Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • Author or Editor: Bahanur Nasya x
  • Applied Social Sciences x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All

Abstract

The success of various placemaking practices, initiatives or installations are inherently linked to how it facilitates engagement among and between multiple stakeholder groups. Given this, placemaking projects are often challenged by a complex set of social interactions, which present competing interests, perspectives, objectives and goals. As a result, the complexity of these social interactions can become difficult to assess or understand. If we cater for various social interactions in the design stage of a placemaking initiative we might assume that the chances for success are improved. If ignored, we might be assuming that the outcome of a placemaking initiative is less sustainable or impactful. In this chapter, we ask, how can placemaking improve engagement? We focus on the density of communications among multiple stakeholders, where they occur and how they might be encouraged. We focus on three forms of dialogical exchange as a means to understand social interactions and where the density of communications might be acknowledged within a given space. These dialogical exchanges include social interactions between people; people interacting with artefacts or objects i.e. a piano in a train station eliciting a response; and finally, people interacting with ideas and abstractions i.e. a feeling of “inclusion” or “liberty” (Baralou & Tsoukas, 2015; Tsoukas, 2009a, 2009b). We use PlaceCity case histories to illustrate how ubiquitous these different dialogical exchanges are within placemaking practices. We look to identify where the density of communications can be found or facilitated within the design stage of placemaking projects. From this we illustrate the variety of hidden dialogical exchanges which often go overlooked. The first case history focuses on placemaking with high school students in Oslo, Norway. The second case focuses on the concepts and ideas for urban regeneration in Vienna, Austria. Our third case focuses on a cooperatively led urban regeneration project addressing expanded gentrification in Lisbon, Portugal. While we present these case histories merely as examples, our goal here is to illustrate the complex mix of dialogical exchanges that can be observed as densities of communications occurring naturally within our urban spaces. We suggest how this could be used as a starting point to improve placemaking design. In turn, we argue that this ensures outcomes are more sustainable and impactful. By improving engagement, i.e. social interaction and dialogue, we highlight how placemaking can contribute to knowledge production in society.

Open Access
In: Placemaking in Practice Volume 1

Abstract

Among placemaking practitioners and scholars, the question of how we improve engagement in placemaking practices is the subject of much debate. We look at different placemaking cases in order to understand how the early inclusion of multiple stakeholder groups in the process of placemaking design and planning can improve citizen engagement and impact. In so doing we present a process-based “tool” to improve participatory engagement across multiple contexts. The early inclusion of multiple stakeholders is important as it can yield deeper insights into the needs of a community. In turn, this can help ensure the outcomes of placemaking projects are more impactful which can lead to more sustainable outcomes for local communities. To contribute to this, we look at different placemaking cases to understand how the inclusion of multiple stakeholders leads to sustainable outcomes. We compare stakeholder engagement across four placemaking initiatives. In the examples of PlaceCity in Oslo and Vienna, placemaking tools were utilized for urban regeneration or improvement. The case of Stará tržnica (Old Market Hall) in Bratislava was a renovation and revitalization of a vacant heritage market. The example of Club Rhijnhuizen in the Netherlands showed how placemaking was used in a strategic way to revitalize a vacant neighbourhood. By comparing and contrasting these cases, we illustrate how an engaged scholarship approach can improve common participatory placemaking practices. An engaged scholarship approach focuses on early inclusion of multiple stakeholders as partners (Van de Ven, 2007). Engaged scholarship accepts that conflict is inherent in the process and should be embraced and managed rather than “solved”. We highlight the implications of this for the design and project management of placemaking initiatives. We conclude this chapter by showing how a process-based view of placemaking practices contributes to sustainable outcomes for city councils, placemaking organizations and local communities.

Open Access
In: Placemaking in Practice Volume 1