通过挪威Klostergata56的案例了解包容性的场所营造过程

Ursula Sokolaj
{"title":"通过挪威Klostergata56的案例了解包容性的场所营造过程","authors":"Ursula Sokolaj","doi":"10.32891/jps.v7i2.1495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public participation and the placemaking approach are receiving continuously increasing attention and are therefore likely to become, in a near future, the norm of shaping our cities. They are instruments of local democracy, enabling citizens to stake a claim and exercise their influence on the city, repositioning them from recipients to active participants in this shaping. Research has shown that these democratic processes are the best way to ensure better physical environments, while also bringing social development. However, this attempt to shift from government to governance by power redistribution can at times pose a challenge to democracy, by repeating existing power relations between participating actors. If representation is not done right and communities are not equally engaged, the social benefits are at stake and issues of inclusion and exclusion arise. The need for assessment in this field is therefore highly relevant, but little progress has been done in developing measurable evaluation tools.This article is based on action research, following as a case study the process of co-designing Klostergata56, a small, underutilized public space in the Norwegian city of Trondheim. It presents a new framework of evaluating a participatory process, applied to the project to investigate its level of inclusion.Results of the study showed that the process had significant limitations to being inclusive to the expense of marginalized groups, due to unequal participation of stakeholders and differences in levels of nurtured social capital and civic trust. The challenges highlighted by the research make it possible to identify lessons for further processes to be more inclusive. Until such challenges are addressed, participatory placemaking will continue to be a trial-and-error process, therefore bound to repeat, at least to some extent, the inequality patterns present in a society. \n  \nRead the full article in accessible html-format here.","PeriodicalId":407771,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Public Space","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Inclusive Placemaking Processes through the Case of Klostergata56 in Norway\",\"authors\":\"Ursula Sokolaj\",\"doi\":\"10.32891/jps.v7i2.1495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Public participation and the placemaking approach are receiving continuously increasing attention and are therefore likely to become, in a near future, the norm of shaping our cities. They are instruments of local democracy, enabling citizens to stake a claim and exercise their influence on the city, repositioning them from recipients to active participants in this shaping. Research has shown that these democratic processes are the best way to ensure better physical environments, while also bringing social development. However, this attempt to shift from government to governance by power redistribution can at times pose a challenge to democracy, by repeating existing power relations between participating actors. If representation is not done right and communities are not equally engaged, the social benefits are at stake and issues of inclusion and exclusion arise. The need for assessment in this field is therefore highly relevant, but little progress has been done in developing measurable evaluation tools.This article is based on action research, following as a case study the process of co-designing Klostergata56, a small, underutilized public space in the Norwegian city of Trondheim. It presents a new framework of evaluating a participatory process, applied to the project to investigate its level of inclusion.Results of the study showed that the process had significant limitations to being inclusive to the expense of marginalized groups, due to unequal participation of stakeholders and differences in levels of nurtured social capital and civic trust. The challenges highlighted by the research make it possible to identify lessons for further processes to be more inclusive. Until such challenges are addressed, participatory placemaking will continue to be a trial-and-error process, therefore bound to repeat, at least to some extent, the inequality patterns present in a society. \\n  \\nRead the full article in accessible html-format here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":407771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Public Space\",\"volume\":\"99 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Public Space\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1495\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Public Space","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v7i2.1495","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公众参与和场所营造方法正受到越来越多的关注,因此在不久的将来,它们很可能成为塑造我们城市的规范。它们是地方民主的工具,使公民能够提出要求并对城市施加影响,将他们从接受者重新定位为这种塑造的积极参与者。研究表明,这些民主进程是确保更好的自然环境,同时也带来社会发展的最佳方式。然而,这种通过权力再分配从政府转向治理的尝试有时会对民主构成挑战,因为它会重复参与行动者之间现有的权力关系。如果代表性做得不好,社区没有平等参与,社会利益就会受到威胁,就会出现包容和排斥的问题。因此,在这一领域进行评价的需要是高度相关的,但是在发展可衡量的评价工具方面几乎没有取得进展。本文以行动研究为基础,以挪威特隆赫姆市的一个小型、未充分利用的公共空间Klostergata56为案例,进行了合作设计。它提出了一个评估参与性过程的新框架,应用于项目以调查其包容性水平。研究结果表明,由于利益相关者的不平等参与以及培育的社会资本和公民信任水平的差异,这一进程在包容边缘化群体的代价方面存在重大局限性。研究强调的挑战使我们有可能找出教训,使进一步的进程更具包容性。在解决这些挑战之前,参与性的场所建立将继续是一个反复试验的过程,因此必然会重复,至少在某种程度上,社会中存在的不平等模式。在这里以可访问的html格式阅读全文。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding Inclusive Placemaking Processes through the Case of Klostergata56 in Norway
Public participation and the placemaking approach are receiving continuously increasing attention and are therefore likely to become, in a near future, the norm of shaping our cities. They are instruments of local democracy, enabling citizens to stake a claim and exercise their influence on the city, repositioning them from recipients to active participants in this shaping. Research has shown that these democratic processes are the best way to ensure better physical environments, while also bringing social development. However, this attempt to shift from government to governance by power redistribution can at times pose a challenge to democracy, by repeating existing power relations between participating actors. If representation is not done right and communities are not equally engaged, the social benefits are at stake and issues of inclusion and exclusion arise. The need for assessment in this field is therefore highly relevant, but little progress has been done in developing measurable evaluation tools.This article is based on action research, following as a case study the process of co-designing Klostergata56, a small, underutilized public space in the Norwegian city of Trondheim. It presents a new framework of evaluating a participatory process, applied to the project to investigate its level of inclusion.Results of the study showed that the process had significant limitations to being inclusive to the expense of marginalized groups, due to unequal participation of stakeholders and differences in levels of nurtured social capital and civic trust. The challenges highlighted by the research make it possible to identify lessons for further processes to be more inclusive. Until such challenges are addressed, participatory placemaking will continue to be a trial-and-error process, therefore bound to repeat, at least to some extent, the inequality patterns present in a society.   Read the full article in accessible html-format here.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信