C I T I
ZEN
SPAC
ES
Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
CITIZEN SPACES
Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
By Jesi Carson | BDes 2013, MDes 2018
A critical and process documentation paper
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Design
© Jesi Carson, 2018
Abstract
The physical and economic growth of large cities under late capitalism
has been driven by the profit motives of the elite class of financiers, developers, and global scale wealth. This urbanization under capitalism can
often eclipse broad and systemic efforts to consider the quality of life of
all citizens. The rapid physical transformation of cities for profit can lead
to increased lack of affordability, displacement of marginalized people,
eradication of historically vibrant cultural zones and privatization of public
space. The increased consumerism caused by capital-driven urban development can result in pacification of potentially revolutionary communities,
cultivating an individualistic rather than collective culture. Citizen participation in action that transforms public space for community benefit can help
re-establish these lost social bonds and promote collective empowerment.
The “right to the city,” is a concept introduced by French Marxist philosopher Henri Lefebvre in 1968, in response to the condition of urbanization
under capitalism and its compromising effect on citizens’ rights. Drawing
on Lefebvre, contemporary anthropologist David Harvey defines the right
to the city as “a common rather than an individual right… [that] inevitably
depends on the exercise of a collective power to reshape the process of
urbanization” (23). My thesis research aligns with Harvey’s definition of
the right to the city and provides examples of grassroots participation and
art and design activism that contribute to collective empowerment through
the creation or transformation of urban public space.
In addition to the condition of urbanization under capitalism, my thesis
responds to contemporary academic research in political science. Participedia is an international academic collaboration researching public participation. This project fosters connections and community between activists,
practitioners and scholars around the world and has developed an open
source crowdsourcing platform allowing contributors to publish information
about cases, methods and organizations in this field of study. I propose
to 1) raise awareness in the Participedia community about grassroots
participation and art and design activism through documentation on the
platform, and 2) experiment with the production of visual media expanding
the ways in which projects are represented on Participedia, encouraging
citizens to get involved in public participation initiatives and potentially
benefiting community groups.
My thesis addresses this research question: How do initiatives of grassroots participation and art and design activism help citizens reclaim
their right to the city and promote localized collective empowerment? To
explore this inquiry at the community level, I launched experimental projects in four cities. I undertook exploratory research to get a broad sense
of currently active grassroots participation and art and design activism
initiatives before reaching out to selected community groups to collaborate
with on experimental projects, outlined in detailed case studies. Through
this work, I explored the reclamation of privatized space for public use
in Madrid, Spain; increased neighbourhood safety in Kingston, Jamaica;
protection of urban green space in Montreal, and the trend of temporary
interventions, or “placemaking,” in Vancouver. As a final experiment, I initiated a public space activation called the Vancouver Bubble, exercising my
own right to the city, transforming an underused site into a “citizen space”
by creating opportunities for participation, dialogue and youth engagement
within a temporary intervention of design activism.
An outcome of my practice-based research includes the ongoing development of a methodology for collaborative media-based storytelling, through
which I engaged with community groups to craft and share stories from
their individual unique perspectives. I used 360° film technology to document and reflect on the site-specific nature of the initiatives explored.
Production of visual media may also benefit community groups by encouraging more everyday citizens to get involved via channels such as Participedia.xyz.
Finally, I propose four axes of participation to address the commonalities
and distinctions between the sites of grassroots participation and art and
design activism I explored in my thesis: 1) threatened versus safe tenancy, referring to site-specificity, 2) top-down versus grassroots initiatives,
referring to the perspective of the organizers, 3) intervention versus site
transformation, referring to action and duration, and 4) oppressed versus
empowered communities, referring to outcomes and impact. The axes
help to outline the characteristics of these site-specific urban contexts
and provide a framework for understanding initiatives affecting the use
of urban public space in ways that can contribute to the empowerment of
citizens by promoting the right to the city. I also illustrate how understanding the way these aspects operate within their varied contexts lays the
groundwork for future work in creating citizen spaces that reclaim the right
to the city.
Contents
5
Abstract
7
Contents
8
Acknowledgements
11
1.0 INTRODUCTION
12
2.0 CONTEXT AND THEORY
12
2.1 Context
12
2.1.1 Urbanization Under Capitalism
14
2.1.2 Participedia: Documenting Public Participation
14
2.2 Themes
14
2.2.1 Public Space and The Right to the City
16
2.2.2 Grassroots Participation
19
2.2.3 Art and Design Activism to Create Citizen Spaces
28
3.0 METHODOLOGY AND PRACTICE
28
3.1 Experimental Case Studies
28
3.1.1 Madrid - Democracy Stories
32
3.1.2 Jamaica - Life Yard
36
3.1.3 Montreal - Saving Urban Jungles
39
3.1.4 Vancouver - The Vancouver Bubble
48
4.0 ANALYSIS
48
4.1 Axes of Participation
48
4.1.1 Threatened vs. Safe Tenancy
51
4.1.2 Top-down vs. Grassroots Initiatives
55
4.1.3 Intervention vs. Transformation of Site
57
4.1.4 Oppressed vs. Empowered Communities
59
5.0 CONCLUSION
61
Works Cited
Acknowledgments
This work is dedicated to my daughter, Oaklee Carson. As a new mother, I
am becoming more and more aware that raising a child, like writing a thesis, “takes a village.” I am forever grateful to the community of incredible
support that has allowed me to do both.
First and foremost, I would like to thank my academic supervisor and
mentor, Amber Frid-Jimenez, Canada Research Chair in Art + Design
Technology and founder of the Studio for Extensive Aesthetics at ECUAD
and Design + Technology Lead of the Participedia project. Your ongoing
support has made this work possible, not to mention your encouragement
to apply for grad school in the first place. You have challenged me to
expand my design practice and to strive for attention to detail with mindfulness and purpose.
Emily Carr University of Art + Design has provided me with a generous
entrance scholarship, including a contribution from the CIBC Awards of
Excellence, as well as an OPUS Bursary. Sincere thanks to the institution
for this opportunity, and for facilitating the review of this thesis internally
by Justin Langlois, Associate Professor at ECUAD, and externally by Dr.
Craig Martin, Senior Lecturer, Design Context, of the University of Edinburgh. To my reviewers, thank you for your valued attention, thoughtfulness and feedback. Thanks to Sean Arden, Prototyping, Media + Programming Studio Technician at ECUAD, for patiently teaching me how to
work with 360° film. I also owe much gratitude to all the other ECUAD staff
and faculty members who contributed to my educational experience over
the past two years, as well as to my MDes 2018 classmates who have
provided insight and friendship that I will never forget.
Funding for my work with the Participedia project has been provided by
the Social Sciences and Research Council of Canada. Thank you to my
Participedia colleagues for your connections, conversations and guidance. Special thanks to Patrick Scully, Managing Director, Mark Warren,
Co-founder of Participedia, for your support of my continued education.
Participedia also contributed funds toward my participation at Medialab
Prado’s Collective Intelligence for Democracy workshop in Madrid, Spain
in 2016, and sponsored multiple team members and mentors to attend
which added great value to the experience.
Thanks to Medialab Prado for the opportunity to lead the Democracy
Stories team in Madrid, as well as organizers, mentors and participants of
the workshop. Special thanks to Medialab mentor Irene Yague, who took
extra time to connect my teammates and I with the inspirational community of participatory action in Madrid and encouraged us to be mindful
of sensitive contexts, and to Audrey Tang, Digital Minister of Taiwan, for
introducing me to the world of 360° film. Thanks to my incredibly intelligent
9
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
and super cool team members, my work took on a new life because of
your participation in Democracy Stories: David Ascher (former Technology Lead, Participedia), Lucy Parry (Research Assistant, Participedia),
Yoav Lifshitz, Gustavo Warzocha, Ciro Oticica, Laura Parra, Mario Garcia,
Herbert, Maria Valese, Giovanna and Raul Fernandez. To the organizers
and participants of Campo De Cebada, Esta Es Una Plaza, Mercado San
Fernando, La Tabacalera, Teatro del Barrio, ECOOO and PAH Madrid,
thank you for sharing your stories.
To Danielle Hoogenboom, Founder of Love Light Yoga, thank you for
allowing me to experience Jamaica through your community connections,
and for your ongoing YINspiration to take time and be mindful. To Shane
Morgan, aka Eyeball, Sabukie, Ikumma and all the members of Life Yard,
thank you for your friendship and for the opportunity to contribute to the
mission. To the Life Children, all my love and gratitude.
Thanks to Participedia co-investigator and Summer School organizer,
Françoise Montambeault, for introducing me to the trend of “greening”
and connecting me with citizen groups in Montreal. To organizers and
participants of Friends of Gorilla Park and Notman Garden, thank you for
sharing your ongoing work.
To my dear friends, the Vancouver Design Nerds, Sarah Hay, Jared Korb,
Eesmayal Santos-Brault and Natalie Tillen, you folks rock and the Vancouver Bubble exists because of you. Thanks also to Mark Busse, Steve
DiPasquale and Bret Liljefors of HCMA Architecture + Design for contributing to the Vancouver Bubble Design Jam and for your ongoing support.
Thank you to VIVA Vancouver and the City of Vancouver for funding the
Vancouver Bubble and providing access to urban resources like space
and electricity. Seattle Design Nerds, particularly Trevor Dykstra, thanks
for your guidance. Frida&Frank superstars Ellie Arkin and Haley Roeser,
so grateful that you joined the team. Hfour Studio’s Ben Z Cooper, your
lighting added just what the bubble needed. CityHive, thank you for your
amazing programming. And to all the volunteers and participants of POP!
we couldn’t have done it without you.
Finally, to my mother, Lynda Carson, thank you from the bottom of my
heart for always being there for me, and now for my daughter too. Thanks
to my sister, Andrea Angioli for your strength and inspiration, and my Auntie, Merillee Davey, for your support and, of course, your copy edits.
10
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This thesis responds to the condition of urbanization under capitalism
and highlights issues that can arise when growth of cities is driven by the
accumulation of profit for an elite class rather than with consideration of
quality of life of all citizens. I outline relevant theory and examples responding to this condition within three themes: 1) public space and the
right to the city, 2) grassroots participation, and 3) art and design activism
that supports the creation of “citizen spaces.” I define citizen spaces as
intentional, sometimes temporary transformations of public spaces into
sites of participation benefiting communities. Citizen spaces can be created through grassroots participation as well as art and design activism,
empowering participants by allowing them to exercise their right to the city.
This research also responds to a design opportunity within the Participedia project, an academic research community collaborating to better
understand and document global examples of public participation in governance. The project includes an online platform (Participedia.xyz) allowing anyone to document and edit cases, methods and organizations in this
field of study. As an activist having participated in protest movements such
as Occupy Vancouver, I am motivated to increase the number of cases
documenting citizen-initiated (as opposed to formal or government-initiated) participatory action. As a designer, I also see the potential of artsbased creative actions and visual media to foster increased participation
by members of the wider public. My work engages with grassroots community groups to produce visual media which may encourage more everyday citizens to get involved in public participation initiatives via channels
such as Participedia.xyz.
The methodology and practice section includes detailed case studies
outlining a series of experimental projects I undertook in four cities. This
practiced-based research informed the ongoing development of a methodology for collaborative media-based storytelling. In each case study, I
examine the site-specific context of the city then describe the project, including my process of research, engagement and documentation. I outline
the results, followed by specific observations of each experiment. Through
this process I document real world examples of grassroots participation
and art and design activism through hands-on fieldwork in Madrid, Kingston (Jamaica), Montreal and Vancouver. This research culminated in a
self-initiated urban-scale project in downtown Vancouver, which I discuss
in relation to the projects I studied in the first phase.
In the analysis section, I propose a series of comparative axes through
which case examples of grassroots participation and art and design
activism can be examined: 1) threatened versus safe tenancy, referring to
site-specificity, 2) top-down versus grassroots initiatives, referring to the
perspective of the organizers, 3) intervention versus transformation, refer-
11
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
ring to action and duration, and 4) oppressed versus empowered communities, referring to outcomes. By looking at the affordances and challenges
of various aspects of participation in varied contexts, the analysis lays the
groundwork for future experiments in creating citizen spaces and reclaiming the right to the city. Finally, the conclusion will summarize my research
findings, outline future considerations for my own design practice and
challenge grassroots organizers, other art and design activists and even
ordinary citizens to explore this space by launching their own experiments
in reclaiming the right to the city.
2.0 CONTEXT AND THEORY
In the context section, I define and situate this thesis within the condition
of urbanization under capitalism. I also explain how my work contributes
to the Participedia project. In the theory section, I address three themes
within this context: 1) public space and the right to the city, 2) grassroots
participation and 3) art and design activism to create citizen spaces. I provide definitions of key terms and articulate how cited examples respond to
the condition of urbanization under capitalism and can empower communities by helping citizens reclaim their right to the city and create citizen
spaces.
2.1 Context
2.1.1 Urbanization Under Capitalism
I define urbanization under capitalism as the condition that exists when
the physical and economic growth of cities is driven by the accumulation
of profit for an elite class, rather than consideration for the quality of life of
all citizens.
According to French Marxist philosopher Henri Lefebvre, urbanization
under capitalism, or the “urban problematic,” results when large amounts
of capital surplus are invested in urban infrastructure as part of a master
plan designed to create more opportunities for commerce (70). While this
condition has many implications, I focus on the specific issues of individual pacification and lack of community empowerment. I also explore the
potential of community-engaged action leading to the transformation of
public space in response to these issues.
The economic motivation to promote consumerism through urbanization creates more opportunity to absorb capital surplus and continue the
cycle of growth. In David Harvey’s 2008 article The Right to the City, he
explains that cities throughout history have been transformed through
the state-driven process of urbanization to meet a capitalist agenda.
12
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
For example, he discusses the implications of a redesign of Paris in the
1850s by infamous urban planner Georges-Eugene Haussmann, who, to
solve the unemployment problem, convinced creditors to fund a massive
infrastructural development of the city (25). As Paris grew, a new way of
life emerged that centered around consumerism, luxury and leisure for the
elite, while the working class were pushed out of the newly unaffordable
urban core (26). Unfortunately, global society didn’t learn from this mistake, and Harvey notes the nearly identical story of urban planner Robert
Moses who essentially duplicated Haussmann’s plan in New York City in
the 1940s with aggressive modernist designs that favored the automobile
and took no notice of historic, affordable, and typically vibrant neighbourhoods and public spaces being demolished (27-28).
Because urbanization has caused many cities to become too expensive
for traditional residents to live in, a suburban counter-culture emerged
(also largely debt-financed), along with the belief that each individual is
entitled to a certain quality of life, bolstered by consumer products (Harvey
26). Parallel to rapid urban development, a perceived need for capital-acquired comforts has emerged. Harvey attributes this “pacification” to a
consumerism that provides the necessary distraction for economic—rather than human-centered—urban development (Harvey 31). Additionally,
these processes “changed the focus of community action towards the defense of property values and individualized identities,” and, to the benefit
of capitalists who continue to propagate these trends, “debt-encumbered
homeowners… [are] less likely to go on strike” (27).
Pacification has cultivated a more individualistic society that is much less
likely to rise up in protest of the capitalist system. Even in Paris in 1868,
it took a severe economic crash, followed by a war to trigger the uprising
of the Paris Commune, “one of the greatest revolutionary episodes in
capitalist urban history” (Harvey 26). Communities which are less pacified,
such as those which cannot financially afford the distractions of consumerism, may be more motivated to resist the type of urbanization negatively
affecting them. Urbanization driven by economics rather than human beings tends to compound affordability issues and privilege the use of public
space toward citizens of affluent social classes.
Citizens can be empowered to participate in new articulations of communities and create transformations of the urban environment that are not tied
to capitalism. This thesis includes examples of grassroots participation
and art and design activism that raise awareness about and offer alternatives to capitalist-driven and state-supported pacification and the resulting
culture of individualism, often through collaborative re-imagining of urban
public space. These examples will illustrate not only a transformation of
public space for community use, but also a shift in the expectations we
can have for ourselves and one another in the communities where we live.
13
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
2.1.2 Participedia: Documenting Public Participation
I define public participation as any form of citizen engagement in
governance.
In addition to the condition of urbanization under capitalism, this thesis
responds to contemporary academic research in political science. Participedia, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
of Canada, is an international academic collaboration researching public
participation. This project fosters connections and community between activists, practitioners and scholars around the world and has developed an
open source crowd-sourcing application allowing contributors to publish
information about cases, methods and organizations in this field of study.
As a team member of Participedia since 2011, now collaborating on the
redesign of Participedia.xyz to better meet the needs of the global community of political scientists and practitioners, I have a unique perspective
on the process of documenting public participation around the world. For
example, the web application and data model were originally designed
to meet the rigorous academic needs of political scientists, with a focus
on quantitative data and in-depth written documentation. Feedback from
team members practicing in the global south informed the design team the
data model seemed weighted to a North American and European context,
an issue that has been addressed through a detailed overhaul of the data
model. Additionally, there exists a focus on formal or government-organized participatory processes, such as Participatory Budgeting and
Citizens Assemblies, while fewer examples of grassroots movements or
art-based engagement are documented on Participedia. Finally, due to the
academic nature of the project and its primary users (political scientists)
less emphasis has been placed on collecting visual media as compared to
the written narrative and meta-data of typical Participedia articles.
Through this thesis, I propose to a) raise awareness in the Participedia
community about grassroots participation and art and design activism
through documentation on the platform, and b) experiment with the
production of visual media to expand the ways in which projects are
represented on Participedia, encourage citizens to get involved in public
participation initiatives and potentially benefit community groups.
2.2 Themes
2.2.1 Public Space and The Right to the City
I define public space as any site where citizens can convene and take
ownership of its activation.
14
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
I define the right to the city as the collective power or empowerment of
communities to manifest positive change within the built, infrastructural,
and social environments around them.
Le droit à la ville, or The Right to the city, is an influential book by Henri
Lefebvre. Beginning his prolific career in the 1930s, Lefebvre wrote extensively on themes of “time, space, the city and everyday life” (Kofman and
Lebas 3-5). His first major urban writing was The Right to the city, and its
title has since become a well-known phrase in urban discourse, passing
into common usage (Kofman and Lebas 6). Drawing on the work of Lefebvre, as discussed above, David Harvey defines the right to the city in his
2008 seminal text The Right to the City:
The right to the city is far more than the individual liberty to access
urban resources: it is a right to change ourselves by changing the
city. It is, moreover, a common rather than an individual right since
this transformation inevitably depends on the exercise of a collective power to reshape the process of urbanization. (23)
This thesis aligns with Harvey’s definition of the right to the city particularly
because of its reference to the power of the collective (communities) to
overcome the challenges of the urban context, including individual pacification and lack of community empowerment. It reinforces the opportunity
for individuals to come together and take action to change the city by
transforming public space for community use. Through participation, all individuals have the potential to change themselves by becoming a part of a
community; building new connections, learning about new ideas from one
another and potentially influencing downstream positive change. From
this perspective, collective power (empowerment) can be described as the
harnessed potential of communities to make change through participatory action reshaping the urban environment and thereby interrupting and
shifting the process of urbanization.
The right to the city depends on the ability of citizens to gather in public
urban spaces. Privatization and surveillance threaten the production and
preservation of those spaces necessary for collective empowerment.
Harvey observes the impact of urbanization under capitalism on the physical form and spaces of our cities, “which increasingly consist of fortified
fragments, gated communities and privatized public spaces kept under
constant surveillance” (32). Currently, privatization of public property is
a common phenomenon in cities with skyrocketing land values, while
surveillance is ubiquitous and largely uncontested by the majority of urban
dwellers. This leads to the use of “public” space being privileged toward
private, state or corporate interests.
The following sections include examples of public participation that can
be interpreted as manifesting collective power, promoting or taking back
15
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
the right to the city by transforming public space. I argue that grassroots
participation and art and design activism can counteract the culture of
individualism and pacification that is prevalent in the contemporary urban
context through this transformative process.
2.2.2 Grassroots Participation
I define grassroots participation as community engaged action not initiated
by the government or any formal institution, but self-initiated by citizens.
As seen in the following examples of grassroots participation, communities most affected by issues arising from urbanization under capitalism
(such as the destruction of neighbourhood character or eradication of
local cultural practices to make way for industry and commerce), can be
strongly motivated to collaborate in order to change these circumstances.
Counter to the “top-down” approach of governments and planners who initiate processes of urbanization for economic gain, grassroots participation
comes from the “bottom-up,” and is initiated by citizens in order to make
change. Community groups motivated by a common goal often initiate
positive change, transforming the city and creating new social networks in
the process.
A historic North American example of grassroots participation in direct
response to capital driven urbanization can be seen in the work of journalist and activist Jane Jacobs, author of the influential book The Death and
Life of Great American Cities, published in 1961. In it, Jacobs provides a
detailed critique of what she calls ‘orthodox’ or traditional city planning.
For example, according to Jacobs the tradidional decentralized planning
approach of “Garden Cities” was flawed because it would limit the growth
of cities and instead promote the landscaped, suburban style of towns,
popularizing the notion that, “The street is a bad environment for humans;
houses should be turned away from it and faced inwards, toward sheltered greens” (20). She likewise defies Le Corbusier’s proposed modernist towers and freeway systems designed to “keep pedestrians off the
streets and in the parks” (23). Jacobs instead argues that thriving cities
with dense populations of real communities, including busy and bustling
streets provide safe and symbiotic community spaces (33). When populations are encouraged to isolate themselves, like in the planning strategies
that Jacobs describes, streets become more dangerous and a true sense
of community is lost.
Jacobs later became known for rallying her community to protest the
aggressive redevelopment of their historic New York City neighbourhood
by city planner Robert Moses (Harvey 28). Jacobs could see what Moses
could not: the inherent value of a vibrant community streetscape. Moses
had plans for expressways and large, Bauhaus-inspired housing complexes.
16
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
From the perspective of architectural drawings and financial models,
his plan made theoretical economic sense. But Jacobs’ view was from
the street level; she knew her neighbours, she walked the avenues and
squares threatened by this planned redevelopment, and she knew how
important these public spaces were to her community. This is what gave
Jacobs’ movement power. Harnessing the shared interest of her community in preserving these public spaces, she was able to defeat Moses’
plans through collectively organized public protests, petitions and other
participatory community actions (Citizen Jane: Battle for the City).
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Jane Jacobs with petitions.
Fig. 1 Jane Jacobs with petitions. Citizen Jane: Battle for the City. Dir. Tyrnauer, Matt. 2016.
The negative impact of urbanization can also be seen in the global south
as traditionally hyper-local communities are infiltrated by industry and
commerce. Like Jacobs, anthropologist Lisa Peattie highlights the importance of meeting members of a community where they are at and building
trust in order to advocate for their needs. She authored The View from the
Barrio in 1968, detailing her fieldwork experience living in a small Venezuelan community while mediating an urban planning process. The developers responsible for a proposed steel mill saw the accompanying dam,
housing and social services as “improvements” that would be embraced
as a benefit to the local community, without considering their impact (Peattie 10-11). At first, Peattie was thought by the locals to be part of this development enterprise, but by living among them with her family and having
personal conversations with the residents, she slowly gained their trust
(12). Peattie described the potential impact an influx of commercial elites
could have on this community’s culture. She recognized the inevitable environmental impact of this new “developed sector,” bound to increase consumerism by exposing the “traditional sector” to a new desire for imported
luxury products, and potentially destroying the existing economy of locally
produced goods and agriculture (Peattie 131-133). She encouraged planners to consider their impact from the perspective of the community and
became a vehicle for this process during her time in Venezuela. Peattie
17
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
describes her work as, “an attempt to look at large scale social processes
from the bottom, working out from a single small case… [or] ethnography
of urbanization and economic development” (2).
Contemporary examples of site-specific grassroots participation can be
seen in European cities like Madrid, Spain, where it is common for community groups to appropriate privatized or underused urban spaces for
public use. “Campo de Cebada” is a citizen-run space in the La Latina
neighbourhood, collectively repurposed following the economic crisis of
2008. That year, municipal plans to have a local public swimming pool rebuilt by private developers fell through, and a 5,500 square meter vacant
lot was left in its place. In 2009, a temporary art installation took place
on the site, inspiring community residents to collaborate with local artists
and activists to transform the space permanently for their use. Part of this
process included negotiation with the city to legally gain access to the site,
and through extensive community meetings they were able to achieve
this goal. Campo de Cebada is an active community space today, hosting
events, art installations, sports games, a community garden and more,
governed by an open general assembly of participants (Bravo). When
organized action is initiated by a community group united by a common
goal, the right to the city can be achieved through the transformation of
public space for community use.
Fig. 2 Panorama of Campo De Cebada. Carson, Jesi. Madrid, Spain. 2016. Photo.
In British Columbia, indigenous-led initiatives of grassroots participation
are often related to land rights. The growth of major cities in this province
is fuelled by natural resources, such as hydroelectricity, natural gas and
oil, harvested from or needing to be transported through traditional First
Nations land. Today, BC Hydro’s Site C Dam project threatens both the
Treaty No. 8 rights of the West Moberly First Nations as well as the environment (Bakker). The project will require the Peace River in Fort St. John
BC to be flooded, destroying the natural habitat of many animals, while
at the same time forcing nearby farmers to evacuate (About Site C). First
Nations leaders have initiated grassroots participatory actions to raise
awareness and build community resistance to the Site C project (Site C).
A network of organizations and grassroots initiatives emerged with mandates to support indigenous-led action, including Fight C and Paddle for
the Peace. Fight C organizes protests throughout the lower mainland, and
18
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
supports the annual Paddle for the Peace, which brings activists on boats
to the Peace River for a peaceful protest on the water at the Site C project
site. While efforts to stop Site C have been able to stall it by initiating
re-evaluations and consultation processes, the project has been approved
to continue construction. When a project like Site C is supported strongly
by the state and corporate interests, not even the illegal infringement of
rights is enough to stop it, although grassroots efforts continue today.
2.2.3 Art and Design Activism to Create Citizen Spaces
I define art and design activism as cultural production that relates to
unstable conditions, contested spaces or the motivation for positive social
change.
I define citizen spaces as intentional, sometimes temporary transformation
of public spaces into sites of participation, dialogue or exchange that can
be created through grassroots participation art and design activism.
My thesis research lies at the intersection of the three distinct histories
of art, design and media activism. The last century was one of shifting
perspectives in society which translated into tenets of activism within each
of these practices. Ecological perspectives were broadened as awareness
increased about the Earth’s finite resources. Social movements and uprisings raised social awareness and opposition to societal conditions such as
racism and sexism, along with class and military conflicts associated with
global capitalism. The fields of design, media and art have all generated a
variety of projects in critical response to these societal issues, and my research focuses primarily on participatory and site-specific examples from
art history and contemporary art. It is also worth noting that tactics and
approaches from these three distinct fields are often effectively interwoven
by practitioners to create multidisciplinary and collaborative activist works.
The practice of design activism includes the development of prototypical
ideas, spaces, objects and publications of protest as well as progressive
design solutions that offer alternatives to the status quo. American architect Buckminster Fuller was an early advocate of environmental sustainability. His focus on resource efficiency translated into a variety of projects, including his prototypical 1927 Dymaxion House, derived from the
principles of ‘dynamic’ and ‘maximum’ that shaped his work (Faud-Luke
41). The Dymaxion House took on several forms, produced as a resource
efficient kit suitable for any site (Sieden 132). Influenced by Buckminster
Fuller, Ant Farm was a collective of design activists from mixed professional backgrounds established in 1968 in San Francisco. This group
launched projects bridging architecture, design, art and media using a
number of formats ranging from videos to installations with the intention
to critique the North American culture of mass media and consumerism.
19
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
While Ant Farm was formed by architects, their work took place not only
outside of the institutional setting, but also outside of the norms of traditional architectural practice. For example, Ant Farm’s Inflatables series
created spaces of engagement using non-traditional architectural design
strategies, experimenting with “Do It Yourself,” participatory spaces made
of simple materials like plastic and tape. These spaces and corresponding user manual called the Inflatocookbook allowed participants to take
control of their own environments (Ant Farm).
Fig. 3 Dymaxion House as installed in Henry Ford Museum. Dymaxion House. Buckminster
Fuller. 1927. (Public domain image, no copyright)
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Spread from DIY inflatable zine, Inflatocookbook by Ant Farm.
Fig. 4 Spread from DIY inflatable zine. Inflatocookbook. Ant Farm. 1971. Print.
20
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
The documentary filmmaking approach of media activism is used to critique or raise awareness about important societal issues of concern. The
Critical Art Ensemble describes themselves as a multidisciplinary group of
practitioners from various media-based backgrounds that focuses “on the
exploration of the intersections between art, critical theory, technology, and
political activism” (Critical Art Ensemble). Among their various media works
that exist in combination with published writings, the Marching Plague
project calls attention to the pointlessness of germ warfare by recreating
an attempt of the British Army to spread Bubonic Plague by boat which
wasted millions of pounds on inconclusive tests attempting to inoculate a
raft of guinea pigs. The artist group filmed the experiment, preceding the
documentary of the work with a history of failed attempts at germ warfare.
The timely release of the film in 2006 responded to the fear mongering of
the Bush administration in the United States following a series of Anthrax
attacks, which increased the germ warfare budget from millions to billions,
feeding the capitalist war machine (Critical Art Ensemble).
360 film and VR technology are now being employed in the activist space,
using the realism of the immersive space to provoke empathy in viewers
about serious subject matter. For example, Australian artist and filmmaker
Lynette Wallworth produced a short VR film called Collisions to allow viewers to experience the Outback nuclear testing of the 1950s and 60s alongside an indigenous elder who experienced its negative impacts such as
displacement and exposure to radiation first hand. Using storytelling and
experimental VR graphics, viewers become part of this true story themselves, potentially experiencing more of an emotional connection to it than
traditional film would allow. Wallworth stated, “People remember this film
as something that has happened directly to them, rather than something
that they saw.... The power of this experience resting in your unconscious
is pervasive” (Watts).
Fig. 5 Photo of Nyari Morgan, indigenous elder featured in the 360 film. Collisions. Writ.
/ Dir. Lynette Wallworth. 2016. Photo Credit: Piers Mussared. (Press image, no copyright)
21
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Citizen spaces represent a current trend in contemporary art, finding a
balance between prescribed and open-ended engagement with works of
art and promoting new social experiences and opportunities for dialogue
for participants. Claire Bishop, in her introduction to the book Participation,
states that one of the most frequently cited motivations for participation
in art since the 1960s is, “the desire to create an active subject, empowered by the experience of physical or symbolic participation” (12). Bishop
describes these types of works as having an, “emphasis on collaboration,
and the collective dimension of social experience” (10). In the context of
an uncertain future where either capitalist power or another, more hopeful
system may prevail, Grant Kester’s book The One and The Many discusses a new paradigm in contemporary art: a collaborative, generative
and discursive tendency called “dialogical practice” (Kester 114-115).
Referring to the current global political climate, he states, “It is this sense
of possibility, and imminent threat, that animates the remarkable profusion
of contemporary art practice concerned with collective action and civic
engagement” (Kester 7). Dialogical practice is also mindfully un-intentional, as the artist creates opportunities for “the collaborative Other,” being
either co-producers or eventual participants, to contribute to shaping the
outcomes of the work (Kester 115).
A review of participatory art in the last few decades reveals that initiatives
of art and design activism can have the effect of contributing to collective
empowerment by engaging communities in processes of transforming
urban public space for their own benefit, fostering dialog and developing
new social constellations. The following examples outline strategies for
creative and collaborative engagement and the creation of citizen spaces
that can lead to collective empowerment of participants.
Interactions among participants play an important role in the meaning,
purpose and impact that an art and design activism project can have. This
designing for human relations is illustrated by the work of German performance artist and political activist Joseph Beuys. His 1972 project Büro der
Organisation für Direkte Demokratie durch Volksabstimmung (Office of the
Organization for Direct Democracy by Referendum) placed emphasis on
the provocation of participant interactions within an office space installation during the 100-day Documenta 5 exhibition in Kassel, Germany
(Beuys and Schwarze 120). A duplicate of Beuys’ Dusseldorf office, this
fabricated site became a hub for discussion of social reform issues among
Documenta visitors (Beuys and Schwarze 124). In the context of the high
art world, Beuys created an accessible avenue for participants to discuss
issues ranging from education to race relations (Bucknell). The piece culminated in Beuys’ Boxkampf für die direkte Demokratie (Boxing Match for
Direct Democracy), a boxing match performance that represented the debates taking place within the office in a fun and physical way. (Bucknell).
22
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Joseph Beuys boxing in performance piece Boxkampf für die direkte
Demokratie at Documenta V.
Fig. 6 Joseph Beuys boxing in performance piece Boxkampf für die direkte Demokratie at
Documenta V. Lusznat, Hans. Kassel, Germany. 1972. Photo.
Beuys describes his artistic practice as “social sculpture,” and argues this
form of art should be central to revolutionary aims, including “dismantling
the repressive effects of a senile social system” (Beuys 125). Beuys’
creation of a citizen space for facilitated, yet open-ended political dialogue
presents the possibility that participation can lead in the best case to
fostering social change. This notion is taken up by many artists who use
participatory strategies to provoke discussion about unjust conditions.
Art and design activism can intentionally subvert state and corporate-driven development processes to transform urban public space for community
use. In 1994, Park Fiction launched in response to a proposed waterfront
office building development that would further gentrify the area surrounding a traditionally revolutionary squatters community within Hamburg,
Germany’s increasingly bourgeois urban core (Kester 202). Artist Christoph Schäfer and his team engaged with local residents to facilitate a
fictional, gameified development consultation process in parallel to that of
the state, outfitting a shipping container with activities where participants
could co-create ideas for the waterfront space (Kester 203). Resulting negotiations empowered the community with funding and legal access to the
site, which was constructed in 2005 according to participants vision (Park
Fiction). Despite potentially being considered “in bed with bureaucracy,”
according to Kester, “Their work proceeded by working in the space between overt activism and formal state protocols” (205).
23
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Park fiction after transformation.
Fig. 7 Park Fiction after transformation. “Park Fiction.” 1994. Spatial Agency. Web. 25 Jan.
2018. Photo.
Technology can play a role in art and design activism, offering new ways
of mediating interactions and sharing content. New technology in projects can be well received, sparking interest through novelty, however its
use can sometimes be accompanied by challenges of accessibility. Artist
Krzysztof Wodiczko is known to make use of technology as an interface
for participatory works and overcomes accessibility challenges by technically supporting participants throughout the process. He also engages
participants in the design process so they may contribute to the definition
of project outcomes and feel more ownership of the work. His 1992-96
series, Alien Staff, invited participants to share their immigration stories
with a public audience in a way that was mediated by technology within
a sculptural artifact: A physical staff with a video screen that played the
recorded stories (Wodiczko 104). Following a process of collaborative
video production, the work was given back to the storyteller who then became the “actor” in a public art piece, without having to speak. The Alien
Staff artifact became the storyteller’s voice, showing their video on a small
screen while they spent time in public space. Any viewer could come
close to the actor and experience the stories alongside them, mediated
by the video technology (Wodiczko 105). A participant actor explained her
relationship with the Alien Staff saying, “We travel together. It’s a kind of
purification on my part. It’s a concretization of suffering and tears, a way of
embodying them differently” (Wodiczko 114). A participatory work mediated by technology can empower participants to share their stories in a way
that makes them feel comfortable.
24
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Participants using the Alien Staff by Krzysztof Wodiczko.
Fig. 8 Participants using the Alien Staff. Wodiczko, Krzysztof. Critical Vehicles. Cambridge:
The MIT Press. 1999. Print.
Technology can also offer a format for the artist to become part of the
work, which can make it more personal and potentially connect with a
wider audience. For example, filmmaker Agnes Varda uses video technology to interact with participants in her documentary process. For Varda,
the making of the 2000 documentary The Gleaners and I, allowed her to
directly engage with the subjects of her interviews and become a part of
the narrative herself, including personal, experimental shots of herself.
The storytelling process was a very personal one. Interviewees shared
intimate details of their livelihoods which included foraging for food and
supplies to survive. Varda displayed great empathy in listening to these
stories, and her presence and participation along with the subjects added
depth to the film. Additionally, the film itself became a tool to raise awareness about gleaning for survival, calling attention to issues of inequality
faced by society (The Gleaners and I).
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Agnes Varda including experimental shots of herself in her film, The
Gleaners & I. First image shows herself holding a camcorder, filming into a mirror. Second shot is of her hand,
playing on scale as she holds it up to a passing truck while recording in a moving vehicle.
Fig. 9 Agnes Varda including experimental shots of herself in her film. The Gleaners & I. Writ.
/ Dir. Agnes Varda. 2000.
25
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
A work of art and design activism can engage local groups by taking
site-specificity and community aesthetics into consideration. Matthew
Mazzotta’s project Open House is an example of using participant engagement to collaboratively define a work of art and design activism
within a local community. Without knowing what the final outcome would
be, Mazzotta held community discussions in the city of York, Alabama.
He discovered through dialogue sessions with residents beginning in
2011, as well as with direct observation during his time there, that the
city was deteriorating, with abandoned structures falling into disrepair
and a distinct lack of community amenities (Mazzotta 248). The process
of engagement, in combination with consideration of a local architectural
aesthetic, informed the eventual work of art: A kinetic sculpture of a house
that transforms into an open theatre and event space (Mazzotta 248). A
year after the engagement process began, the piece was constructed on
a disused property with materials from an existing structure transforming
it into a defacto public space directly meeting community needs (Mazzotta 248). Mazzotta’s process allowed the citizens’ voices to be heard and
helped them see their contribution to the work.
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Open House by Matthew Mazzotta.
Fig. 10 Open House. Mazzotta, Matthew. “Open House.” Public Space? Lost and Found. Eds.
Gediminas Urbonas, Ann Lui and Lucas Freeman. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 247. Print.
In addition to participatory tactics, the intentionality of site, subject, material
and scale matter to a work of art and design activism and help shape its
narrative. Ken Lum’s Vancouver Especially is a miniature replica of a “Vancouver Special” – a common single-family home typology that is now financially unattainable for many. Lum recreated the brick and stucco facade in
small scale at 271 Union Street in Vancouver, illustrating what his $45,000
project budget would buy in the 2015 real estate market (Lederman). The
26
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
piece comments on housing affordability in Vancouver in general, and the
Union Street site also speaks to the transformation of the Chinatown neighbourhood due to gentrification. Vancouver Especially reclaims public space
with a sculptural icon, serving as a nexus of conversation around urban
development and housing issues affecting Vancouver residents.
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Crowd around Vancouver Especially by Ken Lum.
Fig. 11 Crowd around Vancouver Especially by Ken Lum. “‘Vancouver Especially’ art installation by Ken Lum on Union Street.” SkyscraperPage. Feb 22, 2015. Web. 14 Feb. 2018.
Photo.
Participation can take many forms in art and design activism. Artists and
designers can choose to engage audiences in the design process, giving
communities ownership over the outcomes and responding to a site in
ways meaningful to participants. Technology can be used as a tool to connect with audiences and collaboratively produce output like video storytelling, which can take on a life of its own. Dialogue can be facilitated, and
sometimes a work can intentionally subvert state and corporate power.
In the theory section, we looked at historic and present-day implications
of urbanization under capitalism. This condition has led to a need for
collective empowerment of communities through participation to reshape
the urban context to better meet their needs and prevent development
processes from infringing on their right to the city. As seen in the cited
examples, grassroots participation and art and design activism provide avenues and strategies for this type of community engaged action leading to
collective empowerment. These strategies inform the next section of this
thesis, which outlines my design process. Through practice, I develop a
methodology using experimental media production as the primary channel
for engagement with community groups, in addition to prototyping a public
activation to create a citizen space.
27
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
3.0 METHODOLOGY AND PRACTICE
The methodology and practice section includes case studies on my
experimental projects, outlining the development of a methodology for
collaborative storytelling using 360° filmmaking. The projects took place
in Madrid, Kingston, Montreal and Vancouver, featuring currently active,
site-specific examples of grassroots participation and art and design activism, including a self-initiated project called the Vancouver Bubble.
3.1 Case Studies: Experimental Projects
In Madrid, Kingston, Montreal and Vancouver, I undertook exploratory
research to gain a broad sense of ongoing grassroots participation and art
and design activism initiatives. This research included referring to Participedia.xyz and other channels such as social media, reaching out to new
and existing contacts and reading news articles. In Madrid, Kingston and
Montreal, I reached out to selected community groups, connecting with
organizers and participants personally and spending time getting to know
the initiatives. In some cases, I proposed to collaborate on experimental
projects, including 360° films. In Vancouver I took a different approach, initiating a site-specific urban intervention while reflecting on and documenting my own experience as project lead. For each case study, I provide
site-specific context, then describe the project, including my process of research, engagement and documentation. Finally, I outline tangible results,
including creative output, followed by observations about the process.
3.1.1 Madrid - Democracy Stories
Context
Occupation of public space and institutional infrastructure by disenfranchised and politically motivated community groups is common in Madrid,
Spain. Following the economic crisis of 2008, banks hold power over
defaulted mortgages, and residential evictions occur almost daily. Not
even real estate developers have escaped the impact of the economic
crash, leaving large structures abandoned while lots once slated for future
redevelopment stand vacant.
In response to this condition, organizations like PAH Madrid provide free
legal support to those affected by residential evictions. Volunteers—often
victims of evictions themselves—stand together in defence of their neighbours who are experiencing forceful evictions, and support groups are
organized to help survivors heal from the trauma they have experienced
(PAH Madrid). Meanwhile, occupied institutional spaces are transformed
into “social centers” where groups of activists mobilize supporters and
protest the status quo (Moor and Smart 8), and vacant lots take on new
life as community run event spaces (Bravo).
28
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Many other examples of citizen initiatives exist in Madrid, as illustrated
by the Los Madriles project, which consists of both a resource website
and print-based map (Los Madriles). The Los Madriles map locates and
describes a number of citizen-initiatives but differs from Participedia
because it is not intended as an academic tool. It was created specifically
to empower community groups, raise awareness about their actions and
recruit participation.
Experimental Project
In the fall of 2016, I represented Participedia and facilitated a design team
as part of a two-week, hackathon-style workshop at Medialab Prado in
Madrid called Collective Intelligence for Democracy. I initially anchored
my team’s process in the context of the right to housing and proposed to
design and implement a series of temporary “actions” inspired by art and
design activism. The term action in this context refers to a process of rapid
making, experimenting and reflecting. To lay the groundwork for participatory action design, I relied on the “double diamond” design process which
includes four phases: discover, define, develop and deliver. As illustrated in Fig. 10, the discover phase is divergent, consisting of exploratory
research and collecting of knowledge and ideas. The define phase is convergent, narrowing the findings from the discover phase into a research
question. Develop diverges again to ideate on the research question,
followed by a final convergence in the deliver phase, when one or a few
ideas are proposed. I overlaid a process of actions and reflections within
this process.
Fig. 12 Slide from opening presentation at Medialab Prado, with credit to the Vancouver
Design Nerds who commonly use the “Double Diamond” design as part of their “Nerd Jam”
process. Carson, Jesi. 2016. Graphic.
Using the Los Madriles map as a guide during the discovery phase, part of
our process included walking tours and drop-in visits to selected initiative
sites. Medialab organizers helped us by connecting us with participants
29
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
and organizers of initiatives who were willing to meet with us and share
their stories. We visited Campo de Cebada, La Tabacalera, Esta Es Una
Plaza and Mercado San Fernando, all of which are collaboratively-run
citizen initiatives involving the occupation of disused property and public
space.
The site-specificity and engaging aesthetic of the initiatives inspired audio
and visual media documentation, and the team developed a strategy for
collaborative multimedia storytelling, engaging organizers and participants
in the process. As we moved through the develop and deliver phases of
the design process, our actions became visits to sites, with each team
member being assigned a media-based documentary role. We collected
an archive of traditional and 360° video footage, photographs, panoramas
and audio recordings of participant stories in both Spanish and English.
Fig. 13 Collaborative documentary storytelling roles for each team member, shown with Los
Madriles map. Carson, Jesi. Madrid, Spain. 2016. Photo.
The collection of visually and emotionally inspiring content struck us as an
opportunity to enrich the content on Participedia.xyz and potentially benefit community initiatives by providing them with media content that could
be used to promote their own work or recruit participants. We documented
these case studies on Participedia.xyz, and also proposed a design for
a new way to visualize Participedia data that placed emphasis on media
contributions and participant stories.
30
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Results
We called our project “Democracy Stories” and developed a prototype
website (http://madrid.surge.sh/) that visualizes Participedia data in a new
way and invites users to add layers of media content to existing content
on Participedia.xyz.
Fig. 14 Screenshots of prototype website. Carson, Jesi, et. al. Democracy Stories. Madrid,
Spain. 2016. Web.
31
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
My team also produced a shared folder of digital media that can be used
in the future to publish the stories we documented, possibly using Participedia as a platform for this shared knowledge.
The process of documentation of citizen initiatives in Madrid led to the
development of a collaborative methodology of media storytelling that I
simplified and took forward to Jamaica, Montreal and Vancouver.
Observations
Reflection was critical to my experience in Madrid and helped uncover opportunities and challenges with the work. Daily check-in meetings
helped the team work cohesively together. After one such meeting, the
team elected to move away from a focus on housing and instead look
at initiatives in public space. For more sensitive topics like housing, we
would rather promote community-created content (with permission) rather
than coming in as outsiders with cameras, which could make participants
feel uncomfortable or, worse, put them at risk.
The collaborative nature of the storytelling methodology my team developed can help promote the work of citizen initiatives by allowing stories
to be told from participants perspectives, in their own voices. Rather than
academic documentation, these stories become a vehicle for initiatives
with potential benefits by recruiting participants or raising awareness
about their work. Participedia could consider this as a potential goal or
motivation for contributors.
Site-specific cases of grassroots citizen participation in public space lend
themselves well to visual documentation. These initiatives can also take
on a visual aesthetic that represents the creativity of the community, such
as handmade urban furniture, large scale paintings and other community-led designs. The rich and immersive quality of 360° film, a medium I
was introduced to during this project, has the potential to share this special aesthetic quality with viewers in a way traditional film cannot. Viewers
can control what they see, and linger on elements they are drawn to, offering an empowered viewing experience rather than a prescribed narrative.
I elected to document the following experimental projects using 360° film
based on this insight.
3.1.2 Jamaica - Life Yard
Context
Over the last three decades, there has been a general increase in murder
rates in Jamaica, with Kingston having the highest rate (Gray 3). Many
factors have likely contributed to this context, including urbanization and
its consequent shrinking of the agricultural industry, as well as growth of
the illicit drug trade leading to an increased use of guns and recruitment of
32
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
lower income youth as “foot soldiers” (Gray 6-7). Currently, some neighbourhoods in Kingston, primarily where lower income residents live, are
prone to violence and crime. A major concern for locals is the effect this
environment has on youth development. In response, organizations like
Manifesto Jamaica offer opportunities for youth to participate in activities
engaging them mentally and physically, such as parkour competitions.
Others include the Institute for Social Leadership, offering homework
space for youth as well as workshops on communication without anger,
and Paint Jamaica, a collective of artists revitalizing neighbourhoods to
create safer spaces.
Life Yard is an organization created by local residents in response to a
violent urban context, where it was common to see men walking with guns
in the middle of the day, within one block of a local elementary school.
Founders converted the backyard of a family home into a farm which
not only contributes to localized food security but provides a safe space
for children and youth to spend time, participate in workshops and learn
about growing food. They also collaborated with local art initiative Paint
Jamaica to transform the neighbourhood surrounding the farm and school
with colourful murals. According to community members, this visual and
physical transformation and increased youth engagement has had a
profound impact on neighbourhood safety in the area surrounding the Life
Yard site.
Fig. 15 Instagram photos of Life Yard and Fleet Street. Carson, Jesi. Kingston, Jamaica.
2017. Photo.
Experimental Project
I traveled to Jamaica in February 2017 with the intention of producing a
360° documentary film with the founders of Life Yard. My actions evolved
throughout the process to include trust building, adapting to cultural norms
and sensitivities, checking my own privilege and developing a toolkit of
flexible strategies for engagement.
Prior to visiting Jamaica, I took workshops and sought mentorship to
acquire the technical skills required to produce a 360° film. Informed by
33
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
the process that I undertook in Madrid, I assembled a mobile, one-person
360° filmmaking gear kit (backpack, tripod, Zoom audio recorder, Samsung Gear 360° camera, Canon digital camera, laptop, memory cards and
external drives). I developed interview conversation prompts based on the
case narrative outlined used by Participedia.xyz. The prompts covered
four main areas including history and purpose, how the site is operated,
what happens in the space and the impact the initiative has had on the
founders as well as the community.
Engaging with Life Yard organizers proved to be more difficult than I had
anticipated. While I was introduced personally through a mutual friend,
and approached with enthusiasm for the project, I was met with a lack of
responsiveness. I realized I couldn’t jump right into the project but would
first have to integrate slowly and gain the trust of founding members.
Without being too discouraged, I left my agenda at the door, and proceeded to genuinely connect with the Life Yard community. This took a series
of encounters, and I was able to find ways to contribute to “the mission”
of Life Yard I hadn’t expected. I played with the local children, lead yoga
classes and even donated one of my external drives to an aspiring local
filmmaker. I believe these gestures and my willingness to participate contributed to the process of building trust.
Fig. 16 Still from 360° film recording. Carson, Jesi. Life Yard. Kingston, Jamaica. 2017. Photo.
During my final days in Jamaica, Life Yard’s lead organizer, Shane Morgan, was suddenly willing and excited to do a 360° film and audio recorded interview with me. With permission, I had been recording 360° shots of
the space since I arrived, and I think this also generated some interest, as
intrigued community members asked me about the equipment and what
34
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
I was up to. The children in particular were very interested in the camera
and we had a lot of fun with it, and some of the best shots came from
those playful experiences. With Shane’s interview recorded, I was able to
craft a storyboard and remaining shot list for a short film about Life Yard.
Results
The process of journaling helped me overcome the challenges I faced
with engagement. I documented my thoughts, sketches, process and
reflections in a detailed sketchbook. In addition to slowing down and building trust, my sketchbook and the tools of design helped me communicate
with community members. For example, the storyboard I created for the
film inspired the founders of Life Yard to engage with the documentary
process. On the day before I left, I brought the storyboard and shot list to
Life Yard and was able to generate enough excitement to get some shots
of the founders.
Upon returning to Vancouver, I produced a short documentary about Life
Yard that was shared via Vimeo and Dropbox with organizers (https://vimeo.com/216314518).
Fig. 17 Photo of sketchbook showing Life Yard storyboard. Carson, Jesi. Kingston, Jamaica.
2017. Photo.
35
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Observations
Building trust is critical to the process of collaborative storytelling. More
time in Jamaica (I had three weeks) would have been preferable as well.
I would have liked to produce the film in-country and host a screening at
the Life Yard site.
The transformation of public space for community use can positively
impact neighbourhood safety and foster social bonds among local participants. The garden itself contributes to food security and provides a
refuge for youth to gather and participate in workshops and clubs. The
surrounding neighbourhood was revitalized by the addition of murals. The
vacant lot across the street from the Life Yard site used to be a place for
residents to dump garbage, but now is kept clean and used for a variety of
community events, such as sports matches. Most importantly, the community is now known for its safety. According to community members, the
project has created an environment where neighbours now feel confident
to talk to one another, to let each other know when something feels unsafe and to watch out for each other and their children.
Accessibility of new technology can be a barrier to the production of
media content. Due to the size of the raw video files, and the poor quality
of internet connection in Jamaica, only the Vimeo version of the Life Yard
film was able to be accessed after production by founders. We discussed
how to overcome this problem by shipping a USB drive to Jamaica, and
eventually one of the organizers was able to download the files during a
trip to the USA. There are also challenges related to screening 360° film.
Viewing 360° film in 2D is not ideal, and someone else “scrolling around”
on your behalf can feel uncomfortable. This poses both a challenge and
design opportunity that falls outside the boundaries of this thesis, but
which I am interested in exploring further.
3.1.3 Montreal - Saving Urban Jungles
Context
Part of a trend known as “greening,” community gardens, green laneways
and initiatives to save urban green space are examples of public participation in Montreal. For example, the Ruelles Vertes (Green Laneways)
initiative allows laneways to be legally closed to traffic and facilitating the
addition of grass and other greenery. Residents take ownership of these
public spaces, adding plants and public art to transform formerly underused laneways into community spaces for play and leisure.
Small pockets of dense, forested green space known as “urban jungles”
exist within Montreal neighbourhoods, or boroughs. Two examples of
these wild green spaces include Parc Des Gorilles (Gorilla Park) and Jardin Notman (Notman Garden), and both are special places to the citizens
36
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
who live nearby. In both cases, the land on which these urban jungles
grow was previously owned by a railway company and quietly sold to real
estate developers as land values increased in the urban core. Notman
Garden still exists in its lush, forest form, having been saved from demolition (for now) by an adamant citizen group. However, Gorilla Park was
not so lucky. Even after negotiations with the city, and the rallying of much
community support, the urban green space was demolished overnight by
the developer, and a vacant lot remains.
Experimental Project
In June 2017, I spent two weeks in Montreal learning about participatory
citizen initiatives and attending Participedia’s first Summer School at the
University of Montreal. I connected with Participedia team member and
summer school organizer Françoise Montambeault and some of her students and identified potential sites for 360° filmmaking about grassroots
participation or art and design activism. Her focus of research was participation through “greening,” and through her I was introduced to the citizen
group responsible for fighting for the re-establishment of Gorilla Park.
Through social media I discovered that Notman Garden had a very similar
story. I realized these two stories could be told in parallel and continued
with the process of 360° filmmaking, using the same interview questions I
had used in Jamaica.
Fig. 18 Slide from ECUAD MDes Summer Research Presentation. Fall 2017.
I interviewed one of the founders of the Friends of Gorilla Park citizen
initiative for the 360° film. This led to a detailed conversation about the initiative, its history and ongoing struggles. A tour of the site was organized
for the Participedia summer school students, which I was also able to film.
37
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
My experience with Notman Garden was more serendipitous, as I arrived
at the site to see if I could record some initial shots and was surprised to
find a community protest in progress. I entered the space and listened to
speeches. I took note of the speakers, approached them after the event
and was able to interview two organizers. I also chatted with participants
at the event and found the community really cared about this lush green
site and would be very upset to see it destroyed.
Results
After transcribing the interviews from both sites, I produced a storyboard
juxtaposing the two stories. I used experimental editing techniques to
create frames within 360° viewing space. Production of this experimental
film is still underway.
Improvements to the documentary process were made, including the introduction of myself as a character in the film. I had realized when editing
the Life Yard film that I was in most of the shots, but I had not introduced
myself as part of the narrative. This time, I made sure the interviews were
not only recorded by audio, but also with the 360° camera, so I could cut
in the context shots of myself within the story. I also recorded introductory
and reflection shots of myself on both sites to include in the film.
Observations
Grassroots initiatives intended to transform permanent sites sometimes
make use of temporary or “pop-up” interventions as tactics to achieve
these goals. Gorilla Park participants installed a pop-up garden on the vacant site, expecting it to be removed immediately by developers. However,
due to the overwhelming support of the community, the developers left
the garden in place for months. By leaving the Gorilla Park pop-up garden
intact, the developers may have lessened the pressure on themselves.
Transformation of a site for long-term community benefit can build a large
network of voluntary support for a sustained amount of time. The Friends
of Gorilla Park have been engaged in this process for over twenty years,
and the citizen group now fighting for Notman Garden has also participated in multiple other initiatives to improve community life in their borough.
Many initiatives I looked at in Montreal appeared to be community group
or citizen-led but were actually launched by local governments. This
could be interpreted as acknowledgement by the state that participation
in citizen initiatives can contribute positively to urban life, or other political
motivations could contribute to this trend.
Fig. 19 (right) The Vancouver Bubble at POP! Korb, Jared. Vancouver, BC. 2018. Photos.
(Used with permission)
38
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
39
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
3.1.4 Vancouver - The Vancouver Bubble
Context
Vancouver is known for being an expensive and isolating city. Real estate
prices have skyrocketed in the last few decades, pricing out many locals
who now live in the suburbs and resulting in gentrification of traditional
cultural communities like Chinatown. Census data and studies by the
Vancouver Foundation also indicate Vancouver is a socially isolating place
to live (Lu, Schellenberg et. al.). To combat this reality, a trend of temporary, pop-up interventions has emerged, often with the goal of connecting
isolated Vancouverites.
“Placemaking” is common in Vancouver, with “placemakers” being people
who are part of organizations, businesses or community groups who host
events and installations in public space. The Vancouver Public Space
Network organizes community engaged action in underused spaces, Party4Health hosts free, public dance parties and Frida&Frank organizes popup ping pong. The question remains as to whether or not these temporary
interventions have the desired effect of reducing social isolation, but we
can observe that the local government has taken up the cause. The City
of Vancouver is currently working on a Public Space Strategy through the
Places for People campaign. They also support VIVA Vancouver, which
provides funding for artists and designers to activate public spaces. A
system of exchange exists between grassroots and top-down approaches in Vancouver, creating opportunities for community groups to benefit
from funding and removal of barriers to the use of public space, and for
the city to improve its image by facilitating fun and engaging activities for
residents and visitors. However, a critical look at this context may reveal
another form of pacification, offering token levels of support to potentially build permission at a social scale for larger changes that may not be
similarly aligned. For example, developers in Vancouver have installed
community gardens on land under speculation, offering a temporary community amenity to pacify local residents who may otherwise take issue
with forthcoming redevelopments.
Image removed due to copyright restrictions: Life
Between Umbrellas by Vancouver Public Space
Network.
Fig 20 (above, left) Life Between Umbrellas. Vancouver Public Space Network. 2018. Photo.
Fig. 21 (above, right) Frida&Frank host public ping pong at Jim Deva Plaza. Carson, Jesi.
2018. Photo.
40
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Experimental Project
As a final experiment, I launched and documented a participatory public art
project with the intention of creating a citizen space. The Vancouver Bubble
was an inflatable public art installation, or urban intervention, I produced as
Project Lead for the Vancouver Design Nerds. VDN is a non-profit society
dedicated to addressing a wide range of urban issues through participatory
engagement and design. We partnered with HCMA Architecture + Design
and their Tilt Curiosity Lab to apply for grant funding in the summer of 2017.
VIVA Vancouver awarded $5,000 to produce our project.
This experiment included multiple levels of participation, including a
collaborative design and production process. The installation was also
intended to create opportunities for building community connections and
promote dialogue within a citizen space. The form of an inflatable structure offered a dual metaphor for visitors to consider, referring to both the
unaffordability of the “housing bubble,” and social isolation of “living in our
own bubble.”
The participatory design process for the Vancouver Bubble began with a
public design jam at the office of HCMA Architecture + Design. I presented
project parameters and possible sites as well as my research interests.
After group brainstorming and prototyping, five teams presented ideas for
form and programming of the inflatable. Two ideas were related to social
issues, housing and food security (using the Alley Oop laneway site near
Granville and Hastings Streets), and three were geared towards lighthearted engagement, creating a sense of wonder (under the South side of
the Cambie Bridge).
One particular idea from the jam, a concept called Dream House, was
particularly evocative. Dream House proposed that a large-scale inflatable
home shape be wedged high overhead in the Alley Oop laneway, making the statement about affordable housing being out of reach for many
Vancouver residents. The team hopes to take on this proposal in a future
iteration of the Vancouver Bubble.
The concept that stood out for the team the most was the idea of the bubble
as a “platform” for various types of programming. Therefore, we designed
an inflatable shape in response to the Cambie Bridge site for a temporary
installation with selected programming partners: Frida&Frank, a placemaking organization specializing in public ping pong, and CityHive, a youth-run
organization that recently launched a public space activation initiative.
Results
With our programming partners, we produced POP! Get out of your bubble and into ours on January 27, 2018 under the south side of the Cambie
Bridge. We designed and built a simple oblong inflatable that served as a
platform for various types of programming where the aim was to generate
41
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
a discursive temporary public space welcoming all citizens, focusing on
engaging youth in the community. The bubble itself responded to the site
with its rectangular form, aligning with the bridge above. The AstroTurf
below the shape and inflatable seating provided a cozy and welcoming interior environment, with professional lighting and sound equipment adding
to the quality of the experience.
Approximately 400 visitors attended the event. Programming began with
a mini-design Jam, hosted by the Vancouver Design Nerds. We asked
participants to share stories about memorable experiences in public
space, and to envision what else the Vancouver Bubble could be. CityHive
hosted a storytelling event, where youth shared their personal experiences about how public space in the city has affected their lives. Participants
took part in a dialogue about urban public spaces and how youth can get
more engaged. Finally, local soundscape artists Soft Fit and Big Zen activated the Vancouver Bubble with ambient music, and visitors lounged on
inflatable furniture as an LED lighting installation by Hfour Studio, another
local collaborator, was shown under the night sky. All day passers-by were
invited to play ping pong with Frida&Frank, sip coffee and tea, write on the
CityStudio chalkboards and blow giant bubbles.
I have recorded 360° footage from all stages of this experiment, with plans
to produce a documentary in the future.
Observations
Placemaking creates opportunities for citizens to interact. Intentional programming can bolster placemaking initiatives by promoting dialogue about
specific topics in order to create citizen spaces. POP! achieved this by
focusing on the topic of public space itself, providing facilitated activities
where visitors were prompted with questions about their own experiences
in public space and given opportunities to make new connections through
conversations on this topic.
While we didn’t track the impact of visitor interactions at POP! doing so
is potentially possible and worth consideration for future iterations of the
Vancouver Bubble. For example, we could task volunteers with counting
participants, as well as conduct short surveys or interviews during events.
The community of placemakers in Vancouver is well-connected, and the
participatory nature of this experiment allowed me to expand my own
network. Beginning with a small group, the community surrounding the
Vancouver Bubble grew exponentially since the launch of the project.
VIVA Vancouver facilitated some of those connections via Slack, including
Transformation Projects, CityStudio, Hfour Studio and others who had received VIVA funding for pop-up events. Eventually Frida&Frank founders
Ellie Arkin and Haley Roeser became a core part of the team and helped
with the design and construction of our first iteration. Spending time with
42
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
these collaborators allowed me to learn more about the placemaking trend
in Vancouver, as well as get connected to CityHive and propel the POP!
project forward.
The Vancouver Bubble project differs from Madrid, Jamaica and Montreal
experiments because I documented the process from within, as a design
lead and organizer, as opposed to coming in as an outside observer. I
still used 360° film, kept a detailed process book and used my journal
and sketchbook to reflect on the work. However, even though I observed
and participated in this project as an organizer, I went through a similar
process of connecting with community members and building trust within
local networks as I had to do in the other experimental case studies. The
fact that I live in Vancouver, and the longer project timeline, helped with
this networking process, and highlights the need for more time in-country
if working on documentary projects abroad. Finally, as an organizer and
participant in this project, I was able to exercise my own right to the city by
creating a citizen space.
Future opportunities for the Vancouver Bubble include a pop-up event at
Robson Square, also funded by VIVA Vancouver, installing it at MakerLabs, and creating our own event with HCMA in the Alley Oop laneway
(possibly the Dream House). Considerations include rain-proofing the
bubble, more portable flooring solutions and tracking impact.
Fig. 22 (right) The Vancouver Bubble at POP! Korb, Jared. Vancouver, BC. 2018. Photos.
(Used with permission)
43
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
44
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
45
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
46
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Fig. 23-26 The Vancouver Bubble at POP! Korb, Jared. Vancouver, BC. 2018. Photos. (Used with permission)
47
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
4.0 ANALYSIS
The analysis section will address the commonalities and distinctions
between the sites of grassroots participation and art and design activism
I explored in my thesis. To do this I have developed a series of axes that
define characteristics of these initiatives that affect the use of urban public
space and contribute to the empowerment of citizens by promoting the
right to the city. I will also illustrate how understanding how these aspects
operate within their varied contexts lays the groundwork for future work in
creating citizen spaces that reclaim the right to the city.
4.1 Axes of Participation
The following four axes identify aspects of initiatives of grassroots participation and art and design activism for analysis.
Threatened vs. Safe Tenancy (related to site-specificity)
Top-Down vs. Grassroots Initiatives (related to organizing body)
Intervention vs. Site Transformation (related to action and duration)
Oppressed vs. Empowered Communities (related to outcome and impact)
In the following sections, I define the terms of the axes of participation and
explain how they relate to each other and operate within the projects described in this thesis. By plotting the initiatives I explored in my research
on these axes and intersecting them, I illustrate how they can be used
to identify trends in different urban contexts, while acknowledging the
perils of so-called “one-size-fits-all” solutions for participatory action and
empowerment. Also important to this analysis is the observational insight
I experienced by taking the time to engage with and listen to organizers
and participants of the initiatives described in the case studies. Finally, this
analysis highlights that the axes of participation can help to identify opportunity spaces and possible collaborators for experimental projects such as
360° filmmaking and design interventions like the Vancouver Bubble.
4.1.1 Threatened vs. Safe Tenancy
“Threatened” means that the initiative has insecure tenancy or operates
under the threat of eviction or demolition, while “safe” implies secure tenancy on a specific site.
Threatened versus safe tenancy is related to the site-specificity of the
initiatives explored in this thesis. Security of tenancy refers to the degree
to which citizens can access, occupy and use specific sites over time
within their communities. Examining tenancy is important in this analysis
because of its direct relation to the way citizens can use public space to
48
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
activate discourse on issues affecting their right to the city. While interventions on sites of threatened tenancy often affect change in the short-term,
creating the conditions to transition from threatened to safe tenancy takes
time, but has the potential to transform communities in ways that empower citizens in the long-term. Citizens exercise their right to the city through
sustained engagements over a period of time, creating opportunities for
new social structures to emerge, which in turn can lead to the physical
transformation of the urban environment for community use.
Threatened Tenancy
Public spaces exist in cities that could benefit local communities if programmed to meet citizens needs, but often these sites are only accessible, legally, to certain groups for certain uses. Grassroots participation or
art and design activism initiatives may be launched to represent community wishes for a site, often in opposition to state or corporate interests. This
type of engagement occurs with a sense of urgency on contested sites,
and sometimes requires participation in actions of civil disobedience such
as illegal occupation of public space. While actions taking place on sites
of threatened tenancy can involve legal risks, they can also afford increased solidarity among participants who are fighting for a common goal
and stand to lose something as a group should the initiative fail. Transitioning from threatened to safe tenancy can lead to a significant positive
social impact in communities. My work pays particular attention to sites of
threatened tenancy and sites in transition from threatened to safe tenancy
for these reasons, and to help me understand how to contribute to this
kind of transformation through my practice.
Notman Garden and Gorilla Park in Montreal both involve community
groups which have mobilized long-term grassroots movements and involve illegal actions on corporate property. The aim is to protect the urban
spaces with abundant wildlife, known as “urban jungles,” that have meaning for them. Both groups are interested in securing safe tenancy and
have involved a process of participation that has engaged a core group of
community organizers and countless volunteers for over 20 years. A deep
passion to save the sites from the threat of demolition helps sustain their
long-term engagement. Organizers I spoke with in Montreal emphasized
the importance of the relationships between participants to maintain energy for the movement throughout the years and iterations of actions that
have taken place on each site. Gorilla Park highlights how easily years of
effort can fail, as the urban jungle was bulldozed by developers despite
a pending agreement with municipal government to preserve the site.
Regardless, the Friends of Gorilla Park initiative continues to take action,
hoping to restore the site to a community park.
Safe Tenancy
Security of tenancy can affect how long an initiative can last, who can
participate, who organizes it and why, short and long-term goals and even
49
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
possible outcomes. Safe tenancy refers to an initiative taking place on a
specific site, and that has an arrangement, either with local government
or private property owners, allowing them to occupy a particular space
legally. Typically, initiatives with safe tenancy are sanctioned by the state,
which sometimes implies that capitalist interests or other political motives
are at play. In these cases, community groups can sometimes take advantage of these motives in order to achieve positive impact by exercising
their right to the city through formal channels. Nonetheless, such positive
impacts depend on the contemporary political climate. Safe tenancy also
affords a level of security and engagement that, while maybe not urgent, are still important to healthy communities, such as fostering human
connections as a way to combat social isolation. Frida&Frank’s pop-up
ping pong events are an example of this kind of community building that
operates through playful actions and installations. Safe initiatives may
also recur or take place over a long period of time, allowing organizers
the freedom to plan and initiate sustained and thoughtful opportunities for
community participation.
The unique context of different cities also affects security of tenancy for
initiatives. Due to the skyrocketing cost of real estate and limited space
in Vancouver, land use is highly monitored and there is a distinct lack
of public space that isn’t owned by either the government or corporate
land developers. Therefore, the majority of grassroots participation and
art and design activism examples reviewed in Vancouver (other than
protests) hold safe tenancy and are less site-specific, as they have gone
through legal channels on state-sanctioned sites. These examples are
also more temporary, as the use of land for community purposes is tightly
controlled by the city, limiting the opportunity for long-term transformation
of urban space. VIVA Vancouver exists to promote the short-term use of
public space by community and artist groups that may have otherwise
transformed space through grassroots means. The Vancouver Bubble
project is one example, as my team could have illegally occupied a site
to inflate the structure but could have been shut down or fined. However
since we were sanctioned by the city and funded by VIVA Vancouver, we
were empowered to initiate an entire day of community participation. This
connection to the city also afforded the Vancouver Bubble project funding
for materials and insurance, access to electricity, a city worker to adjust
the lighting under the Cambie Bridge and even social media promotion via
VIVA Vancouver Channels.
Transition from threatened to safe tenancy
The transition of a site from threatened to safe tenancy through grassroots
participation and art and design activism challenges the status quo of
public space designed for state or corporate interests rather than community needs. Safe tenancy can be a goal as well as a possible outcome of
site-specific initiatives, particularly those intended to make use of a space
on a long-term basis. Achieving this transition supports the right to the city
50
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
by empowering citizens to legally occupy sites and engage in activities
they define and steward for their own benefit through cooperative means,
as opposed to uses dictated by the state.
Unfortunately, initiatives must go through a process of proving themselves,
sometimes through illegal occupation of public space, before safe tenancy
can be achieved, and it often is not. As seen with indigenous-led resistance
to BC Hydro’s Site C project, safe tenancy can be strongly opposed by state
and corporate interests and block the transition of a site from threatened to
safe tenancy. On the other hand, grassroots action can successfully transform sites despite corporate interests, such as in the case of Park Fiction.
In this art and design activism example, artist and community participation
won the right for citizens to physically transform and use the waterfront
space as a public park, rather than submit the site to redevelopment for
corporate gain. Another successful transition from threatened to safe tenancy is seen in Madrid at Campo De Cebada where citizens had to organize
multiple protest actions before the municipal authorities agreed to allow the
community to occupy and maintain the event space over the long-term. The
historic example of Jane Jacobs rallying the community to preserve neighbourhoods and public spaces in New York in the 1960s also illustrates a
transition from threatened to safe tenancy by means of protest. The fact that
these victories are achieved at all—when safe tenancy is secured through
grassroots means—highlights the potential power of collaboration, participation and citizen-initiated action.
4.1.2 Top-down vs Grassroots Initiatives
“Top-down” refers to government-initiated, and “grassroots” refers to citizen-initiated examples of public space activation.
This axis is related to the organizing body of initiatives. Understanding
who is responsible for organizing, funding, sanctioning and promoting
participatory action in public space can affect its authenticity, potentially
revealing ulterior motives for citizen engagement such as political popularity or corporate gain. Affordances change dramatically when comparing
top-down to grassroots initiatives. Top-down initiatives can have positive
impact and legal advantages, but grassroots movements potentially
cultivate an even deeper engagement through collaborative stewardship,
overcoming barriers to the use of public space, reclaiming the right to the
city and resulting in community empowerment.
Top-Down Initiatives
Top-down initiatives are organized by a formal organization or governing body, usually affording safe tenancy along with other benefits. From
a critical perspective, top-down initiatives can potentially be considered
the participatory equivalent of “greenwashing,” creating a false sense of
51
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
engagement (pacification) for political or corporate gain. For example,
developers in Vancouver sometimes fund the creation of community
gardens on vacant lots, heavily marked by highly visible corporate logos
along the perimeters, while they speculate on land values or wait for
redevelopment applications to be approved. These temporary community
gardens operate as small concessions whose actual value to the community pales in comparison to the value developers gain from the positive
image produced by these installations. Additionally, the power structures
of top-down initiatives sometimes involve one or a small group of decision
makers who have final say in how public space should be used.
While it is important to look at top-down initiatives with a critical eye, many
of the examples I encountered in my research seemed to make genuine
attempts to empower communities through formal channels. For example,
the Green Laneways project in Montreal initiates an application processes to spark interest and create a sense of ownership over each laneway
transformation project for participating residents. The initiative provides
funding to applicants who meet community support criteria as well as
oversees the logistics and engineering sign-off required to transform
traditional laneways into green, traffic-calmed spaces. Finally, once each
green laneway is built, stewardship of the space is passed on to community members. The transformation of laneways to green spaces has
visibly impacted the social structures of local neighbourhoods in Montreal,
promoting collaboration and enabling access to public community space.
However, the type of top-down initiatives that work in Montreal may not
exist in other contexts, for example where the state cannot (or will not)
spare resources for purely social benefits. In Jamaica, participatory initiatives like Life Yard are necessarily citizen-led, responding to a political
context where residents cannot rely on top-down resources to protect their
interests or even their well being and safety.
Grassroots Initiatives
Grassroots initiatives often respond to urgent community needs, such as
access to food, housing and social services, by demanding these human
rights from the state through protest. In Canada, the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms provides that citizens should be granted the freedom of peaceful assembly (PEN Canada). However, this right only extends as far as the
government will allow, and legal injunctions often force evictions of protests that attempt to occupy public space for a sustained amount of time,
such as sites of temporary housing known as “Tent Cities” in Vancouver.
Additional barriers to grassroots use of public space exist, such as lengthy
municipal application processes, fees for use of particular spaces, the
need for costly insurance and permits and poorly facilitated or, in the worst
cases, corrupt process of selection. Grassroots groups often lack funding,
relying on volunteer labour and fundraising, and need to mobilize quickly
to act on a particular issue. This usually means grassroots actions are
52
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
not achieved through formal channels and participants risk fines or even
arrest, despite the legal right to protest. When use of public space by
citizens is deemed illegal, the right to the city is threatened and that space
loses its status as public. All citizens should have the right to use public
space, but in practice that are considered public are often under tight
control. Grassroots methods seek to overcome barriers through thoughtful
communication and collaborative planning, incorporating democratic, flat
or bottom-up organizing structures and decision-making processes.
Grassroots initiatives tend to cultivate strong social bonds, participant motivation and voluntary stewardship. Often, the very individuals affected by
an issue are the ones who launch an initiative, and a social support constellation of participants is built from their social circle, expanding outward
as awareness grows. This can be seen in the Site C example, where local
First Nations launched a resistance movement and solidarity initiatives
have expanded throughout the province of BC and beyond. At Campo De
Cebada in Madrid, what began as a small group of local citizens rallying
for the right to make use of a vacant lot grew into a thriving community-run
space with a large network of local volunteer participants actively working
together to program and maintain it. Grassroots initiatives provide opportunities for citizens to reclaim their right to the city while developing new
and strong social bonds with other participants. While top-down initiatives
can also have positive impact in communities, the sense of ownership and
stewardship cultivated by grassroots initiatives illustrates a deep level of
engagement, resulting in community empowerment.
Safe tenancy of top-down initiatives
When the axis of safe versus threatened tenancy intersects with grassroots versus top-town initiatives in both Montreal and Vancouver, a
distinctly empty quadrant of top-down and threatened tenancy is revealed,
as seen in figures 27 and 28. This highlights that top-down initiatives are
more likely to be considered safe in terms of tenancy. It is when an initiative is launched by citizens themselves, sometimes requiring it to occupy
public space illegally, that tenancy is more likely to be threatened. What
seems like simple logic stands out as a highly problematic reality. Why
should the use of public space be privileged to top-down initiatives? This
is a clear violation of the right to the city for grassroots groups.
I used these intersecting axes to identify possible collaborators for a 360º
film project in Montreal. As seen in figure 27, the two urban jungle sites,
Notman Garden and Gorilla Park, fall into the category of grassroots and
threatened tenancy due risk of demolition by developers. In both cases,
corporate interests threatened the sites, but Notman Garden, despite
being demolished by developers, has since been able to achieve the
promise of safe tenancy from the borough district which has committed to
restore the property as a community green space. The right to the city is
called into question when a valued community asset can only be saved by
the arbitrary good graces of top-down power structures.
53
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
The trend of safe tenancy for top-down initiatives revealed an opportunity
space for design intervention in Vancouver. The Vancouver Bubble project
was able to work within the context of safe tenancy by engaging with VIVA
Vancouver, a top-down organizer that facilitated the use of public space.
However, even though the Vancouver Bubble was empowered to exist
via top-down channels, this doesn’t address the problematic condition of
threatened tenancy of grassroots initiatives. It also presents limitations to
the work that we produced, requiring approval from top-down power structures before moving forward. This condition remains a future consideration
for my continued work in the placemaking space in Vancouver.
Fig. 27 Slide from ECUAD MDes Summer Research Presentation showing Montreal sites on
dual axes of safe versus threatened and grassroots versus top-down. Carson, Jesi. 2017.
Fig. 28 Slide from ECUAD MDes Summer Research Presentation showing Vancouver sites
on dual axes of safe versus threatened and grassroots versus top-down. Carson, Jesi. 2017.
54
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
4.1.3 Intervention vs Site Transformation
“Intervention” implies a short-term or temporary installation or activation
of a site, and “transformation” refers to the long-term occupation of public
space and its repurposing for community use.
The intervention versus transformation axis is related to the type of action
taking place on a site and how long it lasts. Community needs inform the
use of particular sites, including factors such as their suitability for shortterm intervention or long-term transformation. Both interventions and
transformations offer benefits, including opportunities for new social interactions in public space as well as temporary or sustained engagement in
the physical transformation of a site for community use.
Intervention
Intervention on a site occurs when citizens are unable to transform an underused site permanently, often for legal reasons, but are able to change
it temporarily. Interventions can lead to increased public awareness for
particular issues, and social bonds that develop through the process
from organization to action. They can also be used as tactics to achieve
community goals. For example, Gorilla Park organizers installed a pop-up
community garden on the site after it had been bulldozed by developers to
illustrate what could exist there if the community were given stewardship
of the space. Even though this intervention was illegal, it remained on the
site for a number of weeks, showing the developer might have an interest
in meeting community needs (likely not for social reasons, but rather to
secure the sale of the land to the state for a profit).
Interventions promote social interactions and build community in a particular space. In Vancouver I observed a trend clearly weighted toward intervention, with a focus on short-term placemaking and pop-up initiatives that
create opportunities for social interactions in public space (see figure 29).
The City of Vancouver is known for publicly promoting the trend of placemaking, offering funding for artists and other groups to activate underused
spaces temporarily for social purposes.
This axis contributed to the initiation of the Vancouver Bubble project as
an opportunity to experiment with the form of urban-scale interventions
and learn the opportunities and limitations of working through these formal
channels in the local Vancouver context. The Vancouver Bubble used a
participatory design process and engaged a large number of volunteers to
design and build our intervention, offering unique opportunities for collaboration and new social constellations to be formed. Since the POP! event
in January 2018, organizers and volunteers have re-grouped and are
currently working on another iteration of the project, illustrating that the
process of intervention has built a community around itself, regardless of
the temporary nature of the project.
55
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Fig. 29 Slide from ECUAD MDes Summer Research Presentation showing Vancouver sites
on dual axes of transformation versus intervention and grassroots versus top-down. Carson,
Jesi. 2017.
Transformation of Site
Transformation occurs when citizens see an opportunity to make use of
a site and set about physically and programmatically changing it in ways
that make it more accessible and functional for the long-term benefit of the
local community. Often this transformation involves collaborative design
and construction of community amenities like street furniture, sports or
play equipment, games, outdoor theatre screens and seating, and garden
planters, to name a few. When citizens are empowered to care for and
maintain a site for their own community to use, fair and equal decision
making processes emerge, creating opportunities for leadership and collaboration. Participating in informal governance is another way for citizens
to be empowered, to have their voices heard among their peers and to
take initiative by launching new activities with and for other community
members. When transformation is achieved by grassroots means, benefits like sustained engagement and a sense of ownership are developed
among participants, who may be invested personally in a particular site or
cause, as opposed to top-down use of public space decided by the state.
In Madrid, transformative initiatives, where urban sites are often repurposed for long-term community use, are common. Campo de Cebada
participants were a part of the original transformation of a vacant lot and
continue to remain engaged in the ongoing stewardship of the space,
from building street furniture to making sure the garbage gets collected.
Another example from Madrid, Esta Es Una Plaza is a community-run
space that was initiated by local residents to transform a vacant lot into a
community garden, a playground for children and even a bicycle cooper-
56
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
ative where neighbours can learn to repair their bikes. Life Yard in Jamaica also required a sustained community effort to transform a dangerous
neighbourhood into a safe space for children to learn, grow and play. In
all three of these sites of transformation, a community aesthetic emerged
including large scale murals and colourful pallet furniture and other structures unique to each cultural context. Strategies like general assemblies
(community meetings to collaboratively plan programming) are used in all
of these examples to make decisions about the use of the space, empowering community members to take on grassroots governance roles and
contribute in their own ways to their collective projects.
4.1.4 Oppressed vs Empowered Communities
“Oppressed” means that an initiative was unable to achieve its desired
outcomes for any reason, community needs were not met, or that its impact was visibly minimal. “Empowered” refers to the positive impact of an
initiative within a community, socially, physically or otherwise, evaluated
based on the observed achievement of purpose or goals to meet community needs.
This axis proposes to comment on potential impact by evaluating whether
or not the desired purpose or goals of an initiative are achieved based
on its outcomes, including unexpected results or outcomes that occur
after the fact (downstream). Observations of impact are subjective, but
qualitatively evaluating goals and outcomes can potentially be achieved
by listening to the perspectives and stories of participants, which I have
begun to do with my experimental 360° filmmaking work.
Oppressed Communities
If the right to the city is infringed upon, with state or corporate interests
creating barriers to citizens use of public space, an initiative may be
considered oppressed. However, with most participatory actions, an
unintentional result is the building of new social networks and solidarity
among participants. Therefore, it is unlikely any initiative would be entirely
oppressed if participation is being practiced and opportunities for engagement are presented, regardless if goals are met. The Gorilla Park initiative
in Montreal could be considered oppressed because the goal was to save
the urban jungle site, but an outcome was that the urban jungle was demolished by developers despite the efforts of this citizen group. However,
it can also be considered empowered because of the connections made
between community members during the process, and the ongoing energy the group maintains to get their jungle back. Although social ties and
community building may not have been an explicit goal of the initiative, it
is an unexpected result, and therefore Gorilla Park should fall somewhere
in between these two axis points. Similarly, while resistance to the Site C
project has been challenged by state and corporate power, and the BC
57
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Hydro dam project is currently under construction (rendering it oppressed,
as the goal was to save the site), a downstream result is the growing network of solidarity movements in support of the initiative, which continues
to oppose the ongoing construction.
Empowered Communities
If participants are able to exercise their right to the city, engaging in the
transformation of public space to achieve goals they help to define, the
community is considered empowered. In addition to transforming a site for
community use and providing alternatives to the culture of individualism
and pacification caused by urbanization under capitalism, specific community needs or goals requiring the use of public space can range widely. A
few examples include providing housing, promoting neighbourhood safety
or constructing community amenities. The achievement of these goals,
particularly if they are self-defined and self-initiated by a community, indicates empowerment and positive impact.
In Vancouver, while Tent Cities are a symptom of inequitable state support, they can provide temporary empowerment, with the transformation
of urban sites for housing being achieved for as long as is possible before
the government intervenes. Meanwhile, the trend of placemaking in Vancouver has led to many small grassroots organizations emerging with the
goal of increasing citizen engagement in public space by activating underused sites in the city. In Jamaica, many downstream benefits from the
transformation of an urban neighbourhood occurred, although the main
goal was simply to grow food for local residents. Increased community
safety became apparent, along with stronger bonds among neighbours.
A community event space emerged, with soccer matches and musical
performances becoming common.
In the analysis section I defined four axes and used examples of grassroots participation and art and design activism explored in this thesis in
order to develop an understanding of the characteristics of participatory
initiatives. These axes help unpack the various ways in which design can
operate in a given site. In addition to this analytical approach, the methods
employed during the experimental case studies are important, including observation, listening and reflection. By looking at the affordances
and challenges of various aspects of participation, this analysis lays the
groundwork for my design practice, including future experiments in creating citizen spaces and reclaiming the right to the city.
58
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
5.0 CONCLUSION
Through an exploration of the themes of public space, the right to the
city, grassroots participation and art and design activism to create citizen
spaces, this thesis provides relevant theory and examples that respond
to the condition of urbanization under capitalism. My design practice is
grounded in this context and theory and includes ongoing development
of a methodology for collaborative storytelling using 360° filmmaking and
documentation of experimental case studies in Madrid, Jamaica, Montreal
and Vancouver. This research and fieldwork has led to the following conclusions: 1) Grassroots participation can help citizens reclaim their right to
the city by challenging power structures that control, plan and build the urban environment; and 2) Art and design activism to create citizen spaces
can promote localized collective empowerment by fostering opportunities
for dialogue and community connections leading to transformative action.
The Participedia project will benefit from this research as well as the resulting experimental creative output. In addition to increasing the number
of cases of grassroots participation and art and design activism on Participedia.xyz, I am developing a process for community-engaged visual media production that can help, where appropriate, make these stories more
accessible to a wider audience. Adding visual media stories to Participedia.xyz will offer a new channel for community groups to potentially reach
new volunteers or funders. I also intend to explore participatory video
facilitation as part of my future work on this project, a process intended to
benefit communities by empowering them to produce and share their own
media. Finally, the axes of participation may also contribute to Participedia by offering a system to reflect on grassroots participation and art and
design activism as methodologies for participatory democracy.
Using the axes of participation to examine real world examples of grassroots participation and art and design activism, I have laid the groundwork
for future experiments in public space and reclaiming the right to the city in
my own practice. Comparing grassroots to top-down initiatives reveals the
need for systems and structures of power to be challenged and highlights
the fact that grassroots action can lead to reclaiming public space and
securing safe tenancy for community use. Identifying trends in transformation of space versus short-term intervention, particularly actions driven by
art and design activism, allowed me to see the potential of working within
existing systems, and to take advantage of the safe status of top-down
initiatives with the creation of the Vancouver Bubble.
59
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
The Vancouver Bubble was a discursive citizen space where visitors were
challenged to directly confront their own experiences in public space and
in particular how youth in Vancouver can be more engaged in its use.
Although I acknowledge the limitations of top-down initiatives, I would
describe this experiment as largely empowering based on the amount of
community connections formed and fostered. The collaborative design
process built a network of artists, designers, placemakers and eventually
public participants around the concept of reclaiming public space. Adding
elements of impact analysis, such as volunteer surveys, video or audio
interviews with participants can further add to future iterations of this intervention. Through the Vancouver Bubble intervention, I was empowered to
exercise my own right to the city, and I learned that creating citizen spaces
can contribute to collective empowerment. As I build my practice in design
activism, particularly in the temporary placemaking context of Vancouver, I
hope to further examine the potential of transforming public space to meet
the needs of communities in the long-term. I also encourage art activism
practitioners as well as grassroots organizers to explore this space by
launching their own experiments in reclaiming the right to the city.
60
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Works Cited
“About Site C.” Paddle for the Peace. Web. 15 Mar. 2018.
“Ant Farm.” 1968-1978. Spatial Agency. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
Bakker, Dr. Karen, et. al. “Report #1 - First Nations and Site C.” Program
on Water Governance, University of British Columbia. May 2016.
Web. 15 Mar. 2018.
Beuys, Joseph. “I Am Searching for a Field of Character.” 1973. Partici
pation. Ed. Claire Bishop. London: Whitechapel Gallery, 2006.
125-126. Print.
Brenner, Neil and Schmid, Christian. “Towards a new epistemology
of the urban?” CITY, 2015 VOL. 19, NOS. 2-3. 151-182. Web.
24 Apr. 2018.
Beuys, Joseph and Schwarze, Dirk. “Report on a Day’s Proceedings at
the Bureau for Direct Democracy.” 1972. Participation. Ed. Claire
Bishop. London: Whitechapel Gallery, 2006. 120-124. Print.
Bravo, David. (Trans. Julie Wark). “The Barley Field.” Public Space. 2010.
Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Bourriaud, Nicolas. “Relational Aesthetics.” 1998. Participation. Ed. Claire
Bishop. London: Whitechapel Gallery, 2006. 165-171. Print.
Bucknell, Alice. “What Can Joseph Beuys’s Mythic Boxing Match
Teach Today’s Activist Artists?” artnet news. July 13, 2017. Web.
14 Feb. 2018.
Citizen Jane: Battle for the City. Dir. Tyrnauer, Matt. 2016.
“Connect & Engage: A survey of Metro Vancouver.” Vancouver Founda
tion. 2017. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Critical Art Ensemble. Web. 24 Apr. 2018.
61
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Disalvo, Carl. “Adversarial Design.” Cambridge: MIT Press. 2015. Print.
Faud-Luke, Alastair. “Design Activism: Beautiful strangeness for a sustain
able world.” London: Earthscan. 2009. Print.
Frida&Frank. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Gray, Sherrrian. “Trends in Urban Crime and Violence in Kingston, Jamai
ca.” UN Habitat. 2007. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
Harvey, David. “The Right to the City.” New Left Review 53. Septem
ber-October 2008, 23-40. Web. 11 Apr. 2017.
Inflatocookbook. Ant Farm. 1971. Print.
Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage
Books. 1961. Print.
“Jane Jacobs.” Project for Public Spaces, 3 Jan 2010. Web. 10 April 2017.
Kester, Grant. The One and The Many. Duram and London: Duke Univer
sity Press, 2011. Print.
Kofman, Eleonore and Lebas, Elizabeth. “Part I Introduction: Lost in
Transposition - Time, Space and the City.” Writings on cities/Henri Lefeb
vre. Cambridge: Wiley-Blackwell, 1996, 3-60. Print.
Lefebvre, Henri. “The Right to the City.” Writings on cities/Henri Lefebvre.
Kofman, Eleonore and Lebas, Elizabeth, Translators. Cambridge:
Wiley-Blackwell, 1996, 61-181. Print.
Lederman, Marsha. “Ken Lum’s new art installation tackles Vancou
ver’s real estate crisis.” The Globe and Mail. 2 Mar. 2015. Web.
25 Jan. 2018.
Lewallen, Constance, Seid, Steve and Lord, Chip (Ant Farm). Ant Farm,
1968-1978. University of California Press. 2004. Print.
Los Madriles. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
62
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Lu, Chaohui, Schellenberg, Grant, et. al. “How’s Life in the City? Life
Satisfaction Across Census Metropolitan Areas and Economic
Regions in Canada.” Statistics Canada. April 2016. Web. 25 Jan.
2018.
Lum, Ken. Vancouver Especially. 2015. 271 Union Street, Vancouver.
Manzini, Ezio. Design, When Everybody Designs. Cambridge: MIT
Press. 2015. Print.
Mazzotta, Matthew. “Open House.” Public Space? Lost and Found. Eds.
Gediminas Urbonas, Ann Lui and Lucas Freeman. Cambridge:
The MIT Press. 245-249. Print.
Moore, A. W., Smart, A. (Eds.). Making Room: Cultural Production in Oc
cupied Spaces. 2015. Spain: Other Forms. Print.
Pah Madrid. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Pallagst, K. “Shrinking cities in the United States of America: Three cases,
three planning stories.” The Future of Shrinking Cities. 2009.
Print.
“Park Fiction.” 1994. Spatial Agency. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
“Park Fiction - Introduction in English.” Park Fiction. 10 Dec. 2013. Web.
14 Feb. 2018.
Party4Health. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Peattie, Lisa. The View from the Barrio. Michigan: University of Michigan
Press. 1968. Print.
PEN Canada. 2016. Web. 15 Mar. 2018.
“Places for People Downtown.” City of Vancouver. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
“Ruelles Vertes.” Rosemont La Petite-Patrie Montréal. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
63
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Schäfer, Christoph et al. Park Fiction. 1994-2005. St. Paul Neighbour
hood, Hamburg.
Sieden, Lloyd Steven. Buckminster Fuller’s Universe. Basic Books. 2000.
Print.
“Site C Dam.” Program on Water Governance, University of British Colum
bia. Web. 15 Mar. 2018.
Smith, Neil and Williams, Peter. Gentrification of the City. Routledge.
2013. Print.
The Gleaners & I. Writ. / Dir. Agnes Varda. 2000.
Vancouver Design Nerds. Web. 5 Feb. 2018.
Vancouver Public Space Network. Web. 25 Jan. 2018.
Vasudevan, Alexander. The Autonomous City: A history of urban squat
ting. London: Verso. 2015. Print.
Watts, Emma. “‘I Wanted To Show Them How it Felt’: The Women Using
VR as Empathy Activism.” Vice: Broadly. 2 Nov. 2016. Web. 24
Apr. 2018.
Wodiczko, Krzysztof. Critical Vehicles. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 1999.
Print.
64
CITIZEN SPACES Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
Experiments in Reclaiming the Right to the City
By Jesi Carson | BDes 2013, MDes 2018
A critical and process documentation paper
submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Design
EMILY CARR UNIVERSITY OF ART + DESIGN
© Jesi Carson, 2018
Photo: @JaredKorb, Vancouver Design Nerds
CITIZEN SPACES