Résumés
Abstract
A network of various self-managed community spaces played a crucial role in the citizen-led response to the social crisis during the first months of the COVID-19 crisis in the most vulnerable neighbourhoods in the periphery of Madrid. Nevertheless, such community spaces are under a precarious situation due to recurrent threats of closure from different administrations. It is therefore crucial to make visible the importance posed by such spaces in the construction of more resilient, equitable, and caring neighbourhoods. To that end, we propose the definition of a theoretical model of critical placemaking to understand how such grassroots practices are underlaid by a collective project of neighbourhood. The research fills the gap within different theories of placemaking, social innovation, and urban commons to establish a model based on the three axes: community, space, and political project. The study draws from the notions of relational place and civic engagement, together with models of space appropriation and social innovation theory. The theoretical model is contrasted with the qualitative research of the cases of social centres La Villana de Vallekas and Eko de Carabanchel. The results suggest an emergent city model at the neighbourhood scale of proximity self-managed citizen-led infrastructure that configures a resilient network against systemic and external threats.
Keywords:
- Self-management,
- Civic uses,
- Neighbourhood,
- Society,
- Commons,
- Public space,
- Urban space,
- Community,
- Spain
Résumé
Un réseau de divers espaces communautaires autogérés dans les quartiers les plus vulnérables de la périphérie de Madrid a joué un rôle crucial dans la réponse citoyenne à la crise sociale durant les premiers mois de la crise du COVID-19. Néanmoins, ces espaces communautaires sont dans une situation précaire en raison des menaces récurrentes de fermeture de la part de différentes administrations. Il est donc primordial de rendre visible l’importance que représentent ces espaces dans la construction de quartiers plus résilients, équitables et solidaires. À cette fin, nous proposons la définition d’un modèle théorique de Place-making critique pour comprendre comment de telles pratiques populaires sont sous-tendues par un projet collectif de quartier. La recherche comble le vide entre les différentes théories de place-making, d’innovation sociale et des biens communs urbains pour établir un modèle basé sur trois axes : communauté, espace et projet politique. L’étude s’appuie sur les notions de lieu relationnel et d’engagement civique, ainsi que sur les modèles d’appropriation de l’espace et sur la théorie de l’innovation sociale. Le modèle théorique est confronté à la recherche qualitative des cas des centres sociaux La Villana de Vallekas et Eko de Carabanchel. Les résultats suggèrent un modèle émergent de ville à l’échelle de quartier d’une infrastructure de proximité autogérée par les citoyens, qui configure un réseau résilient contre les menaces systémiques et externes.
Mots-clés :
- Biens communs,
- Espace public,
- Espace urbain,
- Communauté,
- Espagne,
- Autogestion,
- Usage civique,
- Quartier,
- Société
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Albrechts, Louis, and Alessandro Balducci. 2013. “Setting the Scene.” https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2013.859000.
- Alexander, Christopher. 1977. A Pattern Language : Towns, Buildings, Construction. Edited by Oxford university Press.
- Ardill, Nicholas, and Fabiano Lemes de Oliveira. 2018. “Social Innovation in Urban Spaces.” International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development 10 (3):207–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2018.1526177.
- Bey, Hakim. 2004. TAZ: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy. Edited by Autonomedia. https://hermetic.com/bey/taz_cont.
- Brenner, Neil, David J. Madden, and David Wachsmuth. 2012. “Assemblages, Actor– Networks, and the Challenges of Critical Urban Theory.” In Cities for People, Not for Profit: Critical Urban Theory and the Right to the City. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203802182.
- Caciagli, Carlotta, and Chiara Milan. 2021. “Contemporary Urban Commons. Rebuilding the Analytical Framework.” Partecipazione e Conflitto 14, (1):2021. http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/paco/article/view/24032.
- Chombart de Lauwe, Paul Henry. 1979. “Appropriation de l ’ Espace Et Changement Social.” Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie 66:141–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40689859.
- Crawford, Margaret. 1995. “Contesting the Public Realm: Struggles over Public Space in Los Angeles.” Journal of Architectural Education 49 (1):4–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1995.10734658.
- Cresswell, Tim. 2014. Place: An Introduction. John Wiley & Sons.
- Foster, Sheila R., and Christian Iaione. 2016. “The City as a Commons.” Yale Law & Policy Review 34 (2). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2653084.
- Franck, Karen A., and Quentin Stevens. 2006. Loose Space \Textbackslashtextbar Possibility and Diversity in Urban Life. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203799574/loose-space-karen-franck-quentin-stevens.
- Fraser, Nancy. 1990. “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy.” Social Text, no. 26/26:56–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466240.
- Friedmann, John. 2010. “Place and Place-Making in Cities: A Global Perspective.” Planning Theory and Practice 11 (2):149–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649351003759573.
- Giddens, Anthony. 2011. Consequencias de La Modernidad. Translated by Ana Lizón Ramón. 5.a reimpr. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
- Gómez Nieto, Alicia. 2015. “Sistemas Urbanos Emergentes: Procesos Informales de Gestión y Producción de Espacio Público.” {PhD} {Thesis}, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. http://oa.upm.es/40081/1/ALICIA_GOMEZ_NIETO.pdf.
- Graham, Stephen, and Patsy Healey. 1999. “Relational Concepts of Space and Place: Issues for Planning Theory and Practice.” European Planning Studies 7 (5):623–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654319908720542.
- Hall, Peter. 2014. Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design Since 1880. John Wiley; Sons.
- Harvey, David. 2012. Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. New York: Verso.
- Healey, Patsy. 2006. “Transforming Governance: Challenges of Institutional Adaptation and a New Politics of Space.” European Planning Studies 14 (3):299–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500420792.
- Healey, Patsy. 2018. “Creating Public Value Through Caring for Place.” Policy and Politics 46 (1):65–79. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557316X14817306640776.
- Healey, Patsy, David E. Booher, Jacob Torfing, Eva Sorensen, Mee Kam Ng, Peterson Pedro, and Albrechts Louis. 2008. “Civic Engagement, Spatial Planning and Democracy as a Way of Life.” Planning Theory and Practice 9 (3):379–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350802277092.
- Heidegger, Martin. 2015. Construir Habitar Pensar (Bauen Wohnen Denken). Barcelona: La Oficina.
- Hernández Aja, Agustín. 2003. “Ciudadanos Fecundos: Participación y Calidad de Vida.” Boletín CF+S 24:247–66. http://habitat.aq.upm.es/boletin/n24/aaher.html.
- Hou, Jeffrey. 2010. Insurgent Public Space \Textbackslashtextbar Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contem. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203093009/insurgent-public-space-jeffrey-hou.
- Karge, Toni. 2018. “Placemaking and Urban Gardening: Himmelbeet Case Study in Berlin.” Journal of Place Management and Development 11 (2):208–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-10-2017-0109.
- Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford university press.
- Lefebvre, Henri. 1991. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith. Blackwell.
- Low, Setha, and Irwin Altman. 1992. “Place Attachment. A Conceptual Inquiry.” In Place Attachment, edited by Irwin Altman and Setha M Low. Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1.
- Lydon, Mike, and Anthony Garcia. 2015. Tactical Urbanism: Short-Term Action for Long-Term Change. Island Press. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-567-0.
- Madden, Kathleen. 2001. “How to Turn a Place Around.” In A Handbook for Creating Successful Public Spaces, edited by Andrew Schwartz and Project for Public Spaces. April 2001. New York: Project of Public Spaces.
- Manzini, Ezio. 2018. “Autonomy, Collaboration and Light Communities. Lessons Learnt from Social Innovation.” Strategic Design Research Journal 11 (2):162–66.
- Meijer, Marlies, and Huib Ernste. 2019. “Broadening the Scope of Spatial Planning: Making a Case for Informality in the Netherlands.” Journal of Planning Education and Research, no. December 2016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X19826211.
- Merrifield, Andy. 2014. The New Urban Question. London: PlutoPress.
- Mitchell, Don. 1995. “The End of Public Space? People’s Park, Definitions of the Public, and Democracy.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 85 (1):108–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/2564281.
- Moulaert, Frank. 2010. “Social Innovation and Community Development: Concepts, Theories and Challenges.” In Can Neighbourhoods Save the City? Community Development and Social Innovation, edited by Frank Moulaert, Erik Swyngedouw, Flavia Martinelli, and Sara González. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203849132.
- Moulaert, Frank, Sara González, and Flavia Martinelli. 2010. “ALMOLIN: How to Analyse Social Innovation at the Local Level?” In Can Neighbourhoods Save the City? Community Development and Social Innovation, edited by Frank Moulaert, Erik Swyngedouw, Flavia Martinelli, and Sara González. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203849132.
- Oswalt, Philipp, Klaus Overmeyer, and Philipp Misselwitz. 2013. “Urban Catalyst.” The Power of Temporary Use. Berlin: DOM.
- Petcou, Constantin, and Doina Petrescu. 2008. “Agir l’espace: Notes Transversales, Observations de Terrain Et Questions Concrètes Pour Chacun de Nous.” Multitudes 31 (4):101–14. https://doi.org/10.3917/mult.031.0101.
- Pierce, Joseph, Deborah G. Martin, and James T. Murphy. 2011. “Relational Place-Making: The Networked Politics of Place.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 36 (1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00411.x.
- Pol Urrutia, Enric. 1996. “La Apropacion Del Espacio.” In Cognición, Representación y Apropación Del Espacio., edited by Lupicinio Iñiguez Rueda and Enric Pol Urrutia. 9. Universitat de Barcelona. Monografies Psico/Socio/Ambientals. https://www.academia.edu/8036324/LA_APROPIACION_DEL_ESPACIO.
- Proshansky, Harold M. 1976. “Appropriation Et Non Appropriation (Misappropriation de l’espace).” In Appropriation de l’espace : Actes de La 3e Conférence Internationale de Psychologie de l’espace Construit de Strasbourg, 34–49. Paris: Ministère de l’Equipement.
- Silberger, Susan, Katie Lorah, Rebecca Disbrow, and Anna Muessig. 2013. Places in the Making. How Placemaking Builds Places and Communities. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://dusp.mit.edu/sites/dusp.mit.edu/files/attachments/project/mit-dusp-places-in-the-making.pdf.
- Simonsen, Kirsten. 1992. “Review of The Production of Space.” Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography 74 (1):81–82. https://doi.org/10.2307/490789.
- Toolis, Erin E. 2017. “Theorizing Critical Placemaking as a Tool for Reclaiming Public Space.” American Journal of Community Psychology 59 (1-2). https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12118.
- Tuan, Yi-Fu. 1975. “Place: An Experiential Perspective.” Geographical Review 65 (2). https://doi.org/10.2307/213970.
- Vidal, Tomeu, and Enric Pol. 2005. “La Apropiación Del Espacio: Una Propuesta Teórica Para Comprender La Vinculación Entre Las Personas y Los Lugares.” Anuario de Psicologia 36 (3):281–97. https://raco.cat/index.php/AnuarioPsicologia/article/view/61819.
- Ward, Colin. 1988. Anarchy in Action. London: Freedom Press.
- Wesener, Andreas, Runrid Fox-kämper, Martin Sondermann, and Daniel Münderlein. 2020. “Placemaking in Action: Factors That Support or Obstruct the Development of Urban Community Gardens.” Sustainability 12 (657):657. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020657.

