Forum: resilience &amp; design

Cowley, Robert; Barnett, Clive; Katzschner, Tania; Tkacz, Nathaniel; Boeck, Filip De

doi:10.1080/21693293.2017.1348506

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this regard, the agency of designers should be decentralized; their capability is no longer design for, and they need to shift the design fundamentally as a part of the process (Cowley et al, 2018;Willis, 2006). This is in line with Armstrong et al (2014) that accentuate participatory design approaches during the design process with the community.…”

Section: Participatory Design and The Necessity Of Socio-technical Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 71%

Pivot 2020: Designing a World of Many Centers

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

xv Usually, designs and designers from colonized countries, marginalized and indigenous communities and minorities (the so-called Global South) are judged as "less good" than their counterparts from the Global North -probably because they are not completely aligned with the "grammar" and values of the Western template. We started in this line of work at the DRS2018 conference, when we chaired (with Dr. Aija Freimane) the track "Not just from the Centre: Multiple voices in Design". For that track, we made a specific Call for Papers to designers from outside of the 'center' of Western culture. Designers and educators from 16 countries across Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, The Middle East, Eastern Europe, Asia and Oceania responded to our call. The interest generated by this track encouraged us to create the DRS Pluriversal Design Special Interest Group (SIG). As DRS SIG convenors, we intend to create space for scholars and designers who are often invisible, offering them support, visibility and recognition.In the last few years, as the movement to decolonize design gains strength, more diverse voices have been featured on the stages of the Center-including, for example, Indigenous voices, more people of color, and more people from countries from the Global South. In short, the Center is slowly starting to include people who have been excluded from the main narrative of design. The challenge here is not only to include people as tokens, but also to embrace their way of thinking, conceiving reality, producing material culture and organizing social life.We believe, however, that the purpose of a radical design practice is not only to fix the Center (by making it more diverse), but to help to create a world with multiple centers -in which many realities, forms of thinking and being can co-exist. To refer to this world, we adopt the concept of the Pluriverse, proposed by Arturo Escobar ( 2018), inspired by a Zapatista dictum, that refers to a "world where many worlds fit". The concept of the Pluriverse challenges one of the pillars of Western Modernity that is Universalism-the idea that we all live in a single world-in favor of a multiplicity of possible worlds that nurture and respect life on Earth (Escobar 2020; Kothari et al. 2019). The Pluriverse does not only refer to the immense diversity of worlds-of diverse ontologies and epistemologies-available on our planet; but also to the fact that these multiple worlds have been shaped and harnessed, oppressed and suppressed by the scientific, technological, and hegemonic forces of Colonialism and Modernity. The Pluriverse framework embraces the idea that significant societal innovations and alternative futures are emerging from the political margins and communities of the Global South (Kothari et al. 2019).Our main goal with the PIVOT 2020 conference has been to build and support a worldwide network of collaborators and allies with shared values. And we hope we have accomplished the goal of creating a Pluriversal Design community, connecting scholars, designers and...

show abstract

Section: Participatory Design and The Necessity Of Socio-technical Instrumentmentioning

confidence: 71%

Pivot 2020: Designing a World of Many Centers

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This article is concerned with practices of sustainable urban design in the context of green approaches to climate adaptation and infrastructure. As previously noted, there are divergent design visions and practices in this setting but, rather than studying these visions in isolation, the understanding of design in this article is that it is a 'situated' process which reflects both the ideals and strategies of designers and other individual actors but also broader institutional and structural pressures and power relations (Cowley et al, 2018;Sunley et al, 2011). In the urban design literature, this issue has been approached through the concept of 'opportunity space' (Carmona et al, 2010, p. 290) which describes how the scope or agency of different actors can be enhanced or constrained by diverse influences including planning and other institutional frameworks which can, for example, require community consultation and potentially enhance the scope for community actors to influence decision-making.…”

Section: The Green Adaptationurban Regeneration Nexusmentioning

confidence: 99%

The green adaptation-regeneration nexus: innovation or business-as-usual?

Tubridy

2020

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are divergent visions and practices of sustainable urban design in the context of contemporary processes of climate adaptation and infrastructural change. However, the key influences on what trajectory is adopted in different instances have yet to be explored in depth. This article highlights and explores an emerging connection between climate adaptation, sustainable urban design and regeneration or what is termed the 'green adaptationregeneration nexus'. This is identified as an ambiguous phenomenon which could instantiate more integrated and collaborative models of planning or, alternatively, denote an intensified economic focus. The implications of the green adaptation-urban regeneration nexus are explored through two case studies of combined climate adaptation and regeneration projects in Sheffield and Copenhagen. The key finding is that both projects' institutional setting within pre-existing regeneration planning frameworks has been a key influence in both enabling and constraining community participation. The article's key contribution is to highlight the inadequacy of inherited and often flawed planning frameworks from the perspective of realizing innovative, socially and ecologically sustainable approaches to design in an increasingly important sector of urban planning and design practice.

show abstract

“…2017) or "philanthropic complex" (Martin 2015) of foundations and think tanks, participatory experimental urbanism employs experimental methods in cooperative urban-economic design beyond-the-state-part of a wider trend towards "innovatory urban governance" (McGuirk et al 2022). This embryonic ecosystem mobilises narratives around resilience and design (Cowley et al 2018), co-production and participation (Bishop 2012), sharing, collaboration, and openness (Lorne 2019), urban laboratories (Bulkeley et al 2019;Gieryn 2006), transformative social innovation (Thompson 2019), urban experimentation (Caprotti and Cowley 2017;Savini and Bertolini 2019;Torrens and von Wirth 2021), and the experimental city (Barnett 2022;Karvonen 2018). Rapid uptake within public policy-potentially reshaping the local state-demands we pay attention to where such ideas are coming from and what the social and political implications might be as they materialise in spatial projects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing a New Civic Economy? On the Emergence and Contradictions of Participatory Experimental Urbanism

Thompson

Lorne

2023

Antipode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can we remake local economies from scratch – not through political struggle but by design – to solve wicked problems and transform urban governance? Such questions are raised by an emergent trend within urban experimentation that emphasises participation and commoning in designing peer‐to‐peer provisioning systems through a platform logic. This article deconstructs the discourses animating what we term “participatory experimental urbanism” and reflects on what this might mean for local state restructuring in times of neoliberal austerity. By following its policies and prototypes as they move and mutate across the London Boroughs of Lambeth and Barking & Dagenham, we examine two exemplary initiatives, Open Works and Participatory City, tracing their beginnings in Lambeth's “cooperative council” model and their ongoing assembling into novel public‐common‐philanthropic partnerships. Foregrounding the contradictions within this latest turn towards urban governance‐beyond‐the‐state, we draw out the implications for the future of social innovation, design‐thinking, and the experimental city.

show abstract

Forum: resilience & design

Cited by 13 publications

References 84 publications

Pivot 2020: Designing a World of Many Centers

Pivot 2020: Designing a World of Many Centers

The green adaptation-regeneration nexus: innovation or business-as-usual?

Designing a New Civic Economy? On the Emergence and Contradictions of Participatory Experimental Urbanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About