The last months PhD student Hanne Van Reusel is developing an action-research that aims at unraveling, developing and empowering collective tactical and grassroots city-making processes, with a specific focus on Commons Josaphat. In this paper Hanne compares Commons Josaphat with four other, carefully selected, projects in Brussels, presenting a framework of 5 key issues 'of civic making' in order to gain a better understanding of their experiences. For this a constructive research collaboration with the Selfcity project has been set up.
As a first feature the research is highly interested in the role and position of the actors. The position of the selected civic initiatives is related to the official institutions by the notions of top-down and bottom-up. Simultaneously this theme questions the profiles of both the users and drivers within these collectives. It looks at the role ‘professionals’ play in these city-making processes. This involves a reflection on the empowering capacity and/or the disadvantages of involvement by social workers and researchers.
The dual theme of ad hoc/organised, as a second feature, looks at the reflexivity of the emerging actions. These concepts focus more on the swiftness in which an initiative manages to respond to certain conditions or changes.
As a third characteristic the aspect of activism is represented in the framework. It questions the potential of these civic initiatives to support democratisation and empowerment. It reflects on their militancy to heighten political consciousness and their willingness to situate their initiative in a broader debate,
The fourth theme of openness, studies how open civic collectives are to new people entering the core group. Is it possible for users or outsiders to easily infiltrate towards a central position in the collective?
As a final enabler, the concept of commoning is studied. Each case has a particular way to deal with the ‘ownership’ and appropriation of a space and/or other common resources.
The following Brussels collectives are researched:
Commons Josaphat, Communa asbl, Dewey asbl, le Grenier des Casseuse de Crise, PLOEF(Plus on est defous).
You'll find the paper Van Reusel, Pak, Verbeke, Van Meerbeek: 'Collective City Making in Brussels, 2015 here.
The dual theme of ad hoc/organised, as a second feature, looks at the reflexivity of the emerging actions. These concepts focus more on the swiftness in which an initiative manages to respond to certain conditions or changes.
As a third characteristic the aspect of activism is represented in the framework. It questions the potential of these civic initiatives to support democratisation and empowerment. It reflects on their militancy to heighten political consciousness and their willingness to situate their initiative in a broader debate,
The fourth theme of openness, studies how open civic collectives are to new people entering the core group. Is it possible for users or outsiders to easily infiltrate towards a central position in the collective?
As a final enabler, the concept of commoning is studied. Each case has a particular way to deal with the ‘ownership’ and appropriation of a space and/or other common resources.
The following Brussels collectives are researched:
Commons Josaphat, Communa asbl, Dewey asbl, le Grenier des Casseuse de Crise, PLOEF(Plus on est defous).
You'll find the paper Van Reusel, Pak, Verbeke, Van Meerbeek: 'Collective City Making in Brussels, 2015 here.
