Loading...

​​Intermezzo #4: Commons Architecture Network

​​At a point during this PhD research, we aimed to initiate the Commons Architecture Network (COMMA) that would function as a knowledge commons for the architecture of the commons. To initiate the network and its web platform we decided some funding was necessary, also to be able to sustain it in the long term. In April 2020 we applied for an Erasmus+ Cooperation for Innovation and the Exchange of Good Practices funding. As KU Leuven we were leading the funding application while collaborating with the University of Pavia (Italy), Herkes Icin Mimarlik Dernegi (Turkey), Universidad De Malaga (Spain), Istanbul Teknik Universitesi (Turkey), Stichting Osmos (Belgium). The idea was to learn how to teach commons in architecture schools as a designerly approach and co-learn from all these processes. The web platform was going to serve as the main online knowledge base, which was also going to be enriched with projects related to commons. Through this collaboration expanding to four countries, we would kick off gathering local knowledge on the architectures of the commons and share it globally. We were hoping that after the kick-off some other institutions and architecture practices would join in and keep feeding the knowledge commons. This was a three-year project with all the project partners running workshops in their local contexts and bringing them together on the online knowledge base (the web platform) and in a book as the final outcome.

​​ 

​​Our application received an 87% score and was eligible for funding. However, this was the time of the Covid-19 pandemic and there were a lot of applications so the projects that scored higher had already eaten the overall funding budget. So we didn’t get to realise the Commons Architecture Network. This failure made us realise that the set-up and continuation of a web platform that would be run by a network requires a lot of care work behind the scenes. Providing the material infrastructure would not be enough, there still needs to be other support mechanisms related to human interactions, such as remuneration of people’s contributions, conflict-solving mechanisms, clear yet open-to-change collaboration protocols and so on. In a horizontal and global structure that we dreamed of as the Commons Architecture Network, this care work becomes even more crucial since we need to be careful not to replicate the existing power structures while keeping the network alive.

​​ 

​​Following the failure of this funding application, the PhD took on a different course. Instead of a research by design for setting up the Commons Architecture Network, the research is directed towards the relationships between knowledge, power, critique, architecture and the commons. This is more visible in the fourth chapter where we conclude with a tool of three strands for the critique and governance of architecture of the commons.

​​ 

​​Learning from COMMA

​​The proposed network and online knowledge base aimed to connect local and global knowledge as a commons, revealing the emergent and empowering potentials of networked knowledge production and sharing in architectural education. Participatory development of the proposal and the online platform idea was painstaking but rewarding. This practice demonstrates the potential and importance of inclusive governance and protocols in the commons.

​​ 

​​Connecting local and global knowledge was a challenge which was handled in a distributed manner, giving agencies to local organizers. The situated, context-specific approach employed tested commons principles of open localism, diversity and care for community needs. The precarity of the care and time invested was a recurrent problem here too, since the acceptance of the project proposal was not guaranteed.

​​ 

​​Even though the project got the right to be funded it was not awarded a grant due to the high number of applications. The application process itself was very fruitful as it involved insightful discussions on architectural education, commons and methodologies. People involved in the application process formed other collaborations such as another Erasmus+ project, publications and conferences.

​​ 

​​Overall, this attempt to initiate a web platform for the architecture of the commons revealed that the labour-intensive process of funding applications is not a sustainable model for the project in the long term. The chances of receiving the funding vary on different factors in some cases not relevant to the quality of the application. From this point onwards it became clear that the PhD cannot be a research by design of the web platform for architecture of the commons. The precarious financial conditions not only for myself but also for the other participants I mobilised to apply for the funding made it clear that conceiving of governance of a website based on funding was not realistic.

​​ 

​​Here are some excerpts from our funding application that would provide some insight into our aims and motivations.

​​ 

​​Please provide a short summary of your project. Please recall that this section (or part of it) may be used by the European Commission, Executive Agency or National Agencies in their publications. It will also feed the Erasmus+ Project Results Platform.

​​ 

​​Be concise and clear and mention at least the following elements: context/background of project; objectives of your project; number and profile of participants; description of activities; methodology to be used in carrying out the project; a short description of the results and impact envisaged and finally the potential longer term benefits. The summary will be publicly available in case your project is awarded.

​​ 

​​In view of further publication on the Erasmus+ Project Results Platform, please also be aware that a comprehensive public summary of project results will be requested at report stage(s). Final payment provisions in the contract will be linked to the availability of such summary.

​​ 

​​The commons are social (re)productive arrangements that empower communities to self-organize in order to access, share and augment resources. Specifically, the urban commons refers to the spatial self-organization of the society in the city as an ongoing shared and collective practice (Kip, M. et al. 2015. Seizing the (Every)Day in "Urban Commons: Moving Beyond State and Market". Birkhauser). The commons has been primarily discussed in fields such as geography, anthropology, law and economics. However, it has not been sufficiently incorporated or discussed in the field of architecture. Conventional architectural education equips students with basic knowledge of architectural representation, theory and history, structural and conceptual design. This role relies heavily on architects being the service providers for their clients, creating spatial designs through commissions by public or private institutions. By definition, this kind of role requires a top-down process, where the project brief is already set, and main decisions on city-making and architecture are taken a priori. This role is insufficient to meet the demands of the active citizens of today to shape and reshape their living environments.

​​The co-design of the urban commons, namely the "commons architecture" requires a new definition of the role of the architect and a new learning environment for future architects. The necessary knowledge, competencies, skills, and tools for the future "commons" architects are yet to be explored. One of the objectives of this project is to reform architectural learning in the spirit of the commons: the architect is at the same time an active citizen who rethinks space as a commons resource and advocates for bottom-up and inclusive practices for its co-design. In this context, this project will develop and test novel methodologies and tools to implement new curricula and guidelines to practice commons architecture critically, and in this way, create a real-world impact in the transformation of architectural design learning. The project will increase the capacity of the architectural higher education institutions to address the emergent social urban challenges, to create stronger bonds between academia and (active) citizens, and transform the higher education students into active citizens.

​​A novel network will be formed to pursue the aims introduced above that stems from this project but expands beyond the partners during the project. The Commons Architecture Network will interlink the three different circles of target groups. The core circle will include learners by doing (local civil society organisations, collectives, and communities actively engaged in spatial practices of commoning) and doers by learning (architects and architecture students who are experienced in or motivated to explore commons architecture).

​​The second circle will be the public authorities such as municipal or regional bodies which regulate the use of space to demonstrate the potential of commons architecture for democratic participation in the appropriation of urban space. The third circle will cover formal and larger institutions that deal with the topic of the commons and join and

​​contribute to the commons discourse. The learning programs and the urban contexts in partner cities are quite diverse, which in turn produces differences in the ways commons architecture is practiced.

​​This transnational project will lead to a better understanding of the similarities and differences between partner cities and generate a reading of commons architecture in Europe. In a peer-learning environment we will have the chance to test our methodology in different contexts, and as a result, draw knowledge and guidelines that embrace European values such as civic engagement, democracy and active citizenship. The project will implement Learning/Teaching/Training Activities in Istanbul, Pavia and Malaga to facilitate peer learning and testing in different local contexts and will result in:

​​-        capacity building on novel methods, strategies and tools for the transformation of (commons) architectural design learning

​​-        new competencies on enabling civic engagement and peer learning in the design process tested in a local workshop

​​-        new skills and competencies in understanding and co-designing architecture and urban space as a commons resource

​​-        increased awareness, new or improved attitudes towards non-extractive and sustainable approaches to spatial design

​​-        a better understanding of students' needs in a peer-to-peer Design Studio environment and improvement of the architectural curricula

​​-        a communicable model for learning commons architecture tested in Brussels, Istanbul, Pavia, and Malaga

​​-        a self-sustained network of commons architecture: COMMA and an Online Knowledge Base

​​-        introduction of new models to architects, students, decision-makers, and civil society which can help reshape existing regulations and guidelines for urban transformation.

​​ 

​​Please comment on your choice of priorities.

​​The project aims to generate a learning environment that is necessary and useful for (co-)designing and sustaining the commons through participatory approaches. Common space is "created and recreated constantly by a community which is organized through processes of participation of its members, considered as equals.” (Stavrides, S. 2016. Common Space: City as Commons, Zed Books). The concept of the common space incorporates the three key elements of the commons: 1) Space is rethought as a "common-pool resource", 2) to be produced and appropriated by a specific group of “commoners” (community) 3) who collectively manage the commons via certain agreed “protocols” which they contribute to the making of. The architectural (re)production of common spaces, namely commons architecture can only be realized by the engagement of active citizens who want to deploy and expand the European common values such as democratic participation, inclusion and solidarity. To realize commons architecture, the architects need to critically transform their practices, learn to get engaged with and serve commoners, and even become part of them, rather than implementing top-down spatial configurations. These require new competencies, knowledge, and skills different from the ones currently taught in the schools of architecture. In the last two decades, novel modes of architectural learning such as “live projects” and participatory approaches have emerged to address these challenges. However, these remain uncommon and insufficient, performed at the margins of architectural design learning in the academy. To activate the potential of commons architecture, civic engagement is essential. The (student) architects should learn to engage with the civic society to understand the daily context, thus becoming active citizens themselves in practice. Secondly, they should learn to co-design spaces with the communities they are involved in to foster civic engagement through commoning principles such as self-governance, peer-to-peer production, solidarity, and collective care.

​​In this context, this project aims to address the knowledge, skills and competence gaps required for the transformation of the conventional architect role to one that fosters civic engagement. For this transformation, architectural education is crucial. In this regard, the project will involve the redesign of the architecture studio as a knowledge commons where the hierarchy is replaced with peer learning. Thus, during various phases of the project, especially in the learning strategies and tools development, the experiences and feedback of students will play a major role. To equip the architecture students with the necessary skill sets to design commons architecture, this project will identify and document the referenced gaps in architectural education, particularly the conventional architecture studio by including feedback from a wide range of commons stakeholders including the students. This feedback on the skills gaps and mismatches will be used to design a new learning environment and a learning methodology to be tested in the curricula of four different schools of architecture located in four different countries with the inclusion of civil society organisations, decision-makers, and commons scholars and other potential commons stakeholders. This process will be utilized using the principles of commoning and participatory action cycles to develop, test and implement flexible and modular toolboxes for learning. Through this new learning methodology that includes lifelong learning strategies, the future generation of architects will be ready to join and co-initiate citizen-led spatial practices and become more relevant to the needs of the wider society in reshaping their immediate living environments.

​​The most prominent innovative character of the project is the interconnected structure of physical gatherings and digital collaboration tools. The Online Knowledge Base of COMMA will function to allow collaboration and agile communication between the partner institutions; to communicate the project findings, intellectual outputs, and activities with a broader audience, and to expand the network towards all interested parties (i.e. architecture students, architects, active citizens, civic organisations) in generating a knowledge commons. The Online Knowledge Base will be co-designed by all partners at the beginning of the project with a modular approach with sections that can be plugged in and out during the project and also after. We will embrace the digital commons modus operandi and principles while making and sustaining the Online Knowledge Base. These are, but not limited to, inclusivity, clearly communicated sharing protocols, collective decision-making, empowerment of people with less accessibility to resources, open design that can evolve according to the needs and desires of the commoners.

​​ 

​​Please explain the context and the objectives of your project as well as the needs and target groups to be addressed. Why should this project be carried out transnationally?

​​Following the austerity politics after the 2008 financial crisis, citizens started gathering together not only to protest the social and economic policies but also to test new forms of publicness. Revitalizing already existing public spaces, claiming vacant private spaces, making collective decisions about their neighbourhoods, they have started to transform into active citizens. Challenging the limits of representative democracy and demanding their voices to be heard and their right to the city, citizen-led initiatives, whether in the form of neighbourhood organizations or solidarity groups, have started to reshape the urban environment (Harvey, D. 2012. Rebel Cities, Verso). These developments brought up novel discussions on urban and public space as a shared resource, as a commons, and the emergence of the term “urban commons”. It is increasingly used to refer to the spatial self-organization of the society in the city as an ongoing shared and collective practice (Kip, M. et al. 2015. Urban Commons: Moving Beyond State and Market. Birkhauser). In the last decade, architects participated in these urban commons at various levels, from co-initiation, co-creation to co-construction or documentation. These brought up novel discussions on the new roles of architects and agencies of architecture as a critical practice: the commons architect.e (Van Reusel, H. 2019. Commons Architect.e, PhD thesis, Advisor: Pak, B.).

​​While the commons has been largely discussed in many fields such as sociology, law, and economics, it has not been sufficiently incorporated or discussed in the field of spatial design. Conventional architectural education equips young adults with basic knowledge of architectural representation, theory, and history, structural and conceptual design. This learning environment is preconditioned by the assumed role of the architect, which is defined during the early twentieth century. This role heavily relies on architects acting as service providers for their clients via commissions received from public or private institutions. By definition, this kind of role requires a top-down process, a process through which the project brief is pre-set and decisions on city-making and architecture are taken a priori. This role is insufficient to meet the demands of the active citizens of today to shape and reshape their living environments. The co-design of the urban commons, namely the “commons architecture” requires a new definition of the role of the architect and a new learning environment for future architects. The necessary knowledge, skills, and tools for the future “commons” architects are yet to be explored.

​​One of the objectives of this project is to reform architectural learning in the spirit of the commons: the architect is at the same time an active citizen who rethinks space as a commons resource and advocates for bottom-up and inclusive practices for its co-design. In this context, this project will develop and test novel methodologies and tools to implement new curricula and guidelines to critically practice commons architecture, and in this way, create a real-world impact in the transformation of architectural design learning. This will increase the capacity of the architectural higher education institutions to address the emergent social urban challenges, to create stronger bonds between academia and (active) citizens, and transform the higher education students into active citizens.

​​A novel network will be formed to pursue the aims introduced above that stems from this project but expands beyond the partners during the course of the project. The Commons Architecture Network will interlink the three different circles of target groups. The core circle will include learners by doing (local civil society organizations, collectives, and communities that are actively engaged in spatial practices of commoning) and doers by learning (architects and architecture students who are experienced in or motivated to explore commons architecture). The second circle will be the public authorities such as municipal or regional bodies which regulate the use of space to demonstrate the potential of commons architecture for democratic participation in the appropriation of urban space. The third circle will cover formal and larger institutions that deal with the topic of the commons to join and contribute to the commons discourse.

​​The learning programs and the urban contexts in partner cities are quite diverse, which in turn produces differences in the ways commons architecture is practiced. By implementing this transnational project, we will understand the similarities and differences between partner cities and generate a reading of commons architecture in Europe. In a peer-learning environment we will have the chance to test our methodology in different contexts, and as a result, draw knowledge and guidelines that embrace European values such as civic engagement, democracy and active citizenship.