Latest revision as of 11:03, 6 November 2021

For help with editing this Wiki page use this link.

For assignments and key readings use this link.

Area	12 km (length)
Place	Sava River
Country	City of Zagreb, Croatia
Topics	Landscape democracy, community, inclusion, diversity
Authors	Adriana Šišul, Andrej Čikvari, Andrija Rudak, Ivona Poljak, Patrik Kostić

Landscape Democracy Rationale

Our objective is to identify and respond to clearly visible landscape problems along the Sava river in an inclusive and democratic way. Although reaction is necessary to transform the area into an accessible and sustainable space, it is imperative to make community members main contributors in any landscape project or practice.

Location and Scope

Loading map...

Phase A: Mapping Your Community

Welcome to Your Community and Their Landscape

Due to the big site area, there is a diversity of communities that inhabit the space around The Sava River. They include a lot of contrasting users who vary from low income communities more present in the eastern parts to high income communities more present in the western parts. The most visible users are the ones who use the space for recreation (families, students, youth, elderly people) and sport (sports club members). Some problems include inaccessibility of the river itself (especially for people with physical disabilities), monotony of the area, division of the north and the south part of the city, health issues due to garbage disposal situated very close to the river and overall lack of content which would activate the space around the river thus making it a place of quality leisure time. There is also a question of privatization which leads to transformation of neglected, unused public areas into privately-owned areas which are more profit than community driven. One of the examples is a golf club just south of the river. While the quality of the space is far from low, it's unavailable for the majority of the citizens of Zagreb.

We have singled out few most important challenges which we found as most important:

no access to the river as well as low access due to pavement (people with disabilities)
paths on embankments that are not continuous and on few points can be dangerous, not paved and expect drastic change of direction (walking under the bridge which can provide problems to cyclist or parents with children)
lack of content that invites people to use the area
biggest problem is ecological - situation of garbage disposal being positioned right next to river, across protected landscape area and orinthological reservoar as well as aquifer area

Structural analysis overview
Layered structural analysis

Groups of Actors and Stakeholders in Your Community

Urban points where communities gather can be divided into two basic groups: anthropogenic and natural points. Anthropogenic being tram turnaround where a lot of different communities gather and natural being parks where communities meet for various kinds of activities. Various and wide range of groups are present due to large area. There are recreational athletes for horse riding, runner or cyclist as well as people just having barbecue and socializing. There are people who respect the space as well and people who don't. That can also be interpreted on how people perceive the space, having people asked, many of them don’t perceive river Sava as something that exists thus having Sava at big risk of being polluted. There is lack of responsibility for space maintenance by the authorities

Detected users

Relationships Between Your Actors and Groups

There are people who respect the space as well and people who don't. That can also be interpreted on how people perceive the space, having people asked, many of them don’t perceive river Sava as something that exists thus having Sava at big risk of being polluted. There is lack of responsibility for space maintenance by the authorities. The area should be more accessible to the general population. There has to be more consent in the area to attract the population to use it. These zones should be various and should cover all the needs the community has. In planning this zone the community HAS TO BE INVOLVED. They can range from recreational sites, to sitting areas. Conservation of various areas has to be done, and garbage disposal has to be resituated.

Common interests within community

Summary of Your Learnings from the Transnational Discussion Panel

Various scales of international projects
Different analysis and approaches to areas
Variety of visual language and visual thinking in presentations
Informations about the communities inhibiting various areas

Theory Reflection

Exploring given literature has given us insight into how democracy can be integrated into landscape and how interdisciplinary, complex and unique the relationship is. From the first step, site visit, to the last step we had so far, we have learned and cleared our vision about what landscape democracy is, and through given examples and lectures we have defined our vision on the importance of implementing landscape democracy into practise.

Landscape Convention Contribution to human rights, democracy and sustainable development (Council of Europe, 2018)

Based on the book it is concluded that the relationship between human rights, democracy and sustainable development in connection with landscape depends on multiple factors and is a very unique relationship that applies differently depending on the situation. There have been identified few relevant approaches to how to practice democracy on different levels from which few are: local, national, international level as well as European Union level.

Editors Shelley Egoz, Karsten Jørgensen, Deni Ruggeri (2018): Defining Landscape Democracy (introductory chapter)

The book questions the very concept of landscape democracy, ie. its meaning and application through a collection of essays and research by professionals from Western and non-Western countries. The main question being tried to answer is “How democratic is the landscape around us and is there a path to spatial justice in it?” The contribution of liberal and neoliber democracy has had impact on contribution, as well as, ripping away from democracy of space e.g. the critique of liberal democracy is that i had introduced the privatization of public space, automatically taking away accessible space he once had and puts it under the administration of private.

Kühne, Bruns et al: Landscape Culture - Culturing Landscapes

Making its way around a lot of topics, this book goes from How the concepts of landscape is understood, to What it is as component to biodiversity and ecosystems, to historical importance etc. To emphasize this book we have singled out a few quotations that left an impact on us: "Perception is often restricted to the visual landscape. Landscape experience refers to the whole arousal resulting from sensing the landscape.”; "Landscapes are the combined manifestation of the natural and cultural variety in the world in space and time”; “Current landscapes and landscape development, such as sub-urbanized areas, post-montane and post-industrial areas, agro-industrial areas, ‘energy landscapes’, etc. oﬀer little resemblance to images of “traditional cultural landscapes” (Hauser, 2013; Hartz, 2013) “

Hester, Randolph (2006): Design for Ecological Democracy

The author emphasizes 3 (physical) forms that must be met in the design of a city in order for the design to be in the role of supporting (ecological) democracy. Of which are: enabling form, resilient form and impelling form. enabling form is the element that will encourage the community to get to know each other and empower each other. A simple and banal example given by the author is the bench in front of the post office, which by its positioning becomes a medium for meeting people who are waiting in line or are in / out of the office. Resilient form represents the implementation of ecological knowledge in the design process so that the designed spaces are in accordance with environmental conditions (vegetation, climate, hydrology, closely available construction materials) which would reduce maintenance costs, improve and improve resilience and strengthen the connection with the surrounding landscape. Impelling form is best described in quotation: ”Make a city to touch the people's hearts" - a stimulating, enchanting form brings an element of joy and fulfillment of life in a space. In contrast to impersonal, monotonous blocks, the living space should be such that it awakens in us a sense of belonging and a desire to take care of a part of the health of that space, thus taking care of our own health.

Council of Europe (2000):The European Landscape Convention

There are few important terms regarding landscape architecture, general and special measures that are singled out in this book. Landscape is an area that man perceives and whose character is the result of the interaction of natural and human factors (perception encompasses all the senses). General measures to be taken by signatories to the Convention: legally recognize the landscape as an essential component of the human environment, establish procedures involving the participation of citizens, local and regional authorities in the process of planning, preserving and managing the landscape Special measures: to raise awareness among civil society, private organizations and public authorities about the importance of the landscape and their roles and the changes they bring to the landscape

References

Landscape Convention Contribution to human rights, democracy and sustainable development (Council of Europe, 2018)
Editors Shelley Egoz, Karsten Jørgensen, Deni Ruggeri (2018): Defining Landscape Democracy (introductory chapter)
Kühne, Bruns et al: Landscape Culture - Culturing Landscapes
Hester, Randolph (2006): Design for Ecological Democracy
Council of Europe (2000):The European Landscape Convention

Phase B: Democratic Landscape Analysis and Assessment

Ivona Poljak and Mohit Sehrawat Correspondence

The communication started through email and afterwards continued through whatsapp and zoom. We have been discussing the reading we did within conversation on zoom.

Mohit has read literature Community matters, chapter Creating an evaluative community, where he highlighted Why community matters, Who is making it possible and Erasing boundaries community. One of the things he highlighted as answer for importance of community is environmental degradation & urban sprawl, social responsibility, shared experience that the community possess, learning comes out from. a community etc. We can engage community through various types of interactive workshops, events, conversations, through organisations that should setup the community-based programs where they teach about popular topics. And who should do previously mentioned activities? That should be professionals who are involved in planning for community such as architects, landscape architects, urban and spatial planners, design corps etc. We should all deliver education to the locals of the community and engage them in a social responsibility.

Design as Democracy, chapter Going to the People's Coming, was the part that I read where there were explained few ways of gathering information about areas from community and how to get from people the 'gems' places hold for them. We can gather information about the places through different approacher one from which can be surveys, workshops, observing and documenting in person, workshops, poring over maps and aerial photos, reading demographic data etc. We start by engaging people and place together, where I have highlighted few important quotes; "By designing together, we learn together.", "Everything started with playing.", "Getting to know community can involve creative scenarios that seem more like play then planning.". Case studies which chapter offered showed closely how researchers gathered information about places from community. The three ways were: 1. Community camera: Piga Picha - which is photo activity used to help residents introduce their community to an outside project team. It is meant to break the ice and initiate informal and semistructured conversations about multiple topics Provokes genuine exchanges, not based on pretence, which can set the tone for subsequent parts of the project process. Works well in different contexts. They also concluded it is most effective at the beginning of a projects where participants get to know each other. 2. Sketching together - activity that takes advantage of multiple modes of communication to document a group's attitudes and perceptions about the place and activities they share. It helps designers gather direct impressions about a proposed ongoing project. 3. El carrito: Rolling out the cart - The carrito is a mobile interactive meeting point that catches people's attention as they move through public spaces. It is versatile tool for passersby to participate and intervene in various design and planning projects, and it allows designers to get in touch with the people who actually use that public space.

On photos below you can read in detail the topics we read and discussed about as well as the flow of our conversation.

Andrej Cikvari and Silvia Ruberti Correspondence

While I was personally very excited about the "pen pal" concept, it turned out that my partner remained unresponsive until now. I believe that by exchanging my thoughts about the literature with someone else, I would get a much deeper insight about it than just by reflecting on it as I have proceeded to do. Still, I am very satisfied that we were given the full version of the book "Design as democracy" as my team has already found ways to apply some of the methods to our project.

Adriana Šišul and Serena Pagliula Correspondence

Communication with a colleague Serena from Italy, more precisely the town Lecce, was very simple and fun. Although at first I felt a slight anxiety about exchanging my thoughts of given literature over time it subsided and I realized that we are very similar. Our experiences, the societies in which we live are not so different. We both agreed that in future projects we will definitely use knowledge from "Design as democracy" since it is the only one of the literature that teaches us practical knowledge. In my opinion all three books have positively influenced us in terms of thinking or giving us some guidance for the further development of this project and many future ones.

Andrija and Ibolya's Correspondence

My correspondent for this part of the seminar was Ibolya from the Nitra team. Seeing as the assigned readings were full of innovative ideas and new approaches, I could easily imagine finding a use for them in the Zagreb 2 team's project, but the most interesting part of this assignment was being able to experience the readings through Ibolya's point of view. I believe this broadened my understanding of the subjects at hand, since we usually tend to only look at things from one perspective and base our opinion only on our initial understanding of the matter.

Patrik and Nora's Correspondence

My pen pal was a girl named Nora, student from Hungary. First, we got in contact via g-mail, then decided to link on Whatsapp for easier communication. we decided we wanted to read the same literature but different chapters, it was "Design as Democracy". I read chapter 2, "Going to the People's Coming" and she read chapter 3, "Experting: They Know, We Know, and Together We Know Better, Later". We shared our reviews of the text we read and then we started talking about our thoughts of this whole project. We both agreed that the Field Work lesson was the most interesting so far because it wasn't like any other assignment we had before. We talked about our hobbies, studies, futures and lots of other things. Everything was great!

Phase C: Collaborative Visioning and Goal Setting

The Scene in Your Story of Visioning

Team Sava meets Zagreb deals with coverage of around 12 kilometers of river stream that runs through the capital of Croatia, the town named Zagreb. Such a large space has its significant challenges. From all these challenges we have chosen the most important one. How to give the community its river and the river its community? If we look closer at our scenery, we can notice there are two main actors that suffer. The river Sava is almost forgotten, and members of the community haven’t felt part of it for a long time. The idea is to reestablish the connection between members of the community through the connection with the river Sava, so we can start a positive chain reaction of problem solving.

The Actors in Your Story of Visioning

The following scene represents the main stakeholder in our community. River Sava represents the main actor that runs through Zagreb as its main vessel. Mayor and city administration represent stakeholders that are not physically present on the area but are the ones that can have the most effect in terms of organizing various events and public content within the area which effects the frequency and perspective of use. Smaller associations that can organize smaller activities in the area for specific or mixed communities with different interests. Reporters should be the ones who are spreading the news of such events and important decisions that concern the river Sava. Informing the wider population and talking about current problems or even just mentioning Sava as part of the city will ‘wake up’ the community and make them aware of its potential. Ivan, Luka, Zvonimir and Sara are randomly assigned names we gave to real people who we've interviewed and who represent our key actors in the scene and who also represent the local community. Their personal perception of the local surrounding and the needs they expressed have huge relevance to what the previous actors should be making an imprint on.

The Story of Visioning

How to give community back its river and the river back its community?

That was our main problem which we kept in our mind during the whole visioning process. To tackle the problem, we set ourselves a few goals which all led one to another: Our first goal was to introduce and amplify a new habit of visiting Sava. After asking ourselves how to achieve that, we reached another goal which was to detect what content and activities people would like by the river. The only way of finding out what that content and activities were, we had to reach out to the community and the people who lived in our focus areas.  During this process, we were guided by the book “Design as democracy”, especially the second chapter where it was highlighted how it’s important to come to people in order for them to eventually come to you and open up about their experience and personal needs and wishes for the space they inhabit.

Because of the limited time, we managed to conduct only four walking interviews. Nevertheless, they were very important for our better understanding of the space and crucial in our vision making and refining. The interview itself was pre-structured based on the worksheet from the Listening method (Chapter 2: Going to the people’s coming) with open-ended questions. It is also important to say that the interview was let to flow in any direction, giving the absolute freedom for the person who was interviewed to express their thoughts and feelings which were documented in the form of notes, digital photos and voice recordings. The information that was gathered from the four interviews further accentuated the problem we ourselves found as crucial: lack of connection with the river and years of neglecting its existence by the local authorities. From that, a vision raised - to give Sava a voice.  Such a simple sentence dealing with such a complicated and layered problem, but we were now on a mission - Sava will no longer be (a) quiet (memory)!

Based on our primary analysis and then influenced by the interviews, we were further encouraged to work out a plan how to make our vision a reality. Our 3-year plan goes as follows: within the first year, we would begin creating a network of different actors, present our plan to community leaders and organise activities that would motivate citizens to rethink their relationship with Sava; the second year would see our plans transform into action and our social connections with the locals strengthen; lastly, in the third and final year of our plan we would work on maintaining the previously created momentum and encouraging the continuation of the community's engagement with Sava.

The success of our plan would be measured by the change in presence of Sava in local media, the continuation of active use of the area surrounding it and the growth of general interest in Sava.

Visioning process
Visioning result
Plan for the future

Reflect on Your Story of Visioning

In every aspect of life you are finding a meaning or purpose. A thing that you want to accomplish. An idea that will leave your signature in human nature. How will you make it happen? The right answer lays in putting your path from here to there, detailed as much as possible. More details - clearer path. This is the spot where this idea can be definead as a GOAL, a path to get there a VISION and those small chunks SMART GOALS. All of this creation you can put into something that is called the GOLDEN CIRCLE. This theory has made Simon Sinek the second biggest speech on TEDx. His principle starts from inner circle. There you find answers on question WHY. Why are you doing it? What resonates to this are your purpose, your motivation and your belief. Then you have outer circle where you exploring the HOW. How wil you do it? And here is showing the form of action steps which you are going to take to realise your WHY. You are drawing the path. And finaly we get to the last circle and that is WHAT. What you're doing as a result of your WHY. When you have set goal this way, you'll get where you want. The characteristics of a good vision - Let's get back a bit on the HOW circle. As you remember, we have paths which drive to our idea. Those paths are your VISION. What vision consist? First, you need a clear future focus. Then, you have a clarity. Both of them develop strong signal showing where you've been and where you're going. Vision inspires. It has clear direction and priorities for your main goal. Vision is where you create opportunities. These are points where your vision is broke down into chunks. To simplfy the whole journey to the main goal fill up the vision line with goals that they are going to be SMART - S for specific, M for measurable, A for attainable, R for relevant and T for timely. Using these SMART GOALS ease you to get done with your process. They need a vision in order to move on to higher goal. Getting to the final big goal is a journey that you'll never forget. And it's worth it.

Phase D: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

Your Prototyping Action

For this phase of our Landscape democracy project, we set out to create a prototype to test out the tools that could aid our transformative action. For the basis of our prototyping process, we used the lectures and Mural workshops from the LED2LEAP seminar which served both as an introduction to the theory behind the method and as guidelines for its implementation. The assigned readings also proved to be a valuable resource during the planning of the prototype. Using this as a foundation for our ideas, we worked together to analyze the various possible methods and figure out which one can be best applied to our specific assignment - the area around Sava - and adjust them to get the information we need going forward. This turned out to be a very creative process as it was logistically challenging to organize a concrete action in a short amount of time.

The Evolution of Your Prototyping Action

Our prototype was the result of the team's brainstorming session in which we weighed the pros and cons for different types of prototypes and their application to our project. Prior to developing our prototype, we needed to determine the limitations ahead considering the current pandemic, which limited our possibilities- any events with a large number of people were out of the question, and any logistically advanced event was impossible given the short time we had to prepare and execute our prototype. These factors made it clear that an in situ interview would be the optimal solution to our task, giving us enough information to further our research and advance our project to a higher level by giving us a better understanding of the challenges and values of the area, while also respecting the health guidelines. To further simplify our prototype, we chose to ask only two critical questions, which allowed us to attract enough participants as people were more willing to answer two simple questions which required no special preparation or knowledge rather than a larger questionnaire. Once we decided on the interview, our professors contributed their help to the prototype by providing us with potted plants from our School's greenhouse, which we used as incentive to motivate people to participate. Despite our preparation, there was one more setback which we had not predicted: due to the extremely high temperatures during our prototyping, we had to - quite literally - step off the beaten path(the gravel pathway along the embankment) and look for people hiding from the sun in the shaded parks nearby.

The Plan Behind Your Prototyping Action

Main research question: How to give the community back its river and the river back its community?

Investigate WHAT? investigate people’s emotional connection with Sava by asking them two simple questions: Share a positive memory of Sava Share a negative memory of Sava

Testing WHERE? In situ (by approaching local residents along the riverbank and offering a potted plant as incentive)

WHOM we want to examine: we deal with the entire community of Zagreb and its surroundings (all actors currently using the Sava river and all users who could potentially use Sava)

Our goal: assess the impact Sava has on the surrounding communities and what experiences reverberate the longest time in people’s minds

The prototype that best suited our idea was an interview because we have to deal with a large area which envelops a community that is a significant part of Zagreb's population. The interview was conducted on site because people are more familiar with the form of the interview and we wanted to have a more personal approach. In that kind of approach, every individual becomes essential and we are gaining the trust of the community. Also, we can examine memories as something intimate and easier to share through live communication. Our main assignment was gaining the knowledge and inspiration for a new design with the help of existing memories from the users themselves.

Sava in the past
Sava in the past
Sava in the past
Sava today
Sava today
Sava today

The Realization of Your Prototyping Action

The interview was conducted over the course of two days in different areas of the Sava. Teams had problems with conducting surveys and finding volunteer participants given the current heat wave. We have found a total of fifteen participants of different ages in four different neighborhoods. Most participants were uncomfortable having their answers recorded or being photographed but they had no problem answering the questions because we were only looking for two short answers. We have noticed some participants showed interest in further discussing the quality of life in this type of environment. In return, we gave all participants a small plant.

Testing the prototype
Testing the prototype

Reflect on Your Prototyping Action

Through the process of transformation and testing, we learned a lot about the different approaches to sociological research and its applications to community-led design practices. Aside from the preparation for the research, we also faced various challenges during the testing itself, including negotiation skills and approach adjustment. This information will be used to accentuate the problems and values of the Sava shore, as provided by the users themselves.

The strong points of prototyping are providing relevant information, including a diverse group of users, reinventing the usual research approaches, encouraging local valuation about the quality of the Sava river, indicating differences in different settlements (through short interviews we can see the main problems in each settlement).

The weak points of prototyping are difficulties to attract a large number of participants, difficulty of understanding the question, requiring participants to understand the process, processing the data for future use. Ways of improving prototype are running it through social media, explaining the question more clearly, setting up an interesting booth that will attract people to come and check out what is happening, providing pamphlets with basic information about the project, providing contact information so that the people can reach out to the team if they want to even after the event.

map of collected memories
main positive and negative memories
collected memories
collected memories
collected memories

Phase E: Collaborative Evaluation and Future Agendas

Collaborative Evaluation and Landscape Democracy Reflection

During the course of the Landscape democracy seminar, our main task was to determine how to approach the wide range of communities settled along the section of the Sava river which flows through the City of Zagreb. Through the process of collaborative visioning, we came up with the slogan “Sava will no longer be (a) quiet (memory)!” as an answer to the main identified challenge which was “How to bring the community back its rivers and the river back its community?”. What the slogan actually says is that the intention is to revitalise the space around Sava in a such way that it no longer flows “quietly” - unperceived, far from people’s heart and mind, but takes on an active role in the life of citizens of Zagreb.

Evidence for this type of mindset was collected by conducting community-led walks with residents living in close proximity to the river. We found inspiration and guidelines to run this kind of community activity based on the lectures and the literature given during the seminar, especially the book “Design as democracy”. The title of one of the chapters - “Going to the peoples coming”, really stuck with us for the rest of the seminar and reminded us that in order to really get in touch with the community, it is advisable to take the first step and reach out to the community instead of asking them to come to us and then provide us with the needed feedback. What we actually did was take the residents for a walk around the embankments of Sava and gave them opportunity to speak about the life they lead there. We were prepared with a set of questions but we tried to keep them open-ended as much as we could while also letting the conversation flow in its own natural direction.

This activity was crucial for detecting the previous stated main challenge as we learned about the wide spectrum of problems regarding the community life around Sava. It also helped us create the vision of the no-longer quiet Sava as we believe that by gifting the river its own voice, we could set ourselves on a good path for the future problem solving.

The next step on our Landscape democracy journey was prototyping. As the scope of our project is quite stretched and covers a wide range of different communities, we decided it would be the best to prototype a method for connecting to the community first. In the spirit of our slogan, our prototype’s intention (“Sava memory vault”) was to collect different memories and stories from the residents in order to see what are the qualities of these memories, are there any shared values and are there any hints we could take up from the storytelling itself regarding the future planning of the space.

Even though we were not able to evaluate all the steps we took in the companion of community members and representatives, we ourselves reflected back on what we have done with the intention to clarify our vision and also our mission - what is our role in this project and how can we truly make it a landscape democracy project?

The visioning process For this step, we think that the inclusion of the community was strong enough and implemented in the appropriate way for us to understand and accentuate the problems the community was dealing with. For the future reference, we could have given more space to investigating all the positive sides of life happening by the river as for now, we are strongly problem driven.

The prototype development and testing What we had in our minds when we created the prototype was to create a vault of some kind which would contain as much memories and stories about Sava that would serve severals roles:

-sparking conversations about Sava among the citizens

-reminding both us and the citizens about the face of Sava that existed in the past and what was enjoyable or not enjoyable at the time

-giving us ideas about what could be done in near future to bring the citizens closer to the river

-highlighting the river as an equal member of the city community

-accentuating the need to detect and identify ecological values of the river

As to fully complete the above mentioned aspects of the prototype, we are set to find the most appropriate way to collect and distribute the memories for them to be available to the public. For now, we are in the process of launching a website for the project but are also looking for alternative ways because we are aware online sources are not equally accessible for all the citizens.

Some personal notes we have on the process of prototyping:

-at times, it was difficult to approach unfamiliar people as we didn't know what kind of reaction we would encounter

-there was a lot of uncertainty about what actually we were doing and if we would succeed in what we intended to do

Visioning process
Visioning result
Prototyping process
Testing the prototype

The Actors in your Collaborative Evaluation

The actors in our Collaborative Evaluation can be categorised into four groups based on their way of contributing to the evaluation: the community, our professors, the LEDLEAP team members and our team. Each group is integral to the quality of our project, with each one providing a different resource to fuel its development: the community's input is essential for the fine-tuning and adjustments of our design approach and their needs and wishes help us focus on specific challenges in the landscape; our professors contribute their own knowledge and experience as well as valuable contacts; the LEDLEAP team members who reviewed our process at different stages of development helped us refine our design by presenting new perspectives and objective feedback; lastly, our team was, of course, in charge of the practical part of the design process and used our individual strong suits to cover all bases to our greatest potential.

There being four distinct groups does not exclude any new groups of evaluators appearing as the project goes forward. On the contrary; we expect in the future an increasingly complex and diverse mosaic of actors to develop along with the development of the project, which is a precondition for maintaining the integrity and relevance of our actions.

Reflection on the Online Seminar

Online lectures give us insights into new ways of learning. Various lecturers, frequent discussions and joint workshops through "Murals" help us in the development of our professional lives. In addition to individual development, group communication was achieved, and some new acquaintances were made.

Lectures gave us the opportunity to established a new kind of connection, teach us different techniques to listen and understand the needs of the community. Even thou in our situation number of participants compared to the entire community is negligible we came to understanding of the main lesson. The community showed us the strength of their voice and even thou we had some experience with this kind of connections we have learned new approaches that complement our acquired knowledge and give us a clearer idea of the democracy of the design.

Reflection on the Living Lab Process

Through the course of our Living Lab activities, we participated in activities we normally wouldn't have had the chance to experience through our School's curriculum, which enriched our education. Realising the various stages of the project, we had the opportunity to use new(to us) techniques, approaches and ideas and actually see the effects of their successful application. As a result, each member of our team now has a broadened understanding of the number of posibble approaches to any challenge and these possibilities will continue growing as we further explore and learn through our project. This process continues to empower us to be more creative and less inhibited when designing and boosts our confidence in our problem-solving skills as it opens countless ways of adressing our role in landscape design.

Output, outcome and impact
Plan for the future

Your Living Lab Code of Conduct

One of the most crucial things that crystalized through our Living Lab process is the importance of brining ideas to life, as the most reliable way to evaluate a design is to test it and analyze the feedback. It is also important for us as Landscape Architecture students to take on a leading role in driving landscape changes while being aware of other people's needs and wishes and taking different ideas into consideration when developing any design. This brings to attention the need to include community members in our project every step of the way and work with them to create a mutually beneficial solution and provide them with a voice in the design of their surroundings. Another important point is the need to stay open to new and emerging design methods and techniques to stay on top pf any changes in our profession as this allows us to be better and do better.

Process Reflection

Despite the Seminar being conducted online due to the current pandemic, we believe the organisers and the students collaborated successfully to get the most out of this learning experience. This seminar presented us with the unique opportunity to experience diverse design practices and landscape challenge approaches across the globe which constantly provided us inspiration and motivation during our Living Lab process. We are grateful for having been able to observe our colleagues' advancement through all the different Living Labs and to get the feedback and advice from experienced professionals from the LEDLEAP team. Although our Living Lab has been developing consistently supported by the structure of this Seminar and we expect and are working on growing it further, our greatest takeaway from the Seminar is the change in our perspective and growth of our confidence which will influence and reverberate throughout our careers as Landscape architects. Another great benefit is that we had the chance to experience, in both theory and practice, the extents to which democracy can be achieved and utilised in the design of open spaces. With the seminar having finished, the ball is in our court and it is our hope and intention to continue to use and promote democratic landscape designing to the mutual benefit of the community in question and us as future professionals.

LED2LEAP 2021 - Zagreb Team 2: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:03, 6 November 2021

Contents

Landscape Democracy Rationale

Location and Scope

Phase A: Mapping Your Community

Welcome to Your Community and Their Landscape

Groups of Actors and Stakeholders in Your Community

Relationships Between Your Actors and Groups

Summary of Your Learnings from the Transnational Discussion Panel

Theory Reflection

References

Phase B: Democratic Landscape Analysis and Assessment

Ivona Poljak and Mohit Sehrawat Correspondence

Andrej Cikvari and Silvia Ruberti Correspondence

Adriana Šišul and Serena Pagliula Correspondence

Andrija and Ibolya's Correspondence

Patrik and Nora's Correspondence

Phase C: Collaborative Visioning and Goal Setting

The Scene in Your Story of Visioning

The Actors in Your Story of Visioning

The Story of Visioning

Reflect on Your Story of Visioning

Phase D: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

Your Prototyping Action

The Evolution of Your Prototyping Action

The Plan Behind Your Prototyping Action

The Realization of Your Prototyping Action

Reflect on Your Prototyping Action

Phase E: Collaborative Evaluation and Future Agendas

Collaborative Evaluation and Landscape Democracy Reflection

The Actors in your Collaborative Evaluation

Reflection on the Online Seminar

Reflection on the Living Lab Process

Your Living Lab Code of Conduct

Process Reflection

Navigation menu

LED2LEAP 2021 - Zagreb Team 2: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:03, 6 November 2021

Landscape Democracy Rationale

Location and Scope

Phase A: Mapping Your Community

Welcome to Your Community and Their Landscape

Groups of Actors and Stakeholders in Your Community

Relationships Between Your Actors and Groups

Summary of Your Learnings from the Transnational Discussion Panel

Theory Reflection

References

Phase B: Democratic Landscape Analysis and Assessment

Ivona Poljak and Mohit Sehrawat Correspondence

Andrej Cikvari and Silvia Ruberti Correspondence

Adriana Šišul and Serena Pagliula Correspondence

Andrija and Ibolya's Correspondence

Patrik and Nora's Correspondence

Phase C: Collaborative Visioning and Goal Setting

The Scene in Your Story of Visioning

The Actors in Your Story of Visioning

The Story of Visioning

Reflect on Your Story of Visioning

Phase D: Collaborative Design, Transformation and Planning

Your Prototyping Action

The Evolution of Your Prototyping Action

The Plan Behind Your Prototyping Action

The Realization of Your Prototyping Action

Reflect on Your Prototyping Action

Phase E: Collaborative Evaluation and Future Agendas

Collaborative Evaluation and Landscape Democracy Reflection

The Actors in your Collaborative Evaluation

Reflection on the Online Seminar

Reflection on the Living Lab Process

Your Living Lab Code of Conduct

Process Reflection

Navigation menu

Search