LED Online Seminar 2018 - Working Group 11

From Ledwiki
Jump to: navigation, search

--> Back to working group overview

Dear working group members. This is your group page and you will be completing the template gradually as we move through the seminar. Good luck and enjoy your collaboration!

Assignment 1 - Reading and Synthesizing Core Terminology

  • You can read more details about this assignment here
  • Readings are accessible via the resources page

Step 1: Your Landscape Democracy Manifestoes

Step 2: Define your readings

  • Please add your readings selection for the terminology exercise before April 18:

A: Landscape and Democracy

Markus Herrmann: Cosgrove, Denis. (1985): Prospect, Perspective and the Evolution of the Landscape Idea. In: Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 10, No. 1 (1985),pp. 45-62. Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers).

Sabine Schneider: The European Landscape Convention

Sam Nassar: The Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters

Seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia: Kucan, Ana (2007). Constructing Landscape Conceptions. In: ECLAS (ed.). JoLA spring 2007, 30-41. Munich: Callwey.

B: Concepts of Participation

Sam Nassar: Gaventa, John: The Powerful, the Powerless, and the Experts

Markus Herrmann: Hester, Randolph (2012): Evaluating Community Design, Landscape Journal

Giulia Martina Bosi: Sanoff, Henry (2014): Multiple Views of Participatory Design, Focus

Seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia: Sanoff, Henry (2014): Multiple Views of Participatory Design, Focus

Seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia :Arnstein, Sherry R.(1969): A Ladder of Citizen Participation, JAIP, Vol. 35, No. 4


C: Community and Identity

Markus Herrmann: Hester, Randolph (2006): Design for Ecological Democracy, The MIT Press

Sabine Schneider: Welk Von Mossner, Alexa (2014): Cinematic Landscapes

Giulia Martina Bosi: Gafford, Farrah D. (2013): It Was a Real Village: Community Identity Formation Among Black Middle-Class Residents in Pontchartrain Park

Seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia: Woodcraft, Saffron, et al.: Design for Social Sustainability: A Framework for Creating Thriving New Communities

D: Designing

Markus Herrmann: Hester, Randolph: Democratic Drawing - Techniques for Participatory Design; Hussain, Sofia, et al. (2012): Participatory Design with Marginalized People in Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunties Experienced in a Field Study in Cambodia, International Journal of Design, Vol. 6, No. 2

Sabine Schneider: Hester, Randolph: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Sustainable Happiness

Sam Nassar: Smith, Nicola Dawn(2012): Design Charrette: A Vehicle for Consultation or Collaboration

Seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia: Smith, Nicola Dawn(2012): Design Charrette: A Vehicle for Consultation or Collaboration

E: Communicating a Vision

Markus Herrmann: BUG project: http://www.decisionproblem.com/bug/bug2.html

Giulia Martina Bosi: Huber, Josef, Pascale Mompoint-Gaillard, and Ildikó Lázár. 2015. TASKs for democracy: 60 activities to learn and assess transversal attitudes, skills and knowledge

Steps 3 and 4: Concepts Selection and definition

  • Each group member selects three relevant concepts derived from his/her readings and synthesize them/publish them on the wiki by May 9, 2018
  • Group members reflect within their groups and define their chosen concepts into a shared definition to be posted on the wiki by June 6, 2018.
  • Other group members will be able to comment on the definitions until June 12, 2018
  • Each group will also report on their process to come to a set of shared definitions of key landscape democracy concepts on the wiki documentation until June 20, 2018

Concepts and definitions

Author 1: Sam Nassar

  • CONCEPT 1: “The Aarhus Convention” it’s a Convention and Protocol empower people with the rights to access easily information, participate effectively in decision-making in environmental matters and to seek justice if their rights were violated. They protect every person’s right to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and well-being. (The Aarhus Convention)
  • CONCEPT 2: “Power and Powerlessness” Explains to outsiders the conflicts between the financial interests of the coal and land companies, and the moral rights of the vulnerable mountaineers. The questions that open investigation of social peace and rebellion in a desperately poor Appalachian valley.(Gaventa, John 1982)
  • CONCEPT 3:” Design Charrette: A Vehicle for Consultation or Collaboration”: A model of participation and creativity, it’s good for reshaping the engagement of design professionals and the dynamic processes available to businesses and organizations seeking ongoing innovation, it is used as a consultant tool for engaging the community in participatory workshops on potentially controversial developments.(Smith, Nicola Dawn 2012)

Author 2: Sabine Schneider

  • Concept 1: Landscapes in movies - The role of landscape as movie settings decreases as digital effects are getting more popular. Even though some movies like Beasts oft he Southern Wild show a clear relationship to the existing landscapes to make people aware of the problems our environment it facing these days. (Welk Von Mossner, Alexa (2014): Cinematic Landscapes)
  • Concept 2: Selective Integration - Integrated communities are more likely to be resilient. Even though concepts like niches and territorry point out the values of segregation. So it’s not all clear in which dimensions integrtion should occur. (Hester, Randolph: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Sustainable Happiness)
  • Concept 3: Inclusive Landscape - Every landscape should be included in the planning. It doesn't matter what kind of landscape (e.g. nature protection areas, settlements,...) as long as it's part of an European country. (The European Landscape Convention)

Author 3: Markus Herrmann

  • Concept 1: Fairness - Fairness is vital for a lasting democracy and especially in democratic landscape planning design. Important is a legal base and a free and fair information flow. Participation is boosted by a fair surrounding, fair information flow and clear laws. It can create a surrounding, where one is ready to raise its voice about injustices. To map Fairness / or unfair spatial situations the key points / topics to map are 1. Accessibility, 2. Inclusions, 3. Equal or unequal distribution of resources and amenities. Important for a designer is to find out about tensions and injustices existing. Mostly poor and / or marginalized (people of color, elderly, youth, women etc.) people are treated in an unfair way – often people are not even clear about that injustices. Many problems can be rectified by good design, but first have to been shown and mapped.(Hester, Randolph (2006): Design for Ecological Democracy, The MIT Press)
  • Concept 2: Representative representation: Nonverbal drawing techniques are often used in democratic planning in a cooperative way. It is far more complex than the normal drawings we learn in architectural practice, as it is not about persuading someone about an idea (a way of presenting you often learn at architecture education). Randolph Hester names the methods used in that field as “representative representations” and categorizes them in 5 areas: 1. Representing people, 2. Exchanging professional knowledge and local wisdom spatially, 3. Coauthoring design, 4. empowering people to ‘represent’ themselves, and 5. Visualizing deep values: community, stewardship, fairness and distinctive place. He states furthermore that most participatory design methods are more “process oriented and less product oriented than other design approaches” (193) but often lead to “unusually carefully crafted and reasonably low maintenance [designs]” mostly “figurative and not abstract” (193)(Hester, Randolph: Democratic Drawing - Techniques for Participatory Design).
  • Concept 3: Planning with immigrants - Designing with immigrants is a highly emotional task – which often requires a huge amount of empathy and can trigger traumata while working with immigrants. The designer / researcher has to be highly emotional in how he / she carries out the research question. The most important part is therefore not the underlying technique but more so the surrounding and the mindset of the researcher paired with a wisely chosen venue. Visual techniques paired with questions asked could deal as an ice breaker. Often we also encounter ethical issues that arise – so it is no easy field of research and a field where designers have to learn a lot in advance, to make sure it is save for both sides.

Salgado, Mariana, et al. (2015): Designing with Immigrants

Author 4: Giulia Martina Bosi

  • CONCEPT 1: "Social responsibility": The planning that involved a participation program should include a goal that the partecipation part needs to reach. Each time that a group of people are involved in a planning they should know that their idea/vision will influence the future of the entire community. (Multiple views of participatory design, Henry Sanoff)
  • CONCEPT 2: "Community building": The children who grew up in Pontchartrain Park in the 1950s and 1960s are no longer related to "black spaces" but they still feel part of this community (the community of "old black middle-class". They feel this community as a family. (It was a real village, Farrah D. Gafford)
  • CONCEPT 3: "Learing by doing". Even children and young people can be involved democracy chanllenge, through non-formal education they can learn easly and have fun at the same time; but they will apply what they have learn during the game in real life. As Confucio said "I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand". (TASKs for democracy, Council of Europe)

Step 5: Reflection

While comparing our readings we found three main concepts regarding ‚landscape democracy‘, that we defined as important concepts, and that make inclusive participation / planning possible:

1.	The Fairness concept – relying on a in most parts democratic basis (political regulations, laws etc.)
2.	The concept oft he landscape idea 
3.	Idea / concept of different interest groups (economical, political etc.)
The basis of a possible ‚landscape democracy‘ in our opinion is a more or less stable democratic basis. In a (in general) anxiety-free environment, fairness, the freedom of speech and consensus driven decision making (and voting) are possible and are clearly secured through binding political laws and regulations. 

The concept of Fairness that Hester Randolph (Hester, Randolph (2006): Design for Ecological Democracy, The MIT Press) described, is a crucial part of democracy. It makes it possible that people raise their voices against inequalities and name problems occurring in their environment, that should be solved. Without a secure and stable democracy, this first crucial step would not happen – the naming of problems (also from minorities). A democracy should also be tolerant to inconvenient opinions and the speech of minorities / marginalized groups. In the case of voting, in most democratic countries the majority of the opinions get imposed – it is consensus driven.

In the case of the landscape, it isn’t often that easy, as many different interest groups are involved. Often therefore, so called ‚experts‘ decide in the planning of landscapes. Often without being inclusive in the planning process. The ideal way is, to make the planning process as inclusive as possible.

Landscape is a complex term, that is generally made up by physical, economical and social factors. In short: The concept oft he landscape is mainly a cultural construct, that is changing over time. Over the time a landscape identity is formed through symbols, mythologies / narratives and nature. A landscape persception develops. The landscape perception can be totally different in different countries or within different groups of inhabitants. But generally speaking: the landscape belongs to the people!

Design / Planning is often done by Elites and not always user orientated. Democratic Landscape Design has the goal to include most user groups in the decision making process – it is a paradigm shift that is slowly happening in the planning world.

There are different participation techniques available (Charrettes, planning games etc.) but the main goal is it to have a clear goal, a fair information flow and a as far as it goes, a neutral project manager / planner. He or she is he moderator oft he process and should make sure that as many key players / users linked to the planning goal should be included – which can be a difficult task.

Step 6: Revised manifestoes

  • please look again at your initial manifestoes and update them with any new aspects/prespectives you have taken up during this seminar

Assignment 2 - Your Landscape Symbols

  • You can read more details about this assignment here

Landscape Symbols Author 1: Sam Nasser

Landscape Symbols Author 2: Sabine Schneider

Landscape Symbols Author 3: Markus Herrmann

Landscape Symbols Author 4: Giulia Martina Bosi

Landscape Symbols Author 5:seyyed mohammadmahdi hosseinikia

Assignment 3 - Role Play on Landscape Democracy "movers and shakers"

  • You can read more details about this assignment here

Assignment 4 - Your Landscape Democracy Challenge

  • You can read more details about this assignment here
  • Each group member will specify a landscape democracy challenge in his/her environment
  • Each Landscape Democracy Challenge should be linked to two or three of UN's 17 sustainable development Goals

Landscape Democracy Challenge 1

References:

Landscape Democracy Challenge 2

Your references:

Landscape Democracy Challenge 3

Your references:

  • ...
  • ...

Landscape Democracy Challenge 4: Giulia Martina Bosi

Your references:

Landscape Democracy Challenge 5: Markus Herrmann

Your references:

Assignment 5 - Your Democratic Change Process

  • You can read more details about this assignment here
  • After documenting and reflecting on your challenges you will continue jointly with one of these challenges and design a democratic change process

Your Democratic Change Process

Reflection

  • ....
  • ....
  • ....

Conclusion:

  • ....
  • ....
  • ....

Your references

  • ...
  • ...
  • ...