RE-THINKING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Lay-Expert Interaction and Knowledge Exchange in Community-Based Design Processes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RE-THINKING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Lay-Expert Interaction and Knowledge Exchange in Community-Based Design Processes Presented by AURELIO DAVID Supervised by Prof Dr –Ing J Alexander Schmidt (University Duisburg-Essen) Prof Howard Davis (University of Oregon) Prof Dr HansJoachim Neis (University of Oregon) A dissertation submitted to the Institute for Urban Planning and Urban Design Department of Civil Engineering, University Duisburg-Essen In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2017 This Thesis has been approved by the Faculty of Engineering, Department of City Planning and Urban Design of the University of Duisburg-Essen Oral examination date: February 21st, 2018 Commission: Herrn Prof. Dr. –Ing. J. A. Schmidt (Institut für Stadtplanung + Städtebau) Prof. Howard Davis (University of Oregon, USA) Herrn Prof. Dr. phil. Dipl. -Ing. M. Lang (Technologie und Didaktik der Technik, Vorsitz), Herrn apl. Prof. Dr. - Ing. J. Bluhm (Institut für Mechanik), Prof. Dr. M. Denecke (Siedlungswasser- und Abfallwirtschaft). Diese Dissertation wird über DuEPublico, dem Dokumenten- und Publikationsserver der Universität Duisburg-Essen, zur Verfügung gestellt und liegt auch als Print-Version vor. DOI: 10.17185/duepublico/70232 URN: urn:nbn:de:hbz:464-20190705-123855-5 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Abstract Since Arnstein’s seminal paper of 1969, the debate on public participation in the context of urban planning, urban design, and architecture, has historically been revolving around topics of democracy and distribution of power. As a consequence of this political focus and despite the growing interest of practitioners, the current body of research on participatory design lacks systematic investigations on how experts and laymen communicate, interact, and generate knowledge. Understanding such interactions is relevant under the following assumptions. First, citizens are repositories of a distributed local knowledge. Second, part of such knowledge is vital to addressing design problems. Third, participation is the only way for experts to get exposed to local knowledge, re-examine the assumptions underpinning their actions, and achieve a more informed design by a process of “knowledge contextualization”. Combining the concepts of Boundary Objects (Star, 1989) and Learning Communities (Wenger, 1998; Fischer 2001) from Knowledge Management theories with the evidence collected from six projects of community-based architecture and urban design, this research outlines an epistemological theory of participation focused on face-to-face public workshops. Of the six projects analysed, three were carried out in England using charrettes, a well-established and reliable methodology to co-design; three were carried out in non-western countries (India, Mexico, and Japan) applying the principles of Christopher Alexander’s Pattern Language theory (Alexander et. al, 1979). The comparative analysis of the six case studies provides insights into (1) the mechanisms underlying lay-expert interaction, (2) the nature of local knowledge, and (3) the cognitive role of artefacts, e.g. maps and pattern languages, in participatory design processes. Finally, this thesis put forth a set of practical recommendations to facilitate lay-expert communication and learn from local communities. Abstrakt Seit der Samenpapier von Arnstein aus dem Jahr 1969 hat sich die historische Debatte über Partizipation im Zusammenhang mit Stadtplanung, Städtebau und Architektur auf die Themen der Demokratie und Machtverteilung fokussiert. Als Folge dieser politischen Fokussierung und trotz des wachsenden Interesses von Praktikern weist die aktuelle Forschung über„Participatory Design“ einen Mangel an systematischen Untersuchungen darüber auf, wie Experten und Laien kommunizieren, interagieren und Wissen erzeugen. Das Verstehen solcher Wechselwirkungen ist unter den folgenden Annahmen wichtig. Erstens sind Bürger Träger verteilten lokalen Wissens. Zweitens ist ein Teil solcher Kenntnisse notwendig, um Gestaltungsprobleme anzugehen. Drittens ist Bürgerbeteiligung der einzige Weg für Experten, um lokales Wissen zu sammeln, die Annahmen nochmals zu prüfen und ein „informed Design“ durch einen Prozess von “Wissenskontextualisierung” zu erreichen. Auf Basis der Konzepte von Boundary Objects (Star, 1989) und Learning Communities (Wenger, 1998; Fischer 2001) aus Wissensmanagementtheorien, verknüpft mit nachweisbaren Erkenntnissen aus sechs Projekten der gemeinschaftsbasierten Architektur und Stadtgestaltung, wird im Rahmen dieser Forschung eine Erkenntnistheorie der Partizipation entwickelt, die sich auf öffentliche face-to-face Werkstätten konzentriert. Von den sechs Projekten wurden drei in England mit Hilfe von Charrettes und drei in nichtwestlichen Ländern (Indien, Mexiko und Japan) unter Verwendung der Pattern Language von Christopher Alexander durchgeführt (Alexander et al., 1979). Die vergleichende Analyse der sechs Fallstudien bietet Einblicke in (1) die Mechanismen, die der Laien-Experten-Wechselwirkung zugrunde liegen, (2) die Arten des lokalen Wissens und (3) die kognitive Rolle von Artefakten, z.B. Karten und Pattern Languages in partizipatorischen Designprozessen. Abschließend wurden in dieser Arbeit eine Reihe praktischer Empfehlungen abgeleitet, um Laien-Experten-Kommunikation zu erleichtern und von lokalen Gemeinschaften zu lernen. Acknowledgments This thesis represents the fruit of three years of work. Besides books, papers, conferences, laptops, libraries, and imperfect drafts, my experience as a PhD student was shaped by the interaction with many important people. First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my three supervisors, Prof Howard Davis, Prof Dr Ing- J Alexander Schmidt, and Prof Dr Hajo Neis, for their constant support and for guiding my efforts towards the right direction. Without their advice and expertise this work would not have been possible. Most importantly, they have taught me the foundation of being a researcher. Besides my advisors, I would like to thank rest of my thesis committee: Prof. Dr. phil. Dipl.-Ing. M. Lang, Prof. Dr.-Ing. J. Bluhm, Prof. Dr. M. Denecke. I am also thankful to Prof Dr Jens Martin Gurr, Prof Arun Jain, Prof Dr Susanne Moebus, and the professors of the ARUS PhD Programme for their hard questions and thought-provoking feedback during our official colloquia and private conversations. Likewise, I am grateful to all the people at the University: my ARUS PhD fellows – Himanshu, Marielly, Ilka, Ricardo, Paulina, Mariana, Janka, Adnan, Gloria, and Julita, - the ISS group – Conrad, Minh, Fabian, Sonja, Frau Gabi, and Dr Elke Hochmuth. During my time at the university, I have always found inspiration in talking with them during our lunch breaks, seminars, or simply in the Institute’s corridor. I thank Charles, Fred, Andreas, Ugo, Lorenzo, Andrea, Dario, and Marilena for sharing their professional perspective on the topic of public participation, architecture, and urban design throughout these three years. In particular, a special thanks goes to JTP for allowing me to join two Community Planning Weekend workshops, providing me with key material and information, and releasing two interviews. Their contribution to this work was essential because it allowed me to check my theoretical assumptions against their practical experience. Similarly, I would like to express my gratitude to Sonia for her trust in my experimental ideas and her help in organizing a workshop in her town, Alfter, to test them in the real world. Besides my advisor, professors, colleagues, and professional peers, I am extremely grateful to my friends and family. In primis, a very special thanks to Alua for our inspiring and clarifying conversations, for helping me improve my writing and argumentative skills, for reading my final manuscript, and – most of all – for her relentless moral and spiritual support throughout these three years. Her positive influence was crucial to help me achieve this goal. Secondly, a big thanks to my mother and father for their big help outside the academic realm, their encouragement and constant presence. I am also thankful to my brother Lorenzo because our conversations in Torino contributed to shaping some of the central ideas of this work. Last but not least, I would like to thank all other people who - directly or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally, early or late – positively affected the three years in which I have been writing these pages. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Research Problem and Hypotheses .............................................................................................. 3 1.1.1 Research Problem ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1.2 Hypotheses ................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Scope of the research ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Outline of the thesis ........................................................................................................................ 9 2. The epistemological