Co-designing collaborative forms for urban commons: using the notions of commoning and agonism to navigate

the practicalities and political aspects of collaboration

Anna Seravalli, Per-Anders Hillgren, Mette Agger-Eriksen Malmö University K3 and MEDEA

• The rising of urban commons?• Participatory design notions of commoning

and agonism • Co-design collaborative forms in Malmö:

navigating practicalities and political aspects of collaboration

Content

From triplex helix to citizens’ co-ownership?

How to face contemporary urban challenges?- Mobilizing different kinds of knowledge- Collaboration between diverse actors

From triplex helix to citizens’ co-ownership?

Empowerment or exploitation?

• How to design collaborative forms for the management of urban commons?

• How to consider both the practicalities and the political aspects of collaboration?

Urban commons (design) specificities and challenges

Why ”traditional” commons design principles do not hold when it comes to urban commons:- The role of the public sector as an enabler/

participant in the commons (Foster 2011)- Differences in actors’ interests-> diverse ways of

value the commons (Foster 2011, Nightingale 2011)- Ossification dilemma (Daniels n.d., Foster 2011):

when structures hinder collaborative management….

A Participatory Design perspective

• Since the ´70 dealing with collaborative processes involving actors with diverse interests for the design of technologies (in the last 10 years also collaborative forms)

• Both working with praticalities and political aspects of collaboration

Commoning

• Consindering commons as an action (Linebaugh 2009, Bollier and Helfrich 2012)

But what kind of action? PD suggests…• Socio-material practice (Martilla and Botero 2014,

Seravalli 2014)• Located practice (Martilla and Botero 2014, Seravalli

2014)• Ongoing: design that allows for change (Binder et al.

2011) and appropriation (Seravalli 2014)

Design for commoning

• Co-designing: Involving the different actors already in the design process to foster co-ownership

• Co-designing forms that allow for collective appropriation and might be changed in time

Agonism

• Collaboration between different actors: consensus might be not possible and neither desiderable (Bodker 1996)

• Agonism (Mouffe 2009): collaboration beyond consensus, allowing for multiple perspective as a way to challenge hegemony… considering and cultivating alternatives

Malmö

Malmö

Living Lab The factory: commoning production

Living Lab The Neighborhood: agonistic collaboration for urban challenges

Innovation Platform Malmö South East: commoning urban renewal?

Commoning in Fabriken

• Three different organizational models over 3 years: from participants’ control to NGO’s control

• Tension between managing shared resources and different in perspective

• The centrality of the NGO in avoiding ossification, but yet retaining power…

• ….who is included? How are collaborative forms shaped? Where does the mandate comes from?

Agonism: pointing towards urban commons but hindering collaborative forms?

• Agonisitic perspective in urban challenges: opening up for new perspectives, ideas and possibilities

Agonism: pointing towards urban commons but hindering collaborative forms?

….pointing a towards the need for co-ownership…but lacking of resources and spaces to experiment with what co-ownership might entail.

Malmö University researchers

Civil servants from the area

Private health care company

Refugee children

Workers looking after the children

Network of Swedish female entrepeneurs

Innovation platform: civil servants in the commoning…

• The Innovation Platform: involving civil servants, academia and companies

• A high level of co-ownership between participants

• Agonism is present but where are the citizens?!

Innovation platform: civil servants in the commoning…

• From a project to a permanent structure in the city• Striving towards diversity: political aspects

(citizens involement) and practicalities (activating property owners)

• How much agonism can be bared by the platform? The risk of prioritizing practicalities over political aspects

• The importance of reflecting in and over the platform and how it is going to be organized

Conclusions

• Designing collaborative forms for urban commons: considering both practicalities and political aspects of collaboration

• Commoning: collaborative forms which can be appropriated and changed in time

• Agonism: considering diversity and hegemony: Who is involved in commoning? Who is missing? Where does the mandate come from?