Designing Situated Vocabularies to Counter Social Polarizations: A Case Study of Nolo Neighbourhood, Milan

IF 1.7 Q3 URBAN STUDIES Urban Planning Pub Date : 2023-04-27 DOI:10.17645/up.v8i2.6420
Virginia Tassinari, Francesco Vergani
{"title":"Designing Situated Vocabularies to Counter Social Polarizations: A Case Study of Nolo Neighbourhood, Milan","authors":"Virginia Tassinari, Francesco Vergani","doi":"10.17645/up.v8i2.6420","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many neighbourhoods are currently serving as laboratories where new methods are being explored for collaboratively redesigning cities and tackling the social, environmental, and cultural issues affecting them. These redesign processes are often supported by local communities who increasingly develop bottom-up initiatives to innovate and preserve the neighbourhood’s “common goods.” This is certainly the case of Nolo, an area in the city of Milan (Italy) that has recently undergone an urban regeneration process thanks to the presence of a proactive community of actors living and working in the neighbourhood. Despite effective social innovation practices enacted by part of the local community, several “voices” in Nolo—mainly belonging to marginalized communities—are still excluded from the current process of urban regeneration. This lack of attention is rather problematic for the whole community, as it is leading to increasing rather than mitigating social polarization. To address this issue, we approached Nolo and its community through a participatory design experimentation, generating a series of collaborative platforms to enable those marginalized voices—humans as well as non-humans—to be heard, to enter into agonistic conversations with one another, and to question what they (should) all care about. What this (still ongoing) experimentation is currently showing is that to co-design collaborative platforms to counter polarization needs to be carefully balanced, negotiating between all the actors involved and acknowledging their thick entanglements to finally unravel how they radically inter-depend on one another. This kind of “ontologizing” practice is currently proving to be pivotal to counter “antagonisms” (and, therefore, mitigate social polarizations), and re-framing them in “agonistic” terms. This article reports how we operated this “ontologizing” practice in a particularly debated area of the neighbourhood by embracing the perspective of marginalized actors, encouraging them to collaborative and transformative actions for their own situated context.","PeriodicalId":51735,"journal":{"name":"Urban Planning","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v8i2.6420","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Many neighbourhoods are currently serving as laboratories where new methods are being explored for collaboratively redesigning cities and tackling the social, environmental, and cultural issues affecting them. These redesign processes are often supported by local communities who increasingly develop bottom-up initiatives to innovate and preserve the neighbourhood’s “common goods.” This is certainly the case of Nolo, an area in the city of Milan (Italy) that has recently undergone an urban regeneration process thanks to the presence of a proactive community of actors living and working in the neighbourhood. Despite effective social innovation practices enacted by part of the local community, several “voices” in Nolo—mainly belonging to marginalized communities—are still excluded from the current process of urban regeneration. This lack of attention is rather problematic for the whole community, as it is leading to increasing rather than mitigating social polarization. To address this issue, we approached Nolo and its community through a participatory design experimentation, generating a series of collaborative platforms to enable those marginalized voices—humans as well as non-humans—to be heard, to enter into agonistic conversations with one another, and to question what they (should) all care about. What this (still ongoing) experimentation is currently showing is that to co-design collaborative platforms to counter polarization needs to be carefully balanced, negotiating between all the actors involved and acknowledging their thick entanglements to finally unravel how they radically inter-depend on one another. This kind of “ontologizing” practice is currently proving to be pivotal to counter “antagonisms” (and, therefore, mitigate social polarizations), and re-framing them in “agonistic” terms. This article reports how we operated this “ontologizing” practice in a particularly debated area of the neighbourhood by embracing the perspective of marginalized actors, encouraging them to collaborative and transformative actions for their own situated context.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
设计情境词汇以对抗社会两极分化:以米兰Nolo社区为例
目前,许多社区都在充当实验室的角色,在这里,人们正在探索新的方法,共同重新设计城市,解决影响城市的社会、环境和文化问题。这些重新设计过程通常得到当地社区的支持,他们越来越多地发展自下而上的倡议,以创新和保护社区的“共同利益”。这当然是Nolo的例子,这是意大利米兰市的一个地区,由于在附近生活和工作的演员们积极主动的社区的存在,最近经历了一个城市再生过程。尽管部分当地社区制定了有效的社会创新实践,但诺罗的一些“声音”-主要属于边缘化社区-仍然被排除在当前的城市更新过程之外。对整个社会来说,这种缺乏关注是相当有问题的,因为它导致了社会两极分化的加剧,而不是缓解。为了解决这个问题,我们通过参与式设计实验接近Nolo及其社区,创造了一系列协作平台,使那些被边缘化的声音——人类和非人类——能够被听到,能够彼此进入激烈的对话,并询问他们(应该)关心什么。这个(仍在进行中的)实验目前表明,共同设计协作平台以对抗两极分化需要谨慎平衡,在所有参与者之间进行谈判,并承认他们之间的纠缠,最终揭示他们如何从根本上相互依赖。这种“本体论”实践目前被证明是对抗“对抗”(因此,减轻社会两极分化)的关键,并以“对抗”的方式重新构建它们。这篇文章报告了我们如何在一个特别有争议的地区通过拥抱边缘化参与者的观点来操作这种“本体论”实践,鼓励他们为自己所处的环境进行合作和变革行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Urban Planning
Urban Planning URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
124
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Urban Planning is a new international peer-reviewed open access journal of urban studies aimed at advancing understandings and ideas of humankind’s habitats – villages, towns, cities, megacities – in order to promote progress and quality of life. The journal brings urban science and urban planning together with other cross-disciplinary fields such as sociology, ecology, psychology, technology, politics, philosophy, geography, environmental science, economics, maths and computer science, to understand processes influencing urban forms and structures, their relations with environment and life quality, with the final aim to identify patterns towards progress and quality of life.
期刊最新文献
Subaltern Politics at Urban Borderlands Between the “Structural” and the “Everyday”: Bridging Macro and Micro Perspectives in Comparative Urban Research Bordering Practices in a Sustainability-Profiled Neighbourhood: Studying Inclusion and Exclusion Through Fluid and Fire Space Migrants in the Old Train Wagons Borderland in Thessaloniki: From Abandonment to Infrastructures of Commοning Social Media Groups in Interaction With Contested Urban Narratives: The Case of Koper/Capodistria, Slovenia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1