文化公地是底层政策的关键。探索巴塞罗那对公共和社区伙伴关系的支持。

IF 0.1 0 ARCHITECTURE On the Waterfront Pub Date : 2022-12-09 DOI:10.1344/waterfront2021.63.12.01
Santiago Eizaguirre Anglada
{"title":"文化公地是底层政策的关键。探索巴塞罗那对公共和社区伙伴关系的支持。","authors":"Santiago Eizaguirre Anglada","doi":"10.1344/waterfront2021.63.12.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to heighten our understanding of community managed cultural facilities, considering that these may be key for the future of cities. The research includes observant participation, thematic analysis of group debates and in-depth interviews with activists and professionals in the domain of community action in Barcelona. I document the construction of active collaboration networks of a wide variety of organizations fostering cultural commons in Barcelona, and highlight the efforts they have made to develop performance assessment tools. The conclusions consider the issue of mutual understanding between neighborhood movements, community action professionals, and the social economy sector. I underline how public-community partnerships can use networking activities to develop a constructive and critical approach to public service delivery and enhance collective learning about economic democratization. Vital importance is given to institutionalization of regulatory tools and the indicators needed to assess the value added by these partnerships. \nExperiences of local development through the management of cultural spaces (Klein and Tremblay, 2020) drive us to question the role of self-organized community actors in fostering the democratization of everyday life. Actual cases of community empowerment and, specifically, the way it develops in those environments known as the urban commons and the cultural commons, have attracted interest from both academia and the policy domain around the globe (Antonucci 2020; Feinberg, Ghorbani, and Herder 2020, 2021; Giannini and Pirone 2019; Kay and Wood 2020; Petrescu et al. 2020; Shah and Garg 2017; Steiner, McMillan, and Hill O’Connor 2022; Williams 2018). In Barcelona, over the last decade, bookended by the effects of the Great Recession and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been growing recognition for the socially innovative potential of those spaces and cultural projects set up by communitarian platforms involving committed local residents as the managers of cultural practices; at the same time, these initiatives have also gained prestige among the general public. \nAs a particular manifestation of spaces of hope (Harvey 2000), community-led cultural centers are one specific subtype in the vast domain of urban commons where struggles are taking place to regain citizenship governance over water, food supply, energy distribution, housing or the public sphere, among others. As initiatives promoting cultural emancipation, collective learning and autonomous creation, these centers react against austerity policies and social vulnerability. Despite the wide diversity in their focal points, in their organizational formulas and in their scales of action, they coincide in that they act upon urban economies and social relationships to push for a general move toward democratization and decommodification. Thus, in addition to promoting cultural activities, many of these centers undertake initiatives that address a large number of current societal challenges. These are initiatives that envision the construction of other imaginaries of possibility. \nIn Barcelona, the development of different initiatives into a political movement, with its own particular platform of associations called Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris (Network of Communitarian Spaces), is proof of the existence of a ‘community-management’ model for cultural facilities. The network includes initiatives with a wide variety of organizational forms, from okupa (squatters) social centers to officially recognized platforms that run public facilities under agreements with public administrations. \n… the forms of community-management are diverse (self-management of squatted or private spaces, management of municipal facilities and resources, cooperatives in rented premises, etc.) and are not based on a single model of work but are defined in a variety of ways that have to do with values, objectives and organizational models, in terms of the management of collective needs and their relationship with the shared resources of a given territory (Balanç Comunitari 2017-2020, Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris). \n  \nIn this article, I support the idea that understanding this type of management of cultural facilities may be vital in exposing how citizens can use specific demands, collective action and organizational proposals to gain the attention of policy makers and thereby claim their right to the city (Bailey and Marcucci 2013; Harvey 2014; Iveson 2013; Kemp, Lebuhn, and Rattner 2015; Novy and Colomb 2013). In this regard, this type of research includes an examination of bottom-linked initiatives as sites seeking complex equilibriums between institutionalization, community development and collective autonomy, and therefore it is essential for increasing knowledge on social innovation initiatives at the local level (Eizaguirre et al., 2012; Oosterlynck et al. 2013; Pradel, Eizaguirre, and García 2013). As for governance nodes for transforming cities and up-scaling their livability, the management of specific cultural facilities offers the opportunity to observe the limits and challenges of previous community development models that were influenced by neoliberal counter-reforms. The performance of these facilities as places where social struggles interact and where contributive democracy is put into practice is at the core of this research. But it also highlights the existence of other (or alternative) communitarian metrics than those related to enhancing individuals' social capital. With these aims, this study focuses on cultural management practices at a level close to citizens, involving them as creators and managers of cultural governance ecosystems, while rejecting the notion that their facilities are merely places for cultural consumption. At the same time, I give special attention to the relationship between these cultural environments and the realm of social economy, particularly the interactions between communitarian-led cultural management practices and forms of social economy.","PeriodicalId":41149,"journal":{"name":"On the Waterfront","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultural commons as a key for bottom-linked policies. An exploration of the support for public and community partnerships in Barcelona.\",\"authors\":\"Santiago Eizaguirre Anglada\",\"doi\":\"10.1344/waterfront2021.63.12.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article aims to heighten our understanding of community managed cultural facilities, considering that these may be key for the future of cities. The research includes observant participation, thematic analysis of group debates and in-depth interviews with activists and professionals in the domain of community action in Barcelona. I document the construction of active collaboration networks of a wide variety of organizations fostering cultural commons in Barcelona, and highlight the efforts they have made to develop performance assessment tools. The conclusions consider the issue of mutual understanding between neighborhood movements, community action professionals, and the social economy sector. I underline how public-community partnerships can use networking activities to develop a constructive and critical approach to public service delivery and enhance collective learning about economic democratization. Vital importance is given to institutionalization of regulatory tools and the indicators needed to assess the value added by these partnerships. \\nExperiences of local development through the management of cultural spaces (Klein and Tremblay, 2020) drive us to question the role of self-organized community actors in fostering the democratization of everyday life. Actual cases of community empowerment and, specifically, the way it develops in those environments known as the urban commons and the cultural commons, have attracted interest from both academia and the policy domain around the globe (Antonucci 2020; Feinberg, Ghorbani, and Herder 2020, 2021; Giannini and Pirone 2019; Kay and Wood 2020; Petrescu et al. 2020; Shah and Garg 2017; Steiner, McMillan, and Hill O’Connor 2022; Williams 2018). In Barcelona, over the last decade, bookended by the effects of the Great Recession and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been growing recognition for the socially innovative potential of those spaces and cultural projects set up by communitarian platforms involving committed local residents as the managers of cultural practices; at the same time, these initiatives have also gained prestige among the general public. \\nAs a particular manifestation of spaces of hope (Harvey 2000), community-led cultural centers are one specific subtype in the vast domain of urban commons where struggles are taking place to regain citizenship governance over water, food supply, energy distribution, housing or the public sphere, among others. As initiatives promoting cultural emancipation, collective learning and autonomous creation, these centers react against austerity policies and social vulnerability. Despite the wide diversity in their focal points, in their organizational formulas and in their scales of action, they coincide in that they act upon urban economies and social relationships to push for a general move toward democratization and decommodification. Thus, in addition to promoting cultural activities, many of these centers undertake initiatives that address a large number of current societal challenges. These are initiatives that envision the construction of other imaginaries of possibility. \\nIn Barcelona, the development of different initiatives into a political movement, with its own particular platform of associations called Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris (Network of Communitarian Spaces), is proof of the existence of a ‘community-management’ model for cultural facilities. The network includes initiatives with a wide variety of organizational forms, from okupa (squatters) social centers to officially recognized platforms that run public facilities under agreements with public administrations. \\n… the forms of community-management are diverse (self-management of squatted or private spaces, management of municipal facilities and resources, cooperatives in rented premises, etc.) and are not based on a single model of work but are defined in a variety of ways that have to do with values, objectives and organizational models, in terms of the management of collective needs and their relationship with the shared resources of a given territory (Balanç Comunitari 2017-2020, Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris). \\n  \\nIn this article, I support the idea that understanding this type of management of cultural facilities may be vital in exposing how citizens can use specific demands, collective action and organizational proposals to gain the attention of policy makers and thereby claim their right to the city (Bailey and Marcucci 2013; Harvey 2014; Iveson 2013; Kemp, Lebuhn, and Rattner 2015; Novy and Colomb 2013). In this regard, this type of research includes an examination of bottom-linked initiatives as sites seeking complex equilibriums between institutionalization, community development and collective autonomy, and therefore it is essential for increasing knowledge on social innovation initiatives at the local level (Eizaguirre et al., 2012; Oosterlynck et al. 2013; Pradel, Eizaguirre, and García 2013). As for governance nodes for transforming cities and up-scaling their livability, the management of specific cultural facilities offers the opportunity to observe the limits and challenges of previous community development models that were influenced by neoliberal counter-reforms. The performance of these facilities as places where social struggles interact and where contributive democracy is put into practice is at the core of this research. But it also highlights the existence of other (or alternative) communitarian metrics than those related to enhancing individuals' social capital. With these aims, this study focuses on cultural management practices at a level close to citizens, involving them as creators and managers of cultural governance ecosystems, while rejecting the notion that their facilities are merely places for cultural consumption. At the same time, I give special attention to the relationship between these cultural environments and the realm of social economy, particularly the interactions between communitarian-led cultural management practices and forms of social economy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"On the Waterfront\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"On the Waterfront\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1344/waterfront2021.63.12.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"On the Waterfront","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1344/waterfront2021.63.12.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

至于改造城市和提高其宜居性的治理节点,具体文化设施的管理提供了观察受新自由主义反改革影响的先前社区发展模式的局限性和挑战的机会。这些设施作为社会斗争互动和促进民主付诸实践的场所的表现是本研究的核心。但它也强调了其他(或替代)社群主义指标的存在,而不是那些与提高个人社会资本相关的指标。有了这些目标,本研究将重点放在接近公民的文化管理实践上,让他们作为文化治理生态系统的创造者和管理者参与其中,同时拒绝他们的设施仅仅是文化消费场所的概念。同时,我特别关注这些文化环境与社会经济领域之间的关系,特别是社区主义主导的文化管理实践与社会经济形式之间的相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Cultural commons as a key for bottom-linked policies. An exploration of the support for public and community partnerships in Barcelona.
This article aims to heighten our understanding of community managed cultural facilities, considering that these may be key for the future of cities. The research includes observant participation, thematic analysis of group debates and in-depth interviews with activists and professionals in the domain of community action in Barcelona. I document the construction of active collaboration networks of a wide variety of organizations fostering cultural commons in Barcelona, and highlight the efforts they have made to develop performance assessment tools. The conclusions consider the issue of mutual understanding between neighborhood movements, community action professionals, and the social economy sector. I underline how public-community partnerships can use networking activities to develop a constructive and critical approach to public service delivery and enhance collective learning about economic democratization. Vital importance is given to institutionalization of regulatory tools and the indicators needed to assess the value added by these partnerships. Experiences of local development through the management of cultural spaces (Klein and Tremblay, 2020) drive us to question the role of self-organized community actors in fostering the democratization of everyday life. Actual cases of community empowerment and, specifically, the way it develops in those environments known as the urban commons and the cultural commons, have attracted interest from both academia and the policy domain around the globe (Antonucci 2020; Feinberg, Ghorbani, and Herder 2020, 2021; Giannini and Pirone 2019; Kay and Wood 2020; Petrescu et al. 2020; Shah and Garg 2017; Steiner, McMillan, and Hill O’Connor 2022; Williams 2018). In Barcelona, over the last decade, bookended by the effects of the Great Recession and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been growing recognition for the socially innovative potential of those spaces and cultural projects set up by communitarian platforms involving committed local residents as the managers of cultural practices; at the same time, these initiatives have also gained prestige among the general public. As a particular manifestation of spaces of hope (Harvey 2000), community-led cultural centers are one specific subtype in the vast domain of urban commons where struggles are taking place to regain citizenship governance over water, food supply, energy distribution, housing or the public sphere, among others. As initiatives promoting cultural emancipation, collective learning and autonomous creation, these centers react against austerity policies and social vulnerability. Despite the wide diversity in their focal points, in their organizational formulas and in their scales of action, they coincide in that they act upon urban economies and social relationships to push for a general move toward democratization and decommodification. Thus, in addition to promoting cultural activities, many of these centers undertake initiatives that address a large number of current societal challenges. These are initiatives that envision the construction of other imaginaries of possibility. In Barcelona, the development of different initiatives into a political movement, with its own particular platform of associations called Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris (Network of Communitarian Spaces), is proof of the existence of a ‘community-management’ model for cultural facilities. The network includes initiatives with a wide variety of organizational forms, from okupa (squatters) social centers to officially recognized platforms that run public facilities under agreements with public administrations. … the forms of community-management are diverse (self-management of squatted or private spaces, management of municipal facilities and resources, cooperatives in rented premises, etc.) and are not based on a single model of work but are defined in a variety of ways that have to do with values, objectives and organizational models, in terms of the management of collective needs and their relationship with the shared resources of a given territory (Balanç Comunitari 2017-2020, Xarxa d’Espais Comunitaris).   In this article, I support the idea that understanding this type of management of cultural facilities may be vital in exposing how citizens can use specific demands, collective action and organizational proposals to gain the attention of policy makers and thereby claim their right to the city (Bailey and Marcucci 2013; Harvey 2014; Iveson 2013; Kemp, Lebuhn, and Rattner 2015; Novy and Colomb 2013). In this regard, this type of research includes an examination of bottom-linked initiatives as sites seeking complex equilibriums between institutionalization, community development and collective autonomy, and therefore it is essential for increasing knowledge on social innovation initiatives at the local level (Eizaguirre et al., 2012; Oosterlynck et al. 2013; Pradel, Eizaguirre, and García 2013). As for governance nodes for transforming cities and up-scaling their livability, the management of specific cultural facilities offers the opportunity to observe the limits and challenges of previous community development models that were influenced by neoliberal counter-reforms. The performance of these facilities as places where social struggles interact and where contributive democracy is put into practice is at the core of this research. But it also highlights the existence of other (or alternative) communitarian metrics than those related to enhancing individuals' social capital. With these aims, this study focuses on cultural management practices at a level close to citizens, involving them as creators and managers of cultural governance ecosystems, while rejecting the notion that their facilities are merely places for cultural consumption. At the same time, I give special attention to the relationship between these cultural environments and the realm of social economy, particularly the interactions between communitarian-led cultural management practices and forms of social economy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
On the Waterfront
On the Waterfront ARCHITECTURE-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
10
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Un museo urbano efímero Dar vida a las azoteas: luces y sombras desde la mirada de las comunidades de vecinos. El caso del distrito de Ciutat Vella (Barcelona) El fenómeno visual del vandalismo en la protesta ciudadana contra el monumento y la memoria franquista ¿Arte urbano antes de los tres años? Art enticements in cultural waterfronts: their perimuseal span in the Bilbao estuary beyond the Guggenheim
×
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