Advertisement

Social Practices in the Commons

  • Davide FassiEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Research for Development book series (REDE)

Abstract

The regeneration of the commons occurs through direct involvement of groups of people who interact closely with spaces and who aim to improve the overall quality of life and experiences connected with those spaces. This process starts from an increased consciousness towards places that do not belong to the private realm but are public or can potentially be used by the civic society. Revealing the commons means being aware of the potentialities of these “hidden places” to not only connect people with them, but for people to also create a sense of community and ownership among themselves that was previously unknown. By showing best practices developed by the Polimi DESIS Lab in the city of Milan and its surroundings, this paper reveals: how design relates to this process; the relationship between the time of involvement and the effectiveness of the result; the short- and long-term impacts of these interventions; and the legacy of the regeneration, including both failures and successes.

References

  1. De Moor T (2015) The dilemma of the commoners: understanding the use of common pool resources in long-term perspective. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Draper C, Freedman D (2010) Review and analysis of the benefits, purposes, and motivations associated with community gardening in the United States. J Commun Pract 18:458–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fassi D (2017) Events and the city: when Arnold meets NoLo. In: Fassi D, Camocini B (eds) In the neighbourhood. Franco Angeli, MilanGoogle Scholar
  4. Fassi D, Galluzzo L, Rogel L (2016) Hidden public spaces: when a university campus becomes a place fro communities. In: DRS2016: design + research + society-future-focused thinking. pagg. Design Research Society, pp 3407–3421Google Scholar
  5. Feeny D, Berkes F, McCay BJ, Acheson JM (1990) The tragedy of the commons: twenty-two years later. Hum. Ecol. 18:1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00889070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gijselaers WH (1998) Experiential learning in higher education: linking classroomand community. Jeffrey A. CantorGoogle Scholar
  7. Hillgren PA, Seravalli A, Emilson A (2011) Prototyping and infrastructuring in design for social innovation. CoDesign. 7:169–183.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2011.630474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Manzini E (2019) Politics of the everyday. BloomsburryGoogle Scholar
  9. Markusen A, Gadwa A (2010) Creative placemaking. National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Munthe-Kaas P (2015) Agonism and co-design of urban spaces. Urban Res Pract 8:218–237Google Scholar
  11. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pasqualini C (2018) Vicini e connessi. Rapporto sulle Social Street a Milano, Fondazione Giangiacomo FeltrinelliGoogle Scholar
  13. Sassen S (2004) Local actors in global politics. Curr Sociol 52:649–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smorto G (2016) The sharing economy as a means to urban commoning. Comp LAW Rev 7Google Scholar
  15. Star SL, Ruhleder K (1996) Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Inf Syst Res 7:111–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Design DepartmentPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations