CATALYSE_Shaking_Hans

CATALYSE - RESEARCH & ACTIONWORKSHOP“SHAKING HANS”

Publishereuropean centre for creative economy | ecceEmil-Moog-Platz 744137 Dortmundwww.e-c-c-e.comfor:Moderation CATALYSE – Research and Action WorkshopBernd Fesel | european centre for creative economy (ecce)Eva Breitbach | schwarz+weiß Berlin | www.schwarzplusweiss.deVilim Brezina | Die Urbanisten e.V. Dortmund | www.dieurbanisten.deSpeakers CATALYSE – Research and Action WorkshopDanjiel Brekalo (Gigo) | artist Essen | www.danijelbrekalo.comCedar Lewisohn | artist London | www.punkandsheep.wordpress.com1. INTRODUCTIONCATALYSE -A EUROPEAN PROJECTin cooperation withConcept “Shaking Hans“Ministry for Family, Children, Youth,Culture and Sport of the State of NorthRhine-WestphaliaPartnerForum d‘Avignonwww.forum-avignon.orgBilbao Metropoli-30www.bm30.eswith financial support byCharles Landry | author and urban planner London | www.charleslandry.comTour to the project “Waende Südost“Florian van Rheinberg | social worker and project coordinatorEssen | www.storp9.deProject coordinationBernd Fesel, Annika Schmermbeck | european centre for creativeeconomy (ecce)With many thanks to the cultural department of the City of Essenfor providing the Atelierhaus as venue for the workshop in theCreative.Quarter City Nord.EssenPhotographyVladimir Wegener | Cover | page 9Thaisen Stärke | pages 2,3,6, 14/15, 16/17, 20Anika Ellwart | pages 5, 11, 12Translation/TextNathalie PuttfarkenDesigntamioe — Visuelle Kommunikation Dortmund | www.tamioe.deHolger Nils Pohl | Tape Art (Layout) | www.holgernilspohl.de1. INTRODUCTION03 | CATALYSE - A European project04 | CATALYSE partners07 | Research and Action Workshop - Shaking Hans2. WHAT IS “SHAKING HANS”?08 | The innovation processThe idea of Shaking HansHow we found the idea3. INITIATING COLLECTIVE NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT:HOW TO TURN SCEPTICS INTO ACTORS OF URBAN CHANGE?10 | Introduction10 | Shaking Hans - A horizontal approach to urban development13 | Horizontal urban development14 | Workshop methodology15 | Modules for initiating collective district development18 | Timeline and course of action19 | The venue - Creative.Quarter City Nord.EssenThe CATALYSE project is founded upon the fact,that social and political challenges Europeannations are currently facing cannot be solved byeconomic means only, but require solutions fromthe European cultural roots likewise: cultureand creativity cannot be neglected when definingthe modern European project, given theirparticular impact on territories’ development,as well as on local and transnational identities.As the European Union is interested in cultureand creativity as drivers for change, the threeproject partners, Forum d’Avignon, Bilbao Metropoli-30(whose main partner is the City ofBilbao) and the european centre for creativeeconomy (ecce), created this project to realisethree international conferences and modelurban actions in order to showcase how cultureand creativity can concretely push and catalysethe future of territories.(These three activities are based on existingpartnerships and different events – the Forumd‘Avignon (November 2013), the Forum d‘AvignonRuhr (June 2013) and Forum d‘Avignon Bilbao(March 2014). Thus CATALYSE gathers the threenational organisations’ teams within a successfulEuropean cooperation: the Forum d’Avignon(France) as coordinator, Bilbao Metropoli-30(Spain) and the european centre for creativeeconomy (Germany) as co-organisers.Based on the previous experiences’ results, theshared objectives of this project can be definedin the short-term and the long-term:To engage key decision-makers and the generalpublic in Europe to make evident the levereffect of cultural and creative investments –public ones as well as private ones - on the GDPand job creation.To sensitise European cities and citizens aboutthe benefits of integrated strategies to makeculture and creativity catalyse the quality oflife in Europe.To start more cultural and creative actions tofoment sustainable growth and social cohesionin a truly European living-together.Through these goals, this cooperation projectis meeting the three specific objectives of theEU Culture Programme: to support the trans-nationalmobility of people working in the culturalsector, to encourage the trans-national circulationof artistic and cultural works and productsand to encourage intercultural dialogue.0203

CATALYSE PARTNERSFORUM D‘AVIGNON,PARISAs coordinator and initiator of the Europeancooperative project CATALYSE, the Forum d‘Avignonacts as lead partner. Since 2008, the Forumd’Avignon serves as a research and discussionplatform for culture, the media and the industry.The conference of the same title takes placeannually in Avignon. The partner events Forumd‘Avignon Ruhr and Forum d‘Avignon Bilbao areheld in cooperation with the Forum d‘Avignon byecce and BM-30.EUROPEAN CENTRE FORCREATIVE ECONOMY,DORTMUNDAs a member of the CATALYSE project and organiserof the partner event Forum d‘AvignonRuhr, ecce is responsible for the CATALYSE activitiestaking place in Essen and the Ruhr Region.LABKULTUR.TV is involved in communicating theproject by interviews and articles.BILBAO METROPOLI-30,BILBAOThe economic promotion agency Bilbao Metropoli-30(BM-30) is the third cooperation partnerof CATALYSE. Thanks to the Bilbao effect, the cityis examplary for the cultural revival of urbanspace. In March 2014, BM-30 has organised thefirst Forum d’Avignon Bilbao.From left to right: Annette Allkemper (GeKuHaus), Idoia Postigo Fuentes (BM-30, Forumd‘Avignon Bilbao), Olivier Le Guay (Forum d‘Avignon),Alfons Wafner (Cultural department of theCity of Essen), Robert Bolin (Artist-in-Residence,Interactive Institute Göteborg), Bernd Fesel(ecce), Vilim Brezina (Urbanisten e.V.)Research focus:A model to assess the impact of cultural investmentin economic and social termsResearch focus:The spillover effects of Culture and Creative IndustriesResearch focus:Best practices in the use of culture to foster thedynamism of a territoryContact:Forum d’Avignon – Culture, économie, médiasCours la Reine - porte CGrand Palais des Champs Elysées75008 Paris - FranceContact:european centre for creative economy | ecceEmil-Moog-Platz 7 | 44137 DortmundGermanyContact:Bilbao Metropoli-30Gran Via, 45 | E-48011 BilbaoSpaininfo@forum-avignon.orgwww.forum-avignon.orginfo@e-c-c-e.comwww.e-c-c-e.comwww.forum-avignon-ruhr.orginfo@bm30.eswww.bm30.es0405

RESEARCH AND ACTION WORKSHOP - SHAKING HANSBY BERND FESELThe CATALYSE workshop organised by ecce wasa three-day, transnational exchange between 30participants focussing on trans-sector innovationin urban development through culture andcreative industries from 21st to 23rd October2013 in the Atelierhaus in Creative.Quarter CityNord.Essen.The aim of the EU-funded Research and ActionWorkshop (RAW) was to design a concept togetherwith local and international players, communities,residents, and planners, for a better involvementof citizens in urban planning anddevelopment with the help of cultural projects.Contrary to conventional civic participationprogrammes based on formal procedures andhearings where objections and concerns can bevoiced, this approach is based on the principleof horizontal urban development. The perspectiveon civic participation is changing - residentsin cities are not longer just participants but,ideally, co-producers of the city.The venue for the CATALYSE workshop in Essenwas not to be a traditional conference or officespace but a quarter where this kind of urbantransformation is really taking place – as inBilbao, London or Paris. The workshop basedon the project idea Shaking Hans, which wasdeveloped by an international team of creativeprofessionals and artists at the Forum d’AvignonRuhr 2013 (workshop group Urban Development):The idea is to integrate the sceptic in us directlyin the development and invigoration of ourown living spaces.Day one was an introduction into the subject,the presentation of the participants, and a guidedtour of the quarter. Creative.Quarter CityNord.Essen itself is a dynamic district that iscurrently undergoing strong changes. It is bothhumus for, and a source of inspiration on, howa design concept for horizontal open forms ofcivic participation can emerge from the initialShaking Hans idea. Examples of successfulunions of urban players help to reveal the potentialhidden in the district. Day two startedwith input on horizontal urban development(cf. chapter 3) by the project consultant VilimBrezina. Afterwards three different topics wereexamined to decide the direction to take in theintended project. The project was not only designedto work for Essen’s northern districtsbut also to function as an inspiration, or as amodel, for other cities. The first topic servedfor collecting desirable utopias and undesirabledystopias – in the northern district of Essen‘sCity.The second topic did deal with the explorationof own potential for, and experiences with, civicparticipation processes. Which role can I play?How can I contribute? How can cooperativesbetween me/us with active groups be initiatedlocally to shape the development of the district?The third topic did institute a debate on the specificideas developed. How can the idea ShakingHans be advanced and how, specifically, can itbe implemented? Which setting is required toactivate residents locally to become designersof their city? Citizens and creative professionalsfrom Essen’s northern districts can giveimportant input with their positive and negativeexperiences. The workshop was more than amere theoretical model but to discuss realitiesand to develop a new form of joint urban design.Consequently, the perspective taken of actualpractices played a central role: the Londonartist Cedar Lewisohn presented a couple ofEuropean examples of real participation andurban development dealing with this subject.Afterwards, Florian van Rheinberg illustratedthis based on the local example of the Mural ArtProject Waende Südost in Essen.After the presentations the conceptual phasestarted. In a hosted workshop, the projects, rolesand ideas previously collected jointly turnedinto a specific project with measures, targetsand priorities. The day ended with a traditionaldrinking hall excursion to the project WaendeSüdost: here, civic participation in union withan artistic development of the neighbourhood isreality.The third and final day the results were shownin a short presentation and thoroughly examinedunder the supervision of a facilitator during thefirst part of the day. Criticism and concerns andany possible weaknesses of the project were discussedand corrected where required. Optionalcomponents of the concept could be discussedtoo. Then the results of the working groups werepresented and debated to a panel of experts. Theworkshop ended here, but the return flow phasecontinued virtually. The results were broughtinto a clear concept form by the project consultantand sent to the workshop participants toreflect on it.0607

2. WHAT IS “SHAKING HANS”?THE INNOVATIONPROCESS BY CHARLES LANDRYTHE IDEA OFSHAKING HANSHOW WE FOUNDTHE IDEAThere were four teams of ten people from companyfounders to researchers – all selectedbecause of their experience in cultural projectsspilling over into such fields as Energy/Climate,Economy/New Work, Urban Development andInterculture. They all did not know each othercoming from different age groups, differentcountries and backgrounds. The groups weremixed with participants from the Ruhr Regionand Europe.The teams were each given a topic to considerthat had been developed through a three-monthconsultation process with activists and experts,who understood spillover impacts, in the RuhrRegion a few months earlier. They were chosenfor being innovative in relation to the economy,the environment, intercultural issues and urbanspace. Each team had five hours to thinkthrough an idea and within that time to create aphysical manifestation of the project. They alsohad an international expert to guide this artisticdesign process with the help of a facilitator.The teams gathered at the end of the day ina room full of materials to create something outof pieces of wood and metal, Styrofoam, string,wool, paints, cartons, paper, chairs, pallets, theodd wheel and general garbage.The following day each team had to present theirproject in any way they wished ranging from asimple description to a play. Shaking Hans, aproject about Urban Development presented itsidea involving all the participants and got themost votes.PARTICIPANTS OF THESHAKING HANS TEAMThe Shaking Hans team was led by Charles LandryThe team comprised: Daniel Brekalo (Gigo) Brekalo/WaendeSüdost Essen, Jan Bunse and VilimBrezina/Urbanisten e.V. Dortmund, Anne Kleiner/Dezentralefür forschende Stadterprobung,Ringlokschuppen Mülheim, Susa Pop/Public ArtLab Berlin, Janjaap Ruijssenaars/Universe ArchitectureAmsterdam, Andrius Ciplijauskas/Beepart Lithuania and Philipp Olsmeyer/Trädgårdpå Spåret: Ideell föreningThe Urban Development team concentrated on aquestion: How can we increase the recognitionby the public and decision makers for thevalue of creative projects and processes? Thechallenge for the group was to create an ideathat could be interesting enough to influencepeople to appreciate the positive impacts ofimaginative projects for urban development andcommunity building.To begin the process of imagining someone inpublic space we created a stereotype. This was“Hans” (it could have been a woman too). “Hans”tends to be inward looking, he is somewhatsceptical about connecting, he tends to be a bitprejudiced and he is slightly self-satisfied andcomplacent. He is a big consumer and is a partof that culture of entitlement. He expects othersto provide for him. He is not a shaper, maker orco-creator of his evolving city. Crucially thereis a “Hans” in all of us.The challenge we set ourselves was to convinceour “Hans” to be less sceptical about gettinginvolved in urban life and engaging withhis community in order to increase his trustand confidence in other people to the benefit ofall. In addition the idea needed to be catalytic,replicable, scalable, flexible and relatively easyto do.Then the team had really got going and ideasstarted flowing. On large scale sheets therewere ideas, slogans and phrases and what shoneout was the notion of bringing “Hans” out ofhimself and this formed the core of the projectencapsulated in the slogan “From the familiarto the unfamiliar”. His favourite room at homewould be transferred, as a longer term art installation,to a public space. It might start withhis sitting room or bedroom and then the installationmight grow to incorporate his kitchen.To launch the project our “Hans” would be thereinteracting with the public for a weekend andthen other “Hans” stereotypes might take over.With a kitchen this transferred domestic spacecould become a temporary café. There couldbe associated events, from the humorous to theserious, small workshops, shared music performancesand more to discuss the power and potentialof the public realm. The core idea can bedeveloped in numerous ways including invitingthe general public could be invited to shape.We left the room to physically build our projectidea and someone said this is a celebratingsceptics project and then another shoutedits Shaking Hans. That was it, this was the titlewith its implied double meaning of both shaking“Hans” into having a consciousness about theimportance of public space and then too thatinteracting in the public realm is about a minimumof two people symbolically shaking hands.One key point - the Shaking Hans title - was saidquietly in passing, by someone who had hardlysaid a word up to that point, but for us it wasthe essence, but to see its importance involvedsome understanding of what the public realmis about.The physical model was centred on two chairsstuck together on a wooden pallet representingthe inward looking and the transformed “Hans”as well as large ball of wool roughly 200 metreslong. In the performance in a dialogue the old“Hans” described why he as he is – inward-lookingand uninterested - and the new Hans describedhis transformation process as a moreengaged citizen triggered by the interest of thepublic in him. As this dialogue is going on thewool slowly goes around the auditorium connectingthe project group and each member to eachother symbolically representing the notion ofshared public space.0809

3. INITIATING COLLECTIVE NEIGHBOURHOODDEVELOPMENT: HOW TO TURN SCEPTICSINTO ACTORS OF URBAN CHANGE? BY VILIM BREZINAFig. 1: Collection of best-practice examples3.1 INTRODUCTIONThe EU-funded Research and Action Workshop(RAW) took place from 21st to 23rd October 2013as part of the EU-funded CATALYSE project in Essen,national and European experts were invitedto participate in cultural projects which occurredin public spaces to discuss how to handlethe residents’ scepticism concerning urbanchange. “Hans“, as a target person and synonymfor this scepticism of urban change, was thefocal point.The idea emerged in June 2013, at the previousForum d’Avignon Ruhr, in a workshop that formedpart of the research project “Spillover Effectsof Culture and Creative Industries in theRuhr Region“. The concept of Shaking Hans wasdeveloped by a team of professionals from thefields of arts and culture with regard to the subjectof spillover effects from culture on urbandevelopment. It was awarded with the N.I.C.E.Award for Innovations in Culture and Creativity.Shaking Hans is based on the idea that participatoryprojects should be construed in sucha manner that they involve “sceptical Hans“in the planning and developing the process ofurban spaces. This idea implies the integrationof so-called sceptics as participants in urbanlife – a target group that is often ignored intentionallybecause it is considered as destructiveand obstructive. These so-called sceptics, however,are also a part of urban life and communalactors should try to integrate them in developmentand coordination processes.Lots of residents complain about insufficientopportunities to participate in and contributeto the development of their own living environment.Some residents, however, take control ofthis development by initiating participatory urban(neighbourhood) projects independently. Aspart of the RAW, ecce invited residents, locallyactive and dedicated residents, artists, and projectinitiators, to talk about their experienceswith participatory projects. The outcome is aguideline for residents, initiatives, local governments,and organisations, on how to contributeto the development of urban spaces.3.2 SHAKING HANS– A HORIZONTALAPPROACH TO URBANDEVELOPMENTThe first part of the CATALYSE workshop wasdesigned as a collection of best practice examplese.g. Prinzessinnengärten in Berlin. Thisexample demonstrates that urban gardening isnot only about collective planting in the citybut has a great deal to do with political workand urban development as well. The Katernbergconference is an example from the northerndistricts of Essen, that shows how members ofcommunal politics and urban administrationsmeet with local citizens and entrepreneurs todiscuss the development of the Essen Katernbergdistrict and to try to give new impetusto the district. The Transition-Town movement,meanwhile, has become a global movement withthe aim of strengthening the local autonomyand the resilience of villages and towns andconsequently reduce external dependencies.(see examples fig. 1)The second part of the workshop was designedas a first practical development phase. The aimwas to develop model guidelines for integratingso-called sceptics into collective urban development.My keynote on collective urban development openedthe model phase and introduced the ”spiralof horizontal urban development“ (see page 13)as a theoretical basis for model development.It was followed by contributions from CedarLewisohn taken from his practical experienceswith top-down participation cases in Londonand Florian van Rheinberg about the exemplarydesign project Waende Südost in the city of Essen.This was followed by a work phase duringwhich the participants of the RAW were dividedinto four groups according to the order ofthe spiral of horizontal urban development todevelop measures for the specific implementationof the three spheres crowd, network andcommunity (see fig. 2). Afterwards, the measureswere sorted by chronological order to analysewhich of the measures would be necessary overthe entire term and which would be applied onlysporadically (see fig. 3).As already emerged previously at the Forumd’Avignon Ruhr 2013, the participants of thisworkshop, too, found that everybody has a“Hans“ in them. Therefore, it is important toconstantly integrate potential sceptics intoactivation processes to offer them opportunitiesfor participation.1011

CROWDTRANSPARENCYCROWDSOURCINGto knowto interactFig. 2: Spiral of horizontal urban developmentHORIZONTAL URBAN DEVELOPMENTNETWORKNETWORKDISCUSSIONto connectto debateFig. 3: Chronological order of measures13COMMUNITYCOMMUNITYLOCATIONCOOPERATIVEFESTIVALISATIONto uniteto locateto organiseto inspire1213

Fig. 4: Clustered measures based on thespiral of horizontal urban development3.3 WORKSHOPMETHODOLOGY3.4 MODULES FOR INITIATING COLLECTIVEDISTRICT DEVELOPMENTThe RAW was based on a very open, proceduraland common approach. The initiators ecce andthe CATALYSE partners had managed to select abalanced and productive mix of participants.This diversity ensured a highly diverse collectionof ideas on issues, for example how to reachpeople through measures such as “Hans“ or howto collectively initiate urban development. Thefact emerged that the participants had a muchstronger understanding of the requirementsof urban or neighbourhood/district developmentthan professional urban developers andarchitects may have through their conventionalvocational training. The collection of ideas onparticipation in processes of decision-making,development, cooperation, etc., had to be analysed,sorted and divided into different fieldsfor measures. This took place in open discussionswith a hosted introduction and joint clusteringof ideas. The first day of the workshopconcluded with an excursion through the Creative.QuarterEssen City.Nord in which the theoreticalideas of the first day were adopted andcombined with the real problems of an upheavingand changing district. The second dayconsisted of two technical inputs and a projectpresentation from Essen, itself. The inactivelecture situations were loosened up by shortdebates at the end of each lecture to finallyend in group work phases. The overall group of30 participants was divided into four effectiveworking groups, to make the clustered ideasmore specific and deduce implementable recommendationsfor action from them. These smallergroups were anxious to achieve good resultssince afterwards they had to expose themselvesto the other participants’ “Hans“-scepticism –meaning that during one group’s presentationthe members of the other three groups wouldassume the role of “Hans“ and confront the presentinggroup with its scepticism. This helpedidentify the weak points of the first part-resultsso that they could be improved in the secondphase.To display their results, the presenting groupused a billboard with index cards for their presentation.The index cards were arranged on thespiral of horizontal urban development dividedby the categories crowd, network, and community.The second day of the workshop ended witha visit to the Mural Art Project Waende Südost.The third day was spent reviewing, correcting,and presenting the workshop results. For thispurpose, the previous days’ small groups convenedagain to edit their lectures for the finalpresentation. Based on the feedback received,all groups included more potential for impro-vements into their measures and, moreover, addeda timeline for implementation. In the end,all four groups presented their final results toexperts (see fig. 4).Participation in urban development can be implementedonly if all actors are perceived aspartners. According to the opinion of many ofthe attendants of the workshops, partnershipsin participatory processes are intransparentand even arbitrary. This problem, however, canbe addressed by cultivating authenticity andtransparency. Clarity in planning schedules andcompetencies is as important as “Hans“-suitable,i.e. user-friendly and reflected communicationwith all partners. This means that negotiationsabout spaces, funding, and generallyabout possibilities of cooperation between partnerssuch as communal administrations and futureusers and/or operators, are conducted oneye-level. Transparency is a reliable means ofauthenticity. For authentic action is only possibleif the parties in cooperative projectsdisclose which know-how is available to themrespectively – transparency in processes, decisions,planning, etc. The same applies to howso-called sceptics are treated: possibly “Hans“wishes to be informed and inspired, to obtaindifferent kinds of access to the project, participatein decisions, to be addressed in a languageand form that feels appropriate to him/her, andwithout being presented final facts but enablinginteraction.The participants of the workshops attemptedto transform the different aspects of the“Hans“-issue into specific measures. The resultsof the workshops will be presented in the herein-below,condensed into four modules andchannelled into varying methods in a guide forcollective urban development. This is intendedas a kind of construction kit that can be usedfor each individual situation in the neighbourhoodor on city level. The titles of the four modulesare Urban Intervention, Reflection, UrbanVision and The Doers.1415

URBAN INTERVENTIONWELCOMING OR IRRITATION CLIMATEDescription:Urban interventions are suitable to overcomebarriers between anonymous city residents andurban change initiators. This requires small buteffective changes to urban spaces by giving familiarthings a new meaning through alienation.This may lead to initial mutual experiences andthe so very important initial contact/welcomingeffect. Irritation in public spaces, such as handingout free strawberries in a pedestrian zone,increase the passers-by sense of well-being andcohesion and may lead to initial conversations.This first contact can be used to point out comingevents or simply to chat about the neighbourhood.For a short moment, they lift the barrierbetween what was previously consideredunfamiliar. The impact of this kind of actioncan be increased by involving additional neighbours,such as shops, cafés, residents and interestedpersons, etc., in the intervention. Whendeciding about the type of action, the venue andits uniqueness are of utmost importance:Take possession of the city, play with it, transformit creatively, and surprise yourself andothers. Respect generally valid rights and carefor the environment. Strive for a synergeticand sustained co-existence with the city andits residents. (Hedinger and Meyer 2013: UrbanInterventions Manifesto). Artistic irritationsare helpful, too, to establish a first contact. Itmay provide an indication of problems in theneighbourhood and thus provoke discourse inthe neighbourhood, which ideally leads to mutualinsights and ideas. Likewise, laying out turfrolls and putting up chairs and tables on a carpark may be a visual statement calling for moregreen spaces and fewer traffic zones in the city.The creative power of imagination has no limitsin thinking up urban interventions. The aim ofall actions is to inform targeted persons aboutnew events or organisations and collect contactdata for the future course of action.Methods:The seven sub-sections of urban intervention,according to Hedinger and Meyer (2013), can besummarised as follows:• URBAN CANVAS (graffiti, signs,markings, buildings, light, et al.)• ATTACHMENTS (creative add-ons,parasitic take-overs)• LOCALISED (designing specific sites,context with a bonus)• PUBLIC PRIVACY (mixing inside andoutside)• PUBLIC STAGE (performances in publicspaces, flash mobs et al.)• ADVERTISED (ad-busting, brand hackinget al.)• NATURALISED (guerrilla gardening,snow, sand et al.)Targets:• artistic irritation in public spaces• address unfavourable developments ina neighbourhood• find opportunities of discourse with“Hans“• acquisition of interested persons byway of mailing lists• spread information about key events/kick-off meetingsExamples:• temporary road closures• temporarily change the function ofpublic spaces -> from a car park to acoffee stall• art performances in shopping streets• design markets• street festivalsREFLECTIONREGULARS’ TABLE (“STAMMTISCH”) OFFORGOTTEN IDEASDescription:Regardless of what you initially thought to knowabout the neighbourhood, it will turn out to bewrong. With this approach, you keep your mindwide open for the inner connections and peoplein the neighbourhood.Establishing a regular informal meeting, a regularplatform for exchanging ideas, and reflectingon the locality, helps to exchange mutualexperiences and get to know each other. This isa characteristic function of regulars’ tables (inGerman “Stammtisch“). A good structure and authenticfacilitator, such as a district manageror carer, in an open and comfortable surrounding– the “hangout” – facilitates the exchangeof ideas for urban visions. Simultaneously,an online-based forum or project managementmakes it possible to integrate ideas and opinionsof persons who are not able to attend. Inaddition, the platform is a collection point forall contact data of interested parties since notall citizens are always able, or want, to becomeinvolved in the same issues. A small core groupwill often act more effectively than everyoneacting together. The participants’ potential andabilities often vary so the group, and especiallythe facilitator, needs a good sense for momentswhen someone should be involved more intenselyor not.Methods:• regulars’ meetings in a relaxedatmosphere• Internet platforms such as blogs,project management, forum, apps,etc.• mailing lists for different subjects• well-structured and open facilitationTargets:• introduce and meet active members• exchange and document stories aboutthe neighbourhood• identify and describe problems in theneighbourhood• collect ideas for improvingcommunity in the neighbourhoodExamples:• meetings in a pub• meetings in a neighbourhood livingroom (cf. Alsen living room inBochum)• meetings on certain topics ofdiscussion and current needs• use Facebook for coordination andannouncements• use platforms such as Trello forproject management (distribution oftasks, contact data, communalcalendar, etc.)URBAN VISIONWHAT TO BELIEVE IN?Description:Creating a mutual vision is only in collectiveworkshops and discussions possible. “Hans“generally wants to know what he/she is optingfor and where he/she is heading. A mutual visionshould not be too specific so that it canbe adjusted and modified in the course of theprocess. On the other hand, it should not betoo unfocussed to avoid misunderstandings anddifferent interpretations. Future workshops aregood tools for outlining common targets and amutual vision. A clear, ideally visualised, visionwritten down on paper is important in terms ofinternal consensus and conviction on the onehand and on the other hand it is a tool to acquiremore supporters.In addition to a convincing vision, targets mustnot be set too high so as to avoid disappointment.For example, it is advisable to find outwho is able to realistically achieve which targetsand accordingly initiate the first steps andtasks. In the end, the group will concentrate ona core group that is able to act efficiently – theCommunity of Practice.Methods:• workshops• future workshops• writing workshops• discussionsTargets:• create and visualise a vision for theneighbourhood• outline a form of implementation and/or organisation• establish and distribute specifictasks – who can contribute?• identify a core groupExamples:• artistic visualisation in publicspaces, such as a self-made 3D planset up in a public space• presentation of the vision to authorities,foundations, public briefings,etc.• theatre or film productions of thestory• hold future workshops with visionsfor the future and good examplesfrom other neighbourhoodsTHE DOERSA CORE GROUP CAPABLE OFEFFICIENT ACTIONDescription:During the group work, doers emerge who arewilling to accept more responsibility and tasksthan others. The doers constitute the implementation-focussedcore group. To remain capableof action and open for more doers, a clearstructure within an organisational form is indispensable.It serves for structuring collectivework and provides orientation for the achievementof targets, implementation of methods,and maintaining the vision. It is not an end initself and eliminates itself after the vision iscompleted, or creates a new vision. How thisgroup makes decisions should be defined in theorganisational structure. Whether it acts accordingto the principle “Dictatorship of the Active“or whether it takes all decisions jointly,or whether a smaller circle of decision-makerssets the course, should be determined in analyticalprocesses such as workshops and discussions,possibly with external experts. All optionshave their advantages and disadvantages.What is important is that the structure is flexibleto be able to adjust changes of the vision.The structure grows with its users and not viceversa.Such an adaptive organisational form not onlyhelps to structure internal work processes butalso generates transparency, accessibility, andtrust, when looking for new partners and actors,applying for funds, or when working togetherwith public institutions. For this purpose,already existing citizens’/neighbourhoodfunds can be drawn on.Also, its presence in the neighbourhood is importantin order to remain in contact with localresidents. “Hans“ has to be convinced of thereliability and sustainability of the project. Itshould also be possible to invite “Hans“ to seewhich possibilities of contribution he/she hasin the group and which skills or competencieshe/she might be able to contribute to help thegroup. The accessibility and permeability that“Hans” experiences with the group, for examplein open meetings, is crucial to turn so-calledsceptics into active parties. Such an organisationsees itself as a socially open institution thatdoes not intend to foreclose and subject decisionsto hierarchies but wants to achieve the participationand integration of the “Hans” in eachof us – an aim that is not subject to time-limitsbecause of residents moving into and out of theneighbourhood.Methods:• set up a recursive organisationalstructure, flat hierarchies and simultaneouslyassign distinct areas ofresponsibility• rent a venue• community budgeting/citizens’ fondsTargets:• establish an open organisational form• establish transparent decisionmakingstructures• be present in the neighbourhood andalways remain open to new ideas• understand setbacks as necessarypart of social learning spaces andovercome them• set up a physical manifestation of thegroupExamples:• foundation of an association or acooperative• renting an office/a space in theneighbourhood in order to be present• offer open doors and meetings tointerested parties• obtain citizens’ funds, neighbourhoodfunds, or other funding partners ormeans to implement the vision1617

3.5 TIMELINE ANDCOURSE OF ACTIONCREATIVE.QUARTERCITY NORD.ESSENProcess:From the start, events should be accompaniedby intensive public relations work. Targeted actionand events extend the radius of interestedparties and potential participators and raiseawareness of the vision. They could consist ofevents in public spaces, such as distributingflyers, practical events illustrating the vision,or interactive events. Service providers who, ona daily basis, are in contact with a high numberof strangers such as taxi drivers, newsagents,or hairdressers, may be involved in the eventsto act as multipliers. Likewise, events in virtualspaces on Facebook/Twitter, or videos and podcasts,help to increase the public radius and increaseawareness of the vision. Classical publicrelations work, such as contacting other groupsin the neighbourhood and the press, illustratingevents with photos and videos, significantly raisethe profile of the events and their synergyfactor.The progress of urban development processesalways depends on the people who drive theprocess. The contents and course of proceduredepend on the skills and commitment of thegroup. Accordingly, the time sequence is highlyvariable and cannot be relevant for measuringthe success or the failure of such a process.Nevertheless, the following shows a model timelineto illustrate how such process may be scheduledwithin a time span of 12 to 15 months.Timeline:month 1-3 urban interventions | reflectionmonth 3-6 reflection | the doersmonth 6-9 reflection | urban vision | the doersmonth 9-12 urban interventions | urban visionThis timeline provides an ideal sequence for thefour modules within a period of 12-15 monthsand may be re-used as construction kit for initiatingcollective projects. The modules can beused variably and ultimately depend on the resultsand the progress of the group. Which measuresof which module are carried out when,also and primarily depends on the type of project.Urban interventions can be a good start forusing irritation in public spaces to highlightcertain problems. It is important that such irritationis flanked by the module reflection asso-called sceptics should not be left alone. Forexample, in one location, irritations can takeplace on one day and discussions on the nextday. Another possibility is to use irritation topoint out a future event, at which the irritationsare addressed, explained and discussed.This phase may last for 3-6 months until an ex-tended group has evolved that wants to changethe neighbourhood. It is followed by the modulethe doers, where the main objective is to reinforcethe group. This may approx. require additional4-6 months. The specification of doersis accompanied by more events for reflectionand first contemplations of an urban vision. Thelatter should become more and more focussedand specific in order to actually effect changesin the urban space and implement the vision.Thus, the implementation of a jointly initiatedneighbourhood development project tendsto take between 12 and 15 months. The implementationperiod is significantly reduced if anactive, established group already exists in theneighbourhood that is able to exclusively focuson using the module to convince “Hans“.The implementation of participatory urbandevelopment must be seen as an ongoing andopen-ended process that is optimised continuously.So-called sceptics such as “Hans“ willalways exist and this is a fact that cannot bechanged. What can be changed, however, is to letthe borders between the doers and the so-calledsceptics become blurred. Thus, one of the conclusionsof this guide must also be that innovationleading to a more open administrative cultureis the prerequisite for citizens to becomeactively involved in opportunities to participate.Is it possible for an administration to establishitself not only as a preserver but rather as anenabler of innovation?Doers are able to learn as much from the so-calledsceptics as vice versa. At the end of the day,we carry both figures in us. The question thatarises is: when do I assume which role – is myscepticism justified or is it based on a fear ofchange?THE VENUEThe venue for the Research and Action Workshop(RAW): Atelierhaus Schützenbahn 19/21 inthe Creative.Quarter City Nord.EssenEssen, with its approx. 570,000 residents, is thefourth largest city in the Land of North Rhine-Westphaliaand is located in the middle ofthe Ruhr Region. The urban setting is dividedinto two parts: the densely inhabited city centretogether with the northern districts and thesouthern areas with their many green spaces.Zeche Zollverein – an industrial monument andUNESCO world heritage site – is the city’s landmark.The call for “work spaces for the arts“ in 2010was the occasion for the initiative “Freiraum2010“ to occupy the former DGB (German TradeUnions) building at the Schützenbahn in thenorthern districts of Essen‘s city. Two years later,in 2012, the first studio house, the venueof the RAW – also situated at the Schützenbahn– opened its doors and gave an impulse to openthe neighbourhood with its typical character toartists and creative professionals.The popularity of the former TV studio’s spaceswas as extraordinary as significant: the city’sdecision was to open the spaces in the formerlysparkling and now bleak City Nord.Essen forcreative professionals, now it is a visible triggerfor the development of the Creative.Quarter,which through art and culture has created anew feeling of community and brought togethervarious actors and residents who collectivelywant to develop the neighbourhood in a positivedirection. Therefore, the studio house not onlyacts as a place of work and creation for artistsbut also assumes the role of a local hub for allprotagonists of the neighbourhood and for theneighbourhood itself.Individuality instead of mainstream – visitingCity Nord.Essen you will encounter an increasingamount of idiosyncratic shops and smallproducers’ galleries next to food stalls of variousnationalities and original, trendy venueswith catering facilities. If you are out forspectacular industrial culture, you will searchin vain. The area’s special charm is a seeminglyinsignificant small-scale patchwork characterof a neighbourhood district. Behind it standsa neighbourhood’s feeling of community, a movementsimilarly connecting residents, tradesmen,entrepreneurs, artists, and city officers.Their common interest: urban spaces for a morelife-worthy future. Supporting and qualifyingartists and providing affordable studios andwork spaces are therefore equally on the agendaas are further measures to develop the Creative.Quarterand to promote the neighbourhood’sidentity.1819