Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

‘Designing’ commons: exploring interplays between commons, space and spatial design

  • Original Article
  • Published:
URBAN DESIGN International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the commons debate engaging with space and spatial design by analysing community-based design processes in two housing commons institutions in Brussels. Based on a literature review and an action research in a Community Land Trust housing project and a public space regeneration project in a housing cooperative, I argue that spatial designers can play an important role in commoning by empowering people to act outside dominant planning discourses and by spatially articulating the social, cultural and environmental role of dwelling space. However, there is need for public support and flexibility in the institutional frameworks of spatial design execution to create room for such engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aernouts, N., and M. Ryckewaert. 2017. Beyond housing: On the role of commoning in the establishment of a Community Land Trust project. International Journal of Housing Policy 18 (4): 503–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aernouts, N., and M. Ryckewaert. 2018. Reproducing Housing Commons: Government Involvement and Differentiated Forms of Commoning in a Brussels Housing Cooperative. Housing Studies 34 (1): 92–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • An Architektur. 2010. On the Commons: A Public Interview with Massimo De Angelis and Stavros Stavrides. An Architektur 23: 4–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanc, M. 2012. Espace, inégalité et transaction sociale. SociologieS (En ligne), Débats, Penser ls inégalités, 27 January 2012. http://sociologies.revues.org/3832.

  • Blundell Jones, P., D. Petrescu, and J. Till (eds.). 2005. Architecture and Participation. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C., and E. Kelling. 2013. Towards an Architecture of Dissensus: Participatory Urbanism in South-East Asia. Footprint 7 (2): 41–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boillier, D. 2016. Commoning as a Transformative Social Paradigm. The next system project.

  • Borch, C. 2011. Interview with Edward W. Soja: Thirdspace, Postmetropolis, and Social Theory, Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 3 (1): 113–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooke, D.W.-G. 2013. An Anthropology of Urbanism: How People Make Places (and What Designers and Planners Might Learn from It). Footprint 7 (2): 21–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charley, J. 2008. The Glimmer of Other Worlds: Questions on Alternative Practice. Architectural Research Quarterly 12 (2): 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cognetti, F., and I. Castelnuovo. 2013. The double responsibility of public engagement. Reflections from the Polisocial Program. In Intercultural Horizons: Intercultural Strategies in Civic Engagement, ed. E. Nash, N. Brown, and L. Bracci, 41–55. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corijn, E., and J. Groth. 2011. The Need for Freezones: Informal Actors Setting the Urban Agenda. In Art and Activism in the Age of Globalisation, ed. L. De Cauter, R. De Roo, and K. Vanhaesebrouck, 146–159. Rotterdam: NAI Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, V. 2014. Investigating Urban Design Workshops in Flanders: Researching Designerly Research (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Leuven, Belgium: KU Leuven.

  • Dessouroux, C., R. Bensliman, N. Bernard, S. De Laet, F. Demonty, P. Marissal, and J. Surkyn. 2016. Huisvesting in Brussel: Diagnose en Uitdagingen. Brussels Studies 99: 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doucet, I., and K. Cupers. 2009. Agency in Architecture: Reframing Criticality in Theory and Practice. Footprint (4): 1–6. https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.3.1.694

  • Fonds du Logement. 2014. Marché Public Pour la Conception et l’Exécution de Travaux Pour la Réalisation d’Habitations: Cahier Spécial des Charges. Brussels: Fonds du Logement de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. 1984. Des Espaces Autres. Hétérotopies. Of Other Spaces, Heterotopias. Architecture, Mouvement, Continuité 5: 46–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregotti, V. (1985) 2012. Territory and Architecture. In: Introducing Architectural Theory: Debating a Discipline, ed. K. Smith, 341–344. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfrich, S., and J. Haas. 2009. The Commons: A New Narrative for Our Times. Washington, DC: Heinrich Böll Stiftung North America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, C. 2008. Mapping New Commons. In Presented at the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons, Cheltenham, UK, 14–18 July.

  • Heynen, H., and A. Loeckx. 2013. Scenes of Ambivalence: Concluding Remarks on Architectural Patterns of Displacement. Journal of Architectural Education 52 (2): 100–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krivy, M., and T. Kaminer. 2013. The Participatory Turn in Urbanism. Footprint 7 (2): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. 1974. La Production de l’Espace. Paris: Anthropos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Licata, A., C. Louey, G. De Pauw, and L. Pazienza. 2013. Cahier des Recommendations: Le Projet vu Par ses Futurs Habitants. Molenbeek: CLT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linebaugh, P. 2008. The Magna Carta Manifesto. Liberties and Commons for All. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, K. 2007. Building Commons and Community. New York: New Village Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, P. 2009a. From Justice Planning to Commons Planning. In Searching for the Just City, ed. P. Marcuse, J. Connolly, and J. Novy, 91–102. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, P. 2009b. From Critical Urban Theory to the Right to the City. City 13 (2–3): 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. [1867]2010. Het Kapitaal. Amsterdam: Boom Filosofie.

  • Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pateman, C. 1970. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Petcou, C., and D. Petrescu. 2015. R-URBAN or How to Co-produce a Resilient City. Ephemera Journal 15 (1): 249–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrescu, D. 2005. Loosing Control, Keeping Desire. In Architecture and Participation, ed. P.B. Jones, D. Petrescu, and J. Till, 42–71. London and New York: Spon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, M. 2002. Excavating Lefebvre: The Right to the City and Its Urban Politics of the Inhabitant. GeoJournal 58: 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, M. 2009. Resisting Neoliberalization: Communicative Planning or Counter-Hegemonic Movements? Planning Theory 8 (2): 140–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rancière, J. 2010. Dissensus on Politics and Aesthetics, (Steven Corcoran, Trans.). London, UK: Continuum.

  • Remy, J. 2016. Spatialité du Social et Transactions. SociologieS (En ligne), Espaces et transactions sociales. http://sociologies.revues.org/5354. Accessed 16 Jun 2016.

  • Remy, J., and L. Voyé. 1981. Ville, ordre et violence. Formes spatiales et transaction sociale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, K. 1991. Translator’s Introduction. In The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five lessons in intellectual emancipation, ed. J. Rancière, vii–xxiii (K. Ross, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

  • Ryckewaert, M., and K. Landuydt. 2007. Een Methodologisch Kader Voor Case Study Onderzoek Naar de Ruimte Van Het Wonen. Leuven: KU Leuven & Steunpunt Wonen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saija, L. 2014. Writing About Engaged Scholarship: Misunderstandings and the Meaning of “Quality” in Action Research Publications. Planning Theory & Practice 15 (2): 187–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, T., and J. Till. 2009. Beyond Discourse: Notes on Spatial Agency. Footprint 4: 97–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavrides, S. 2010. Heterotopias and the Experience of Pourous Urban Space. In Loose Space: Possibility and Diversity in Urban Life, ed. K.A. Franck and Q. Stevens, 174–192. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soja, E.W. 1996. Thirdspace: Journey to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places. Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squatting Europe Kollective. 2014. The Squatters’ Movement in Europe: Commons and Autonomy as Alternatives to Capitalism, eds. Cattaneo C., & M. Martínez. London: Pluto Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt183p1wf.

  • Swyngedouw, E. 2005. Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-Beyond-the-State. Urban Studies 42 (11): 1991–2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swyngedouw, E., and F. Moulaert. 2010. Socially Innovative Projects, Governance Dynamics and Urban Change: Between State and Self-organisation. In Can Neighbourhoods Save the City? Community Development and Social Innovation, ed. F. Moulaert, F. Martinelli, E. Swyngedouw, and S. Gonzalez, 219–235. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Till, J. 2005. The Negotiation of Hope. In Architecture and Participation, ed. P.B. Jones, D. Petrescu, and J. Till, 19–41. London and New York: Spon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, S. 2007. Reflective Action in the Academy: Exploring Praxis in Critical Geography using a “Food Movement” Case Study. Antipode 39 (2): 331–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G. 1994. Women, Theft and the World of Stolen Goods. In Women, Crime and the Courts in Early Modern England, ed. G. Walker and J. Kermode, 81–105. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, J., and M. Hirst. 1982. User participation in the early stages of building design. Design Studies 3 (1): 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank all participants of the design process of Vandenpeerenboom and Destrier. Especially the volunteers deserve special mention.

Funding

This work was supported by Innoviris (Grant Number 2015 PRFB 129).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cosmopolis Centre for Urban Research, Department of Geography, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Nele Aernouts

Authors
  1. Nele Aernouts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nele Aernouts.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author reports no potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aernouts, N. ‘Designing’ commons: exploring interplays between commons, space and spatial design. Urban Des Int 25, 63–76 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-019-00107-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-019-00107-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation