Enable communities to get involved in change

Rory Williams

Rory Williams

Published Feb 14, 2016

Share

Rory Williams

Environmental historian Dr Farieda Khan wrote in the Weekend Argus of February 6 about how connected the residents of District Six were with the mountain. It was their playground, where they hiked and camped and escaped from the intensity of life in cramped quarters, and for some, it was a place with spiritual meaning.

This connection, she says, was lost when people were shipped out to the Cape Flats, and when people lose this connection, they no longer see its value to them – and the natural environment is no longer something to be protected.

The same is true of any of us, and our connection with any aspect of the city. If we don’t experience it directly, we won’t value it and look for ways to enhance it. At best it becomes an objectified point of interest, not something we want to see resources spent on.

When the monster sunglasses appeared on the Sea Point promenade, some people asked why they were put in an area already privileged with resources. But the sunglasses would not be there without the effort of individuals who wanted to add value to the place. We can debate whether they actually do add value, but the debate will only happen if people value the promenade in the first place.

So, if we want to spread value-enhancing initiatives across the city, we need to find people who are willing to explore new ideas to improve their own neighbourhoods. And to find them, there need to be relatively cheap and quick things for them to try out to improve the emotional and physical connections of residents with the spaces around them.

Figuring out what would be best (most valued) for each community is like throwing darts in the dark, unless residents are already playing around with ideas. Getting people spontaneously involved in exploratory activity is the best way to demonstrate a need, not as “consultation” but as simply living.

Parklets, which are popping up in Cape Town, are a good example of something that seems like a non-essential frill on the urban fabric. These are microparks set up by businesses or enthusiastic individuals in city parking bays or unused spaces. They have become a trendy example of a class of interventions that are referred to as “urban acupuncture” or “guerrilla urbanism” – depending on their permanence and degree of rebellion against prevailing regulations.

That trendiness has tainted perceptions of them. But instead of rejecting them, critics should consider how to take the best aspects of what they offer, and design variations that are appealing in a particular context.

Maybe you don’t have an available parking bay, but you need a micropark close to people and traffic so that it is safer than a conventional park. Or maybe you can reverse that – find a fun way to attract lots of people to a neglected area so that it won’t feel so isolated. And if it doesn’t work, just try something else that is quick and cheap. There are thousands of examples worldwide, all it takes is imagination.

If enough people in different parts of the city began to see the benefits of transforming small spaces into very public places for gathering, using wi-fi and engaging in social activities, then both the people and their ward councillors might begin to see these as an essential service. They could – with the “light touch” of reduced bureaucracy – be a very easy way for communities to reclaim parts of the city in highly customised ways, suited to their particular needs.

If local people are involved in change, they can guide it, and demonstrate to government what they want delivered as an urban service – and how. When a service becomes institutionalised as something that government rolls out, it is almost unavoidable that it becomes standardised for ease of implementation, losing value in the process. Almost, but not quite.

Government often thinks its mechanisms for providing services are the only, or best means, of delivery. But what is being delivered? If citizens create parklets as services for themselves, then the city’s role in service delivery is not providing the parklet itself, but establishing an easy process that citizens can follow to get them built by businesses or community organisations. Government’s “basic service” is, then, the enabling process, not the product.

And the beauty of it is that the product doesn’t need to be predefined. Everyone has the opportunity to plan their own city-building intervention.

@carbonsmart

Related Topics: