Coltivando Thesis Book by Coltivando Orto Conviviale

ORTO CONVIVIALE al Politecnico di Milano Evolving the community garden model into a cooperative, based on a collaborative service between a university and its neighbourhood.

RELATOR Prof. Davide Fassi CO-RELATOR Prof. Giulia Simeone STUDENT Gustavo Germรกn Primavera 754743

POLITECNICO DI MILANO SCUOLA DEL DESIGN Master Degree in PRODUCT SERVICE SYSTEM DESIGN A.Y. 2010/2012 Date of discussion 27th July 2012

4•5

Abstract English The utopia of a consumer society is not viable on a global scale, regardless of the progress of green technologies in the coming decades. After years of neglecting and ignoring, environmental awareness is reaching decision makers and citizens. These same people are starting to incline towards a sustainable lifestyle as the new paradigm for quality of life. But to make such paradigmatic jump, we need to change our lifestyles dramatically. This means that progressive innovation is not sufficient, instead we need to implement radically new approaches. This kind of innovation emerges from behavioural change that comes from bottom-up rather than topdown process. The way individuals or communities act to solve a problem or to generate new opportunities is referred as social innovation.[1] Among the ongoing tendencies there are some in which this diffuse design creativity - social innovation - has found a way of converging in collaborative activities.[2] An example of which are initiatives that have to do with healthy, natural food and self-managed services. A co-design approach is crucial for the conception of such services, apart from deep insight, co-creation practiced at the early front end of the design development process can have an impact with positive, long-range consequences.[3] With the overall goal to design towards sustainability and resuming to the work done in the Temporary Urban Solutions course[4] the following questions arose: how can we create a community garden inside the Politecnico di Milano Campus Via Durando[5] to share this public space with the Bovisa neighbours? Is it possible to shape it as a community-based service to create meaningful bonds between individuals, and build resilience through an inclusive solution that helps the worst off and least able? During the year 2011, Politecnico di MIlano represented the perfect enabling platform, with the capacity to absorb and experi1 2 3 4 5

Emerging User Demands for Sustainable Solutions (EMUDE), 2006 Jégou, Manzini et al, 2008 Co-creation and the new landscapes of design - Sanders, Stappers, 2008 RTC 2.1 Exploring the Opportunities RTC 2.2 Analyzing the Niche

ment with innovation and with the privilege management of the campus public spaces. These characteristics were perfectly understood by the INDACO Department that proposed opening the campus as a public space to the Bovisa neighbours. As a result of the combination of opportunity and demand, in February 2012 ‘Coltivando - Orto Conviviale’ was launched by a design group of Politecnico di Milano’s INDACO Department; as a project based on offering a community gardening as a cooperative service. The thesis project consists in a service run by a group of affiliates composed by members of the academic community and the Bovisa neighbourhood (sub-urban dwellers who just share the same values of the project and want to be an active part of it). This self-managed service relies in the contribution of manual labour to collectively grow organic produce in exchange for that same produce. In addition the garden is meant to be used as a place for social interaction, hosting different types of workshops, organic public dinners and local events. On the medium term, the project aims at generating and enabling a resilient community of members to recover the quality of healthy and biological food, sharing peer-to-peer care and support, and by doing so regenerate the social fabric of the neighbourhood as well. On the long term, it is expected for ‘Coltivando’ to diffuse into smaller cells and become a social innovation platform where the members generate and put in practise more sustainable ideas of wellbeing. Developing such collaborative service requires social creativity, interaction, participation and joint problem solving between users and professionals: co-creation. The design team held a series of codesign workshops that helped in identifying the key resources and needs and co-project an enabling solution; not only engaging and forming the community of members, but giving a sense of ownership to the final users. This thesis delivers a full functioning Products Service System solution ready to be put into practice. It includes the Coltivando Member Manual and several Garden Models: Program, Business, Governance and Spatial. The thesis also foresees a medium-term scenario for the garden and service expansion and a long-term scenario for the local expansion of the service – in the shape of a toolkit – and international expansion – in the shape of a PSS Format. The project ultimately hopes to active self-managed collaborative gardens within communities of local individuals to generate new opportunities in the search to improve the quality of life in the region.

6•7

Abstract Italiano L’utopia della società consumistica non è perseguibile su scala globale nonostante i progressi delle tecnologie sostenibili degli ultimi decenni. La sostenibilità ambientale sta diventando un tema sempre più sensibile tra i cittadini contemporanei e i vertici decisionali dopo aver passato troppi anni in cui veniva trascurata e ignorata. Queste figure stanno ora tendendo a perseguire uno stile di vita sostenibile come nuovo paradigma della qualità di vita, ma solo cambiando radicalmente il nostro atteggiamento sarà possibile il definitivo passaggio. L’innovazione e il cambiamento progressivi non sono più sufficienti , necessitiamo infatti di introdurre un nuovo approccio alla vita a tutto tondo. Questo tipo di innovazione radicale è realizzabile solo con un cambiamento comportamentale, facilitando processi bottom-up piuttosto che top-down, in cui gli individui o le comunità risolvono problemi o generano nuove opportunità, quindi Social Innovation.[1] Tra queste nuove tendenze ve ne sono alcune in cui la Social Innovation ha trovato una naturale convergenza in attività collaborative[2], ad esempio nel campo della sanità, del cibo naturale e dei servizi auto-gestiti. L’approccio co-design è cruciale per la nascita di tali servizi: oltre a fornire profondi insights, la creazione condivisa all’inizio del processo progettuale può avere conseguenze positive a lungo termine.[3] Avendo quindi come obiettivo principale il design per la sostenibilità e riprendendo il lavoro svolto durante il corso di Temporary Urban Solution[4], sono sorte le seguenti domande: come possiamo creare un Orto Collettivo dentro il Campus Durando[5] del Politecnico di Milano? È possibile condividere questo spazio pubblico con il vicinato di Bovisa? Sarà possibile trasformarlo in un community-based-service? Sarà in grado questo di resistere e superare difficoltà creando legami significativi tra individui, aiutando i più deboli e i meno abili? 1 2 3 4 5

Nel 2011 il Politecnico di Milano si presentava come piattaforma perfetta, capace di assorbire e sperimentare progetti di innovazione grazie anche alla sua gestione privilegiata dello spazio pubblico del campus. Questa caratteristica veniva perfettamente interpretata dal dipartimento Indaco del Politecnico , che proponeva così di aprire lo spazio al vicinato di Bovisa e trasformarlo a tutti gli effetti in spazio pubblico. Come risultato della combinazione di opportunità e domanda venne lanciato nel Febbraio 2012 il progetto Coltivando - Orto Conviviale basato sul concetto di Cooperativa sociale. Il progetto di tesi consiste in un servizio gestito da un gruppo di affiliati che nasce dall’unione dei membri della comunità accademica e del vicinato di Bovisa, particolarmente interessato alla condivisione di questi valori. Questo servizio auto-gestito consiste nel contribuire con lavoro manuale alla coltivazione collettiva di prodotti organici in cambio del coltivato stesso. Inoltre il giardino sarà una piattaforma di interazione sociale, ospitando diverse tipologie di Workshops, cene a base di cibo organico ed eventi locali. Nel medio termine il progetto si pone come obiettivo la nascita di una comunità resistente e durevole nel tempo in grado di recuperare la qualità del cibo biologico, condividere supporto e cure peer-to-peer. Attraverso questo processo sarà così possibile rigenerare il tessuto sociale del quartiere. Nel lungo termine ci si aspetta da Coltivando di diffondersi in piccole cellule tali da diventare una piattaforma di innovazione sociale dove i membri possano generare e mettere in pratica nuove idee di benessere sostenibile. Sviluppare tale servizio collaborativo richiede Co-Creation, cioè creatività sociale, interazione, partecipazione e risoluzione di problemi in gruppo tra utenti e professionisti. Il team creativo ha tenuto una serie di co-design workshops che hanno aiutato a identificare le risorse chiave e i bisogni al fine di progettare una enabling solution; non solo coinvolgendo e formando la comunità dei membri, ma anche conferendo un sentimento di proprietà all’utente finale stesso. Questa tesi offre una soluzione Product Service completamente funzionante pronta per essere messa in pratica, includendo il Manuale di Coltivando e una serie di Garden Models (Program, Business, Governance e Architectural). La tesi prevede anche uno scenario a medio-termine per l’espansione dell’orto e del servizio e uno scenario a lungo-termine per la riproduzione locale (toolkit) e regionale/globale (PSS Format). Il progetto infine si prefigge di attivare giardini autogestiti all’interno di comunità di individui locali che generino nuove opportunità di miglioramento della qualità di vita nella regione.

8•9

Abstract Español La utopía de la sociedad consumista no es viable en una escala global, a pesar de los progresos de las tecnologías sustentables de las ultimas décadas. Luego de años de mantener los ojos cerrados, la conciencia ambiental está llegando a los ciudadanos y a los encargados de tomar decisiones. Estas mismas personas están comenzando a inclinarse hacia un estilo de vida sustentable como nuevo paradigma de la calidad de vida. Sin embargo, para completar tal salto paradigmático debemos cambiar dramáticamente nuestro modo de ser en el mundo. Esto significa que la innovación progresiva no es suficiente, en cambio debemos implementar nuevos enfoques radicales. Esta clase de innovación radical surge del comportamiento individual, lo que significa que los procesos provienen de abajo hacia arriba más bien que de arriba hacia abajo. Este modo de resolver problemas o generar nuevas oportunidades se incluye en el concepto de innovación social.[1] Entre las nuevas tendencias hay algunas en que esta innovación social ha encontrado la forma de converger en actividades de colaboración.[2] Ejemplos de esto son las iniciativas que tienen que ver con la cultura de la comida sana y natural y los servicios autogestionados. Un enfoque de co-diseño es crucial para la concepción de tales servicios, además de aportar ‘insights’ más profundos, su implementación puede tener un impacto con consecuencias positivas a largo alcance.[3] Retomando el trabajo hecho durante la materia ‘Temporary Urban Solutions’[4], surgieron las siguientes preguntas proyectuales: Cómo podemos crear un huerto comunal dentro del Campus Durando[5] del Politecnico di Milano para compartir este espacio público con los vecinos de Bovisa? Es posible proyectarlo en forma de servicio basado en una comunidad para crear lazos significativos entre sus miembros, construyendo resiliencia a través de una solución inclusiva que ayude a los que están en peores condiciones? 1 2 3 4 5

El Politecnico di Milano representa la perfecta plataforma habilitante, con la capacidad de absorber y experimentar la innovación y el manejo privilegiado del espacio público del campus. Estas características fueron debidamente interpretadas por el Departamento INDACO el cual propuso abrir el campus como espacio público a los vecinos de Bovisa. Como resultado de la combinación de oportunidad y demanda, en Febrero del 2012 el proyecto ‘Coltivando - Orto Conviviale’ fue lanzado por un grupo de diseñadores de dicho departamento. Este proyecto consiste en un servicio administrado por un grupo de afiliados compuesto por miembros de la comunidad académica y el vecindario de Bovisa. Este servicio autogestionado depende de la contribución de la fuerza de trabajo por parte de sus miembros para cultivar a nivel comunitario productos orgánicos de propio consumo. Además el huerto esta destinado a ser usado como lugar para la interacción social, auspiciando de anfitrión para diversos workshops, cenas orgánicas públicas y eventos locales. A mediano plazo, el proyecto se propone recuperar la calidad de la comida saludable y biológica generando una resiliente comunidad de miembros que se apoyen unos a otros y de este modo regenerar el tejido social en el vecindario de Bovisa. A largo plazo, se espera que ‘Coltivando’ se difunda en pequeños huertos células, convirtíendose en una plataforma de innovación social donde sus miembros generen y pongan en práctica nuevas ideas de bienestar sustentable. Desarrollar este tipo de servicios colaborativos requiere de creatividad social, interacción, participación y resolución de problemas en conjunto, en una palabra, de co-creación. A estos efectos, el equipo de diseño organizó una serie de codesign workshops que ayudaron a identificar los recursos y las necesidades claves y a co-proyectar la solución habilitadora. Estos workshops no sólo afianzaron el compromiso sino que dieron un sentido de pertenencia a sus participantes. Esta tesis entrega un sistema del servicio-producto completamente funcional y listo para ser usado. Incluye un Manual de Membresía y varios modelos organizativos del huerto: Programa, Negocios, Gubernamental y Espacial. La tesis también prevé escenarios a mediano plazo: la expansión del huerto y del servicio; y a largo plazo: la replicación local - en forma de toolkits y regional/global - a través de un formato PSS. El proyecto fundamentalmente espera activar jardines colaborativos outogestionado en comunidades locales para generar nuevas oportunidades en la búsqueda de una mejora calidad de vida en la región.

10 • 11

Preface

Letter to Coltivando by Antonella Ceccato. Abito da sempre in via Candiani di fronte all’entrata del Politecnico. Ho visto insieme alla mia famiglia la trasformazione della fabbrica Ceretti e Tanfani dove mio padre ha lavorato per molti anni come gruista e carpentiere. Dopo le fatiche della fabbrica mio padre aveva una passione: l’orto. Per ben quarant’anni ha avuto un orto in Bovisa. Erano in molti a coltivare la terra dopo il lavoro. Operai, piastrellisti, muratori, ecc…. che , in un angolo dell’operosa Milano avevano trovato il modo di ricordare le proprie origini contadine e di passare il tempo libero in modo decisamente diverso. La via che portava agli orti non aveva un nome, da via Cosenz si prendeva una stradina non asfaltata che portava verso la ferrovia. Mentre si percorreva la strada in bicicletta o in auto si aveva la sensazione si lasciarsi alle spalle la città e di arrivare in campagna. L’abbaiare di Urius annunciava l’arrivo di ospiti e il vociare allegro degli amici dava sempre il benvenuto, talvolta il passaggio di un treno ricordava la vicinanza della ferrovia, ma poco importava, questo luogo, da pochi conosciuto, veniva chiamato Gli orti belli. Appena arrivati si poteva ammirare la baracca centrale e il suo pergolato a vite che a tempo dovuto dava i suoi frutti. La baracca centrale, costruita con materiale di recupero, era il fulcro della comunità. Intorno al tavolo rotondo, sotto il pergolato durante la bella stagione, ci si riuniva per ricevere gli ospiti, si prendevano decisioni importanti , si discuteva, si giocava a carte, si festeggiavano i compleanni… Quando arrivava l’inverno le riunioni e i festeggiamenti si facevano all’interno della baracca centrale, dove non mancava nulla: tavoli, sedie, bicchieri, frigorifero, televisione… tutto recuperato!

Di fianco alla baracca centrale c’era il campo delle bocce dove si poteva assistere a vivaci tornei. Ogni contadino urbano si prendeva cura del proprio appezzamento di terra: il recinto, la casetta per il deposito degli attrezzi, il compostaggio, i barili per la raccolta dell’acqua piovana era frutto della vivace fantasia di ognuno di loro. Se qualcuno si ammalava o andava in vacanza c’era sempre il vicino che si prendeva cura della terra e di distribuire i frutti del raccolto. C’era anche un presidente che provvedeva agli acquisti e teneva i conti della cassa; non esigeva uno statuto o un regolamento scritto, ma la ragionevolezza faceva prendere le decisioni giuste. Nel tardo pomeriggio tutti se ne tornavano a casa con il raccolto della giornata e con qualche meravigliosa rosa da regalare alla propria signora. Tornando in bicicletta talvolta mio padre aveva modo di incontrare amici e conoscenti ai quali donare i pomodori o l’insalata appena colti; anche questo era per lui un modo di condividere la propria passione con gli altri. Da qualche anno gli orti belli non ci sono più… le ruspe li hanno eliminati. ora al loro posto stanno costruendo un gruppo di palazzi di circa 18 piani. Dopo i primi momenti di sconforto mio padre non si è perso d’animo e ha pensato che il su piccolo balcone potesse diventare quello che oggi chiamano il giardino verticale, e così ha iniziato a seminare nei vasi le piante aromatiche che tanto ricordano i profumi dell’orto! Lascio a voi ogni riflessione… … ma vorrei che il vissuto di questi pionieri degli orti urbani non vada dimenticato e che la loro esperienza sia utile al vostro progetto di orto conviviale in Bovisa. Buon Lavoro! Antonella Ceccato, un cittadino del quartiere Bovisa.

Contents Abstract English Italiano Español Preface Letter to Coltivando by Antonella Ceccato.

1.0 Theoretical Background 1.1 Sustainable PSSD Pag.18

1.2 Social Innovation and Collaborative Services Pag.30

1.3 Design for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security Pag.30

1.4 Community Gardening and Urban Agriculture Pag.48

1.5 Food Cooperatives Pag.58

2.0 Methodology and Design Phases 2.1 Exploring Opportunities Pag.64

Pilot Project. C’è Giardino per Tutti Pag.66

2.2 Research & Strategic Analysis Pag.68

Analysing the niche Pag.69

Networking with local community garden and urban landscape initiatives. Pag.78

Contact with international realities Pag.82

PSS idea development Pag.83

2.3 Informing & Engaging Pag.84

Presentation of the concept vision to the Politecnico di Milano authorities Pag.84

Creation of the brand Pag.90

Co-Design Workshop seeder with Academic Community Pag.98

Co足-Design Workshop Extended Version I Pag.104

Co足-Design Workshop Extended Version II Pag.119

2.4 Product Service System Development Pag.128

2.5 Introduction of the PSS Concept Solution Pag.130

2.6 Support & Incubation Pag.132

Evaluation of the Solution Pag.132

Designing in the Collaborative Community Pag.133

The Creation of the First Coltivando Community Pag. 134

2.7 Maintenance & Expansion Pag.136

Implemented Solution Pag.136

Introduction of new service aspects Pag.136

2.8 Replication Strategy Pag.138

Format - University gardens (regional and global expansion) Pag.138

Toolkit - Cooperative Garens (local expansion) Pag.139

3.0 Current PSSD Solution: Coltivando 3.1 How does Coltivando Work? Pag.142

System Map Pag.144

Actors Map Pag.146

3.2 The Service Offer Pag.148

Service Offer Map Pag.150

3.3 Business Model Pag.152

3.4 Spatial Model Pag.154

3.5 Future Scenarios Pag.158

Market Stand Pag.159

Barter Workshops Pag.161

Academic Courses Pag.162

Full functioning System Map Pag.164

4.0 Outcomes 4.1 Members Manual Pag.168

4.2 Program Model Pag.169

5.0 Conclusions and Further Developments 5.1 Method Conclusions Pag.176

5.2 Content Conclusions Pag.177

5.3 Replication Strategy Pag.178

Toolkit - Cooperative Gardens Pag.179

Format - University Gardens Pag.181

Overall Strategy Considerations Pag.182

Annex 1 - Case Studies A.1 Food Cooperatives Pag.186

Park Slope Food Coop Pag.186

A.2 University Gardens Pag.190

Harvard Community Garden Pag.190

Yale Sustainable Food Project Pag.196

Stanford Community Farm Pag.202

A.3 Community Gardens Pag.206

Prinzessinnengarten Pag.206

Orto Libero, Il Giardino degli Aromi Pag.210

Docklands Community Garden Pag.214

Veg-足Out St. Kilda Pag.216

The Union Street Urban Orchard Pag.218

Bibliography Pag.220

1.0

Theoretical Background

In this section we will define the conceptual context on which creative communities thrive and socially innovate developing enabling solutions for Collaborative Product Service Systems. We will introduce the concepts of Sustainable Product Service System, the kind of innovation these represent and the reason for the lack of their diffusion. This will be applied in defining how to design for creative communities understanding what they need to thrive, their favourable contexts and finally how they can be scaled and replicated.

Ballinfoile Community Organic Garden: Local Food Produce & Wildlife-friendly.

20 • 21

[A Product service system (PSS) can be described as an integrated system of products and services delivered by a network of stakeholders, and designed to be competitive and satisfy customer needs.][1]

1.1 Sustainable PSSD Over the last few years, a wide debate on the definition of eco-efficient system innovation took place between design researchers and they decided to use the term Product-Service System. A Product service system (PSS) can be described as an integrated system of products and services delivered by a network of stakeholders, and designed to be competitive and satisfy customer needs.[1] An innovative PSS aims “to a systematic minimization of resources, as a consequence of innovative stakeholder interaction and related converging economic interests”.[2] The kind of PSS innovation we are interested in, is that one which generate value and social equity while decreasing total resource consumption. However, we should not assume that PSS is synonymous of low environmental impact: it does not guarantee environmental improvements per se. Product Service Systems only have the potential to do so by offering a promising concept to move in the direction of sustainability; but this potential can be exploited only if Product Service Systems are properly designed, developed and delivered.[3] In order to be eco-efficient, a PSS should create economic and competitive incentives to decrease and optimise material and energy consumption for all the actors of the network. Secondly, all the products belonging to the PSS should be properly designed and developed with a low environmental impact in the various phase of the life cycle. The configuration of new stakeholders’ interactions constitutes the starting point towards achieving certain environmental results. 1 Goedkoop et al., 1999 2 UNEP, 2002 3 Ceschin, 2010

Starting from these considerations an eco-efficient PSS can be defined as a PSS “where the economic and competitive interest of the providers continuously seeks environmentally beneficial new solutions”.[4] Eco-efficient PSS is not always a sustainable PSS. In order to be sustainable, we have to include also the socioethical dimension. The socio-ethical dimension can be classified in three socio-ethical groups: benefits for customers, for the value chain, and for the society at a whole. These three socio-ethical aspects in a PSS allow to: improve quality of life, enable a responsible and sustainable consumption, increase equity and justice in relation to stakeholders, integrate weak, marginalized people in the value chain, improve social cohesion, reinforce the social fabric, empower and enhance local resources. Designing a Sustainable PSS The design and development of sustainable Product Service Systems need the implementation of a new design approach. This is essential in order to move from product thinking to system thinking.[5] The new design approach can be articulated in four parts: • a “satisfaction-system” approach: from a single product or service to the combination of products and services capable to fulfil the demand of satisfaction; • a “stakeholder configuration” approach: design the configuration of the stakeholders network and the interactions occurring between them; • a “customer-oriented” approach: design the relationship between the customer and the actors producing and delivering the PSS;[6] • and a “system sustainability” approach: PSS eco-efficient and socially equitable and cohesive. Designers besides having this new design approach should have new main skills to ideate and develop sustainable Product Service Systems.[7] Firstly the ability to design an integrated system of products and services fulfilling a particular demand of satisfaction; secondly the ability to promote and facilitate new socio-economic 4 5 6 7

Lens, 2011 Manzini et al., 2001; Manzini and Vezzoli, 2003 Baines et al., 2007 Vezzoli, 2007

22 â&#x20AC;˘ 23

Graph 1.1 Method for System Design for Sustainability (MSDS). Carlo Vezzoli.

stakeholder interactions; thirdly the ability to promote and facilitate participated design between different stakeholders; fourthly the ability to orientate the above processes towards eco-efficient and sustainable solutions. From a more practical point of view, several methods and tools have been developed by the researchers in the last years in order to support the designing of eco-efficient and sustainable Product Service Systems. These methods are usually organised around four main phases: preparatory phase (or strategic analysis), exploring opportunities, PSS concept design and PSS engineering. For example the MSDS, Methodology for System Design for Sustainability is divided in six different phases: strategic analysis, aimed at gaining the information needed to generate ideas oriented towards sustainability; exploring opportunities, aimed at producing a series of promising strategic possibilities (scenarios); PSS concept design, aimed at devel-

PHASES

AIM

STRATEGIC ANALYSIS ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT PROMOTERS ANALYSIS OF THE REFERENCE CONTEXT ANALYSIS OF THE REFERENCE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF THE CASES OF EXCELLENCE DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY DESIGN PRIORITIES

Obtain the information necessary to facilitate the generation of sustainable ideas

EXPLORING OPPORTUNITIES

Create a catalogue of sustainability designoriented scenarios

IDEAS GENERATION ORIENTED TO SUSTAINABILITY DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY ORIENTED DESIGN SCENARIOS, VISIONS, CLUSTERS AND IDEAS

DESIGNING SYSTEM CONCEPTS VISIONS, CLUSTERS AND SINGLE IDEAS SELECTION SYSTEM CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIO & ECONOMIC EVALUATION

DESIGNING (& ENGINEERING) A SYSTEM SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT (EXECUTIVE LEVEL) ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIO & ECONOMIC EVALUATION

COMMUNICATION VISUALISATION DOCUMENTS EDITING

Determine a one or more system concepts oriented towards sustainability Develop the most promising concept into a detailed version. Draw up documents to communicate the characteristics of the system designed.

oping one or more system concept; PSS design and engineering, aimed at developing a detailed concept required for its implementation; communication, a series of tools aimed to guide the designer in the process towards the development of sustainable Product Service Systems and tools to facilitate the co-design and visualisation of Product Service Systems. One big problem emerges on these methods: they put too little emphasis on the implementation phase. This is an important phase that faces several barriers that cause delay in the implementation and diffusion of these radical innovations. Most of the methods do not even mention this phase, while other only provide general suggestions and guidelines.[8]

sustainable pssd

Why Sustainable PSS are not so diffused. From the second half of the ‘90s the theme sustainability has become more and more important and popular. A series of studies and analyses led to a clearer understanding of the dimension of change necessary to achieve a society that is effectively and globally sustainable. In the mature industrial contexts in 50 years we should use 90% less resources than industrialised countries are doing today.[9] In order to achieve this goal we have to drastically reduce the consumption of environmental resources and finding innovations just on a product level is not enough to obtain these results. Even though product innovations can improve environmental performances of products, they also often negatively counterbalance by an increase in consumption levels.[10] Some companies, for examples are economically interested in reducing costs and resources in the production phase, but at the same time they do not have a direct economic interest in extending a product life span. Products innovations are not enough; we have to move towards a wider systemic approach that takes in consideration new potential ways of satisfying the social demand of wellbeing.[11] In order to do that we should move from an economy based on the exchange of products to be consumed to a functional economy in which products are simply means for providing functions. The solution for a functional 8 9 10 11

Ceschin, 2011 Factor 10 Club, 1994; Schmidt-Bleek, 1996 Haake and Jolivet, 2001 Schot and Geels, 2008

Products innovations are not enough; we have to move towards a wider systemic approach that takes in consideration new potential ways of satisfying the social demand of wellbeing.

24 • 25

[Radical innovations require a substantial change in culture (shifts in thinking models and perceptions), practise (changes in habits and ways of behaving and doing) and institutions (changes in regulations and norms).]

economy is the developments of sustainable and eco-efficient innovations based on the design of Product Service Systems. Also knowing that Product Service Systems are the solutions for the sustainability issue, Product Service Systems are not really diffused into the society because they are often radical innovations. A radical innovation compared to an incremental innovation is drastic extreme, because they challenge existing institutions, customers’ habits and lifestyles, companies’ organizational structures and regulative frameworks and as a result they have high probability to be rejected under mainstream market conditions.[12] Sustainable Product Service Systems innovations usually require a change in the routine behaviours that are daily reproduced by individuals, groups, business communities, governmental institutions, and society at large scale. The incremental innovations is a series of small improvements to an existing product or system that usually helps maintain or improve its competitive position over time. Instead radical innovations, since they usually are extremist and revolutionary, need more time and a strategic process to influence the dominant regime, routines and cultural habits. Researchers are doing a strong battle to introduce and implement Product Service Systems innovation in the companies and the societies. For those companies that do see PSS innovation as key to their future, there are still significant challenges to be faced, not only in developing a promising PSS concept, but also in understanding the contextual conditions in which it is introduced and identifying the best strategies and development pathways to implement and scale-up it in the market. Introducing radical innovation. Based on what we explain about the nature of radical innovations, we can say that these are innovations that act as new interactions/partnership between the stakeholders of the demand satisfaction system, potentially to be oriented towards sustainable solutions.Radical innovations require a substantial change in culture (shifts in thinking models and perceptions), practise (changes in habits and ways of behaving and doing) and institutions (changes in regulations and norms). Radical changes have to face different barriers they 12 Schot and Geels 2008; Tukker and Tischner 2006

meet in all the different stakeholders part of the system. For this reason the implementation and scaling-up of this kind of innovations has not only to deal with a technical issue, but also with matter of personal behaviours and habits, mind-sets, socio-economic and governmental contexts.[13]

sustainable pssd

A way to simplify this process is to use a Multi-level Perspective or MLP. Transitions take place through the successful coupling and developments of all three levels. The socio-technical regime (medium level) refers to a dominant culture, practices and institutions, normative and rules related to a specific field (e.g. mobility, energy, etc.). Generally regimes are quite stable and resistant to change, because their rules and institutions and actors tend to discourage the development of alternatives; The niche (micro level) is a protected space “isolated” from the influence of the dominant regime, where radical innovations can be tested and encouraged to grow, and potentially can challenge regime regulations and institutions to change; The landscape (macro level) represents the social, economic and political context in which actors interact and where regimes and niches evolve. It includes socioeconomic and political structure.[14] The structural nature of this approach facilitates the RADICAL INNOVATION

Emphasis Technology Trajectory Risk & Success Time frame Result

Graph 1.2 Differences between radical and incremental innovations.

INCREMENTAL INNOVATION

Focus on developing new products, processes or services that thansform the economy of a business. Exploration of new technology

Focus on costs or features improvements in existing processes, products or services Exploration of existing technology

Sporadic and discontinuos: revolutionary Unpredictable and highly uncertain Mid to long-term Creates a dramatic change that transforms existing markets or industries, or creates new ones

Linear and continuos: evolutionary Predictable and low uncertainty Short-term Improves competitiveness within current markets or industries

13 Weber et al, 1999 14 Rip and Kemp, 1998; Geels and Kemp, 2000; Geels, 2002

transition through some sort of sustainable chain reaction. For example, changes in the landscape level could encourage the regime level to be more flexible and opened to radical innovations. At the same time, when an innovative solution acquires more stability and gets sufficiently developed inside niches, they can take advantage of the flexibility and openness and take place in the socio-technical regime and consequently the regime can start to influence the landscape.

26 â&#x20AC;˘ 27

Niches are therefore a fundamental part of transitions, but not sufficient. Moreover, even if niche developments can hold great promise, they do not immediately live up to expectations because they are immature when they enter the market and they conflict with the way the society is organized. In this sense, if immediately exposed to market competition, they have great probability to not survive. For these reasons a protected space should be created, where continuous experiments can bring them to

Graph 1.3 The dynamic of transitions (Ceschin, 2011; adapted from Geels, 2002).

SOCIOTECHNICAL LANDSCAPE (macro level)

Markets, user preferences

SOCIOTECHNICAL REGIME (meso level)

Industry Technology

Science Policy

Culture

NICHE INNOVATIONS (micro level)

TIME

mature.[15]

sustainable pssd

Niches can therefore be used as “incubation rooms” for experimenting[16], learning, and improve the innovation and establish new social networks in order to gain momentum for diffusion or even replace dominant regime rules[17]. An essential condition during the introduction of radical innovations is the creation of partially protected socio-technical experimentation. Collaborative Radical Innovations Radical innovations, ideas that affect a large number of technologies and people have great deal of uncertainty. The pay-off to innovation is greatest when this uncertainty is highest. When you get a radical innovation is highly uncertain whether, how, why and for what it could be applied. More and more, the application of the idea is being worked out ‘in use’ with collaboration with users. The main issue is organization. The participation of several is not a good thing per se, since it could create a cacophony unless these participants organize themselves in the right way. The organisational recipe rests on a balance of three ingredients between participation, collaboration and recognition as the currency by which the first two are paid for.[18] We could somehow infer that the future well-being will come to depend less on what we own and consume and more on what we can share with others and create together. According to C. Leadbeater, the starting point is a “gift” of knowledge that provides the basis for the growth of a community and hence, the generation of yet more knowledge. Is in this community in which the market thrives, but in order of appearance, community comes first. The markets trade products, and communities breed knowledge by the circulation of ideas in the shape of gifts. That is to say, in the economy of ideas, the capital is shared. Independent people, with different information, skills and outlooks, working together in the right way, can discover, analyse, coordinate, create and innovate together at an unprecedented scale compared with traditional organisation. In user-driven innovation, creativity emerges when people with different vantage points, skills and 15 Schot and Hoogma 1996 16 Geels, 2002 17 Kemp et al., 1998 18 ‘We Think: The Power of Mass Creativity’ written by Charles Leadbeater, published by Profile Books LTD, 2008

[The participation of several is not a good thing per se, since it could create a cacophony unless these participants organize themselves in the right way. The organisational recipe rests on a balance of three ingredients between participation, collaboration and recognition as the currency by which the first two are paid for.][16]

28 â&#x20AC;˘ 29

know how combine their ideas to create new combinations. Designing Transition Paths An â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;experimental-, learning-, and network-based management approachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; represents a promising strategy to increase the probability to successfully incubate, test, develop and bring to mature eco-efficient PSSs. Strategic designers that want to act as effective agents of change they have to be aware of the mechanisms and dynamics that regulate the implementation and diffusion of this kind of innovations and how it is possible to guide and orient them.

Graph 1.4 Sustainable PSS societal embedding. Ceschin, 2011.

Their role in the transition towards sustainability is not limited to the proposal of eco-efficient concepts, but the designer should also indicate the pathway (transition path) for the implementation and diffusion of such radical innovations. In order to design and develop appropriate pathways, designers should also understand the contextual conditions in which PSS concepts are introduced. Several methods and tools have been developed to support strategic designers in ideating and developing sustainable PSS concepts but if they want to act as effective

traditional design scope for strategic designers

new design scope for strategic designers

[1] PSS concept vision

[2] Transition path

Incubation phase

Socio-technical Experiments phase

Scaling-up phase

agents of change they have also to know the mechanisms and dynamics that regulate the societal embedding of this kind of innovations and the modalities through which it is possible to guide and orient these processes.[19]

sustainable pssd

If we look to the societal embedding of a sustainable PSS innovation, the entry point is a project vision [1]: a PSS idea or concept developed to overcome a societal/ business challenge. This project vision provides a direction to the transition path [2], in which a broad network of actors experiments and learns how the project vision can be met. The transition path is based on the implementation of socio-technical experiments, the development and empowerment of a niche, and the scaling up of the PSS innovation. The transition path is characterised by dynamic adaptation: what is learnt by actors brings to a continuous and mutual adjustment of the transition path, the long term vision and the actors network itself.[20] A broader design scope Strategic designers face with a new broader design scope: the ideation of sustainable PSS concepts should be joined with the designing of appropriate transition paths to gradually incubate, introduce and diffuse these concepts. The design scope should be extended to the design of the transition path that we can explain like a sequence of steps that can bring to gradually improve the PSS innovation and promote its societal embedding (incubation, socio-technical experimentation and niche development & scaling-up). At the same time, designers have to keep in consideration the identification and involvement of the actors that can support the societal embedding process in the various steps of the transition path. Designers need a bifocal design attitude in order to focus both on the long term goal (the achievement of a future concept vision) and the short and medium term actions to be undertaken in order to orient the societal embedding process towards the long-term goal.

19â&#x20AC;&#x192; Ceschin, 2011 20â&#x20AC;&#x192; Ceschin, 2011

[...the ideation of sustainable PSS concepts should be joined with the designing of appropriate transition paths to gradually incubate, introduce and diffuse these concepts.]

LON G-TE RM ED [1] IU M -T ER M [3 ]

SHOR

R T-TE

M [2]

PSS concept vision

Incubation phase

Socio-technical Experiments phase

Scaling-up phase

Time horizon

Strategic designers are asked to focus on different time perspectives: the long-term one [1] (designing of the PSS concept vision), and the short-term [2] and medium-term [3] ones(designing of the steps to be undertaken to orient the societal embedding process towards the achievement of the project vision).[1] A broader design attitude In order to be focused on creating the most favourable condition to facilitate and speed-up the societal embedding of the PSS innovation, designers should have a broader strategic design attitude. When radical innovations enter in the market they are always immature because they have to survive in a dominant socio-technical regime with its established and stable rules and networks of actors.

Graph 1.5 Designers perspective. Ceschin, 2011.

Sustainable PSS innovations are in most of the cases such revolutionary innovations. It is not possible to implement a sustainable PSS innovation simply asking a company to change its business model alone, because changes in the socio-technical context are most of the 1â&#x20AC;&#x192; Ceschin, 2011

times required. Strategic designers should focus also on the contextual conditions that may support or block the societal embedding process. Strategic designers should adopt a broader strategic attitude oriented at influencing the sociotechnical context (i.e. by involving those actors that could affect administration practices and institutions; by stimulating changes in actorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behaviours and practices) for creating the most favourable conditions to support the societal embedding of the PSS. The transition path is seen as a process aimed not only at testing and bringing the PSS innovation to develop (thanks to the feedback coming from the socio-technical context), but also on influencing the socio-technical context to favour and promote the societal embedding of the PSS (thanks to the strategic attitude oriented at stimulating changes in actorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behaviours and institutions).

sustainable pssd

32 â&#x20AC;˘ 33

1.2 Social Innovation and Collaborative Services The term social innovation refers to changes in the way individuals or communities act to solve a problem or to generate new opportunities. These innovations are driven more by changes in behaviour than by changes in technology or the market and they typically emerge from bottom-up rather than top-down processes.[1] In this way, we can say that social innovation could be a suitable way to achieve the transition towards the implementation of sustainable Product Service Systems. Whenever a community acts to solve problems and exploit new opportunities in a new, creative way, this is an act of social innovation. This shape of diffuse creativity has found a way of converging in collaborative activities, daily procedures that performed by individuals inside structured services that rely on a greater collaboration of these individuals amongst themselves. The scenario also gives an idea of how the diffusion of organisations based on sharing, exchange, and participation on a neighbourhood scale can also regenerate the social fabric, restore relations of proximity and create meaningful bonds between individuals. Clear examples of which are the cohousing movements, the international slow food movement, self-managed child-care services, home sharing for elderly care, time banks, among others. Looking at these cases, we can observe that they are radical changes on a local scale they are new approaches to a more sustainable way of living. Individuals inside this 1â&#x20AC;&#x192; Young Foundation, 2006

systems are required to have a much more active role in the satisfaction of their needs, opposed to the passive one that today’s society offers. An interesting example for the development of this thesis is found in the new generation of Farmers Markets, cases of recovering the quality of healthy biological foods in areas where it is considered normal to ingest other types of produce, provided with absolute passivity on the part of users. Positive side effects of this kind of organizations are that while they put into practice new and more sustainable ideas of well-being, they simultaneously reinforce the social fabric. Achieving this well-being appears to be coherent with major guidelines for environmental sustainability, such as: positive attitudes towards sharing spaces and goods; a preference for biological, regional and seasonal food; a tendency towards the regeneration of local networks .[2] Creative Communities There are three main characteristics present on this type of communities. First and foremost, behind each one of the cases of diffused creativity in the shape of a collaborative service, there are a group of people who have fundamental traits in common: they cooperatively invent, enhance and manage innovative solutions for new ways of living, recombining what already exists without waiting for a general change in the system. Rather than waiting for this change, they help making it. This ability of re-organizing existing elements into new, meaningful combinations is why these groups of people can be defined as creative communities: people who cooperatively invent, enhance and manage innovative solutions for new ways of living.[3] The second characteristic is that these cases have outgrown the problems posed by contemporary everyday life. Creative communities apply their creativity to break with given mainstream models of thinking and doing. In doing so, consciously or unconsciously, they generate the local discontinuities, new, different, and sustainable ways of living. The third characteristic is that creative communities result from an original combination of demands and opportunities. Demands posed by problems of contempo2 Jégou, Manzini, 2008 3 Meroni, 2007

[Achieving this well-being appears to be coherent with major guidelines for environmental sustainability, such as: positive attitudes towards sharing spaces and goods; a preference for biological, regional and seasonal food; a tendency towards the regeneration of local networks.][1]

34 • 35

rary everyday life, and opportunities arisen from different combinations of three basic elements: traditions, usage of an existing set of products and the existence of favourable social and political conditions.

[Creative communities tend to emerge in contexts where the knowledge economy is more developed.]

The presence of tradition leads some observers to say that after all, these cases are nothing new, and that they simply spring from nostalgia for a village that can no longer return. In the end, it is a heritage of knowledge, behaviour patterns and organisational forms that, seen in the light of current conditions of existence and current problems, may constitute valuable building materials for the future.[4] Moreover, the existing set of products refers to the available technologies that combined in new ecoefficient ways create the possibility for the sustainable innovation. Finally, these communities are most likely to thrive when they develop in the right environment. Creative communities tend to emerge in contexts where the knowledge economy is more developed. Favourable Contexts The contexts where creative communities and collaborative services happen to exist are highly complex socio-technical systems. These contexts do not present themselves as clones of a social, cultural and economic situation, they do share the capacity to enable a large number of potentially innovative citizens to move in the same direction (Landry, 2006; Leadbeater, 2006). Another characteristic is that they present in environments with a high degree of tolerance. Fostering creative communities means accepting something that will probably not fit with existing norms and regulations. Furthermore, these environments are governed in a participatory, flexible, open and horizontal way. This facilitates the regeneration of specific traditions that foster an appropriate technological infrastructure to generate a favourable social, political and administrative context. In conclusion of this point, we can say that it is simply a matter of speed of change: wherever changes are fast and deep, creative communities appear, and, once they have been generated, they move around and re-localise in other places: a movement of ideas and experiences that can go in all directions, from North to South, from West to East, and vice versa.[5] 4 Strandbakken, 2008; Vadovics, 2008 5 Jégou et Manzini, 2008

Diffuse Social Enterprises When it consolidates into a mature organisation, a creative community becomes a new kind of enterprise, a diffused social enterprise, producing both specific results and social quality. The side effect of this is the reinforcement of the social fabric and improvement of the environmental quality. In short they produce sociality.[6]

Social Innovation and Collaborative Services

The difference between the traditional concept of social enterprise and diffuse social enterprises lies in the characterising aspect that everyone concerned is directly and actively involved in achieving the result that the enterprise itself sets out to reach. When creative communities become diffused social enterprises, the new organisations they generate evolve into a new kind of social services (collaborative services); micro-enterprises (collaborative enterprises); and networks of active people (collaborative citizens) and local institutions (participative institutions). Collaborative Services are social services where final users are actively involved and assume the role of service co-designers and co-producers in a peer-to-peer manner. This form of collaboration calls for trust, and trust calls for relational qualities: no relational qualities, means no trust and no collaboration, and consequently no practical results from collaborative services. Collaborative Enterprises are entrepreneurial production and service initiatives that enhance new models of locally based activities by encouraging direct relationships with users and consumers who, in this case too, become co-producers. Collaborative Citizens are groups of people who collaboratively solve problems or open new possibilities. Participative institutions are parts of larger institutions operating on a local scale, on locally defined projects and with the extensive participation of interested people. Some examples are the promotion by local authorities of programmes.[7] Design and Social Innovation Social innovations, like all innovation processes, emerge, mature and spread in an ‘S curve’ from brand new 6 Leadbeater, 2006; EMUDE, 2006 7 Jégou et Manzini, 2008

[Collaborative Services are social

services where final users are actively involved and assume the role of service co-designers and co-producers in a peer-to-peer manner.]

36 • 37

ideas, to mature solutions and to implemented ones. This three-step evolution can also be seen in social innovation produced by creative communities. Solution Prototypes consist on solution ideas that are feasible and that someone somewhere managed to put into practice. Although they might be functional services, it is too early to know if they can last over time – be sustainable – and work independently from the special group of people that initially implemented it.

[An enabling solution is a system of products, services, communication, and whatever else necessary, to improve the accessibility, effectiveness and replicability of a collaborative service.]

Mature Solutions are solution ideas that have managed to last over time, in some cases inspiring other groups of people to do something similar in another place, but similar context. Implemented Solutions are established collaborative services that are supported by specifically designed ‘enabling solutions’. An enabling solution is a system of products, services, communication, and whatever else necessary, to improve the accessibility, effectiveness and replicability of a collaborative service.[8] Enabling solutions should help collaborative services to become as accessible to everyone as possible; more effective increasing results while reducing the individual and social effort; and more attractive enhancing individuals’ motivation to be active. In other words, taking an active part in a collaborative service must be stimulating. Enabling Platforms are experimental spaces that act as incubators for new social enterprises and, more in general, facilitate different socio-technical experiments; advanced product-service systems specifically designed to make it easier for collaborative services to function smoothly, such as flexible mobility services; fluid payment systems; customised and intelligent booking and ordering systems, tracking and tracing technologies.[9] Scalability of a Collaborative Services On of the most interesting benefit Collaborative Services have is the ability to scale the up to support sustainable lifestyles for a larger number of people. They have the potential to become mainstream and reorient the 8 Emerging User Demands for Sustainable Solutions (EMUDE), 2006 9 Warnke et Luiten, 2008

on-going social and economical changes in a sustainable direction. And they can do so because they are also real steps towards sustainable ways of living that can already be implemented as viable solutions to urgent contemporary problems (of housing, mobility, childcare, care of the elderly, health, urban regeneration and last but not least, food).[10] For collaborative services, successful scalability is achieved by replication rather than growth. Scaling up collaborative organisations calls for the development of systems with a high degree of relational qualities. The existence of such qualities seems to be possible only when interaction between the involved actors is sufficiently direct, and when the organizations they set up are sufficiently understandable and manageable, in short, when they are sufficiently small. At this point we can say that in order to scale-up the impact of creative communities we have to maintain their original social qualities that are largely related to the small scale of each single initiative. But is it as simple as replicating the promising cases? When we talk about scaling-up, we can plan how to generate conditions to make the replication of the service ideas present on these promising cases more probable. Replication Strategies As we said in the previous paragraphs, we need to increase the social and economic impact of collaborative services without increasing their sizes. This could be achievable if we think of such increment in the shape of a network of multiple numbers of a service ideas connected with one another. There are three well-known strategies to fulfil this task: A franchising programme enables several small organizations to enter into ‘business’ under the umbrella of the mother company’s reputation while committing to follow the rules that this main organization lays down. A format is a programme idea that can be set up in other contexts. The result is a multiplicity of programmes that are, at the same time, both global (the idea is proposed worldwide) and local (in each context it is broadly localized).[11] 10 Jégou et Manzini, 2008 11 Jégou et Manzini, 2008

Social Innovation and Collaborative Services

[...in order to scale-up the impact of creative communities we have to maintain their original social qualities that are largely related to the small scale of each single initiative.]

38 â&#x20AC;˘ 39

A toolkit consists of a set of tangible and intangible instruments conceived and produced to make a specific task easier. Tool kits can be interpreted in different ways and used for different goals. Thanks to this openness, toolkits are compatible with the nature of creative communities and their corresponding collaborative services. The new century brought along a new tool that displays a whole new panorama of different strategies. Nowadays common knowledge indicates that Internet converted the world into a connected global village where the impact of an event is not necessarily linked to its physical dimension, but to the quantity and quality of its links. Social networks where born from this phenomenon, capable of catalyzing large numbers of interested people, organizing them in peer-to-peer mode and building a common vision.[12] This opportunity can and should be exploited in the process of achieving a global scale-up of a collaborative service idea. Ultimately, it is highly probable that this peer-to-peer systems network will strongly reinforce each other: creative communities will bring the lively richness of people involved in real, daily problems; social networks will bring the unprecedented opportunities that have been opened by their brand new forms of organisation; and, finally, the development of distributed systems will provide the technical infrastructure for this emerging distributed sustainable society.[13] Designing for Social Innovation Operating on this context, designers have to design with and for the actors involved actively in the production of such innovation. This relationship it characterized by the designer stepping forward as a design specialist, and the actors designing as design amateurs. This interaction may occur as the combination of two different modalities: designing in and designing for creative communities. Designing in creative communities means that designers should work on a peer-to-peer mode along the actors involved in the community through a co-design process. In this modality designers have to facilitate and mediate among the different partners towards shared ideas and potential solutions. Designing for creative communities means working 12â&#x20AC;&#x192; Weber, 2004; Tapscott, Williams, 2007 13â&#x20AC;&#x192; Manzini, 2007; Warnke, Cagnin, 2008

through qualitative research and close observation of the organization in need of an advance solution to increase their accessibility and effectiveness and therefore their replicability. In conclusion, we can say that designers have always created bridges between society and technology. So far, they have mainly looked at technical innovation and from the new opportunities it offered, they developed artefacts with some meaning for society. Today, this way of doing, i.e. this direction in crossing these bridges, remains valid. But now the same bridge also has to be trodden in the other direction: to look at social innovation, identify promising cases, use design sensitivities, capabilities and skills to design new artefacts and to indicate new directions for technical innovation. To do so, designers have to re-think their role and their way of operating.

Social Innovation and Collaborative Services

Figure 1.1 Toolkit from ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’, pilot project of ‘Coltivando’.

40 • 41

Conclusions A new type of solution arises. There is a demand for new services and approaches that are in step with the economic and social structures, desires and practices that increasingly prevail. Developing collaborative services will require social creativity, activating knowledge networks, resources and imagination across society not just within the public service professions and institutions.

[More affluent and better-educated people are more able to change their lifestyles. In low-income areas, collaborative working power could allow communities easy access to healthier lifestyles and sustainable food.]

There is a need for a different way forward: not further incremental innovation but rather radical transformation and a new approach: co-created services. This kind of services is new; they are not merely new combinations of an existing offer. Mobilization of resources, know-how, effort and expertise distributed across communities and households, rather than turning solely to professional expertise located within institutions. Distributed resources will be most effective when they can be used collaboratively to share ideas, provide mutual support and give voice to particular user needs and circumstances of individuals and communities. These resources need to be brought together to make an impact. This requires interaction, participation and joint problem solving between users, workers and professionals. But why do we need distributed and shared solutions? For starters, collaborative services help restoring and reinforcing the social fabric. Social support and a sense of belonging, being part of a social network, are a vital part of good health. People who are part of social networks are generally healthier than people who feel isolated. People who are part of a community have access to care and support from friends and neighbours. They also tend to have higher self-esteem and confidence from a sense of social belonging.[14] Moreover, collaboration is vital for people to share and spread ideas and know-how. Ideas propagate and grow in communities. People seeking individualised solutions will be cut off from this flow of peer-to-peer advice. Individualised solutions – hiring personal elderly care, buying organic produce – are easiest to access for the best 14 Hilary Cottam, Charles Leadbeater, 2004

off, leaving many of the worst off under-served. We need community-based solutions to help the worst off and least able to maintain healthy lives. More affluent and better-educated people are more able to change their lifestyles. In low-income areas, collaborative working power could allow communities easy access to healthier lifestyles and sustainable food. Collaborative Services need to be co-created. Distributed and collaborative approaches will only be effective if they enable co-created services. At the heart of the approach is a new role for users who will no longer be just on the receiving end of services. Instead they will be vital to the design and delivery of services, working with professionals and front line staff to devise effective solutions. Users play a far larger role in helping to identify needs, propose solutions, test them out and implement them, together. Co-creation is not a one off event, like a referendum in which the community decides what should be done â&#x20AC;&#x201C; developing fully functional services take more time â&#x20AC;&#x201C; nor is co-creation just a question of formal consultation in which professionals give users a chance to voice their views on a limited number of alternatives. It is a more creative and interactive process that challenges the views of all parties and seeks to combine professional and local expertise in new ways.[15]

15â&#x20AC;&#x192; Hilary Cottam, Charles Leadbeater, 2004

Social Innovation and Collaborative Services

42 â&#x20AC;˘ 43

The first World Food Summit took place in Rome, Italy between 13 and 17 November 1996 organised by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

1.3 Design for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security Since the end of World War II, agriculture has changed dramatically. Food and fibre productivity increased exponentially due to new technologies, mechanization, increased chemical use, specialization and global government policies that favoured maximizing production. These changes allowed fewer farmers with reduced labour demands to produce the majority of the food and fibre. Although these changes have had many positive effects and reduced many risks in farming, there have also been significant costs. Prominent among these are topsoil depletion, groundwater contamination, the decline of family farms, continued neglect of the living and working conditions for farm labourers, increasing costs of production, and the disintegration of economic and social conditions in rural communities. A growing movement emerged during the past five decades to question the role of the agricultural establishment in promoting practices that contribute to these social problems. This movement for sustainable agriculture counts with support and acceptance within mainstream agriculture. Not only does sustainable agriculture address many environmental and social concerns, but it also offers innovative and economically viable opportunities for growers, labourers, consumers, policymakers and many others in the entire food system.

On October 1945 The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (Italian: Organizzazione delle Nazioni Unite per l’Alimentazione e l’Agricoltura) – a specialised agency of the United Nations that leads international efforts to defeat hunger – was formally constituted. Serving both developed and developing countries, FAO acts as a neutral forum where all nations meet as equals to negotiate agreements and debate policy. FAO is also a source of knowledge and information, and helps developing countries and countries in transition modernize and improve agriculture, forestry and fisheries practices, ensuring good nutrition and food security for all. The first World Food Summit took place in Rome, Italy between 13 and 17 November 1996 organised by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). This resulted in the adoption of the Rome Declaration on World Food Security. The Declaration reaffirms the right of everyone to have access to safe and nutritious food consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger and pledges political will and common and national commitment to achieving food security for all and to an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger in all countries with an immediate view to reducing the number of undernourished people to half their present level no later than 2015.

WORLD FOOD SUMMIT 13 - 17 Novermber 1996 Rome Italy

Rome Declaration on World Food Security [...] Increased food production, including staple food, [...] This should happen within the framework of sustainable management of natural resources, elimination of unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, particularly in industrialized countries, and early stabilization of the world population. Within the global framework, governments should also cooperate actively [...], on programmes directed toward the achievement of food security for all.

44 • 45

Ultimately, sustainable agriculture integrates three main goals – environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity. A variety of philosophies, policies and practices have contributed to these goals. People in many different capacities, from farmers to consumers, have shared this vision and contributed to it. Despite the diversity of people and perspectives, the following themes commonly weave through definitions of sustainable agriculture. Sustainability rests on the principle that we must meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Therefore, stewardship of both natural and human resources is of prime importance. Stewardship of human resources includes consideration of social responsibilities such as working and living conditions of labourers, the needs of rural communities, and consumer health and safety both in the present and the future. Stewardship of land and natural resources involves maintaining or enhancing this vital resource base for the long term. A systems perspective is essential to understanding sustainability. The system is envisioned in its broadest sense, from the individual farm, to the local ecosystem, and to communities affected by this farming system both locally and globally. An emphasis on the system allows a larger and more thorough view of the consequences of farming practices on both human communities and the environment. A systems approach gives us the tools to explore the interconnections between farming and other aspects of our environment. A systems approach also implies interdisciplinary efforts in research and education. This requires not only the input of researchers from various disciplines, but also farmers, farmworkers, consumers, policymakers and others.[1] In this thesis we emphasize on the input that design professionals can contribute to enable consumers become producers of food to partially cover their diets consolidating in the process equal social status and stronger social bonds ultimately achieving a more sustainable lifestyle. Good examples of design applied as bottom-up enablers are the initiatives ‘Dott 07’, ‘Local Food Lab’ and ‘Nutrire Milano’. This last one being inside the Coltivando’s project framework. The demand for locally and sustainably produced food is growing thanks to increased consumer 1 Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program – Agricultural Sustainability Institute at University of California

awareness about the environmental, economic and social benefits of making responsible food choices. But this demand is still greatly outpacing supply because the barriers to entry and scale are too high for food and farm entrepreneurs. These initiatives solve this problem by serving as an incubator, collaborative workspace and educational programs for sustainable food farms and start-ups.

Design for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security

Dott 07 Dott 07 was a collaboration between the Design Council and, the Regional Development Agency ‘One North West’, UK. Its aim was to create innovative responses to social issues using design as a process to achieve that goal. Dott stands for ‘Designs of the Time’ the initiative was set up to bring together local communities and worldclass designers to work on projects that improve how we live, work and play. The project demonstrated that great design could make a positive difference to our lives and create a more sustainable, inclusive society. The initiative lasted over eighteen months, in which designers applied creative thinking, developed innovative design solutions and made change happen. The projects looked at the things that really matter for people and breathed new life into deprived areas, helping to improve

Figure 1.2 ‘Dott 07’ (Design of the times) emblematic logo.

public transport options, worked towards co-designing a low carbon economy and helped to put Cornish produce in the local and global spotlight. In other words, the initiative aimed to design a better future for the people of Cornwall.

Design for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security

Dott’s work had a simple design concept approach, using design to bring solutions to everyone – from school children to the ageing population, taking on board all points of view and working on issues from all angles. This approach brought all sorts of people to the design table: talented designers, strategic thinkers, policy makers, experts and members of the general public. The result was great designs and the delivery of exciting changes. This unique approach developed long-lasting, innovative solutions to a wide range of problems that have local, national and international significance. Dott initiative explores and answers the needs of people to give solutions to everyday issues, putting the end user first and unlocking their creativity to co-design a better and more sustainable future.[2] Local Food Lab Local Food Lab is a Palo Alto, California based incubator and collaborative workspace for early stage sustainable food and farm startups. The initiative provides food entrepreneurs and beginning farmers with the space, equipment and resources necessary to help them build a better food system. Their social mission is to support entrepreneurship and education in food and agriculture in pursuit of a more sustainable food system. Aiming at facilitating cooperative business practices of the Palo Alto area an association of entrepreneurs and community members dedicated to creating a more socially just and environmentally sound alternative to our conventional food system. Their main approach is the building of a network to rebuild the broken food system, bringing all stakeholders along the food chain together. They place specific importance on networking entrepreneurs and businesses from farm to table. Local Food Lab brings together industry experts, mentors, investors, entrepreneurs and the community at large as way of ensuring the most effective solutions to our food system challenges. 2 Dott 07 Manual Design Council, Thackara, 2007

[...building of a network to rebuild the broken food system, bringing all stakeholders along the food chain together.] Placing [...specific importance on networking entrepreneurs and businesses from farm to table.]

Figure 1.3 Pubilicy signage for a local food dinner hosted by the ‘Local Food Lab’ to present a new member of the network.

48 • 49

Nutrire Milano “Feeding Milan” (Nutrire Milano) is a research program promoted by a partnership between academic institutions – the INDACO Department of Politecnico di Milano and University of Gastronomic Sciences – and Slow Food Italy, with a network of local food producers in the Milanese area. The idea for the program came from the observation that in the Milanese urban area, the demand for high quality, fresh food hugely exceeds the actual, available production, despite the presence of a large, potential ‘urban cellar’ known as Agricultural Park South Milan. The park is a 47,000 acre wide area of intensive agro-industry, where only 3% of farms practice sustainable agriculture. Moreover, the motto for the Expo 2015 is ‘Feeding the planet, energy for life’, highlighting the importance of land use and food provision in the near future. The main strategy to support the demand is to make agriculture the presidium of the area’s regional quality. This means revitalising local networks, encouraging the sharing of common principles and optimising resources in order to create a new regional system. The emerging vision prefigures a rural-urban area where agriculture flourishes by feeding the city (de-mediation) and, at the same time, offers city inhabitants opportunities for a multiplicity of farming and nature related activities. This is what ‘Nutrire Milano’ stands for and dedicates its actions towards, the redefinition of the food chain between Milan’s metropolitan area and the ‘Parco Agricolo Sud’ into a scenario of sustainable and innovative metro-agriculture.

Figure 1.4 ‘Nutrire Milano’ (Feeding Milan Project) logo. Figure 1.5 Nutrire Milano’s idea sharing stall at ‘Il Mercato della Terra’ (Milan’s Farmer’s Market).

50 • 51

1.4 Community Gardening and Urban Agriculture Since originating in Europe and Great Britain during the early nineteenth century, community gardening has continued to exist in one form or another.[1] Community gardens were highly praised as a means of allowing for the economical provision of one’s own food supply. The reasoning behind community garden practice has changed through the years and currently perceived as possessing a multitude of social, economic and environmental benefits.[2] This section is to introduce and explain the practice of community gardening, its background context including the definition, history, development and current situation around the world. The section concludes with an analysis of the many benefits community gardens have to offer to the actors involved and to the environment in which they sprung; with an in-depth look into their contribution to social and community development. What is a Community Garden? A community garden means many things to many people and therefore, there are several ways to define it. For some, a community garden is a place to grow food, flowers and herbs in the company of friends and neighbours, while for others, it’s a place to reconnect with nature or get physical exercise. Some people take part in community gardening to build or 1 Hatherly, 2003 2 Grayson, 2007

revitalise a sense of community among neighbours.[3] In just a few words we can say that ‘community gardens are places where people come together to grow fresh food, to learn, relax and make new friends.’[4] In a more explanatory approach, we can consider a community garden to be an area of shared land in which members of a community participate in the cultivation of food and other plants. The term ‘community garden’ is an inclusive term for different types of activities that involve practices such horticulture of foods, community involvement, and government support and participation. Community gardens are multifunctional places with a great diversity of spaces, plants, environments and opportunities. They attract people from a wide cross section of the community, satisfying an enormous variety of interests and needs.[5] There are two main types of community gardens – communal and allotment. Communal gardens involve participants sharing maintenance of an entire garden which most of the times is focused on its convivial component rather than on its cultivating one. On the other hand, allotment gardens are based on members having a defined area of land for which they are responsible and have exclusive rights to grow and harvest produce.[6]

3 4 5 6

Glover, Parry & Shinew, 2004 ACFCGN, 2009 Leichhardt Municipal Council, 2004 Grayson, 2000

community gardening and urban agriculture

[There are two main types of community gardens – communal and allotment. Communal gardens involve participants sharing maintenance of an entire garden which most of the times is focused on its convivial component rather than on its cultivating one.]

Figure 1.6 Allotments garden. Source: Grayson, 2007.

52 â&#x20AC;˘ 53

As we have described over the theoretical sections, community gardens are often grassroots initiatives aimed at revitalising low-to-moderate income neighbourhoods in urban areas. These bottom-up associations however, are widely supported by social service agencies, housing authorities, and local councils. They are less about gardening than they are about community, offering noncommercial places outside of work and home where people can gather, network, and identify together as residents of a neighbourhood.[7] The history of community gardens The origin of community gardens goes back to the year 100BC with allotment gardening in the small Celtic fields of Lands End, Cornwall, (still in operation this day). By the early 1800s in the United Kingdom (UK) and by the 1830s in Western Europe, urban allotments were being set aside as places where people could supplement their food supply.[8] They were considered as a means for costeffective living.

Figure 1.7 Communal garden. Source: Grayson, 2007.

The activity of community gardening has been predominantly practiced in the UK and the United States of America. During the 1890s, the USA saw the appearance of its first community garden, established in Detroit. During the initial phase of community gardening, a mixture of groups, including social and educational reformers, together with those who were directly a part of the civic beautification movement, were responsible for encouraging community gardening. The gardens originated as a 7â&#x20AC;&#x192; Based on municipal council reasearch carried out by McKelvey. 8â&#x20AC;&#x192; Grayson, 2007

means to providing land and technical assistance to unemployed workers in large cities and to teach civics and good work behaviour to youth.[9]

community gardening and urban agriculture

During the early 1900s, American educational reformer, John Dewey, actively encouraged gardens in schools. He influenced teachers in presenting learning opportunities in their classes that would unite academic subjects with practical experiences. This encouraged students to establish gardens, allowing them to discover fundamental principles and skills through its hands-on approach. Approximately 80,000 school gardens across the USA were in operation by 1910, established to offer experiential learning and creating strong-bodied, competent and satisfied citizens.

[During the early 1900s, American educational reformer, John Dewey, actively encouraged gardens in schools. He influenced teachers in presenting learning opportunities in their classes that would unite academic subjects with practical experiences.]

During World War I, the US government endorsed community gardens to supplement and increase the domestic food supply. The federal government began an extraordinary effort to integrate agricultural education and food production into the public school curriculum through a Bureau of Education program called the United States School Garden Army (USSGA). Literally millions of children enrolled in the program, 50,000 teachers received curriculum materials and several thousand volunteers helped direct or aid garden projects. Although community gardens existed in the UK before World War I, it was this conflict and World War II that firmly established the practice of community gardening in the cities of combatant countries. In the UK and the USA, these wartime gardens were known as Victory Gardens and were popularised as sources of dietary nutrition for civilian populations. With the growing wealth and the opening of markets to make use of the industrial capacity developed during World War II, the cheap mass production of food became possible. This contributed to a resulting decline in allotment or community gardening. In the UK, allotments were abandoned and their land more than often developed.[10] The revival of community gardening in the 1970s was a response to urban abandonment, environmental concerns, rising inflation, and a desire to build community spirit. Established organisations aided people with acquiring land, building gardens and creating educational 9â&#x20AC;&#x192; McKelvey, 2009 10â&#x20AC;&#x192; Graysonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s views on food mass production.

54 • 55

programming. Local residents, facing a myriad of urban problems, used gardens to rebuild neighbourhoods and expand green spaces. Even though food production, recreation, income generation, and beautification still provided a strong justification for gardening, the new focus of rebuilding social networks and the infrastructure of shattered urban communities was imposed.[11] Community Gardens Today

‘Community gardens are more than places to grow food. They are places of significance in the urban landscape where individuals, friends and families can gather. They are special places that combine many different activities’ ~ Russ Grayson, 2007. ~

Well-developed and cohesive city farm and community garden movements are at current active in the UK, Western Europe and the USA. In the UK, community gardens and city farms are supported by the National Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens (NFCFCG) which receives direct funding from the UK Department of the Environment. Local government is still predominantly the main provider of land for allotment gardening. At this current time, it is believed that there are over one million allotments in existence. The Civic Trust has an extended waiting list for allotments, believed to be around 10,000. The organisation offers valuable support and advisory services to groups seeking to secure access to land for community gardening. The USA and the UK are not the only countries where community gardens are highly regarded. Germany has more than 200 allotment gardens, Australia counts with 75 cases and growing, while Switzerland and Sweden have around 50 each.[12] We will come back to all of this in the case studies section where we will introduce examples from all around the world interesting for the pureness of their models. The benefits of community gardens ‘Community gardens are more than places to grow food. They are places of significance in the urban landscape where individuals, friends and families can gather. They are special places that combine many different activities’ ~ Russ Grayson, 2007. ~ Community gardens possess a multitude of benefits. Some of their benefits include, access to nutritious food, food security, waste minimisation and conservation, education on sustainable living practices, physical exercise, 11 McKevley, 2009 12 Grayson, 2007

recreation, crime reduction and reclamation of public spaces. Community gardens also contribute to social and community development. They do this by allowing friendship formation, social interaction, social skills development, the breaking down of cultural barriers, community involvement, the development of a sense of belonging and community spirit and interaction with strangers, ultimately helping regenerating the social fabric.

COMMUNITY GARDEN BENEFITS

community gardening and urban agriculture

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

Friendship formation Social interaction Social skills development Breaking down of cultural barriers

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Access to nutritious food Food security Waste minimization/conservation Education on sustainable living Physical excersice Recreation Crime reduction Reclamation of public spaces

MISCELLANEOUS

Community involvement Sense of belonging Community spirit Interaction with strangers

Social Development We have already introduced the social benefits from a theoretical perspective. In this section we will look deeper into the actual social actions that occur around the garden and analyze its outcome. Several studies have been undertaken to understand how community gardens help to encourage social interaction amongst participant gardeners.[13] While some 13â&#x20AC;&#x192; Bartolomei et al., 2003; Glover, Parry & Shinew, 2005

Graph 1.6 Benefits of Community Gardening. Source: Grayson, 2007.

56 • 57

studies have focused on social development in publicly accessed community gardens, others have narrowly analysed social development within gardens built on public housing estates land for use restricted to social housing tenants. A study undertaken by the UNSW, analysing the benefits of community gardens through the experiences of public housing tenants actively gardening the Waterloo Community Gardens, revealed that some tenants knew each other by sight, but it was not until they started to share a love of gardening that the barriers of shyness and suspicion melted and friendships began to develop.

[In other words, as the plants grew, so did Friendship. The gardens acted as a means for relationships to become forged across the cultural divide with tenants from various ethnic backgrounds becoming acquainted with each other on a personal basis.][14]

In other words, as the plants grew, so did Friendship. The gardens acted as a means for relationships to become forged across the cultural divide with tenants from various ethnic backgrounds becoming acquainted with each other on a personal basis.[14] This notion is further emphasised by a research held by the Sydney council where a community garden used by public housing tenants helped foster new friendships by providing neighbours with the opportunity to socialise and interact with each other.[15] Gardeners willingly develop social connections through their participation in the shared act of gardening with garden friendships more than often becoming year-round social ties. A study analysing the development of relationships through community gardens revealed that relationships built in the garden space led to further socialising outside of the garden space. This finding suggests that community gardens not only encourage social interaction amongst participant gardeners, but also equip participants with the skills and confidence to interact with people not associated with the community garden, outside of the garden walls. A further evaluation verified that community gardens provide social housing tenants with social skills and confidence to avoid social isolation and increase interaction with different cultures and members of the public.[16] The program’s aim of uniting communities and building confidence and social interaction amongst social housing tenants through the establishment of community gardens on public housing estate grounds has proven to be effective. A study of the wellbeing of participants of community gardens in upstate New York found that many of the com14 Bartolomei et al., 2003 15 Canterbury Council, 2009 16 Glover, Parry & Shinew, 2005

munity gardens helped to facilitate improved social networks allowing residents to meet each other, socialise and learn about other organisations and activities/issues in their local community. This notion is again expressed with community gardens considered to act as neighbourhood commons that encourage neighbours to work together and socialise.

community gardening and urban agriculture

Community development To understand what community development means, the definition of ‘community’ must be made clear first. The Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘community’ as: “A group of people living together in sympathetic association, more usually in a village, town or suburb.” Community development is identified as being the art of connecting, the power of telling stories and having conversations locally.[17] These elements are naturally expressed through the activity of community gardening. Jenson suggests that a community is made of a combination of five dimensions. These dimensions include, belonging, inclusion, participation, recognition, and legitimacy. In the struggle to strengthen communities, these five dimensions must be targeted and individually improved.

ISOLATION

BELONGING

EXCLUSION

INCLUSION

NON-INVOLVEMENT REJECTION ILLEGITIMACY

PARTICIPATION RECOGNITION LEGITIMACY

As its name suggests, a community garden is intended to encourage a sense of community amongst the residents of the neighbourhood in which it is located.[18] They are meant to serve as potential sites for community building. 17 Jenson, 1998 18 Glover, 2003

[Community development is identified as being the art of connecting, the power of telling stories and having conversations locally.][17]

Graph 1.7 Dimensions of social cohesion. Source: Jenson, 1998.

58 â&#x20AC;˘ 59

On a general spectrum, community gardens encourage a sense of community identity, ownership and stewardship. They provide a place for people of various backgrounds to intermingle and share cultural traditions. The notion is again expressed with community gardening identified as creating the opportunity for culturally diverse groups and people of different ages to interact and develop a sense of community and belonging.[19] But how do community successfully equip participants with the capabilities to interact with people outside of the garden walls? In the context of community gardens on public housing grounds, external interaction may be with non-garden participant housing tenants, or in the instance of publicly accessed community gardens, external interaction may be with strangers. This last one is the case of Coltivando. Publicly accessed community gardens are said to not only facilitate social interaction between gardeners themselves, but also open up opportunities for connecting with other members of the neighbourhood. The Gardens were found to act as a catalyst for conversation, breaking down social barriers. This allowed the gardeners to speak to strangers.[20]

[This study showed that social and recreational programs such as community gardening act as vehicles for developing a sense of community spirit amongst participants, equipping them with the urge to be more involved in the community.]

Research into Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres has revealed that participation in social and recreational programs such as community gardening produced networks that promoted a sense a belonging to a community and a sentiment of wanting to contribute back to the community. The research revealed that a number of participants went on to become involved in volunteering, management committees and decision-making activities in the broader neighbourhood. This study showed that social and recreational programs such as community gardening act as vehicles for developing a sense of community spirit amongst participants, equipping them with the urge to be more involved in the community. The five dimensions of a community suggested by Jenson are considered to be effortlessly achievable through participation in community gardening. Conclusion In conclusion we can say that while the present-day model of community gardening has been shaped during 19â&#x20AC;&#x192; Jenson, 1998 20â&#x20AC;&#x192; Bartolomei et al., 2003

the last century, the practice has been in use since 100BC. During this long period of exploitation of the activity, its purpose changed, but at current they are making several significant and positive contributions to the community involved. Gardens promote social and community development by allowing friendship formation, social interaction and social skills development, the breaking down of cultural barriers, community involvement, the development of a sense of belonging and community spirit and interaction with strangers. The objective to analyse the significant contribution community gardens make to social and community development has been addressed in this section. To understand how community gardens help facilitate social and community development amongst its members, the real-life experiences of community gardeners must be studied. An introduction to two case study public housing community gardens will be presented in the next section to provide a useful background of the gardens’ surrounding context, establishment process and governance model.

community gardening and urban agriculture

Figure 1.8 Workshop at the ‘Prinzessinnengärten’, Berlin, where Russian and Turkish matriarchs teach specialized techniques to the other gardeners.

60 â&#x20AC;˘ 61

[There are two main kinds of food coops: private and opened. In private coops, only members may shop at the store. [...] In an open food coop, anyone may shop at the store, but only members receive discounted prices.]

1.5 Food Cooperatives A food cooperative is a collectively owned grocery store. Most frequently it focuses on making natural foods more affordable for coop members, although other products may be carried as well. Even though there are a number of different styles of food coop, all of them share common values of group management and decision-making, social responsibility, and equality. In the USA, towns of all sizes have food coops ranging from very small to quite large, hence their easy access and successful amount of active members. The affordability of the good comes from the gross purchase derived from the group organization. This allows for a significant mark-up[1] reduction, reaching almost 10% compared to the 75% standard of regular retail stores. There are two main kinds of food coops: private and opened. In private coops, only members may shop at the store. In order to become a member, someone pays a small initiation fee and usually invests a set amount of money in the food coop to purchase a share. Some food coops allow members to purchase multiple shares, or require an annual fee, which causes long-term members of the food coop to own more shares. Most interesting examples are found in food coops that share the store labour. We will see a case study further on about this type of coop. Basically, this food coops work around members joining work crews and contributing a few hours of work to the running of the coop. The frequency and duration of work shifts varies from coop to coop. This allows for even smaller mark-ups with smaller member fees. In an open food coop, anyone may shop at the store, 1â&#x20AC;&#x192; Mark-up is the difference between the cost of a good or service and its selling price. A retail mark-up is added on the total cost incurred by the purchaser or producer of a good or service in order to create profit.

but only members receive discounted prices. Anyone may join the coop, often receiving benefits on the day that he or she joins. The prices for non-members at an open food coop can vary widely, but they are often lower than other retail stores in the area, to encourage people to shop at the coop even if they cannot join. In both cases, members are able to vote on issues that are relevant for the coop. For example, members may decide that the food coop should stock only organic products. They may also have an influence on hiring decisions, remodelling, and other management issues. Because coordinating a big group of people can be challenging, a food coop encourages cooperation, support, and honesty.

Figure 1.9 â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Park Slope Foodcoopâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, Brooklyn, NYC . Member owned and operated supermarket.

2.0

Methodology and Design Phases PSS innovations are fundamentally different from incremental innovations due to its radical approach. Incremental innovations on the other hand are more concerned with exploration of existing business processes and technology. This is the reason why the introduction of PSS business models can bring substantial change in the existing market and society in a relatively short period of time. The methodology for implementing these innovations is focused on designing and selling an interconnected system of products and services. Thinkingin a creative, new uncommon way, and actively use visualizations, analysis and stakeholder management in the process. The design methodology will be introduced in five phases: Exploring the Opportunities Reasearch & Strategic Analysis Informing & Engaging PSS Development Implementation Support & Incubation Maintenance & Expansion Until the presentation of this thesis, the design team has successfully developed an experimental enabling solution ready to be implemented and tested.

Presentation of the Layout Timeline at the internal Workshop. May 3rd, 2012.

64 • 65

Design Process Timeline DIS

ARC ING

ACTORS students in course

TIMELINE

EXPLORING OPPORTUNITIES Novembre ‘11

Temporary Urban Solution Course: ‘C’è Spazio per Tutti’. Exploration of the event outcome: Pilot Project ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’.

ACTIONS & RESULTS

local community

design team

LABS

RESEARCH & STRATEGIC ANALYSIS February ‘12

Analysis of the niche. Networking with the local community garden and urban landscape initiatives.

lead users

students

INFORMING & ENGAGING April ‘12

Presentation of the concept vision to Politecnico authorities. Creation of the brand.

Contact with international Realities.

Co-Design Workshop seeder with Academic Community.

PSS concept idea development.

First Extended Co-Design Workshop. Second Extended Co-Design Workshop.

Methodology and design process

distric 9

sponsors

coordinator

PSS DEVELOPMENT June ‘12

Coltivando Community

market stand

board of directors

IMPLEMENTATION PSS SOLUTION October ‘12

Design of the Registration PSS Enabling of the Solution. Association.

local community

SUPPORT & INCUBATION October ‘12

Evaluation of the PSS Enabling Solution.

volunteers

students in course

MAINTENANCE & EXPANSION October ‘13 to ’15

REPLICATION STRATEGY

Local Replication: Toolkit Introduction of Strategy Presentation Co-Construct the new service of the Final ion of the Designing ‘in’ aspects: International Solution in Garden. the Expansion: Market Stand; Ateneo of collaborative Barter Format Politecnico di Creation of community: Workshops, Strategy Milano. the critical Co-Design Academic together with mass Workshops ‘in Curricula. the DESIS community. situ’. Network Implemented Solution.

66 • 67

2.1 Exploring Opportunities The exploring opportunities phase had the objective of looking at possible incorporation of an innovative solution for the area behind the PK building at the Durando Campus of the Politecnico di Milano. During this phase Professor Davide Fassi – current head of the Coltivando project – threw a one-week workshop that consisted in opening the Durando Campus to the Bovisa community. A group of students – of which the author of this thesis was a member – picked the previously named area to work with and made a temporary garden installation with the aim of projecting a scenario for a future stable solution. The installation used toolkits to give out to the participants in order to inform and raise awareness of the future project as well as to engage interested actors to take part of the further development. C’è Spazio per Tutti – Bovisa Temporary Event

SPAZIO Figura 2.1 Logo of the ‘Temporary Urban Solutions’ course event: ‘C’è Spazio per Tutti’..

‘C’è Spazio per Tutti’ that in Italian means ‘There is always room for one more’, was a temporary event that took place November 12th 2011 in the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano. The event was the outcome of the elective course ‘Temporary Urban Solutions’, held by Professor Davide Fassi, within the MSc Product Service System Design at Politecnico’s School of Design. The event was supported by ‘esterni’ and in collaboration with the European project ‘Human Cities’. These organizations acted as a framework and were actively involved during the day of the event. Human Cities also took the event’s toolkit outcomes and analyzed them for further improvement and future implementation as part of the project that consists on

highlighting and tackling the uses and attitudes of people in urban public space. It questions the socio-cultural issues of urban design ranging from public spaces to urban furniture and objects in European cities today. The event consisted in opening the campus to the neighbourhood and inviting the local community to enter and get to know the campus as a public space they can use. The students of the course developed different initiatives such as guided tours, DIY breakfast, and urban gardening. Is in this context that the pilot project of Coltivando began. The demonstrational garden was named after the event as ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’, that in Italian means ‘There is space in the orchard for everyone’.

Figure 2.2 Opening moments of ‘C’è Spazzio per Tutti’ at the ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’ activity.

68 • 69

Figure 2.3 (left) Elizabetta, little Bovisa neihgbour seeding her first plant of her life at ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’. Figure 2.4(down) Picture taken on May 2012 of the flourishing garden bed of Coltivando’s pilot project: ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’.

Pilot Project - ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’ The micro project consisted in the realization of a demonstrational garden bed and a tool kit with general knowledge on how to make an urban garden as well as information on the possibilities of project to be – Coltivando. People coming to the garden were invited to sow seeds and complete recipes to be shared and leave their details if they happened to be interested in being involved on the future project. The event was a success and the micro project collected several contacts of interested local people as well as raising interest from the academic community inside of Politecnico. The garden bed was still up and running until this thesis was delivered, growing beans and peas plants that were harvested by the students who had their lunch breaks in the area.

70 â&#x20AC;˘ 71

2.2 Research and Strategic Analysis The strategic analysis had the objective of building a thorough and systematic understanding of the existing models of community gardening around the world and in Milan. The international researches of case studies was aimed at detecting the excelling cases of each of the model categories existing and systemically catalogue their characteristics in order to compare and contrast them more efficiently. The local research was oriented towards the analysis of the existing cases of community garden in the Milan area, their typology, organizational model, and extension. Also, the analysis spanned to the several existing organizations that carry on expansive gardening programs, mainly around the Bovisa area. This analysis generated a common understanding of the behaviour of the overall system and defined orientations for the next actions and steps to enable the design of a successful concept solution.

Analyzing the niche: My neighbourhood, my University, my campus. “The role of Politecnico is, will be and it always has been a decisive one. It’s an important presence for a series of reasons: because physically it substituted what there used to be once in the area, because of the fluxes of people that it carries with it and for the design capacity that characterises it. Nevertheless the shape of the role that it will assume, or consolidate in the future depends mostly on how Politecnico wants to appropriate in an illuminate manner of the Bovisa neighbourhood. The risk stands on it turning into a hegemonic foreign presence in the neighbourhood. On the contrary, I hope for it to react by re-thinking the numerous free areas that exists to re-qualify the neighbourhood, recovering old feelings with a modern view. Politecnico should make the most out of these areas that are an important resource, to make beautiful things, taking care of public areas, in particular the green ones. One thing that scares me however, is that here in Bovisa no one ever speaks about creating green areas.” ~A. Manzoni, Il Libraccio, former neighbour.~ Bovisa Neighbourhood: History of an area suspended between the past and the future. Bovisa is located in the north of Milan, mostly surrounded by the railways and its platforms. The name of the land comes from the word ‘boves’, since the land was used for the grazing of cattle (buoi) because of the fertile lands present in that area. During the first part of the twentieths century big factories started to thrive in the area – Montecatini, Ceretti e Tanfani, l’Officina del Gas – giving birth to a working class neighbourhood, recognized by the city of Milan in the year 1932. This industrial centre starts making contrast with the historical neighbourhood, a dense residential area. After World War II the reconstruction of the neighbourhood took place, opening the way for tit to

[Bovisa is located in the north of Milan [...]. During the first part of the twentieths century big factories started to thrive in the area [...], giving birth to a working class neighbourhood...]

72 • 73

A new [... perspective shows Bovisa not as an abandoned industrial area waiting to be dismantled, but as buildings in need of a new life.]

Figure 2.5 Workers at the old funicular factory ‘Ceretti e Tanfani’, 1950; actual Durando Campus of the Politecnico di Milano.

become an economic power during the 1950’s and 1960’s. During the 1970’s the factories started to shrunk until almost becoming extinct in the 1980’s. This unfortunate reality makes the neighbourhood loose a bit of its working class identity and most importantly, it isolates it from the social and cultural life of the city. As a result of this, most of its young inhabitants leave the now ‘pull factor-less’ neighbourhood in the search for a new job opportunity right next to their house door. From the year 1989 onwards, a neo-urbanizing phase begins, phase which is still active nowadays. This period is bolstered by a desire to make out of Milan a polycentric structure, with decentralized functions, innervated by a diffuse network of services appropriate to promote the regeneration of its suburbs. This urban mutating process takes the road of recovery through a new vision of the former industrial centre of Bovisa. This perspective shows Bovisa not as an abandoned industrial area waiting to be dismantled, but as buildings in need of a new life. This project begins when the Engineering University of the Politecnico di Milano starts to utilize an old warehouse from the former ‘Fbm Costruzioni Meccaniche’ as a new wing of the university with headquarters in Piazza Leonardo da Vinci, located in the urban area. In the year 1994, the University of Architecture settles in the restructured building of the former cable railway factory ‘Ceretti & Tanfani’. Nowadays, Bovisa is located in a peripheral position, but in the centre of urban planning forces that are re-evaluating the geography of the city: its closeness to the strategic works in the Malpensa airport area; the new ‘Fiera Milano’ exhibition complex, located in Rho/Pero; and big residential projects like ‘Il Portello’, eventually Bovisa will be located in the city centre. Thanks to the creation of new railway and highway systems, the neighbourhood managed to connect not only better with the actual city centre, but also with other suburban areas in way of expansion. Bovisa still is a very active neighbourhood with so many areas waiting for the opportunity to be exploited. These areas can be found not only as big expansions of land, but also small fertile parcels in the middle of the historical fabric. These apparently invisible parcels, could contribute to the modernization and revitalization of the area.

74 • 75

The inhabitants of Bovisa: Generations, worlds and different cultures in touch. Bovisa is opened today as a dynamical turf where different types of people live, co-exist and pass by every single day. A neighbourhood that mutated from the traditional industrial area to become a well-connected place to live with several links to the city centre of Milan and its metropolitan core area.

[The population of Bovisa is quite heterogenic, you can easily distinguish two macro categories: those who live their entire day and those who are just temporary bypassers.]

The population of Bovisa is quite heterogenic, you can easily distinguish two macro categories: those who live their entire day and those who are just temporary bypassers. To inquire on the different social groups and their habits, it is interesting to analyze their main characteristics that define their lifestyle, the peak presence hours in the area, and most of all the geographical use they make or better the way in which they take advantage of the neighbourhood. It is possible to divide the population on its social components; in particular we will distinguish two main categories. The first defined as the ‘permanent residents’ that clashes in all of those who are rooted in the territory, from their accommodation situation to the proximity of their social relations. The second called ‘temporary recipients’ or as defined by Martinotti: ‘city users’. This category gathers all the people that pass by the neighbourhood on a daily basis to make use of its services, whether it is as employees or users; this makes them temporary consumers. The first group is formed by the original and immigrants inhabitants and the merchants. The second group on the other hand, is formed by the university students, the creative professionals (researchers and private practices) and workers (teachers, administrative employees and service providers). The original inhabitants are obviously diffused around the residential areas and they make use of the local shops and public spaces such as small squares, parks, and public schools. This part of the population is the one that preserves the historical memory and carries on with the Italian culture traditions. On the other hand, we have a wave of immigrants that settled in Bovisa. This new inhabitants come with their own different needs and demands, most of these compose the group of local merchants and artisans that work

in the core of the neighborhood. The areas in which they concentrate, tend to become a sort of attractive pole of the local dimension still organized on a local scale where it is possible to establish personal bonds and relationships between customers and owners.

Research and Strategic Analysis

The immigrant accommodation is located mainly on the margins of the neighborhood. Their presence is quite noticeable at times thanks to the multi-lingual advertisement present. They seem to make intense use of the public space sometimes substituting the original users, other uniting themselves to them. Students compose the biggest portion of the neighborhood commuters, being present on it only during the day and without making entire use of it. Most of them arrive by train and they hasten straight towards the campus. The small minorities that do stay around the area come to this decision driven by its closeness with the study centre and the reduced price of its accommodation. For students in general there has been a large development of services along the road that lead to the campus. All services are complimentary to the university lifestyle, from copy centers to resellers of specialized materials and all sorts of take away shops. Professionals were lured to Bovisa driven by its low costs of the industrial real estate turned into lofts and ateliers, and by the presence of important cultural institutions such as Politecnico di Milano and the Triennale Bovisa (a branch of the Triennale Design Museum located in Cardona in Milanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s city centre). The practices are scattered throughout the historical residential area, however they are hardly visible, this means that the inhabitants themselves do not know much about the current experiences happening right there underneath their noses. The main reason for this is the lack of integration of this type of creative reality with the neighborhood. The only chance for this to happen used to be an event held during the Salone del Mobile called Fuorisalone Bovisa, which consisted in opening every single creative space available to create internal paths inside the neighborhood, attracting at the same time many external visitors. Finally workers are a group in fast expansion, with very little tie to the neighborhood unless ii is during the lunch break. The areas they frequent are mostly on the margins or even isolated that the triangle located north to the Bovisa Railway Station.

[The main reason for this is the lack of integration of this type of creative reality with the neighborhood. The only chance for this to happen used to be an event [...] which consisted in opening every single creative space available to create internal paths inside the neighborhood, attracting at the same time many external visitors.]

76 • 77

Campus Bovisa: Catalyzing a new idea of neighbourhood. In the year 1989 the Politecnico di Milano, which only had its headquarters at piazza Leonardo da Vinci, decides to move one of the engineering university departments to an old warehouse from the former ‘Fbm Costruzioni Meccaniche’ in Via Lambruschini. During the following years, the Politecnico decides to take under a total reconstruction of the former funicular factory ‘Ceretti & Tanfani’ (specialist in the construction of lifting mechanisms and transport of goods and people), in Via Durando, where the new building of the School of Architecture should be placed. “The role that Politecnico has in the history is Bovisa is decisive as it is vital, whether it has been in the past and it still is in the present. It has physically substituted the state in which the neighbourhood used to operate, the flux of people that it carries, and the design capacity that university is characterized by.” ~ F. Pirola, neighbour. ~

This is finally the new reality, one in which historical memory is incorporated and fixed inside modernity.

Figure 2.6 Ovale Square of the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano. The heart of all the exterior activities until now. In front, the B8 building of the design courses.

Since the very first years, around three thousand students start taking over the industrial ruins dessert, meaning the re-entering of young people into the neighbourhood. The visual panorama gets colored by the bluered-yellow university buildings as well as its green areas. Colossal sculptures in the shape of old metallic structures decorate the common squares of the campus as if they where part of a new evolving wave of modernity. This is finally the new reality, one in which historical memory is incorporated and fixed inside modernity. The Via Durando Campus is home for not only the School of Architecture, but also since June 2000 the School of Design as well as part of the School of Engineering. Laboratories, departments, classes, libraries for a total of 6.000 people approximately 5000 students, over 400 teaching staff and a further 500 research and teaching assistants working in various capacities. This numbers go higher when including all the small services that arrived to the adjoining area since the campus started functioning.

During the whole settlement process all the territorial integration actions have been reinforced in a way that the neighbourhood would take ownership of its new identity as an area destined to young people, creativity and research.

Research and Strategic Analysis

78 • 79

The Project Area: One campus for an entire community The area destined to the ‘Coltivando – Orto Conviviale’ is located inside the Campus Durando of the Politecnico di Milano. It consists of a big green area that was abandoned for many years. As we have said previously the Campus Durando used to be the funicular factory ‘Ceretti & Tanfani’, during the time of blossom of the factory, this big green area was used as the factory’s paint deposit, thousands and thousand of gallons of paint where stored in metallic buckets waiting to be used.

[Although trees were planted and grass was sown the field still remains polluted due to the chemical substances that the paint leaked into the ground. Official testing discovered an important amount of heavy metals present in the soil samples.]

Figure 2.7 Picture of the piece of land destinated to ‘Coltivando’, where students are starting to make use of the newly revitalized area. It is located behind the PK library building of the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano.

After the company closed in the year 1984 all the paint buckets were left in that place in the open air to rust and leak for the next 15 years. Unfortunately, when the Politecnico di Milano started the remodelling works, the area was used as dump from all the residues derived from the construction. By the end of the job, the ground was freed from any remains and left to be used in future projects. It wasn’t until the year 2010 that the area was properly cleaned and landscaped. Although trees were planted and grass was sown the field still remains polluted due to the chemical substances that the paint leaked into the ground. Official testing discovered an important amount of heavy metals present in the soil samples. The terrain has an extension of around 10.000 m2. The project involves the construction of a cooperative community garden with the aim of involving not only students but also neighbours that until now did not have the opportunity of making use out of this extended green area. It is important to clarify that all the land in which the Durando Campus expands, is of complete public use.

80 • 81

Figure 2.8 (left) Table meeting at ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ where we explained our intentions about the project to Leopoldo Tomassi, the garden’s official expert. Figure 2.9 (right) Guided tour around ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ by Leopoldo Tomassi.

Networking with local community garden and urban landscape initiatives As part of the reasearch to understand the existing models of community gardens existing in the urban and suburban area of Milan, the design team took actions of field research and stakeholder engagement at the same time. The team got in contact with the local Milanese reality, and contacted several institutions related to the matter and also visited two of the most developed project gardens; one in the city center called ‘Un Giardino per Via Montello’, and the other in the suburban area of Affori, right netx to Bovisa called ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’. Among the institutions contacted, some where actively involved during thw co-design workshops and some others are interested in developing alliances and doing networking after the garden starts running.

Passparverd Passparverd is an event held by the association of Architects without borders - Achitetti senza Frontiera - that consists in a series of aperitivos in previously mapped green spaces that have the potential for a community garden. This particular aperitivo was held in the Bovisa neighbourhood to start with the construction of the garden among the neighbours. In the event, ‘Coltivando’ had the chance to meet talk and ultimately network with the involved local representativwa of Architects without Borders, a local council representatives and strengthen the relationship with the project ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ who is also part of this network and invited us to participate. It is interesting to further explain the meeting with the local council, since during this opportunity we had the chance to start networking with Andrea Motta, the President of the Environmental Commission of the 9th Circumscription - the one to which the neighbourhood of Bovisa belongs.

Figure 2.10 (left) Table meeting at ‘Passparverd’ with the Association of Architects without Borders. Figure 2.11 (right) Networking at ‘Passparverd’ with Andrea Motta, the president of the Environmental Commission of the 9th Circumscription.

84 • 85

Contact with international realities Correlatively to the research and analysis done locally, the design team also investigated and started networking internationally.

[A highlighted outcome of this interview would be the positiveness the manager showed towards the cooperative nature of our garden model...]

Several international case studies were analysed. For more information on these case studies, see Anex 1. Among these case studies, we made research on the ‘Harvard Community Garden’ to understand how a major university worked around it and see not only what kind of analogies could be done between Harvard and Politecnico, but if it was possible to undertake any sort of collaboration between universities.

Figure 2.12 Picture of the ‘Harvard Community Garden’ at the university campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

A highlighted outcome of this interview would be the positivity with which the manager showed towards the cooperative nature of our garden model, while sentencing that organizing the garden as collaborative services was the future of university gardening.

Emily Ballantyne Brodie introduced the team to the manager of the ‘Harvard Community Garden’. Through a Skype meeting the team and the garden manager discussed both our garden models as well as possible collaborations between universities in the future.

PSS idea development After carrying out all the necessary research the design team had the task of delivering a preliminary idea for a Product Service System Solution to be presented to the Politecnico di Milano authorities on March 2012. The idea conception came after a series of meetings held at the INDACO department inside the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano. The aim of these meetings was to settle the main idea of the project and give the students sufficient guideliness to be able to present a project proposal.

Figure 2.13 Picture of the design meetings held at the INDACO Department at the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano.

86 • 87

2.3 Informing and Engaging The informing and engaging phase was the most critical phase since the result and the future of the project depended on Politecnico’s approval and support as well as the community’s support and level of engagement. During this phase the first concept vision was presented to the Politecnico di Milano authorities in the shape of a Vision and Scope Proposal. After the university’s approval, the team developed the brand and created a strategy for informing and engaging the Coltivando community based on a series of co-design and informational workshops with the aim of co-creating the solution and building the community of members. This phase gave the design team all the necessary feedback and insights that were put into the Product Service System development.

Presentation of the concept vision to the Politecnico di Milano authorities The design team got together in a series of meetings that had two main objectives. The first meetings were those of brain storming, where the team come up with the main guidelines for the project. It was of general agreement the intentions of making a community garden that had the overall goal of opening the campus as public space to the neighbourhood and help the integration between the academic and the local community. On the other hand, the preliminary research showed

that almost all of the successful gardens around the world were run under the private allotment model. In this sense, the design team came to an agreement of settling for making a hybrid model where the private allotment and convivial models would co-exist. After taking over the first field researches around the Milan area and collecting international data, the design team came up with a preliminary project for the garden to be presented to Dean Giovanni Azzone, Cristian Borello (Logistic Manager) and Chiara Pesenti (Communications and Relations for Politecnico); under a feasibility consultation and approval. The result was a project under the name of ‘Community Garden at Politecnico di Milano’ in the shape of a proposal that apart from the preliminary project, included the still in force design premise, research and analysis and case studies.

Figure 2.14 Cover page of the ‘Community Garden at Politecnico di Milano’ proposal.

Figure 2.15 Picture of the ‘Design Team’ page of the project proposal.

Figure 2.16 Picture of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Design Processâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; page of the project proposal.

92 • 93

Creation of the brand Once the proposal was presented to the Politecnico di Milano authorities and given the green light to carry on with the project, the design team had the task of coming up with a brand name that would represent a complex mix of ideas, service models and realities. A series of brain storming meeting were held where the design team analyzed and reflected over the concept and a proper name for the garden. The result was a concept tree that reflects all the ideas related to the concept of the project devided into its semi-private and semi-public aspect. The name came from the idea of the garden as an activity of producing. The produce however is not just restricted to vegetables or any kind of eatable goods, but also the production of sense of belonging, new relationships, selfesteem, sense of community.

Graph 2.1 Idea evolution of the brand name of the Product Service System ‘Coltivando’.

In general, the name needed to translate not only the food production nature of the service, but also the reinforcement of the social fabric the collaborative garden can bring to its neighbourhood. The team chose: ‘Coltivando’ which means to cultivate.

VERB

ACTIONS for/by

GERUND

grow

community relationships food selfesteem

growing

coltivare :[intransitive] to increase in amount, size, number, or strength; if plants grow, they exist and develop in a natural way; to gradually become better.

It reffers to the actions of incrementation, reproduction and creation.

coltivando

The verb functions as a noun that describes an action over a period of time, and a sense of a continuos process.

Informing and Engaging

cul•ti•vate [transitive] 1 - to prepare and use land for growing crops and plants: The land was too rocky to cultivate. 2 - formal to plant and take care of a particular crop [=grow]: 3 - to work hard to develop a particular skill, attitude, or quality: Try to cultivate a more relaxed and positive approach to life. 4 - to make an effort to develop a friendly relationship with someone, especially someone who can help you.[1]

1 Definition from the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English . Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 2012

This word became the conceptual representation of all for what the project stands for. The next steps where to develop the logotype and service manifesto so as to be able to continue with the presentation of the project to both academic and local community. The need for a logo was left on purpose on hold. The idea behind this decision was to leave space for the other departments of Politecnico to get involved in the project. This interaction and engagement was planned for the codesign workshops, in particular the first one, in which the team would directly involve all the acting academic departments at the Durando Campus of Politecnico di Milano.

94 • 95

sostenibilità

Graph 2.2 Concept tree of the brand name ‘Coltivando’.

MATERIALI reciclo

bio-compatibilità

Figure 2.17 (next page) Logotype of ‘Coltivando’ toghether with the brand statement.

pallet attrezzi

compost

terra

COLTIVARE

alimento verde

attività sana hobby

tranquillità affittuari

individualità

privato

ALLOTMENTS produzione propria

internazionale

dipartimenti + laboratori

futuro sostenibile

comunità accademica

istituzionale

PoliMi

POLITECNICO

disegno

progettazione

accademico

università

eventi collettivi

workshop

:/OR•TI-UNI•VER•SI•TA•RI/ si definiscono orti universitari degli appezzamenti di terra all’interno del campus, per la coltivazione non solo di prodotti ma anche di conoscenze.

studenti + professori

ORTI UNIVERSITARI

COMMUNITY GARDEN POLITECNICO DI MILANO

SEMI-PRIVATO

verde

Informing and Engaging

piante

VITA VEGETALE

alberi

organico

radici

CIBO ORTI

acqua

autoproduzione = vita sana

CIRCOSCRIZIONE ZONA 9

SAGGEZZA processo di crescita

community supported agriculture

mercato

utenti + volontari

incontro urbano

QUARTIERE BOVISA

tutti = multiculturale

COLLETIVITÀ

condividere

CONVIVIALE

comunità

lavoro di squadra

inclusivo SEMI-PUBBLICO

felicità ORTI URBANNI

relax

:/OR•TI-UR•BA•NI/ si definiscono orti urbani come piccoli appezzamenti di terra per la coltivazione ad uso domestico, aggregati in colonie organizzate unitariamente.

[Concept Tree]

ORTO CONVIVIALE Politecnico di Milano

Healthy organic food, at zero cost, for working members through cooperation.

Coltivando Members Manifesto Coltivando, Orto Conviviale has the aim to provide the community of Bovisa with quality food and products while serving as a community centre and meeting place for its member-owners: people who believe in the value, rewards and responsibility of collective labour, action and ownership. The benefits of this shared responsibility are twofold, the most obvious being that with scheduled, reliable member labour we are able to provide every members of this community with healthy organic produce at zero cost. But another equally important reward comes from the satisfaction we receive from working together as a community to build something upon which we can all rely. At Coltivando we believe the basis of truly sustainable agriculture is the development of biological cycles involving microorganisms, soil, fauna, plants and animals. Our aim is to produce the highest possible quality of food in optimum quantity and seeks to co-exist and work with nature rather than to dominate it. As a member of Coltivando, you share ownership of the cooperative garden with all the other member-owners. Work, learn, participateâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;be a part of a unique and rewarding community here in Bovisa. When you buy in a traditional supermarket, you are buying someone elseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work. When you work at Coltivando â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Orto Conviviale, you are consuming the fruits of your own labour with all the guarantees such thing ensures. We look forward to having you join us, and experience for yourself what a unique organization we are!

98 • 99

Co-Design Workshops

...[the Coltivando Orto Conviviale team decided to introduce co-design workshops as a tool not only to grasp insights, experiences and capture as many different perspectives as possible, but also to start building the community in which the garden project will flourish.]

As we have explained before, a co-design approach is crucial for the conception of collaborative services because it brings to the project not only the deepest insights, but co-creation practiced at the early front end of the design development process can have an impact with positive, long-range consequences as well.[1] As part of the design process the Coltivando Orto Conviviale team decided to introduce co-design workshops as a tool not only to grasp insights, experiences and capture as many different perspectives as possible, but also to build the community in which the garden project will flourish. When we talk about community, we are talking about the neighbourhood (external) as well as the academic community (internal). Three different co-design workshops where held. The first oriented towards all the departments present on the Bovisa campuses: Architectural, Engineering, Sustainability and Design Departments. The second workshop had a wider span of participants, these included: the academic community involved in the previous workshop, the external community of Bovisa neighbours and lead users from other community gardens around Milan. Finally, the third workshop oriented towards the young and most active creative component of the academic community, its students. It is worth adding that the second and third workshop, were re-thought and modify according to the experience acquired in the previous one. In this section we will describe the general aim each of these workshop by analyzing and introducing the different kinds of participants involved, how these were selected and contacted and the workshop’s organizational model – we will develop this topic in more detail later on.

Graphs 2.3 Distribution of the different co-design workshops models according to their most defining characteristics openness and ownership.

To give a better insight on the workshops, a timeline with specifications of the different activities developed and their expected outcomes will be introduced. Finally, we will discuss the overall real outcomes and insights that each workshop contributed to the project. 1 Co-creation and the new landscapes of design - Sanders, Stappers, 2008

Organizational Model The methods for organising co-design vary. In general, your objectives and desired outcomes will define the most appropriate method for your particular project. There are two central axes that define types of co-design: Openness:Cananyonejoininorarethereselectioncriteria? Ownership: Is the outcome owned by just the initiator or by the contributors as well? These two dimensions differentiate the four main types of co-design. As we shall see, different organisational models map closely to the co-design continuum.[2]

The Crowd Model

Community of Kindered Spirits

Coalition of Parties

2â&#x20AC;&#x192; VODAFONE Co-Design Workshop Manual, 2011

OWNERSHIP

OPEN-NESS

Club of Experts

Informing and Engaging

100 • 101

Academic Workshop

[This workshop was conceived to bring together all of the head of the different academic departments present in the Bovisa campuses [...] as well as key research units of the institution...]

As we have previously mentioned, the academic workshop was oriented to the Politecnico di Milano academic community, the students however were excluded at this point. This workshop was conceived to bring together all of the head of the different academic departments present in the Bovisa campuses – Architecture, Engineering, Design – as well as key research units of the institution – Sustainability Research Unit based on Campus Leonardo, Milan. The Coltivando team aimed at mostly informing and sharing with all of the departments in order to detect and involve the interested ones. Another secondary aim of the workshop was to form a focus group to reflect on the next step of the project. The workshop was held at the INDACO Department of the Politecnico di Milano, a wing building to the Campus Durando. Organizational Model: Club of experts The ‘‘Club of Experts” style of co-design is best suited to specific, time-pressured challenges that demand expertise and breakthrough ideas. Contributors meet certain specific participation criteria and are generally found through an active selection process. Quality of input and chemistry between participants are the key to success. Motivated, innovative thinkers are the most effective collaborators in this model. It is important to manage these teams and be open with them. Timeline Report Introduction

Figure 2.18 Picture of the participants of the Academic Workshop while they listen to the presentation.

The workshop started with a 45-minute presentation of the project. The slideshow was structured in the following way: presentation the core working team, its member’s background and academic background of the research cell; introduction of the overall project theme; introduction of the framework project ‘C’è Spazzio per Tutti’; methodological approach; analysis on research and case studies; actions taken so far with the ateneo; and finally a concept project proposal.

Internal engagement of all the Politecnico CONTACT Departments present in Durando Campus. Professional slide presentation targeted to an understood audience. Sharing of the project aims, values, guidelines and several models to be developed.

0’

INTRODUCTION 10’ 20’ 30’ 40’

Feedback retrieval from the different professionals present. Sharing of the positions taken by each different department and suggestions.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Activities and data collection. Surveys to start expanding the academic professionals involved in the project. Program Model brainstorming on the activities held on the garden.

SURVEY & PROGRAM ACTIVITY

Put forward of the ideas about the program model and interdisciplinary build-in on them by all of the participants. Use of their professional expertise.

DISCUSSION OF THE ACTIVITY

Facilitators’ synthesis of the different points of views and ideas rose by the participants. Invitation to join the project and assist to the second co-design workshop with representatives of the other members of community.

WORKSHOP CONCLUSIONS

50’ 1h 1h10’ 1h20’ 1h30’ 1h40’ 1h50’ 2h 2h10’ 2h20’ 2h30’

General Discussion During this phase, the participants were invited to present themselves and explain their interest for participating as well as to raise their first thoughts and opinions on the project. There was no specific icebreaker activity given at this point due to the lack of time, but exchanging thoughts and insights put everyone on the same plane.

Informing and Engaging

Survey & Program Model Activity After introducing expressing their first thoughts, the participants were invited to fill in a survey and complete a management activity. The aim of this was to provide the project team with detailed information on the interested departments, the capabilities they could provide to the project and level of involvement with which they were willing to participate. On the other hand, the Program Model Activity was intended as a brainstorming session on the different ac-

Graph 2.4 Timeline of the Academic Workshop held at the INDACO Department. Figure 2.19 Picture of the participants brainstorming on the Program Model Activity.

104 â&#x20AC;˘ 105

tivities the garden could/should develop and under which categories they should fall. This prepared the Program Model for the Roles & Rules Activities that were going to be given in the following co-design workshops. Discussion of the Activity After the activity took place, the participants shared their thoughts and input on the garden management model. Each academic professional present Synthesis & Conclusion

Figure 2.20 Picture of the final discusion and reflections on the Program Model Activity.

Finally to conclude the workshop, the facilitators synthesized the different points of views and ideas rose by the participants, and invited them to the next co-design session to be held three weeks later with local community members and gardening experts, leaving also the door open to join the project as academic collaborators.

Academic Workshop Conclusion After the first workshop was finished, the academic community was successfully informed and updated on all the actions taken so far by the team as well as the concept project status. The team was able to detect and involved the interested departments into the future steps of the project.

Informing and Engaging

Further more, among the feedback collected during the workshop, the academic community showed unanimus agreement on changing the hybrid nature of the project into a full collaborative service. The workshop also helped testing the activities for the extended co-design version, and some adjustments were made.

Graph 2.5 Main insights gained at the Academic Workshop. May 3rd, 2012. INDACO Department.

INSIGHTS

May 3rd, 2012 - INDACO Department

1º Engagement Academic Workshop The importance of introducing a long-term soil remediation program together with the above ground gardening approach as an ethically coherent measure. Obtained the necessary back-up to make out of ‘Coltivando’ a full collaborative service based on a cooperative model. Modifying the existing hybrid model of private allotments and convivial areas. Integration of rainwater harvesting. Incorporation of street gates to access the garden. The possibility to held academic related workshops in the garden premises. Involving the garden in the academic curricula.

106 • 107

First Extended Co-Design Workshop As we have previously mentioned, the extended workshop was oriented to Bovisa neighbours, departments of the academic community and lead users. This workshop was conceived to bring together for the first time the local community and the academic one and confront them with the knowledge and guidance that expert on the matter could contribute (stories of success, gardening expertise and management models). Organizational Model: Community of kindred spirits The ‘Community’ model is most relevant when developing something for the greater good. Groups of people with similar interests and goals but different backgrounds can come together and create. This model works mostly in social innovation initiatives; it leverages the potential force of a large group of people with complementary areas without being necessarily all experts in the workshop’s subject. It is far more important for the participants to belong to the reality in which the project will take place, so as to be able to propose, interpret and develop the common will. Participants As we indicated previously, the participants who assisted this workshops were, the academic community, the local community and lead users. Lead users are people who have already explored innovative ways to get things done and who are willing to share their approaches with others.[1]

Figure 2.21 Picture of ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’ where the participants filled in the contact sheets to be able to participate in the garden’s further developments..

The academic community members were the participants of the first workshop, which was specially oriented to them. The members who showed interest in participating in further development of the project where contacted through the university’s internal mailing service and attended the second workshop. The local member where contacted through two modalities: direct reach and street advertising. The members 1 Co-creation and the new landscapes of design - Sanders, Stappers, 2008.

contacted directly were the ones who had previously participated in the pilot project ‘C’è Giardino per Tutti’ during the temporary event ‘C’è Spazzio per Tutti’ held by the course of Temporary Urban Solutions under the tutoring of Professor Davide Fassi.

Informing and Engaging

108 • 109

On the other hand, a street publicity campaign took place in the neighbourhood a week prior to the workshop in the shape of window display posters and postal cards.

Figure 2.22 Poster displayed on every local shop at Piazzale Bausan, Bovisa. The most seccessful way of engaging the neighbours. Graph 2.6 Timeline of the First Extended Co-Design Workshop. May 19th, 2012.

The professional perspective was provided by all the contacts gained during the expert stakeholder engagement phase. These lead users were: the responsible for the non-for profit association ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ Aurora Betti and colleagues, who is behind our case study of ‘Orto Libero’; the responsible for ‘A garden for Via Montello’ Marco Sessa, partner at the green architectural firm Atelier delle Verdure; the agronomist Leopoldo Tommasi; the association Architetti senza Frontiera; and the president of the Environmental Commission of Zone 9 (Bovisa area) Andrea Motta.

E-mail past contacts, window display posters and postcards as invitations.

CONTACT

Slide presentation targeted to the neighbours. Sharing of the project aims, values and general service idea (cooperative garden). Five-minute presentations on behalf of the organizations present - ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’, ‘Un Giardino per Via Montello’.

INTRODUCTION

0’ 10’ 20’ 30’ 40’

Moments of reflection to help the participants clear any sort of doubt on the project and express their point of view about it.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Data collection.

SURVEY

Co-Design activity for the definition of the actors’ roles and build-up of the general regulations of the garden.

RULES & ROLES ACTIVITY

Sharing of the results group by group, followed by reflections and feedback.

DISCUSSION OF THE ACTIVITY

Co-Design activity of the architectural aspect of the garden. Layout of the different areas needed in the garden.

LAYOUT PLANNING

Sharing of the results group by group, followed by reflections and feedback.

DISCUSION OF THE ACTIVITY

Facilitators’ synthesis of the different points of views and ideas rose by the participants.

WORKSHOP CONCLUSIONS

50’ 1h 1h10’ 1h20’ 1h30’ 1h40’ 1h50’ 2h 2h10’ 2h20’ 2h30’

110 • 111

Timeline Report Presentation

Figure 2.23 Picture of the participants of the workshop listening to the presentation by the design team.

The workshop started with a 25-minute presentation of the Coltivando team and lead-users present. The slideshow was structured in the following way: presentation the core working team, its member’s background; introduction of the overall project theme; introduction of the framework project ‘C’è Spazzio per Tutti’; methodological approach; analysis on research and case studies (here the lead-users were asked to present their own project); and finally a concept project proposal.

Introduction to the Activities The end of the presentation starts with an introduction to the first of the activities of the co-design workshop. The facilitators introduced the actors of the group and the different personas inside of them, to conclude with this, the facilitators ask the participant which kind of actor they think they are. Right afterwards the facilitators gave out a survey that had several aims, on the one hand it was useful to collect participant information, on the other hand this committed identification to one of the roles in the concept project was useful for making the groups for the rest of the activities. Having homogeneous groups allowed for a better-organized understanding of the outcomes they produced. Gathering not just insights, but insights in the shape of unpolluted points of view from the different type of persona involved.

Informing and Engaging

Figure 2.24 Picture of the Roles & Rules activity set.

112 • 113

Roles & Rules The activity was introduced by the facilitator with projected visual aid. The kit consisted in an A2 printout with all the activities available in the system organized by categories – management, gardening, maintenance and networking – and time lapses – daily, weekly, monthly and seasonal; along with this print out we gave the participants a series of stickers as iconic representations of each of the actors involved. The aim of the activity was to create the role that each actor should have inside of the system as well as professional input from the part of the experts on the activities to be done in the garden. For this last outcome we facilitated blank activity spaces to be completed and we gave the liberty of crossing out, modifying and moving the activities around the chart as they pleased.

Figure 2.25 Completing the open spaces in the Program Model.

Once they were finished with the role activity, another printout was given out. This print out consisted on the description of the basic principals of the service that were not to be modified but informed, and right next to it, a series of premises/rules that were to be ordered by importance. The rule activity also offered the possibility of adding new rules that the groups came up with as well as modifying or commenting on the ones that were gave.

Figure 2.26 Deciding the roles of the involved actors.

The activity aimed to inform the participants on the basic principals and grasp the order of importance they gave to the following rules as well as comments and new criteria to take into account.

114 â&#x20AC;˘ 115

Sharing Debate After the activity was completed, each group presented their outcome to the other groups. This gave time for questioning, debating and reflexion on the matter. On-field Work

[...a more concrete approach in the design of the architectural aspect of the garden. ]

The second part of the workshop was dedicated to a more concrete approach in the design of the architectural aspect of the garden. The part of the workshop was to be carried out on the garden location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; outdoors. Unfortunately due to weather conditions, it was carried out inside. The activity consisted in a dashboard printout with the master plan of the garden location along with the dimensions in percentage of each functional structure â&#x20AC;&#x201C; accesses, garden beds, greenhouse, compost area, tool shed, relaxing area, educational area, kitchen and common table. The instructions were to indicate how these areas should be displayed according to their believes, desires and most of all knowledge. The aims of this activity were to introduce the space to the participants, inform on the physical content of the design to the local community and get insights on how to design the garden from the experts. Sharing Debate Like it happened after the previous activity, once it was completed, each group presented their outcome to the other groups. This gave time for questioning, debating and reflexion on the matter. Conclusion After the activity discussion, the facilitators addressed the participants and made a brief summary of the events of the day providing a sort of future scenario in the end. At this point, the team evaluated based on the response of the participants their level of involvement, to see if it had increased or decreased. The participants showed high level of involvement. The team shared the final guidelines for the following operational actions and informed that future contact would come via mailing list.

Figure 2.27 Architectural activity after been worked out and filled by the participants..

First Extended Co-Design Workshop Conclusion

116 â&#x20AC;˘ 117

Graph 2.7 (left) Insights gained at the First Extended CoDesign Workshop. Graph 2.8 (right) Survey results question by question from the First Extended CoDesign Workshop.

After the conclusion of the workshop, the aim of it was considered achieved. It successfully managed to bring together representatives from both communities (internal and external) involved in the project as well as lead users from the area. The community building had its start kick and all of the participants showed not only interest in continuing the further developments of the project, but also early feelings of ownership. The integration of the professionals was useful to obtain specific data and in-depth insights on the garden design as well as on the management model shape to follow. Moreover, the lead users took storytellers roles and shared successful garden projects in the area, feeding with confidence and tension release. They helped in eradicating any sort of doubts and uncertainties inside the future Coltivando community.

INSIGHTS

May 19th, 2012 - Edificio B8

First Extended Co-Design Workshop It is vital for all gardeners to harvest their own produce of consumption. Not just one squad or member should be involved in the harvesting activities. All gardeners can and should do all of the activities that there are to be done. Beginner Users are to be involved in all the managerial activities and are more than capable of completing the tasks assigned with minor explanations. New key activities that were overlooked during the analysis and research stages. Workshops related to other areas of interest for and by the community.

WERE YOU ABLE TO GROW A GARDEN IN THE PAST TWO YEARS? BEGINNERS

EXPERTS

YES 72%

CONVIVIAL 12%

YES 50%

NO 50%

PRIVATE 88%

NO 28%

PRIVATE 58%

CONVIVIAL 14%

DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE TO CONTRIBUTE TO ‘COLTIVANDO’? BEGINNERS

EXPERTS

TECHNICAL 6.5%

YES 100%

BOTH 28%

TECHNICAL 28%

YES 44% PRACTICAL 25%

NO 56%

NETWORKING 16%

PRACTICAL 28%

DESIGN 12.5%

HOW MANY HOURS A WEEK COULD YOU SPEND IN THE GARDEN? WHICH DAYS? WEEK 10% WEEKEND 30%

2-5hs 20% INDISTINCT 10%

INDISTINCT 15%

1-2hs 80% WEEK 35%

118 • 119

SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICS CO-DESIGN EXTENDED WORKSHOP

FOCUS SURVEYS

14%

3 PARTICIPANTS

43%

10 PARTICIPANTS LOCAL COMMUNITY

LEAD USERS

10 PARTICIPANTS 43% ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

INFORMING AND ENGAGING

1 AGRONOMIST 1 GARDEN MANAGER 1 PROJECT MANAGER

RETIRED

30% 7 PARTICIPANTS

GROUP OF EXPERTS

ACTIVE

70% 5

STUDENTS

16 PARTICIPANTS

GROUP OF BEGGINERS

TEACHERS

Graph 2.9 Survey demographic results from the First Extended Co-Deisgn Workshop.

WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN USING THE GARDEN FOR ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN GARDENING? WHAT KIND? EDUCATIONAL 45% AND LEISURE

EDUCATIONAL 15%

YES 100% LEISURE 40%

WHAT DO YOU THINK COULD BE THE REPAYMENT FOR THE HOURS WORKED IN THE GARDEN?

100%

VEGETABLE BOX

65% USE OF SPACES FOR PRIVATE ACTIVITIES

30% TRAINING CLASSES

HOW DO YOU THINK THE WORKING SQUADS SHOULD DEVELOP THEIR WORKSLOTS IN THE GARDEN?

85% WORKING SQUADS DO ALL THE ACTIVITIES

15% WORKING SQUADS DO ONE KIND OF ACTIVITY

Second Extended Co-Design Workshop The Second Extended Co-Design Workshop was held a month after the first co-design experience. The aim of this second run was to involve as many participants as possible including all the interested integrants of the student community inside the Bovisa Campuses of Politecnico di Milano. In this opportunity, some of the timings and content of the workshop were revaluated. All of the associations present in the previous workshop were contacted and asked to participate in this edition. However this time their role would be a slightly more passive one, since they would not have time to engage the ‘Coltivando’ community in their experience storytelling. In any case, their input in the activities was more than useful and contributed an expert’s point of view on the activities’ matter.

INFORMING AND ENGAGING

[The aim of this second run was to involve as many participants as possible including all the interested integrants of the student community inside the Bovisa Campuses of Politecnico di Milano.]

Organizational Model: Community of kindred spirits Like in the previous edition, the Second Extended CoDesign Workshop was organized under the ‘Community of kindred spirits’ model. Such model is most relevant when developing something for the greater good. Groups of people with similar interests and goals but different backgrounds can come together and create. This model works mostly in social innovation initiatives; it leverages the potential force of a large group of people with complementary areas without being necessarily all experts in the workshop’s subject. It is far more important for the participants to belong to the reality in which the project will take place, so as to be able to propose, interpret and develop the common will. Participants As we indicated previously, the participants who assisted this workshops were, the academic, the student and the local communities as well as the lead users belonging to the projects and associations contacted during the stakeholder engagement phase.

Graph 2.10 Survey results question by question from the First Extended CoDesign Workshop.

122 • 123 Figure 2.28 Ingresso al Community Garden Veg-Out. Maggio, 2010. Graph 2.11 Timeline of the Second Extended Co-Design Workshop at the ‘Coltivando’ premises.

The academic and local community members were the participants of the first and second workshops, respectively. The local member where contacted through two modalities: direct reach and street advertising. The members contacted directly were the ones who had previously participated in the First Extended Co-Design Workshop. On the other hand, a street publicity campaign took place once again in the neighbourhood two weeks prior to the workshop in the shape of window display posters and postal cards.

E-mail past contacts, window display posters and postcards and FB event.

CONTACT

Short slide presentation targeted to the neighbours and students. Sharing of the project aims, values and general service idea (cooperative garden).

INTRODUCTION

0’

10’

20’ The participants cleared doubts on the project and express their point of view.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Instructions on the activities to be developed at the garden and data collection.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTIVITIES & SURVEY

Co-Design activity of the architectural aspect of the garden. Layout of the different areas needed for the garden’s correct functioning. Garden grounds recognition.

LAYOUT PLANNING

30’

40’

50’

1h10’ Co-Design activity for the definition of the actors’ roles and build-up of the general regulations of the garden.

RULES & ROLES ACTIVITY 1h20’

1h30’

1h40’ Open air aperitivo. Facilitators’ synthesis of the different points of views and ideas rose by the participants. Invitation to join the ‘Coltivando’ team in October for the construction phase.

WORKSHOP CONCLUSIONS 1h50’

124 • 125

Timeline Report Presentation The workshop started with a fifteen-minute presentation on the values, aim and general idea of the ‘Coltivando’ project (Collaborative service based on a cooperative garden model). The slideshow was structured in the following way: introduction of the overall project theme; introduction of the framework project ‘C’è Spazio per Tutti’; methodological approach; and finally a concept project proposal. This time around, the presentation was much shorter to leave space to develop in more depth the codesign activities planed by the design team. Introduction to the Activities

[This time around, the participants were asked to form heterogeneous groups integrated by all sorts of profiled actors. The production of these mixed teams was compared with the homogeneous productions from the previous workshop to see how different or similar they were.]

Like in the First Extended Co-Design Workshop, the end of the presentation starts with an introduction to the first of the activities of the co-design workshop. The facilitators introduced the actors of the group and the different personas inside of them, to conclude with this, the facilitators ask the participant which kind of actor they identify with. Right afterwards the facilitators gave out a survey to collect participant information and help in making the groups, asking the participants to go outside to the garden location where the activities would be developed. This time around, the participants were asked to form heterogeneous groups integrated by all sorts of profiled actors. The production of these mixed teams was compared with the homogeneous productions from the previous workshop to see how different or similar they were. Layout Planning The first part of the outside activities was dedicated to a more concrete approach in the design of the architectural aspect of the garden. The activity consisted in a dashboard printout with the master plan of the garden location along with the dimensions in percentage of each functional structure – accesses, garden beds, greenhouse, compost area, tool shed, relaxing area, educational area, kitchen and common table. The instructions were to indicate how these areas should be displayed according to the participants’ believes, desires and most of all knowledge.

Figure 2.29 Picture of the groups projecting the layout in situ.

Once the members of the groups came to general agreements, they were requested to plant different banners indicating the places around the garden in which they would

place each functional structure. The point of this request was to let them do recognition of the garden grounds and get familiarized with the project area.

Informing and Engaging

The aims of this activity was to introduce the space to the participants, inform on the physical content of the design to the local community and get insights on how to design the garden from the experts. Roles & Rules The activity was introduced by the facilitator with projected visual aid. Like in the First Extended Co-Design Workshop, the roles kit consisted in an A2 printout with all the activities available in the system organized by categories â&#x20AC;&#x201C; management, gardening, maintenance and networking â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and time lapses â&#x20AC;&#x201C; daily, weekly, monthly and seasonal; along with this print out we gave the participants a series of stickers as iconic representations of each of the actors involved. The aim of the activity was to create the role that each actor should have inside of the system.

Figure 2.30 (left) One of the local community participants placing the banners of the layout planning activity. Figure 2.31 (down) The co-design groups engaged in the Roles & Rules activity.

At the same time they were asked to complete a new version of the rules activity. This ameliorated print out consisted on the random display of the ‘Coltivando’ rules with 10 blank spaces next to it. The kit also had the same rules printed in small cards that were to be used to put the rules in order of importance. The rule activity also offered the possibility of adding three new rules that the groups came up with as well as modifying or commenting on two of the ones that were gave. The activity aimed to inform the participants on the basic principals and grasp the order of importance they gave to the following rules as well as comments and new criteria to take into account. Conclusion After the activities were finished, the participants were invited to an evening aperitivo in site. The facilitators used this aperitivo environment to addressed the participants in a personal way and made a brief summary of the events and receiving feedback to finally inform them about the next steps in the ‘Coltivando’ path. Figure 2.32 General view of the Roles & Rules activity.

The next date for the future ‘Coltivando’ members was fixed for October 2012 to start with the construction labours.

Second Extended Co-Design Workshop Conclusion This last co-design workshop prior to the construction stage was the most successful one. It managed to bring together representatives from both communities (internal and external) involved in the project as well as lead users from the area. The community building kept on growing as all of the participants continued to show interest in being actively involved in the further developments of the project. The feeling of ownership was more present than the first time, all of the participants saw themselves as future members and were eager to start with the construction phase. The massive integration of the student community was a success in the terms of publicity and diffusion of the initiative. It also helped in filling some of the roles that were missing in the garden related to activities that require specific project skills. Moreover, the local community – in the most part formed by matured aged people – started to really grasp on the idea of sharing the garden with younger generations.

Informing and Engaging

Graph 2.12 Insights gained at the Second Extended CoDesign Workshop.

INSIGHTS

June 18th, 2012 - ‘Coltivando’ Premises

Second Extended Co-Design Workshop Necessity for restrooms and locker facilities. Incorporation of natural insect control. For example bat houses. The possibility of using only bio-seeds and create a garden that fosters endangered vegetable species. Introduction of a non-compostable waste policy. Regulation of the access that non-members can have to convivial moments inside garden premises. The need to make the working squad in a mixed composition of beginner, intermediate and expert members. Opening the garden not only to Politecnico’s educational curricula but also to the local schools.

130 • 131

[The designer started the design

in detail the most promising PSS idea according

with the feedback taken from the participants at the co-design workshops.]

2.4 Product Service System Development During the development phase, the design team elaborated the different aspects of the service according the team members’ competences. The designer started the design in detail the most promising PSS idea according with the feedback taken from the participants at the co-design workshops. The idea upgraded from a general description and visualization to a precise version ready for implementation and testing. The designers built-up and formalized a project vision shared among the actors and social groups involved in the project, in other words, what the project network wants to achieve. From the soft design part, it has been developed a detailed system map to represent the Product Service System made up of stakeholders, flows and infrastructures involved in the PSS delivery; a member manual to be given to all the Coltivando members, with rules and indications on the correct functioning of the solution. The hard design team produced the architectural design of the garden and its elements, fence installations and entrances. Because of its due date, this thesis is delivered with the finalization of this phase, and the prospective to continue with the remaining ones from September 2012 onwards. [1]

Figure 2.33 Rough copy of the general system map of ‘Coltivando’.

1 3.0 Current PSSD solution: ‘Coltivando’.

132 • 133

[The call will organize the applicants with a certain criteria to choose the final members of the primordial Coltivando Member Community.]

2.5 Introduction of the Concept Solution After defining the socio-technical experiment in detail, the design team will start to prepare the implementation process. The aim is to translate the final vision into an action plan to support and favour societal embedding of the Product Service System concept in other words, how the vision could be achieved. The first step will be the preparation of a detailed action proposal to be explained in a presentation with the Politecnico di Milano authorities on the 18th July 2012. The objectives of the presentation will be: presenting the Product Service System at its full operative phase as well as its transition path for implementation focusing on the organization of the socio-technical experiment and the physical construction of the garden premises. The tools that will be used in the presentation for the visualization of these ideas are: offering diagram, system map, a detailed storyboard (one for the service at its full operative phase and one for the pilot project) as well as construction blueprints and masterplans and overall layout. At the same time, the team will concentrate on the creation of the first member community that will test the solution on its critical mass scenario. To this end a call will be launched to the Politecnico and Bovisa community.

Figure 2.34 Involved actors at Parsparverd Garden, Bovisa. Project of ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ and ‘Architetti senza Frontiera’.

The call will organize the applicants with a certain criteria to choose the final members of the primordial Coltivando Member Community.[1]

1 RTC 3.2 How does Coltivando work?

134 • 135

[This phase is the first step for testing the PSS solution that could be potentially brought to a gradual societal embedding of the PSS innovation.]

2.6 Support and Incubation As we have explained in Chapter 1, strategic designers should not just focus on the design of the concept vision, but also on the pathways that leads to the overall embedding of such concept vision. The Support and Incubation phase is part of the shortterm perspective that the strategic designers should have. This phase is the first step for testing the PSS solution that could be potentially brought to a gradual societal embedding of the PSS innovation. In ‘Coltivando’ the aim of the support and incubation face would start with creating the critical mass community that is the primordial community that enables the service to work properly. The design team calculated the incorporation of twenty five members that are to be invited from the participants of the co-design workshops. The aim during this phase is stimulating changes into these actors’ behaviours and practices and at the same time create the most favourable conditions for the social embedding of the service.

Evaluation of the Solution During the Support and Incubation phase, the design team together with the community of involved members will put under evaluation the concept solution.In this way, the design team can detect which adjustments to make the PSS solution for it to work better and to make easier it social embedding.

During this phase the design team will have to adopt a flexible and dynamic approach to deal with these continuous adjustment and re-direction of the project. The project vision is not a static outcome to be achieved, and the transition strategy is not a fixed road map to be covered.

Designing in the community A necessary tool during this phase is going to be the codesign workshops in situ. As we have mentioned before, co-designing is not limited to a previous design stage to achieve a PSS concept solution, but quite opposite to that, co-design is a tool that sticks to the whole transition path of a collaborative service and any radical innovation in general. What is learnt by actors during the societal embedding process is used to adjust the project vision and, as a consequence, to re-orient the transition strategy. At ‘Coltivando’ we will held co-design workshops on a regular basis where members and the design team will have the chance to expose mal-functioning aspects of the service and work on solving them together, collaboratively.

Figure 2.35 Picture of the Second Extended Co-Design Workshop held in the ‘Coltivando’ garden future premises. It was a preview on how the codesign workshops in situ could be like.

136 • 137

The Creation of the First Coltivando Community

[...the design team will [...] prioritise the distribution of the vacancies among the participants of the first and second codesign workshops held during May and June 2012.]

Coltivando aims at creating a community based on an open policy of inclusiveness. However, the creation of the very first ‘pilot community’ is a different matter. The service during its Implementation, and Support and Incubation phase, will be under constant evaluation and modification.[1] This is the main reason why the service should have its starting point with a small amount of active members inside the community. For the creation of this primordial community, the design team will release a call to the academic and local community for participating in Coltivando. In this call there will be a series of requirements and specifications that will regulate the completion of the member vacancies. It is important to have in mind the fact that part of the pro-

LOCAL COMMUNITY BIGINNER LEVEL

LOCAL COMMUNITY EXPERT LEVEL

SELECTION CRITERIA

WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS PRIORITY

COLTIVANDO/ RESIDENCE DISTANCE

ONE MEMBER PER FAMILY

1 RTC 2.5 Implementation of the Concept Solution and 2.6 Support and Incubation

ject aims is to bring together the academic and the local community. To this end the design team pre-establishes a fixed amount of member vacancies destined to the academic community and the local community separately.

support and incubation

In general terms, idle candidates will be selected according to how close they live to the garden premises, and to postulate only one member per family group. Finally and most importantly, the design team will however prioritise the distribution of the vacancies among the participants of the first and second co-design workshops held during May and June 2012. After the service is up and running, the garden expects an expansion in size and therefore in the amount of members it can absorb. Arrived to this point, member vacancies will be naturally regulated. Once the maximum number of members is reached, the project will make the preparations to put into practice the replication strategy at a local level.

ACADEMIC INDACO

ACADEMIC DPA

Graph 2.13 Member vacancies for the ‘First Coltivando Community’.

STUDENTS STUDENTS SCHOOL SCHOOL OF CIVIL OF DESIGN ARCHITECTURE

SELECTION CRITERIA

WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS PRIORITY

COLTIVANDO/ RESIDENCE DISTANCE

138 • 139

[This phase will still be used by the design team as a strategic opportunity for experimenting, learning, exploring favourable conditions for the introduction and the diffusion of the innovation.]

2.7 Maintenance and Expansion The Maintenance and Expansion phase has the middle-term perspective attention from the design team. This phase picks up from an implemented solution perfected during the Support and Incubation phase. Implemented solutions: collaborative services that are supported by specifically designed “enabling solutions”. They are collaborative services supported by specifically designed systems of products, services and communication programmes. An enabling solution is a system of products, services, communication, and whatever else necessary, to improve the accessibility, effectiveness and replicability of a collaborative service.[1] During this phase, it is really important to establish and develop a broad socioeconomic network in order to implement PSS solution expansion. This phase will still be used by the design team as a strategic opportunity for experimenting, learning, exploring favourable conditions for the introduction and the diffusion of the innovation. Introduction of new service aspects: Future scenarios

Figure 2.36 ‘Mercato della Terra’ one of Milan’s farmer’s market in which ‘Coltivando’ could take place.

On parallel to the maintenance actions the design team plans to introduce several expansions on the Product Service System Implemented Solution connecting it to other functions. These additions will require for the gradual introduction of new service aspects that will require to be evaluated during their implementation. As we have mentioned before, the transitional path need to have a flexible approach. For more information of the future scenarios of the ‘Coltivando’, please refer to Chapter 3, Paragraph 3.2. 1 Emerging User Demands for Sustainable Solutions (EMUDE), 2006

140 • 141

[The scaling up of a radical innovation should be seen as a path based on exploring, searching and learning about: the most appropriate characteristics that a radical innovation should have in order to answer to a societal/business challenge; the most appropriate strategy to create the conditions for contributing to its societal embedding.]

2.8 Replication Strategy Sustainable PSS innovations are innovations that satisfy a societal need in a different way from other innovations. It is complex to deal with such a complex and uncertain innovations because the process to embed these innovations cannot be based on a pre-conceived and fixed solution, but on an experimental and learning based approach. The scaling up of a radical innovation should be seen as a path based on exploring, searching and learning about: the most appropriate characteristics that a radical innovation should have in order to answer to a societal/business challenge; the most appropriate strategy to create the conditions for contributing to its societal embedding. The design team plans to scale up the socio-technical experiment developed in ‘Coltivando’ inside the Politecnico di Milano from the local and protected level to a global level. The first step for the replication of the ‘Coltivando’ PSS idea is carried out in the previous two phases, which are based on learning from the experiment in a specific context – Politecnico di Milano, Campus Bovisa. The second step is related to the broadening based on the repeating the experiment in the local sphere. This local expansion will take place once the PSS concept solution becomes a full functioning sustainable-implemented solution. By sustainable we mean that the solution is mainly economically independent and can work without further special protection. At one point the ‘Coltivando’ garden will not be able to absorb more members due to a physical space impediment. It is at this point that the local expansion should take place.

The design team will develop a toolkit consisting in several booklets to help the reproduction of the service at a local scale, together with workshops at the ‘Coltivando’ garden to support and foster these ramifications. For more information on this matter, please refer to Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.3, Coltivando Toolkit. The third is the scaling-up globally based on the embedding the experiment in the socio-technical regime. The idea comes from the fact that Design Universities are perfect environments for this kind of PSS solution to hopefully flourish and as a consequence expand locally. To enable this process the design team plans to make out of ‘Coltivando’ a formatted programme that can be inserted in design-oriented universities around the world with the help of the DESIS Network that works inside Politecnico di Milano. For more information on this matter, please refer to Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.3, Coltivando Format.

Design Process Final Considerations An experimental and learning based approach requires a flexible and dynamic management attitude. The project vision during all the phases of the transition path is continuously adjusted as a result of what is learnt by actors during the process, in particular during socio-technical experiments - Support and Incubation, Maintenance and Expansion. The vision adjustments bring also to the correction of the transition path and the network of actors involved in the process. Strategic designers have to deal with a dynamic process that is characterized by the mutual adjustment of the long-term vision, the transition path and the actors network. They have to adopt a flexible and dynamic approach to deal with these continuous adjustment and re-direction of the project.[1] The implementation of a PSS innovation is by all means a constant on-going process.

1 Ceschin, 2011

[The project vision during all the phases of the transition path is continuously adjusted as a result of what is learnt by actors during the process, in particular during socio-technical experiments...]

3.0

Current PSSD Solution: Coltivando

As illustrated before, a PSS idea or concept has to be developed to overcome a societal/business challenge. The project vision provides a direction to the transition path and the societal embedding of the PSS. In the process of designing the transition path it is important to adopt a bifocal design attitude. An attitude that lead strategic designers to focus simultaneously on: - the long-term project goal: the achievement of a future scope in which a sustainable PSS innovation is part of the normal way in which a societal need is fulfilled (project vision); - the short-medium-term actions: to be undertaken in order to orient the societal embedding process towards the long-term goal. In this sense â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Coltivandoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; solution was thought in several phases (RTC 2.0 Design Process) aiming at incubating and supporting during early stages to proceed with an expansion towards a full functioning model to conclude with a local and international replication strategy.

Envisioning of the Current PSSD Solution: Coltivando

144 â&#x20AC;˘ 145

3.1 How does Coltivando work? Coltivando â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Orto Conviviale al Politecnico di Milano.

[Coltivando, Orto Conviviale has the aim to provide the community of Bovisa with quality food and products while serving as a community centre and meeting place for its memberowners: people who believe in the value, rewards and responsibility of collective labour, action and ownership.]

Evolving the community garden model into a cooperative, based on a collaborative service between a university and its neighbourhood. Coltivando is a Product Service System that takes the original concept of community garden once present in the neighbourhood, and updates it to todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s technologies and opportunities. Specifically, the opportunities brought by the fields of enabling solutions, collaborative networks, distributed production, social businesses and freemium business models. Coltivando, Orto Conviviale has the aim to provide the community of Bovisa with quality food and products while serving as a community centre and meeting place for its member-owners: people who believe in the value, rewards and responsibility of collective labour, action and ownership. By taking a hands-on approach on the production of eatable goods, the cooperative makes healthy organic food available to its members. Unlike most community gardens in the area, Coltivando requires its members to work on a weekly basis in exchange for a vegetable box.

Only working members may take advantage from this arrangement, but membership is open to all. Coltivando members rely on one another to share the work of running our cooperative garden and of contributing to its success. The benefits of this shared responsibility are twofold, the most obvious being that with scheduled, reliable member labour we are able to provide every members of this community with healthy organic produce at zero cost. But another equally important reward comes from the satisfaction members receive from working together as a community to build something upon which they can all rely. In cooperation with the paid coordinator, members run the garden and play a huge role in the day-to-day operations of the cooperative, which gives them all the opportunity to feel the value of our cooperation firsthand. Not only do members contribute 100% of the labour in the cooperative garden, they can also take an active role in the decision-making process and participate in planning and discussions of the organization’s future. Coltivando members share ownership of the cooperative garden with all the other member-owners were everybody works, learn and participate. Collaborative networks will be the result of putting diversity of people together and make them work inside a cooperative model allowing exchange and interaction for food production. Here one will find designers interacting with enthusiasts, designers with designers and enthusiasts alike, in the hope that people from diverse economical backgrounds will be attracted, giving richness to the project, community inclusion and an overall regeneration of the social fabric of the Bovisa neighbourhood. Distributed production will be possible because the members of the cooperative can access to ‘Coltivando Garden Premises’ where they have space to cultivate together and learn from one another. In this sense, members will consume organic greens without relying on a third party for their personal consumption of greens – in the worst cases present as industrialized non organic services –, but growing them themselves, in cooperation, while fostering and nourishing the exchange of value – knowledge, inclusion, sustainable lifestyles.

[Coltivando members share ownership of the cooperative garden with all the other member-owners were everybody works, learn and participate.]

146 • 147

This System Map describes the service at its Implementation stage. The amount of actors presented is the smallest scenario necessary for the system to guarantee a basic functioning. The proposal is design taking in mind the different possible actors and stakeholders that could be added in the immediate and distant future.

COMMUNITY OF ACTIVE MEMBERS (LOCAL AND ACADEMIC COMMUNITY)

SPONSORSHIP DYI SHOPS AND LOCAL NURSERIES

WEBSITE

DIS

Graph 3.1 ‘Coltivando’ System Map of the service as planned for the Implementation of the Concept Solution phase.

INTERNATIONAL DESIGN RESEARCH GROUPS AND UNIVERSITIES

STUDENTS

LA S

ANDSCAPE SERVICES

FLOW REFERENCES INFORMATION LABOUR ECONOMIC EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL

COORDINATOR

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

FUNDS PHILANTHROPY AND BANKS

DISTRIC 9

148 • 149

STUDENTS AND PERSONNEL

POLITECNICO DEPARTMENTS

MEMBERS ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

GENERAL COORD.

SPONSORS

MEMBERS BOVISA COMMUNITY FUNDS LOCAL COMMUNITY

CIRC. OF 9TH ZONE

Graph 3.2 ‘Coltivando’ Actors Map with epicentre on ‘Coltivando’

MUNICIPALITY OF MILAN

Graph 3.3 ‘Coltivando’ Actors Map with epicentre on Politecnico.

CIRC. OF 9TH ZONE

MUNICIPALITY OF MILAN

LOCAL COMMUNITY

MEMBERS BOVISA COMMUNITY

LOCAL GARDEN INITIATIVES

FUNDS

MEMBERS ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

SPONSORS GENERAL COORD.

STUDENTS AND PERSONNEL NUTRIRE MILANO

INDACO

LABS

DIS

DESIS

HUMAN CITIES OTHER POLI DEPARTMENTS

150 â&#x20AC;˘ 151

[The Product Service is divided into two valuecreating units: the cultivating areas, and the social activities area for members to learn how to grow a garden and have access to a source of knowledge and socialization.]

3.2 The Service Offer The Product Service is divided into two value-creating units: the cultivating areas, and the social activities area for members to learn how to grow a garden and have access to a source of knowledge and socialization. Both units co-exist as the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Coltivando Garden Premisesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and it is located inside the Politecnico di Milano Durando Campus in the green area behind the PK building. This area belongs partially to District 9 of Milan. (For more information on this aspect RTC 2.2 Analyzing the Niche) The Cultivating Areas People who are interested in taking part of the project would do there. Were they would be invited become members of the Coltivando Cooperative. Giving them access to a physical space where to grow food together with the necessary tools. The space works under membership agreements and has a donation request before becoming a member as well as seasonal donation request for a lower value. Voluntary work is also welcome, however voluntary based work does not enable the person to get access to the fruit of its work. The different areas are: vegetable beds, aromatic herbs beds, tool sheds, and composting bins. The basis of truly sustainable agriculture is the development of biological cycles involving microorganisms, soil, fauna, plants and animals. Organic farming requires sound rotations, recycling of all animal and vegetable wastes and adopting the most appropriate cultivation techniques. Organic agriculture actively encourages a diverse and healthy environment in which birds, insects and animals thrive and where nature is in balance also thanks to the Benje shrubs. The aim is to produce the highest possible quality of food in optimum quantity and seek to co-exist and work with nature rather than to dominate it. The result is simple - pure, natural food - full of traditional flavour and all produced without synthetic pesticides,

fungicides or artificial fertilisers. In order to retain and increase soil fertility it is important that a good compost is applied along with sound rotations. Hence, composting is one very significant area to the system. Soil health is vital for organic growing where no artificial fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides can be used. Compost not only puts nutrients back into the soil but also improves soil structure, disease suppression and increases pest tolerance. The Social Activities Area The activities that are to do with the garden functioning are also developed in the premises. These activities are the weekly ‘New Member Orientation Workshop’, the ‘Specialized Workshops’, the seasonal ‘General Meetings’ and the ‘Annual Meetings’. However this are not the only social activities that are programmed in the garden. We will fatherly explain this subject in the future scenarios section, for now we will introduce other social activities that could take place in the garden premises that would also be a result of gaining value from the members’ practical knowledge. The services should provide a space for Barter Workshops, and Academic Workshops. (For more information please refer to Chapter 3.4 Future Scenarios). Conclusion The service offers the Bovisa community and the Academic community of Politecnico di Milano a sociotechnical space that enables them to cultivate all kinds of eatable greens along with its confection and distribution for their own consumption in a self-constructed garden. At the same time, and complementing the cultivating activity, the service habilitates its members to learn and participate from the different workshops available at the garden premises. The service is hence a consequence of the members’ collaborative work and practical knowledge sharing. The outcome is a place where to go and do physical exercise to obtain fresh organic food contributing education and including the participants into a resilient and welcoming community. Ultimately as a consequence of this new social and physical wellness, the social fabric of the neighbourhood is regenerated and a new paradigm of quality of life is introduced: the sustainable lifestyle.

[Ultimately as a consequence of this new social and physical wellness, the social fabric of the neighbourhood is regenerated and a new paradigm of quality of life is introduced: the sustainable lifestyle.]

ACTORS

OFFER

SELFCONSTRUCTION

CULTIVATION AREAS

OPEN THE CAMPUS AS PUBLIC SPACE

ENABLES BY PROVIDING

FOOD PRODUCTION

CONFECTION & DISTRIBUTION

LOCAL COMMUNITY

OPEN THE CAMPUS FOR ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN ACADEMIC

ENABLES BY PROVIDING

ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

SOCIAL ACTIVITY AREAS

Graph 3.4 ‘Coltivando’ Service Offer Map as a full functioning PSS solution.

GARDENING WORKSHOPS

ACADEMIC COURSES

BARTER WORKSHOPS

SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES

LONG-TERM OUTCOMES

AS A RESULT OF

COOPERATIVE WORK SUSTAINABLE LIFESTYLES FRESH ORGANIC FOOD COMMUNITY PHYSICAL INCLUSION EXCERCISE

EDUCATION

AS A RESULT OF

PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE

REGENERATION OF THE SOCIAL FABRIC

154 • 155

3.3 Coltivando Business Model Canvas

*ACADEMIC RESEARCH DIS Research Group. ‘Nutrire Milano’: study of ‘Coltivando’ as a service offer. [Academic Curricula. Launch of the ‘Coltivando Toolkit’.] [DESIS Network. Launch of the ‘Coltivando Format’.] [New division of the INDACO interested in taking part of the project.]

KEY PARTNERS

KEY ACTIVITIES

Local community

Food Production.

General Coordinator

Open Workshops.

PoliMi collaborations: DIS Research Group. Lab Allestimenti.

Organic Food Events.

[New Stakeholders INDACO interessati nel progetto.]

Service for Sust.

Other Workshops Farmers’ Market.

RESOURCES

Sponsors: DIY & Nurseries Stores. Fondazione CARIPLO.

Members’ Labour

District 9.

Coordinator

Local Green Initiatives.

Board of Directors University Departments

COST STRUCTURE Energetic Servicies

Garden Materials

Coordinator (€20.000 annual)

Graph 3.5 “Coltivando’ Business Model Canvas. In black: canvas as plannes for the Implementation phase. In gray: canvas addition for fully functional PSS solution.

VALUE PROPOSITION Coltivando provides a community-based service that creates meaningful bonds between individuals, through an inclusive solutions that helps the worst off and least able towards a more sustainable lifestyle; openening the campus to the local community and offering educational programs to the academic community.

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS Coltivando Member Community.

CUSTOMER SEGMENTS Segmented:

[ Academic assistance for Workshoops and Corses.] [Assistance for Market Sales.]

Local Community Academic Community [Farmers’ Market Consumers.]

CHANNELS Website & Blog. Campus and on site Advertisement. Local and Int. Media.

REVENUE STREAMS University funding Other funding

Member Donations Market Sales

156 â&#x20AC;˘ 157

Graph 3.6 Garden Spatial Model Masterplan by Alessandro Sachero.

3.4 Spatial Model

Figure 3.1 Garden Spatial Model Envisioning by Alessandro Sachero.

Figure 3.2 Garden Spatial Model Envisioning by Alessandro Sachero.

160 • 161

3.5 Future Scenarios We have already established that working was the only way of taking advantage of the garden benefits, but is gardening the only way a member can contribute workedtime?

[The idea is to introduce this new aspects of the service once the basic functioning of the garden is set up and running.]

The future scenarios are expansions of the service that were planned for the Maintenance and Expansion phase. The idea is to introduce this new aspects of the service once the basic functioning of the garden is set up and running. To achieve such state, the design team predisposed an Incubation and Support phase, directly previous from the Expansion one.[1] The aim of these expansions is to complete the PPS Solution and take it to the next level of complete sustainability. This means that arrived to this point, hopefully the garden will not be faced with the fact of depending from Politecnico di Milano or any other sort of funding. Even though non-for profit organization usually depend on other institutions to exist, we believe that this would be an enormous impediment for the replication of the service anywhere else. And the ultimate aim of ‘Coltivando’ is to grow and take the sustainable lifestyle to as many people as it can. For this reason there are a couple of things that could be added to the service that would make it more sustainable in terms not only of monetary funding but as a knowledge value creator as well. The most promising future scenario would be incorporating ‘Coltivando’ as a producer to sell on the local Farmer’s Markets, hence making profit to pay for the costs of the service structure. Moreover we propose Community Events and Barter Workshops and finally the incorporation of Coltivando to the university’s academic curricula. 1 RTC 2.6 Support and Incubation

Market Stand The most promising future scenario for Coltivando would be its incorporation to the local Farmers’Market. Farmer’s Markets consists of individual vendors – mostly farmers – who set up booths, tables or stands, outdoors or indoors, to sell produce, meat products, fruits and sometimes prepared foods and beverages. Farmers markets add value to communities: - farmers/producers sell directly to consumers, minimizing profit loss by circumventing the middleman; - consumers can buy direct from the farmer/producer; - consumers can obtain organic fruits and vegetables from Certified Organic farmers; - consumers can enjoy fresh, seasonally-grown food that was produced within a drivable distance from their homes; - local, fresh food is more likely to foster health and prevent illness than heavily processed foods; - finally, more capital remains in the consumers’ community. Farmers markets exist worldwide and reflect their area’s culture and economy. This is great advantage when it comes to formatting ‘Coltivando’ and launch it internationally. Their size ranges from a few stalls to several city blocks. Farmers markets often feature produce grown naturally or organically, meats that are raised humanely on pasture, handmade farmstead cheeses, eggs and poultry from free-range fowl. Produce found at Farmers Markets is renowned for being locally grown and very fresh. People argue farmers markets allow farmers to pick produce at the peak of flavor, preserve the nutritional content of fresh produce, and since locally grown produce does not travel as far to get to your table, the difference in mileage saves fossil fuels. Advocates of Farmers markets state that the markets help farmers stay in business as well as preserve natural resources. The most well known Farmer’s Market in Milan is called ‘Mercato della Terra’ from which Nutrire Milano takes part.[2] 2 RTC 1.3 Design for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security

[Farmers markets exist worldwide and reflect their area’s culture and economy. This is great advantage when it comes to formatting ‘Coltivando’ and launch it internationally.]

162 • 163

Graph 3.7 Describes the labour and produce flow with a Farmers’ Market Stand hypothesis.

The service idea for ‘Coltivando’ is to have stands in the local Farmer’s Markets. These stands would be served by ‘Coltivando’ members, who would work in a fixed Market Squad, and would trade this shifts at the market for the service benefits. As a solution for the production of the food destined to the market, the design team foresees the segmentation of the garden produce with a previous expansion of the garden premises. This expansion should add a series of garden beds, which are going to be destined to the production of greens that are to be sold at the market. It is interesting to ascertain the fact that as ‘Coltivando’ grows bigger, so do the Specialized Squad that develop certain kinds of activities. This is due to the level of specialization some activities gain.

GARDEN SQUAD LABOUR

FOOD PRODUCTION MARKET SQUAD LABOUR MARKET STAND

MARKET REVENUE

MEMBERS’ CONSUMPTION

Barter Workshops

future scenarios

Another addition to the social activities developed at the garden would be the incorporation of Barter System Workshops. Barter is a method of exchange by which goods or services are directly exchanged for other goods or services without using a medium of exchange such as money. It is usually bilateral, but may be multilateral, and exists parallel to monetary systems. While one-to-one bartering is practised between individuals and businesses on an informal basis, organized barter exchanges have developed to conduct third party bartering. A barter exchange operates as a broker and bank in which each participating member has an account that is debited when purchases are made, and credited when sales are made. At ‘Coltivando’ the barter Workshops would be another possibility of contributing working time to the cooperative. The idea consists of offering workshops on diverse subject, which don’t have to be necessarily related to gardening. The facilitators of such workshops would be members of the cooperative that work just like all the other members to obtain the benefits in produce. One of the main things to have into account when incorporating such service, is the probable necessity of periodicity that the workshops should have in order to sustain the regularity of the active member. Another way of looking through this issue would be the trading of a certain amounts of other working shifts for ‘Barter Shifts’, such thing would be possible only when the garden had absorbed a critical mass of members that allows for flexible working shifts, especially those destined to the garden work. During early stages – critical mass of only a few members – this kind of trade would become very inconvenient for it might leave squads with lack of members that find themselves unable to fulfil all the necessary work at the garden, resulting in less production. One thing is for certain, if this kind of ‘Barter Shifts’ were to be incorporated, it should be rigorously ruled in the Members Manual. It is quite probable that members who are interested in doing ‘Barter Shifts’ will have to publish the topic with the program and reach a certain amount of interested members that would like to assist.

[At ‘Coltivando’ the barter Workshops would be another possibility of contributing working time to the cooperative.]

BARTER SHIFTS ENABLES WEEKLY VEG-BOX

MEMBER WORKSHOP FACILITATOR

BARTER WORKSHOPS

COMMUNITY INCLUSION

CRITICAL AMOUNT OF INTERESTED MEMBERS

EDUCATION

Academic Courses

Graph 3.8 Flow Map of the Barter System Workshops.

The encounter of ‘Coltivando’ with the academic curricula was on of the first things that arose when thinking of possible solutions for the system’s financing. The idea is to make out of ‘Coltivando’ a project subject for an academic course. We will use the word course to define a unit of teaching that typically lasts one academic term, is led by one or more instructors (teachers or professors), and has a fixed roster of students. At Politecnico, students receive a grade and academic credit after completion of the course. The incorporation of ‘Coltivando’ to the academic curricula is s potential win-win situation. On the one hand students enrich their experience by applying conceptual work into an existing project which faces them with all the opportunities real life has to contribute and subtract, eventually preparing them more efficiently for professional work. On the other hand, ‘Coltivando’ would enrich from the help and support students would contribute while solving the different design problems that will

inevitably arise as a consequence of the mere existence of the service. It goes without saying that all the design actions held at the garden will and should be converged with a co-design approach, been this an inclusive solution for the actual members as well as an opportunity for the students’ formation. It is important to clarify that ‘Coltivando’ is not presented as a course per se, but it defines the course subject study and works as a cell lab for the academic course. Students could intervene in different aspect related to the garden maintenance, expansion, governance improvements and local replication. This been said, the garden could potentially offer a wide range of activities that depending on how they are frame worked, could serve for most of the bachelor and master degrees that are given at Politecnico. For now, we will limit to describe some hypothetical situations in which students from diverse courses could contribute with their design perspective to the project and at the same time enrich their experience as designers.

STUDENTS

FUTURE SCENARIOS

Graph 3.9 Flow Map of the incorporation of ‘Coltivando’ as a project study of Politecnico di Milano design courses.

ACADEMIC COURSE

PROJECT STUDY OUTCOMES

166 • 167

COMMUNITY OF ACTIVE MEMBERS (LOCAL AND ACADEMIC COMMUNITY)

SPONSORSHIP DYI SHOPS AND LOCAL NURSERIES

WEBSITE

BARTER WORKSHOPS

DIS INTERNATIONAL DESIGN RESEARCH GROUPS AND UNIVERSITIES Graph 3.10 ‘Coltivando’ System Map of the service once all the expansions have taken place.

STUDENTS

LA S

ANDSCAPE SERVICES

FLOW REFERENCES INFORMATION LABOUR ECONOMIC EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL

MARKET STAND

COORDINATOR

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

FUNDS PHILANTHROPY AND BANKS

DISTRIC 9

4.0

Outcomes

So far the design team succeeded in transiting through the design process until the Product Service System Development phase. To get to this point the team organized a series of co-design workshops engaging the future member community of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Coltivandoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. The result from those workshops were the completion of a Governance model in the shape of a Members Manual and the conclusion of a Program Model where all the activities developed at the garden were organized according to categories and time of development as well as the roles of the different members inside the system.

Envisioning inside the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Coltivando Members Manualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

170 • 171

4.1 Coltivando Membership Manual The ‘Coltivando Member Manual’ is a useful tool for understanding the finer points of the cooperative’s membership and for answering the members’ questions about pressing issues. The manual was created based on the feedbacks gained at the co-design workshops as a result of the Roles and Rules activities.[1]

[The manual was created based on the feedbacks gained at the codesign workshops as a result of the Roles and Rules activities.]

A part from setting the basic rules, the manual explores the different aspects of being a Coltivando member, from the very basic of becoming a member, choosing a workslot, absences policy, shift swapping and the consequences for not completing your shift. The manual also gives clear instructions for taking time off from the cooperative, the regulations about the presence of children at the garden and the workshops and events. Members can also find in the manual the basic principles and values of ‘Coltivando’. Reading the manual they can learn what Coltivando means by cooperation and how it is applied inside the cooperative. Moreover, the manual also present a pinpoint description of the decision process at the cooperative as well as the way in which food is produces, harvested and distributed. No important aspect is left out from the manual. It is important for work at the cooperative to be clearly structured and that members are fully aware of very single aspect of the way in which the cooperative works. Informed Coltivando members are powerful Coltivando members! For more information, please see the Appendix 1 ‘Coltivando Member Manual’. 1 RTC 2.3 Informing and Engaging

4.2 Coltivando Program Model During the co-design workshops in the Informing and Engaging phase held by the design team, special activities were planned to be able to co-design the different models functional to the garden. One of these activities was the Program Model and consisted in a schedule of all the activities to be carried out in the garden. All the members present at the original co-designed workshops defined the Coltivando Program Model. However, a pre-elaboration was necessary to create the activity. As we have already described, the design team contacted all sorts of experts during the Engaging phase. On top of this information flow generated between the garden experts and the design team, to create the Program Model, the team interview Paolo di Croce from Slowfood to help us come up with all the existing activities to define the pre-elaborated model. Once the activity was designed, the participants were asked a two-folded task. On the one hand they had to define which actors they believed could develop the activities, and on the other hand they had to fill in blank spaces with activities they thought were missing or change the order of the existing ones according to the time laps and categories they were in. Just like the Members Manual, the program Model as co-production material, it is to be put under constant evaluation and remediation during the co-design workshops in situ. As a result, all of the activities that the garden needs to be able to function fully were defined, as well the role of the different kinds of members who could do them. It goes without saying that any member with a higher degree of expertise can fulfil the task of a lower degree of expertise member.

[As a result, all of the activities that the garden needs to be able to function fully were defined, as well the role of the different kinds of members who could do them.]

Figure 4.1 Ten Basic Rules page of the Coltivando Membership Manual. Figure 4.2 (next page) Colivando Program Model.

MANAGEMENT

D T

D D D T

QUA

D .

ER ER

QUA

XP R E

PLANTING

ER .

DAILY WEEKLY MONTHLY

OORD

SEASONALLY

QUA

PRUNING

SOWING

OORD

SEASONAL EXPERT CONSULTATION

GENERAL PURCHASING

SPECIAL VEG-BOX CONFECTION REGISTER

ORGANIZATION GENERAL MEETINGS

XP R E

GIN N

QUA

COMPOST DISTRIBUTION

TRANSPLANTING

FUND RAISING ACTIVITIES

OORD

QUA

MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS

QUA

PACKING VETEABLE BOXES

HARVESTING

ACTIVITY ASSIGNMENT

OORD

QUA

OAR

ORGANIZATION SQUAD CALLED MEETINGS LE

VEG-BOX DISTRIBUTION

ADMINISTRATION

OORD

QUA

WEEDING

NEW MEMBERS ORIENTATION WORKSHOPS

OORD

QUA

ACTIVITY PHISYCAL DASHBOARD

MAKE-UPS MANAGEMENT AND REGISTER

COMPOSTING

DAILY GARDEN DECISIONS MAKING

PRESENCE REGISTER

WATERING

OORD

WAITING LIST MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT MEMBERS’ NEEDS

WELCOMING

GARDENING

MAINTENANCE

OORD

BENJE SHRUBS KEEPING

QUA

GENERAL INFORMATION PHISYCAL DASHBOARD

DOORKEEPING

OVERALL PREMISES CLEANING

TOOL MANAGEMENT

NETWORKING

STORAGE OF TOOLS

NETWORKING WITH OTHER LOCAL GARDEN INITIATIVES

T T T

OAR

XP R E

PROMOTIONAL EVENTS

OAR

EXPANSION WORKS

XP R E

EVENTS WITH OTHER LOCAL INITIATIVES

QUA

GARDEN BED REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE

MAILING LIST

QUA

SEASONAL STATION REPAIR

WEBSITE UPDATE

GRAFTING

OORD

OAR

XP R E

OAR

INTERNAL COMMUNICATION

TOOLS MAINTENANCE

MANAGEMENT OF EXTRA FOOD ACTIVITIES

QUA

XP R E

5.0

Conclusions and Further Developments

While conceiving the project the design team corroborated several pre-conceptions about ‘designing for’ collaborative communities. Developing Coltivando requires social creativity, interaction, participation and joint problem solving between the members and design professionals. It was made clear that in order to promote healthier and more sustainable lifestyles among the community, incremental innovation on the existing community garden models in the area would not be sufficient; and that the radical alternative cared for the co-creation of the service. On the other hand I firmly stand by the decision of making out of Coltivando a cooperative service, where the group effort confers resilience and inclusiveness to the system helping the worst off and least able. Finally, it is important to clarify that the co-creation of Coltivando is not a one-off event, and that the co-design workshops done so far are not enough to arrive to a fully implemented solution. It is a creative interactive process that combines professional and local expertise in new ways. It will be necessary to carry on modifying and improving the functional aspects of the service ‘designing in’ the Coltivando community.

Green area behind the PK building of the Durando Campus, destined for â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Coltivando Orto Convivialeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

178 â&#x20AC;˘ 179

5.1 Method Conclusions The design path walked so far clearly shows the positive attitude and openness of the Milanese culture towards health related to food and its production.

[...it is necessary to highlight the importance to keep developing the functional aspects of the service during the support and incubation phase. This will call for intense co-design activity inside the already functioning garden.]

To properly understand this it was necessary for the design team to carry out not only micro, but medium level research as well. Micro level research allowed the comprehension of the neighbourhood characteristics, which not only helped in engaging people to develop the first co-creation steps â&#x20AC;&#x201C; co-design workshops â&#x20AC;&#x201C; but also in understanding of their previous experiences related to the project subject. Medium level research consisted in investigating local cases of community gardening and analysing the way they were conceived. This medium level research also enabled the design team to get in touch and ultimately network with the leading actors behind these gardens. This networking facilitated the participation of such lead users during the first co-creation steps, giving extremely relevant insights for the program model and inspiring the future members of the Coltivando community with their story sharing. Finally, it is necessary to highlight the importance to keep developing the functional aspects of the service during the support and incubation phase. This will call for intense co-design activity inside the already functioning garden. Problems arising will be problems to be co-solved in the search for a permanent implemented solution.

5.2 Content Conclusions The project was developed in a multidisciplinary team composed by two design researchers, two interior designers and the hereby product service system design. The most of the design process was coursed together: the main concept direction, branding, co-design workshops and networking were the result of a team effort. The processing and outputting of the information was however an individual journey. In this sense, it is important to underline the essential collaboration between the team members, for the distributed design competences were crucial to properly achieve a full functioning prototype with which to work in the future development of the project. On the one hand, the interior designers delivered a garden design ready to be constructed; on the other hand, I delivered an enabling solution for the functional aspects of the service. Most importantly, thanks to the close relation between us during the design process, both outcomes go hand in hand and work together perfectly. It is important to acknowledge that while the brand was developed in-group, none of the involved designers has a communication background, the result however is left opened to be modified or even changed according to demand. Involvement in the project of pertinent designers is expected for the support and incubation phase, once the solution is constructed and functioning. This new group of designers will be given full freedom to act over the brand and communication. Nevertheless, the main goal for the communication team will be to design a functioning online platform that can respond to the needs of the project, therefore this platform is to be design in close collaboration with all the service designers involved in that moment.

[Involvement in the project of pertinent designers is expected for the support and incubation phase, once the solution is constructed and functioning.]

180 â&#x20AC;˘ 181

5.3 Replication Strategy As we discussed in Chapter 1, we need to scale collaborative services without increasing their sizes. Such increment should be thought then in the shape of a network of multiple numbers of the same service idea connected with one another in a way that still maintains the relational qualities of each concrete initiative. We call this the SLOC approach. SLOC stands for Small, Local, Open and Connected.

[The way in which we multiply the number of service ideas and connect them creating a larger network can be defined as the replication strategy.]

The way in which we multiply the number of service ideas and connect them creating a larger network can be defined as the replication strategy. We have also previously introduced the main strategies to fulfil this task â&#x20AC;&#x201C; franchising, formatting and toolkit development. For the replication strategy of Coltivando we will focus on the formatting and the toolkit development. The first strategy aims at reproducing the service on an international scale, while the second strategy should expand the idea locally, that is locally in Milan as well as in the other future international reproductions of the service idea. But before entering into detail of each of the strategies development, picking up from chapter 1, the concepts of each strategy should be further explained. A toolkit consists of a set of tangible and intangible instruments conceived and produced to make a specific task easier. Although each tool can be more or less dedicated to a specific task and the whole kit can be more or less specialised to fit a specific activity, the tool kit can be interpreted in different ways and used for different goals. Thanks to this openness, toolkits are compatible with the nature of creative communities and their corresponding collaborative services.

A format describes the overall concept, premise and branding of a program idea that can be set up in other contexts. The result is a multiplicity of programs that are both global and local at the same time – global because it is reproduced international but local because each version of the service is particularly tailored to the nationality and end users culture. In each contexts in which is reproduced, formats are extremely localized. Another advantage of introducing a format is the lower risk associated with an already-proven idea as well as the time saving potential.[1]

Coltivando Toolkit: Cooperative Gardens The idea of making a toolkit to enable the local reproduction of Coltivando comes from the need of, arrived to a certain point, closing the amount of active members. This closure would come not only as consequence of a physical impediment to absorb and produce for more people, but also as a control method to guarantee the system’s simplicity. This breakthrough moment is clearly expected once the Support and Incubation phase is over, and the project has a solid implemented solution. The toolkit would consist on two booklets and active workshops at the university premises of Coltivando, which from now on we will call ‘Flagship Coltivando’. The first booklet would be the revised and modified version of the members’ manual. This tool should enable the organization of new pilot projects with a solid and tested governance model, which should ensure that the project run smoothly and fairly. The second booklet would be the instructions to replicate Coltivando physically. This booklet is already been followed by Alessandro Sachero – interior designer involved in the project. This tool should enable the individuals involved in the local replication with all the necessary information to construct proper garden facilities based on previous experience and with professional instructions. 1 Jégou, Manzini, 2008

[The toolkit would consist on two booklets and active workshops at the university premises of Coltivando, which from now on we will call ‘Flagship Coltivando’.]

182 â&#x20AC;˘ 183

Graph 5.1 Coltivando Toolkit Replication Strategy.

Finally, the usage of these toolkits should be followed by special workshops held in the university premises of Coltivando. These workshops will most probably be private sessions between the group of individuals involved in the local replication and the coordinator of Flagship Coltivando together with a selection of its most leading members. The aim of such workshops would be to provide peer-2-peer assistance in any possible way. In this sense, the idea of co-designing will rise again, and experienced individuals will take the newcomers under their wings, to help them analyze their existing resources, co-design to fit their needs and co-construct new Coltivando cells. In most of the cases due to the local character of the ex-

ENABLES BY PROVIDING

STUDENTS[1]

TOOLKIT COLTIVANDO TAKE PART WORKSHOPS AT FLAGSHIP COLTIVANDO

MEMBER & CONSTRUCTION MANUALS

INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN THE LOCAL REPLICATION

CO-CREATION OF

COLTIVANDO MEMBERS

pansion, it is expected for the different cells to have just about the same kind of resources.

replication strategy

Coltivando Format: University Gardens The idea of making a format out of Coltivando lingered since the very begging of the project. As we have explained in chapter 2, paragraph 2.2, Politecnico di Milano is the perfect enabling platform for this kind of project, and so could be other design-oriented universities around the world. These universities intrinsically enable a large number of innovative individuals to move in the same direction. The main reasons for this are many of the innate characteristics these highly complex socio-technical systems have. Universities present high tolerance to new ideas; likeliness to be politically benevolent towards innovation; and openness to support and foster organizations with flexible and horizontal governance models. Returning to Politecnico di Milano and Coltivando, one of the most interesting resources that Politecnico could contribute to the project is the DESIS Network. To completely understand how the formatting of Coltivando could work, a brief summary of what DESIS is and what it stand for and which are its aims is needed. Design for Social Innovation towards Sustainability is a network of design labs, based in design schools and design-oriented universities, actively involved in promoting and supporting sustainable change. DESIS Network collaborates with other networks whose focus is complementary to its own as well as establishing special partnerships with private companies, non-for profit organizations, foundations and government agencies that share similar views and are willing to co-develop open projects on topics and areas of common interest. People involved in the DESIS Network believe that in the complexity of contemporary society, social innovation is spreading and its potential, as a driver of sustainable change, is increasing. To facilitate this process, the design community, in general, and design schools, in particular, can play a pivotal role.

[...one of the most interesting resources that Politecnico could contribute to the project is the DESIS Network.]

184 • 185

Graph 5.2 Coltivando Format Replication Strategy.

DESIS Network aims at using design thinking and design knowledge to co-create, with local, regional and global partners, socially relevant scenarios, solutions and communication programs. It is inside this framework that Coltivando proliferates as a service idea of the Milano DESIS lab. DESIS Labs are groups of academics, researchers and students who orient their design and research activities towards social innovation. They operate at the local scale with local partners and, in collaboration with other DESIS Labs, they actively participate in large-scale projects and programs.[2]

FORMAT BOOKLETS

CO-DESIGN, MEMBER & CONSTRUCTION MANUALS EXPLANATORY BOOKLET OF THE PROJECT. FULL REPORT OF ITS DESIGN PROCESS AND ACTUAL STATE.

INTERNATIONAL DESIGN RESEARCH GROUPS AND UNIVERSITIES

cultivating

2 DESIS Network information brochure

kultivieren

The formatting of the idea would give the project a Regional and Global scale.

replication strategy

The format would come in the shape of an explanatory booklet of the project, from its early begging’s to the design process that it went through and a full report of its actual state. The format would also include a toolkit consisting of three different manuals. The first would be the co-design workshop manual that would include a detailed report of the workshops done at Coltivando in each of its developing stages as well as useful insights and suggestions for the organization of such activities. The second one would be the construction manual that would include sustainable policy or requirements under which to construct the new gardens, sustainable directions like for example the use of water reservoirs. The third manual would be the version of the Coltivando Members Manual to its actual date with a prefix of a series of issues to be solved for the service to work correctly. The idea is that the tools stimulate and help make the problems the users will face easier. All these tools are meant to be used in the freest way.

Overall Strategy Considerations It is inside this network of design reasearch groups and universities, that Coltivando could be formatted and globally inserted into different yet suitable environments in order to be scaled up. The possibility of local expansion has already been addressed with the incorporation of an enabling toolkit. Although localism comes with the very recurrent assumption that resources tend to be the same, the expansion in large distances brings other things into account. Reality shows that each ‘place’ has different resources – either physical or cultural – and it is because of this fact that the toolkit should also undergo local interpretation according to the local characteristics present. In this sense, we can make the educated guess that each format replication will have slight different toolkits for its local reproduction of the service idea.

[Although localism comes with the very recurrent assumption that resources tend to be the same [...] Reality shows that each ‘place’ has different resources – either physical or cultural – and it is because of this fact that the toolkit should also undergo local interpretation...]

ANNEX 1

Case Studies Case studies show us what been done in three specific areas of community gardening so far: the university gardens, the urban community gardens and the temporary events tied to this type of activity. We will also pay particular attention to the organizational and economical aspects of each project to be able to have deeper insight on their governance model and sustainability aspect in general.

Picture of the school trips at â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Il Giardino degli Aromiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; garden at the former Psichyatric Hospital Paolo Pini, Affori, Milan.

188 • 189

A.1 Food Cooperatives Park Slope Food Coop Brooklyn, NY, USA, 1973

[Unlike most cooperatives in the United States, the Park Slope Food Coop requires members to work. Nowadays, the PSFC has more than 15,000 active members who work for a 20 – 40% savings on groceries.]

The Park Slope Food Coop is located in the heart of the Park Slope section of Brooklyn, New York. Since 1973, the Park Slope Food Coop has been providing Brooklyn and beyond with quality food and products while serving as a community centre and meeting place for its memberowners: people who believe in the value, rewards and responsibility of collective labour, action and ownership. By taking some control away from corporations and putting it into the hands of the community, the Coop has been able to make healthy, affordable food available to its members. Unlike most cooperatives in the United States, the Park Slope Food Coop requires members to work. Nowadays, the PSFC has more than 15,000 active members who work for a 20 – 40% savings on groceries. The members rely on one another to share the work of running the Coop and of contributing to its success. The benefit of this shared responsibility is two-fold, the most obvious being that with scheduled, reliable member labour the Coop is able to keep the payroll costs down, which translates to low prices. But another equally important reward comes from the satisfaction received from working together as a community to build something upon which everyone inside of the community can rely.

Figure A.1 Picture of the working T-shirts of the Park Slope Foodcoop.

In cooperation with the paid staff, members run the store and play a huge role in the day-to-day operations of the Coop. Not only do members contribute 75% of the

190 â&#x20AC;˘ 191

Figure A.2 Picture of the entrance sign of the foodcoop.

labour in the Coop, they can take an active role in the decision-making process and participate in planning and discussions of the organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s future. The Coop carries a wide variety of products, including local, organic and conventionally grown produce; pastureraised and grass-fed meat; free range, organic and kosher poultry; fair-trade chocolate and coffee; wild and sustain-

ably farmed fish; supplements and vitamins; imported and artisanal cheese; freshly baked bread, muffins, scones and croissants; bulk grains and spices; environmentally safe cleaning supplies; among others.

food cooperatives

Governance Model Becoming a Member: Membership is open to all, but only members may shop and work at the Coop. Membership in the Coop means that you have been to an Orientation, and chosen a workslot. Every Coop member has to pay a onetime joining fee and an investment. Employees: All the paid staff do work that requires a broad overview of the Coop, work that would be difficult to divide into workslots or work that requires day-to-day responsibility. All paid staff also have responsibilities in supervising and coordinating the labour of our 15,000+ members. Work Force: As we have mentioned before, not only members provide the work force, but also a dozen paid employees who also receive the benefits of the savings. Members have to work one workslot every four weeks. Each member is responsible for covering his or her workslot. If, for whatever reason, they are unable to attend their shift, their first responsibility is to attempt to make a trade with another member so that someone will come to work in their place. Absenteeism is regulated with a double-make up policy. The majority of members at the Coop work on a squad that meets at the same time every four weeks. Every squad in the Coop belongs to a larger group called a Committee. For example, the squad Shopping every first Monday of the month 8 a.m. is part of the larger Shopping Committee. This means that every squad has one type of activity assigned, therefore, members are only prepared in that only activity in which their workslot takes place. Decision Making: There is a monthly General Meeting (GM) that has been the decision-making body of the Coop since the Coop began in 1973. The memberâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s initiative, discussion and decision-making are the purpose of the GM. Everyone who attends a meeting has a vote.[1]

1â&#x20AC;&#x192; The Park Slope Food Coop Membership Manual

[Members have to work one workslot every four weeks. Each member is responsible for covering his or her workslot.]

192 • 193

A.2 University Gardens Harvard Community Garden Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 2010 Typology: Non-for profit, convivial university garden. Vision & Mission: The creation of a beautiful and productive space on campus that would get together the students, graduates and members of the community. The mission of the Harvard Garden Project is to provide experiential education in sustainable, urban agriculture and food for students, faculty, and the local community. History: It has been born as the heir of the historical ‘Harvard Botanical Gardens’, constructed on 1807 and functioning until 1943. The initial project was under the supervision and collaboration from the ‘Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School’, the ‘Office for Sustainability’, and the ‘Food Literacy Project’, a division of ‘Harvard University Hospitality’ and ‘Dining Services’.

Figure A.3 Construction days at the Harvard Community Garden.

Project: The garden is delimited by perishable plants, and constituted by a mix of above ground allotments for the cultivation of the produce. Infrastructural wise, the garden counts with a convivial patio for lectures and events together with a big green area. Demonstration events in the harvesting environment are held along with tastings, didactical activities for school and preparative courses for interested new comers. The garden course and the allotments are completely accessible to disable

194 • 195

people thanks to the help during the design process of the ‘University Disability Services’. In further construction stages, the incorporation of several greenhouses is foreseen. This should help the garden continue their activities during the winter season. Funding: All the funding for the Harvard Community Garden comes from the university itself. The garden produce is sold mainly to the Dining Services on campus and the revenue from that transaction helps covering the basic tools and gardening material that are bought seasonally. Produce: The compost is produced thanks to the use of the discarded organic material from the Dining Services. All students at campus are invited to separate for compost material into special bins designed for the purpose. Governance Model

Figure A.4 Students from local highschools involved in academic programs developed at the garden. Figure A.5 First Harvest Festival at the Harvard Community Garden.

Employees: The responsible team is composed of university employees. The director of the Garden Board to the date is Kathleen Frith M.S., she is the managing director at the ‘Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School’. The student board is composed of Senior under graduate students. The day by day decision are made by this group of students prior they are run through the head member of the Garden Board for clearance. Student Involvement: The garden is run throughout the year by the student council that work, day after

196 • 197

day in the overall maintenance. The green areas are not just opened to productive ends, but mainly sociable. The garden nature is that of a practical learning environment every now and then opened to the Cambridge community aiming to spread a strong awareness of the importance of a proper nutrition, healthy lifestyle and healthy environment. Ties to the Community: Community members are welcome to volunteer for work at the Harvard Community Garden. The dinners and pizza parties are open to every student and community member who has worked in the garden. Often, community members are rewarded with some vegetables for their volunteer work. In other words, the Harvard Community Garden is a project by the university community for the university

KEY PARTNERSHIPS

KEY ACTIVITIES • Public Art Porjects

Business Model Value Proposition Reflection:

• Harvesting Events - Music Performance - Sustainable Food Co’s.

By providing hands-on learning to students and the wider community, the Garden helps people understand the central role food plays in their health and the health of the planet.

• Volunteer Work Days (for students)

KEY RESOURCES • Harvard Students - Permanent Board - Volunteers - Interns •University Department s • Campus Landscape Services

COST STRUCTURE •Interns Payroll Graph A.1 Harvard Community Garden Business Model.

• Teachers Payroll

• Tools & all gardening essentials

community were outsiders are nonetheless welcome.

UNIVERSITY GARDENS

Communication: The project foresees the implementation of several communication channels, all of them in tune with a strong marketing strategy inside campus. The garden has a website with overall information about the project, its story from the conception of the idea to nowadays. Website: The website is constantly updated with official news and events through an online calendar. Members and contributors are informed by a monthly mailing list about the state and programs for the garden. More intimate and daily news are posted on the student blog run by the student council. http://www.garden.harvard.edu/

VALUE PROPOSITION

Provide

experiential education in sustainable, urban agriculture and food for students, faculty, and the local community.

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP

CUSTOMER SEGMENTS

• Co-Creation of the product / value proposition.

• Cambridge Community

• Salesman Assistance.

• Market Customers

• Harvard Students

CHANNELS • Website / Blog • On Campus Ad.

REVENUE STREAM • Market Sales • University Annual Investment • Donnations

198 • 199

Yale Organic Farm New Haven, Connecticut, USA, 2003

As a global university, Yale gives students the knowledge and resources to become leaders in forming partnerships. Through an understanding of food and agriculture, the Yale Sustainable Food Project equips students to innovatively solve problems across disciplines.

Typology: Biological-on campus-farming enterprise. Born as a Community Garden, year after year, the Yale Organic Farm was transformed in a real consolidated business. The model is based on the Produce of biological food for the university diners and the New Haven’s CitySeed farmers’ market, still managing to maintain the concepts of conviviality, sharing and connection. The project is committed to food donation to nonprofits like the Fellowship Place, the Downtown Evening Soup Kitchen, and Integrated Refugee and Immigrant Services. Vision & Mission: Over the years, the ‘Yale Organic Farm’ became the ‘Yale Sustainable Food Project’. This project manages a biological-farming enterprise inside campus as well as several educational programs that support the exploration and academic research in relation to food and agriculture. Their statement is that: “Every day, food offers the opportunity of getting involved with the surrounding world. To gather people around shared food, shared work and shared inquiry, the Yale Sustainable Food Project promotes a culture that perceives significance and pleasure from the connection between individuals and food.” Dimension: 15 acres. Project: The ‘Yale Organic Farm Project’ was born in the year 2000 when the university decided the utilization of biological food for all the university diners. In the year 2003 the preparation of the land starts with the very first actions of agriculture. In the following years the cultivating area is almost doubled, there has been an increase in the amount of greenhouses available; a reinforcement of the irrigation system and a composting system has been organized to ensure the organic-ness of the produce.

Figure A.6 Yale Food Project interns cultivating at the Yale Organic Farm.

In the past few years, the academia has demonstrated an increasing interest for the activities developed in the Yale Farm. There has been an increment on the amount of academic courses available dedicated to agriculture and biological cultivation. The project is also responsible for

200 • 201

the creation of a large amount of new scholarships for students working in the farm premises. Funding and Costs: Further on, we will see a precise picture on how the business model of the Yale Organic Farm works, but for now we will introduce the main numbers. Initial Cost: € 55.000 Year Maintenance Cost: € 60.000 Yearly Revenue: €20.00 to € 75.000 Governance Model Employees: Almost 45% of the total workers of the Yale Organic Farm are full-time employees of Yale University. Students on scholarships and volunteers compose the remaining 25% and 30% subsequently. Decision Making: A committee of agricultural experts makes all of the farm decisions. Students Involvement: More than 1,300 students volunteer yearly at the afternoon workdays, and another 600 attended Farm events like our apple galette workshop and harvest festival. Communication: The Yale Food Project has a website with all the information related to their past, current and future activities. As well as the Harvard Community garden website, the Yale Organic Farm has its activities and events calendar inside the Yale Sustainable Food Project website. The events are also publicised through dedicated posters which are placed on campus as well as in the farmer’s markets around the New haven area. Website: http://www.yale.edu/sustainablefood Farm Activities and Events: First Workday: The Farm’s first workday of the year has over 150 students of all classes and schools coming together to plant lettuce, turn compost, and harvest potatoes.

Figure A.7 Yale students enjoying the Annual Jack Hitt Last Day Of Classes Pig Roast.

Apple Galette: Cooking workshop held by the chefs from a local bakery. Attendees help peel and slice apples to create thin

sustainable pssd

202 • 203

pastries that are then cooked in the Farm’s brick oven. Annual Jack Hitt Last Day Of Classes Pig Roast: Annual last day of classes event, named after writer Jack Hitt. In just under two hours, the farm feeds over 500 Yale and New Haven community members, who came to join the Farm workday, eat, and enjoy live music from Yale bands. Community Workdays:

Graph A.2 Business model of the Yale Sustainable Food Project, including the Yale Organic Farm.

The farm hosts open workdays for members of the student and New Haven community as well as members from cultural organizations such as the African-American Cultural House, Choate-Rosemary Hall, and the Urban Foodshed Collaborative.

INTERNAL ACADEMICS

KEY PARTNERSHIPS

KEY ACTIVITIES

• Harvest. Week-long pre-orientation course. • Public Schools visits . • Senior Projects. Thesis • Colloquium on Food, Agriculture, and the Environment • Internships.

• Internal Academics • External Academics • Cooking Workshops • Harvesting Events • Last Day of Class Fes t • Community Work Days (pertinent organizations )

EXTERNAL ACADEMICS

•Advisory Board • Lazarus Program Coordinator • SVC • Interns •University Departments

• Ivy League Real Food Summit. • Atlantic Monthly Food Channel. • Food Corps. National crusade program.

KEY RESOURCES

COST STRUCTURE •Interns Payroll • Teachers Payroll

•Employees Payrol l

• Tools & all gardening essentials

Harvest Festival:

university gardens

Volunteers at our Harvest Festival celebrated the changing seasons that happen to coincide with the Halloween Festivities. The event hosts a haunted farm tour, pumpkin carving, scarecrow stuffing, pizza, butternut squash soup, and an apple cider press.

VALUE PROPOSITION The Sustainable Food Project manages an organic farm on campus and runs diverse educational programs that support exploration and academic inquiry related to food and agriculture.

CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP • Sustainable Food Project Community • Salesman Assistance

CHANNELS • Website / Blog

CUSTOMER SEGMENTS • Yale Pertinent Students (grades & payment) • Student Volunteer Coalition (no grades & payment) • Market Customers. • Yale Dining Service.

• On Campus Ad.

REVENUE STREAM • Market Sales • University Annual Investment • Donnations

204 • 205

Stanford University Farm Palo Alto, California, USA, 1998 Typology: Educational Community Farm. There is a particular stress on training, academia and learning. Vision & Mission: Experiential creation of a good nutritional model for students and community of Palo Alto, through the creation of the Student Garden and Biological Orchards. The ‘Stanford Educational Farm Association’ and the ‘Stanford University Sustainable Food Program’ back up the farm project. The overall goal is the creation of a community based on sharing experiences and collective work. The project promotes also an internship program for students and employees to learn on sustainable food Produce, as well as the marketing methods, distribution and sales behind it. Dimension: The farm is 4000 m2. The idea is to extend its cultivating surface to the nearby fields once the project is up and running smoothly in a small scale. History: The Stanford Workers Union initiated a community garden during the 1970’s, since then, the community garden was abandoned and out of use as such. In the year 1997 an under graduate student elevates a farm proposal to the Health and Security department and this is how the first seed of the project was planted. Project: The project is similar to the one of an agricultural enterprise and it includes land for open-air cultivation, greenhouses, fruit trees that delimit the farm area, composting area and a stable. There have also been constructed multi-purpose roofed structures to accommodate the educational and recreational activities held at the farm. Moreover, outside every single diner on campus, a small demonstrational garden has been constructed in order to educate and raise awareness on the seasonality of organic and sustainable food.

Figure A.8 Market stand run by students of the Stanford University Farm.

Funding and Costs: The Stanford University has financed the agricultural enterprise. The initial cost was €20.000 plus €12.00 a year to pay for the farm employees.

sustainable pssd

206 • 207

Governance Model Employees: There are several positions inside the Stanford Community Farm structure. There is a parttime coordinator and five managerial positions. There is also a group of students working on a fix schedule in the farm. Decision making: There is a consulting committee composed by the head of the Stanford Health Department, a member of the community cooperative, the Stanford Minister – who’s in charge of the spiritual work related to the activity – and other external figures of support.

[The farm is managed and the activities are carried out thanks to the work of studentvolunteers. During the summer period the farm adds 5 more paid internship openings for all students, faculty and other university employees.]

Figure A.9 Publicity poster of the annual event calendar at the Stanford Farm.

Students Involvement: The farm is managed and the activities are carried out thanks to the work of studentvolunteers. During the summer period the farm adds 5 more paid internship openings for all students, faculty and other university employees.

Produce: The farm produces all kinds of vegetables and seasonal fruits. Whatever is harvested is sold to the on-campus cooperatives, the campusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; diners and in the Palo Alto Farmerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Market. The campus diners have a composting material collecting system in which all students are encouraged to participate.

university gardens

Ties to the academia: The initiative is very useful for students on Agricultural and Ecological degrees. Working on the farm under tutorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; supervision, they are able to obtain credits for their academic curricula. Communication: To this date, the Stanford Community Farm website is under reconstruction. The existing version counts with general information on the project vision and mission. Updates on events and activities are given through the farm Facebook page. The activities with academic value are publicised and controlled by the didactical planning office. Related Websites: http://farm.stanford.edu

Figure A.10 Student Stand to make pubblicity for the Stanford Farm.

208 • 209

A.3 Community Gardens Prinzessinnengarten Berlin, Germany, 2009 Typology: Community Garden Vision & Mission: Creation of a place where to meet and exchange for young people, schools, horticulturists and most of all a place for integration between the original local community and the numerous groups of immigrants of the area. The basic idea is the sharing of knowledge and activities. Dimension: 6000 m2

Figure A.11 Little local girl playing at the Prinzessinnengarten.

Project: The project is born from an idea that two citizens – Marco Clausen and Robert Shaw – had after a trip to Cuba. The idea consisted on trying to cultivate directly in the city the greens that are later consumed by people. They chose Moritzplats, which at the time was an almost abandoned area, to transform it into the first urban orchard of Berlin, and one of the first around the world. The space is for the community, hence there are no individual allotments – except for those destined to the school children; each class is given with a piece of land of which they have to take care from the seeding to the harvesting. Garden beds come in a transportable shape, independent from the soil, made out of recycling material such as old bottle plastic containers or the industrial bag of rice. Common areas are very well looked after given the convivial character of the garden. Funding: Before the actual realization of the project, the non-for profit association ‘Nomadisch Grün’ (No-

210 â&#x20AC;˘ 211

Figure A.12 Prinzessinnengartenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s small Kiosk.

madic Green) is founded. This organization carried out events around the city and it succeeded in obtaining the necessary funding for the first phase of construction. The project foresees the garden to be self-sufficient. This is thanks to the fact that material that are used are all recycled, the agricultural and maintenance work is done by network of volunteers that is rewarded with the produce of their work. Nowadays, the main source of funding is by private, governmental, and commercial donations. Another source of funding are the bar and the gardening shop that have been introduced inside the premises.

Produce: The garden produces more than 500 different species of greens as well as honey from their beekeeping facilities.

COMMUNITY GARDENS

Governance Model Founders: The non-for profits association has twenty-five active members amongst whom there are the two original citizens who came up with the idea. Work Force: As we said before, the garden is completely organized on a volunteer structure. This includes, members of the community, passersby, students from schools and universities. Decision Making: The ‘Nomadic Green’ committee carries out the decision-making inside the Prinzessinnengarten. Members of the organization supervise all of the garden activities. Rewards to volunteers are giving under their consideration, supervision and consent. Ties to the community: We said before that the community has been involved since the beginning, but what we must mention is that this openness facilitated the introduction of the Turkish and Russian women communities. This integration was key to the garden start-up project since these horticulture expert women gave the founders all of the garden basic notions and improvement suggestions on how to properly work the land. Communication: The main communication strategy is based on the word of mouth and journalist publicity. Over the Internet, the garden has an elaborated blog with which they spread basic information as well as a calendar with the events and activities. Events and Activities: There are several activities held in the garden, and they defer from the way they involved the different co-existing realities of the neighbourhood; what they have in common however, is the educational approach to the overall outcome. An interesting example of this kind of activity is the recreation of a Japanese orchard to provide a local Japanese chef with fresh autochthonous products and demonstrate how the integration through recreation of typical spaces is possible.

[Rewards to volunteers are giving under [the ‘Nomadic Green’ committee’s] consideration, supervision and consent.]

212 • 213

Orto Libero, Il Giardino degli Aromi Ex OP Paolo Pini, Affori, Milan, Italy, 2003 Typology: Private Allotment Community Garden. Oriented towards pedagogy and social integration. Vision & Mission: “From a good turf, a good organic compost, a microorganism biotypes protection to an optimal nutrition”. Il ‘Orto Libero’ aims to promote awareness as well as the correct practice of the relationship between humans and its surrounding environment, through horticulture producing and offering fruit and vegetables.

‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ [...became a network of several gardens around the northeast area of Milan amongst which we find the ‘Orto Libero’.]

Figure A.13 Picture of one of the more than seventy private allotments at ‘Orto Libero - Il Giardino degli Aromi’.

History: Around the year 2003 the non-for profit organization ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’ is born from a group of women with horticultural experience. The organization starts following a group of handi-capable people in activities around green areas like horticultural therapy with internship or ways of involvement towards the possibility of inclusion and social reinsertion. This association soon became a network of several gardens around the northeast area of Milan amongst which we find the ‘Orto Libero’. Project: The garden spreads in the park of the former ‘Psychiatric Hospital Paolo Pini’ through the reutilization of abandoned pieces of land. The garden counts with public spaces such as meeting areas, composting spaces, several greenhouses, lakes and ‘Benje’s Hedges’, all necessary to shield the garden fields from the wind, thus providing microclimates in the farmland. In addition, they are a suitable habitat for all kinds of animals and plants. Many species of birds find protected nesting places and field hares and raises their young undisturbed. However, the organizational scheme is characterized by the existence of private allotments assigned to anyone who requests them. To the date, they have a waiting list of over 250 plot requests. A peculiar detail however, is the tendency to minimize the barriers between plots or allotments in the search for a more convivial environment and a better sense of community. The garden also counts with areas dedicated to schools and programs for handi-capable per-

214 • 215

sons and a hen house. The whole area is covered with an already installed irrigation system, all the material utilized in the construction of the private allotments must be recycled, and one of the main rules is the use of plastic prohibition.

Figure A.14 Founding group of the association ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’. In the centre of the picture Aurora Butti, the president of the association.

Funding: The major part of the funding comes from the governmental structure whether they are municipal, provincial and regional. They garden is also part of private funding programs like the Cariplo Band. On top of this, however, every member of the garden pays an annual fee for the privilege, which is around €20 to €30 depending

on the size of the allotment.

community gardens

Produce: The harvest comes from working the land individually therefore the Produce is personal. During abundance periods, some auctioning events are organized between the growers. No amount of the produce is for sale. Governance Model Founders: The responsible for the garden is Aurora Betti, president of the non-for profit association. One of its founding members – the agronomist Leopoldo Tommasi – is also the responsible for the agronomical planning and control. Work Force: Everybody that possesses an allotment is responsible for the cultivation and correct functioning of that piece of land. However, during special necessity seasonal moments, everybody is called to voluntarily help with the required activity, such as season pruning and cleaning. Decision Making: The non-for profit committee as well as a group of lead users make the overall decision regarding planning and policies. They also manage the waiting list and can decide when and how to ‘expropriate’ the allotments when the owner has not managed to fulfil a satisfying job with it. Communication: The ‘Orto Libero’ has not got at the date an official website, the project is inside the website of the non-for profit organization ‘Il Giardino degli Aromi’. As we previously described, this association held’s events on a monthly basis to promote urban gardening around the area through the co-creation of new cell-gardens. Every once in a while on of these events is targeted to the volunteer networking of the ‘Orto Libero’ for the creation of new projects and expansion. For example on July 2011 new garden beds for the aromatic herbs where made by members and volunteers. Websites: http://www.olinda.org http://www.cascinabollate.org

[...this association held’s events on a monthly basis to promote urban gardening around the area through the co-creation of new cell-gardens.]

216 â&#x20AC;˘ 217

Docklands Community Garden Melbourne, Australia, 2010 Typology: Convivial Community Garden

[The aim for its existence is to inspire people to engage in sustainable lifestyles through food and community connectedness.]

Vision & Mission: The Garden is a symbol of the Docklands community and sustainable lifestyles in the city. It is a flourishing example of what is possible in Docklands and is a great opportunity to help the Docklands streets and walkways come alive. The aim for its existence is to inspire people to engage in sustainable lifestyles through food and community connectedness. History: The project started as an initiative of the social enterprise Urban Reforestation. This enterprise managed the construction and dealt with the negotiations with the Melbourne municipality, until this last one became in charge of the garden on April 2012. Funding and Costs: The environmental and sustainability authorities of the city of Victoria fund the community garden. On top of this, the garden sales its produce during organic markets held in premises and organic food dinners. Another source of income are donations made by the users and sponsors of the garden. Produce: It is a convivial garden that works around the sharing and exchanging of goods, knowledge and produce. Governance Model Employees: The garden has only one employee and that is the coordinator. This person works full-time schedule and the municipality of Victoria covers its salary. Decision Making: The coordinator is the one making the vital decision inside the garden. He is responsible for the correct functioning of the system as well as the control over the harvest and volunteer benefits.

Figure A.15 Working with shovel and wheelbarrow at the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Docklands Community Gardenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

Work Force: The garden is organized around the voluntary work of the entire community follow closely by the coordinator.

Communication: The whole communication is done on site by informational leaflets and publicity. The garden also relies on the media publicity and the municipalities website activity calendar. Website: http://www.urbanreforestation.com/

community gardens

218 • 219

Veg-Out St. Kilda, Melbourne, Australia, 1998 Typology: Private Hybdrid Community Garden. When private allotments and convivial gardens co-exist. Vision & Mission: Veg-Out is an organic community garden herbicide and pesticide free. A commitment to a sense of community, conservation and organic gardening principles underpins all activities on the site. Dimension: One hundred and forty five private allotments plus convivial areas. History: In October 1998, Port Phillip Council offered the site of the disused St Kilda Bowling Club as studio space to local artists. The Club buildings were quickly occupied on a month-by-month basis and a thriving artist colony began. However, the sorry sight of a former bowling green sprouting weeds drove several of the artists to turn the soil into what would become a series of plots and a community garden. Local environment officer and EcoCentre coordinator Neil Blake, with the assistance of Joan Gibby, consulted with locals, gardeners and artists to come up with the design of the space. Nowadays, Veg-Out has over 140 plots, where members, friends, families and community groups enjoy getting their hands into the soil.

[...the friendships that have sprung up between gardeners, artists and visitors make the gardens an oasis of calm in one of Melbourne’s busiest tourist precincts.]

Project: Veg-Out lacks rigid barriers between common land and each plot; the paths curve and meander; flowers, vegetables and artworks have equal standing; the rabbits, chickens, budgies and quails add yet another dimension; and the friendships that have sprung up between gardeners, artists and visitors make the gardens an oasis of calm in one of Melbourne’s busiest tourist precincts. Veg-Out comprises 145 garden plots as well as communal spaces. Ten plots are held by local community groups and the remainder by private individuals. Funding & Costs: The major part of the funding comes from the organization of a Farmer’s Market every first Saturday of the month. Private plotholders pay a 6 monthly fee of $4/m2 or $2.5/m2 concession.

Produce: Veg-Out counts with three different public composts heaps in order to have a constant delivery of organic fertilizer. Due to scarce water, Veg-Out counts with a rain accumulative system, and have strict time rules for using the suministrative pipes.

community gardens

Governance Model Overall Administration: The municipality is in charge of the finance administration and overall follow up of the activities. Work Force: Convivial areas are worked on a volunteer basis, private allotments are a responsibility of the plotholder. Decision Making: The Veg-Out Committee is in charge of the decision-making, however, every member of the garden is invited to participate during the committee meetings and raise their voice.

Figure A.16 Entrance signage of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Veg-Outâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; garden at St. Kilda.

220 • 221

The Union Street Urban Orchard London, UK, 2010 Typology: Temporary Community Garden Following the London Festival of Architecture and lasting through the autumn, the site of 100 Union Street in SE1 was transformed into an urban orchard and community garden.

[The garden aim was to regenerate a disused site in Bankside and create a place for exchange between local residents and visitors to the Festival.]

Vision & Mission: The garden aim was to regenerate a disused site in Bankside and create a place for exchange between local residents and visitors to the Festival. Project: Designed by Heather Ring of the ‘Wayward Plants for The Architecture Foundation’ and built with the help of ‘Bankside Open Spaces Trust’ and an array of other helpful volunteers. The Urban Orchard was also home to the LivingARK, a zero-carbon pod which was inhabited during the period of the project to showcase sustainable ways of living. The site also hosted ‘The Nest’, a pavilion created by the Finnish Institute, the Identikit by Thomas Kendall and Tamsin Hanke and a skip turned table tennis table created by Oliver Bishop-Young. A series of workshops and activities took place in the Orchard over the few months it was open. In September 20120 the garden was dismantled and all the trees were given to local estates and other community gardens to remain as a lasting legacy of the 2010 London Festival of Architecture. Produce: All of the produce during the temporary urban solution was meant to be exchanged among people from the neighborhood and visitors of the exhibition. Funding: The project was conceived in collaboration between ‘The Architecture Foundation’, ‘Bankside Open Spaces Trust’, ‘ProjectARKs’ and ‘Wayward Plants’.

Figure A.17 ‘Union Street Urban Orchard’ pallet-made garden beds.

Communication: The project counted with a very well articulated website with access to overall information on the project, and ways in which visitors and locals could participate on it. It also had an online calendar with all the events and activities held in the garden. Website: http://www.unionstreetorchard.org.uk/

222 â&#x20AC;˘ 223

Bibliography VV.AA. (2006), EMUDE - Emerging User Demands for Sustainable Solutions, European Community. Sanders, E., Stappers, P., (2008) Co-creation and the new landscapes of design.â&#x20AC;&#x192; Manzini, E., Vezzoli C., (2002) Product-Service Systems and Sustainability: opportunities for sustainable solutions, UNEP Goedkoop, M., van Halen, M., Riele, H. & Rommens, H. (1999) Product Service Systems, Ecological and Economic Basics. Amersfoort, The Netherlands Ceschin, F., Raven, R., (2011) Managing the introduction and scaling-up of sustainable Product-Service Systems: Towards a system innovation approach for practitioners, Politecnico di Milano and TU Eindhoven. Ceschin, F., (2012) Introduction and scaling-up of sustainable Product Service Systems: A new role for strategic design for sustainability, Phd Design Thesis, Politecnico di Milano: Milano Ceschin, F., (2012) A handbook to support strategic designers: Introduction and scaling-up of sustainable Product Service Systems, Phd Design Thesis, Politecnico di Milano: Milano VV.AA., (2011) Learning Network on Sustainability, Lens http://www.lens.polimi.it/ Manzini E., Vezzoli C., Clark, G., (2001) Product-service Systems: Using an Existing Concept as a New Approach to Sustainability, The Journal of Design Research

Baines, T.S., Lightfoot, H.W., Evans, S., Neely, A., Greenough, R., Peard, J., Roy, R., Shehab, E., Braganza, A., Tiwari, A., Alcock, J.R., Angus, J.P., Bastl, M., Cousens, A., Irving, P., Johnson, M., Kingston, J., Lockett, H., Martinez, V., Michele, P., Tranfield, D., Walton, I.M. and Wilson, H. (2007). State-ofthe-art in product-service systems, Journal of Engineering Manufacture. Vezzoli, C., (2007) System design for sustainability Schmidt, F., (1996) Factor 10: Making Sustainability Accountable - Putting Resource Productivity Into Praxis Weber, Hoogma, Lane, Schot (1999), Experimenting with sustainable transport innovations Meroni, A., (2007) Creative Communities. People Inventing Sustainable Ways of Living, Edizioni Polidesign: Milan, Italy Leadbeater, C., (2008) We Think: The Power of Mass Creativity, Profile Books LTD Ceschin, F., Raven, R., (2011) Managing the introduction and scaling-up of sustainable Product-Service Systems: Towards a system innovation approach for practitioners, Politecnico di Milano and TU Eindhoven. Young Foundation (2006), A Manifesto for Social Innovation, Social Silicon Valleys. http://www.discoversocialinnovation.org

Leadbeater, C., (2007) The rise of the social entreprenur, Demos: London. Jégou, J.,Man zini, E., Bala, P., Cagnin, C., Cipolla C., Green J., Luiten, H., Van Der Horst, T., Marras, I., Meroni, A., Mnatsakanian, R., Rocchi, S., Strandbakken, P., Stø, E., Thackara, J., Thoresen, V., Un, S., Vadovic, E., Warnke, P., Zacarias, A., (2008) Collaborative Services. Social Innovation and Design for Sustainability, Edizioni Polidesign: Milan, Italy

224 • 225

Weber (2004) The Success of Open Source, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA. Tapscott, D., Williams, A.D., (2007), Wikinomics. How Mass Collaborations Changes Everything, Portfolio: New York Manzini, E. (2007), Design research for sustainable social innovation in: Michel R. (edited by), Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects: Birkhäuser Basel Cottam, H., Leadbeater (2004), Open Welfare: Designs on the public good, Design Council: London, UK. VV.AA., Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, Agricultural Sustainability Institute at University of California: California Thackara, J., (2007) Manual Design Council, Dott. 07: London, UK. Hatherly, J. (2003) Community Gardens: More Than Urban Green Spaces, Australian Institute of Landscape Architects: Australia. Shinew, K., Glover, T., & Parry, D. (2004) Leisure spaces as potential sites for interracial interaction: Community gardens in a segregated urban area. Journal of Leisure Research: Australia VV.AA. (2009) Australian City Farms & Community Gardens Network, The Australian City Farms and Community Gardens Network first published Community Gardening: Australia Grayson, R. (2008) Community Gardens: Policy Directions for Kogarah Municipals Council, Kogarah: Australia.

Grayson, R., (2007) Community Gardens: Policy Directions for Marrickville Council, Marrickville Council Sydney: Australia. â&#x20AC;&#x192; McKelvey, B. (2009) Community Gardening Tool Kit, University of Missouri Extension. University of New South Wales: Australia Bartolomei, L., Judd, B., & Thompson, S. (2003) A bountiful harvest: Community gardens and neighbourhood renewal in Waterloo. University of New South Wales: Australia Glover, T., Shinew, K. & Parry, D. (2005) Association, sociability, and civic culture: The democratic effect of community gardening. Journal of Leisure Research: London, UK. Jenson, Jane. (1998).Â Mapping social cohesion: The state of Canadian research. Canadian Policy Research Networks Study No. F-03. http://www.cprn.org Glover, T., (2003) The story of the Queen Anne Memorial Garden: Resisting a dominant cultural narrative. Journal of Leisure Research: London, UK. Sanders, E., Stappers, P., (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, Taylor & Francis, March. Awramenko, C., Wolak, S., Clarke, D., Tate, M., Falby, D., Hicks, M., (2001) VODAFONE Co-Design Workshop Manual. VV.AA., (feb 2012) DESIS Network Information Brochure http://www.desis-network.org/sites/default/files/desis_brochure.pdf

Insua, B., Townsend, T. (2010) The Park Slope Food Coop Membership Manual. New York.

bibliography