Methods & approaches

The research methods included a literature review, autoethnography and self reflections.

Introduction

The approach of the Fargemarka Boligprosjekt Research Group in NTNU (‘Muslica’) was to carry out empirical action research, synthesising a comparative literature review with analytical autoethnographic research. The Research Group critically analysed academic literature with relevance to urban experiments, and produced three mini-reviews across three domains: intentional communities, insurgent planning, and self governance & self organisation. Alongside this, the group fully participated and played an active role in group activities, and collected empirical data through observations, a survey and interviews. Throughout the process, the group reflected on their personal role in the processes of social change observed in the group.

Urban Ecological Planning

The approach and suite of research methods were developed as part of the ‘Understanding Urban Ecological Planning (UEP)’ self-guided module. The aim of the module is to develop a “critical understanding of the key theoretical concepts in UEP”1 in relation to real-life cases, and arguably acts as a bridge between academia and achieving change in society. The roots of the UEP course are in the Chicago School approach to planning, which focuses on urban structures and their evolution from empirical evidence (Park and Burgess, 2019). Silwa et al. reflect on how the UEP course is based on nine key value statements (Silwa et al., 2018), which differentiate them from traditional planning approaches, as shown in Figure 7. These resonate closely with both the approach of the research project and that observed in the Fargemarka Association itself. Three of these value statements are elaborated on below:

Bottom-top planning

Traditional planning approaches recognise the duality of urban processes, and how they can be considered both ‘top-

1 https://www.ntnu.edu/studies/courses/AAR5230

Value based and developmental planning

Strategic

down’ (government-driven) and ‘bottom-up’ (community driven). The UEP approach rejects this dichotomy, and proposes stronger horizontal relationships and a collaborative approach at all levels. The Research Group paid particular attention to bottom-up approaches including ‘activist planning’ and ‘self organisation’ that emphasise collaboration between authorities, citizens and urban experiments. The group also explored the coincidence of attitudes between the Association and the Municipality, and how this could create opportunities for collaboration or otherwise.

Value-based and developmental planning

Value-based planning recognises the right of people to participate in development, particularly the disadvantaged. The Research Group has paid particular attention, through theory, observations and reflections, to the role of the group structure in facilitating a distribution of power. Attention was also paid to the different drivers and intentions within the group. Similarly, the Association itself has actively sought partnerships to help bring in traditionally marginalised voices through non-governmental organisations and the psychiatric unit of St. Olav’s Hospital.

The formal-informal continuum

Urban activities typically operate between the ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ spheres. The UEP approach recognises informality as an integral part of development, which should not be ignored. The Research Group had investigated the role of negotiated agreements in other intentional communities, and how they can carve out ‘tolerated’ informal spaces for planning, including in Svartlamon (Trondheim) and Christiania (Copenhagen). Similarly, the Association itself works through both formal and informal methods of planning (for example, through squatting as opposed to formal negotiation).