Ambrose Gillick
Email: ambrose.gillick@postgrad.manchester.ac.uk
Investigation into participatory design and self-build.
Supervisors: Simon Guy and Diana Mitlin.
New urban development must address the issues related to environmental degradation, but only developments which also respond to the economic and social needs of the community will be genuinely sustainable. For this to occur in poorer communities in the North the right to self-governance needs to be regained by the residents, a process of empowerment which will endow them with the primary voice in the development or regeneration process. Previous models of social housing have tended to be ‘handed down’ to those in need and have proved an ineffective way of producing long-lasting and fruitful communities as a consequence. Whilst participatory techniques are now routinely used in the design process of social projects, they arguably devalue both the architect (by denying their expertise) and the lay-person (by not appreciating their knowledge of how space works and has meaning for them, in their specific context) and produce little useful information at that. If an urban development is to last it must have meaning for the residents which in artefacts is generated through the circumstances and processes of their production, as well as their ownership and use. If a person is prevented from playing any real part in the selection and production of their home it is unlikely that it will ever be home to them. They will remain tenants in someone else’s scheme and as such disenfranchised. Places produced through top-down processes will therefore mean little and be valued accordingly. In such a context co-production offers a dynamic, practical and innovative solution to the problem.
‘Co-production has emerged as a general description of the process whereby clients work alongside professional as partners in the delivery of services’ (Joseph Rowntree Foundation findings paper, ‘Co-production by people outside paid employment’, June 2006). This can take many forms, from the maintenance of basic social networks to more complex urban development goals. The co-production systems used in the South to regenerate urban areas are a response to the huge and growing problem of informal settlements. Attempts at successfully housing the new urban poor have failed in general and co-production, which underscores the inherent value of the layman through the simple assertion that they are an available source of skills and knowledge (albeit ones not recognized in the market-place), is now increasingly used to help the layperson house themselves. By bringing together all actors relevant to urban development, strategies are devised which empower the residents to define, create, manage and rejuvenate their own environments, whilst being able to call upon the expertise of specialists when necessary.
Co-production is a method by which people can take responsibility for their situation, gain control of it and by doing so become capable of helping themselves. A case-study from the South will demonstrate ways in which co-production strategies have been used in the processes of design and architecture. It will enable me to fully analyse the role of architects in the regenerative co-production scheme: how they design, what their relationships with the client, builder, businesses, NGOs, charities and government are and how effective they are at helping communities realise their own futures. I will contrast this with a case study in the North in which participatory methods are used in the regeneration process which will enable critical analysis of the intentions, methods and results in such a scheme. In answering these questions I will be able to advance some ideas as to how architecture in the North could be developed in a similar way as a means towards sustainable, strong and fruitful communities for the Northern urban poor.