Boeletuin Amsterdam: Urban Gardening, Social Practices

and Everyday Urbanism.

Course: LUP-80436 (Msc Thesis Land Use Planning)Student: Ioana-Cristina MusatNumber: 881010592020Supervisor: prof. dr. AJJ (Arnold) van der Valk Second Reviewer: dr. IM (Marleen) Buizer

Final Colloquium Msc Land Use Planning

Content• Introduction Background of the research Core content• Research Research design Theoretical framework Methodology • Findings Social practice and spatial insights• Recommendations Spatial planning context Role of the spatial planner

Background of the research• Issues of global concern: food sustainabilitypublic health

• Urban gardening popular practice (e.g. Amsterdam)raises awareness

• Researchcase study: “Boeletuin” garden in Amsterdam

Core content

• Exploratory objectivegardening practices spatial planning ??insights??

• Underlying aim a planning approach based on everyday practices

Core content

Submersion in everyday practices +Social (practice) and spatial theoretical framework

Main findings:Urban gardening practices such as “Boeletuin” • reduce maintenance costs.• raise awareness: food sustainability, health.• create quality urban places*.• increase life quality of members: health.* will be further explained

Research design• Research problem:societal: food sustainability and public health(Cohen & Ilieva, 2015)

research: gap between practices & planning(Jacobs, 1961; Healey et al., 2015; Cohen & Ilieva, 2015)

• Researchers’ perspective:social constructivist

urban gardening practices

•Qualitative, exploratory case-study

• Research question

What insights can the lens of social practice theory and every-day urbanism offer for the spatial planning practice, based on the case study of gardening practices at the ‘Boeletuin’ garden in Amsterdam?

Research design

Research design

Case description“Boeletuin”• in Amsterdam Zuidas business area• vicinity of VU University and Medical Center• history of over 50 years• vulnerable statute• community and individual gardening

connects to research problem

Research design

Theoretical framework

Social practice theory

EverydayUrbanism

Theoretical framework

Meanings

Competences Materials

(Shove et al., 2012)Social practice theory

Theoretical framework

Flexible space allows inhabitants to creatively appropriate urban areas and turn them into “places”.

Criteria for quality urban places:• Vitality• Accessibility• Efficiency• Safety• Sustainability• Health• Delightfulness (Lynch 1981; Gehl, 2010)

Everyday urbanism approachTheoretical framework

(Chase et al., 2008)

Park(ing) day, U.S.

Allotment garden in Naerum, Sweden

Methodology Directed by the theoretical guidelines

Methods: • participant observations• interviews• questionnaires• secondary data

Validity strategies: • triangulation• member checking• rich and thick descriptions

Main findings: social practice insights

• food • leisure• social• gardening• nature• education

Meanings

in the context of health

Competences• permaculture• agricultural• gardening

mostly self-acquired,of different levels

Materials• soil• water• vegetation• garden tools• utilities

in good stage,mostly low-cost,

recycled

Gardening practice of “Boeletuin”

Main findings: spatial insightsAppropriation

• flexible space• citizen-led design• 3 initiatives 3 designs

Main findings: spatial insightsPlace-making

Opinions about qualities of the place

(source: questionnaire)

Main findingsConclusion

Specific gardening practice + Spatial characteristics = Urban quality place

Practices such as urban gardening can naturally create urban quality places.

Not the other way arround!

RecommendationsFor spatial planning of urban gardens

• green spaces with continuity in place-making • green spaces in the vicinity of educational

and health centers !!The statute of these spaces must remain flexible for appropriation!!

Use following indicators for identifying potential urban gar-dening places:

Integrate in urban plans existing:• place-making urban gardens.

RecommendationsRole of the spatial planner

Once existing and potential urban gar-dening places are identified...

The planner • Analyses based on social practice and

spatial guidelines.methods: prolongued visits, interviews, questionnaires etc.• Facilitates practice strengthening and/or

place related design.• The aim: autonomy.

Cohen, N. & Ilieva R. (2015). Transitioning the food system: A strategic practice management approach for cities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 1, 1-19.

Chase J.L. et al. (2008). Everyday urbanism. New York: Monacelli Press. 1-224.

Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for People. Island Press. 288.

Healey, P., Silva E. A., Harris N., Van den Broeck, P. (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Planning ResearchMethods. New York: Routledge. 1-529.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House. 458.

Lynch, K. (1981). A Theory of Good City Form. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Shove, E., Pantzar, M., Watson M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice. Everyday Life and how it changes. London: Sage Publications. 1-191.

References