IGRA USTVARJALNOSTI – teorija in praksa urejanja prostora Št. 11 / 2023 PROJECT PROJEKT ARTICLE ČLANEK COMPETITION UVODNIK NATEČAJ WORKSHOP DELAVNICA PREDSTAVITEV RAZPRAVA RECENZIJA PRESENTATION DISCUSSION REVIEW EDITORIAL DIPLOMA MASTER THESIS 72 Špela Verovšek: S KREATIVNIMI PRAKSAMI K USTVARJANJU PROSTORA: 72–75 POVZETEK Eden temeljnih ciljev programa A-Place je krepitev vezi med ljudmi in prostori skozi prakse kreativnega ustvarjanja prostora. Pristop dela v štirih letih projekta je bil raziskovalno in akcijsko naravnan in je potekal v načrtovanih letnih ciklih dejavnosti, ki so se izvajali v posameznih partnerskih mestih (Barceloni, Bologni, Bruslju, Lizboni, Ljubljani in Nikoziji). V obdobju trajanja projekta so se v organizaciji partnerskih mest zvrstile številne akcije in dogodki, ki so sledili trem glavnim implementacijskim ciljem, to so, ustvarjanju urbanih prostorov za vse, organizaciji in spodbujanju produkcije multimedijskih prispevkov različnih javnosti na temo prostora, identitete ter bivanja, in nenazadnje diseminaciji kreativne produkcije, nastale v okviru projekta skozi tri festivale - Urban Visions (Bologna) Pame Kaimakli (Nicosia) in LOOP (Barcelona). Za zagotavljanje učinkovitosti prihodnjega dela so vse izvedene aktivnosti tudi predmet ocene vpliva: me- todologija ocene učinka, ki smo jo zasnovali posebej za namen projekta združuje družbeno-etnografske, fenomenološke in estetsko teoretične okvire za kritični argument in presojo, kako participativno ustvarjanje prostora lahko krepi sodelovanje v družbi in pomaga izboljšati odnose med skupinami v skupnosti ter odnos do prostora. KLJUČNE BESEDE trajnostna šola, sodoben učni prostor, šolske stavbe, šolska arhitektura TOWARDS NETWORKED ARTISTIC PRACTICES IN PLACEMAKING ABSTRACT One of the fundamental goals of the A-Place project was to strengthen the connections between people and places through practices of creative placemaking. The approach was both research-oriented and action-oriented, carried out in planned annual cycles of activities implemented in various partner cities (Barcelona, Bologna, Brussels, Lisbon, Ljubljana, and Nicosia). Throughout the project’s duration, numerous ac- tions and events were organized by the partner cities, following three main implementation goals: the creation of urban places for all, the organization and promotion of multimedia contribu- tions from various target groups on the topics of place, identity, and living, and lastly, the dissemination of creative production generated within the project through three festivals - Urban Vi- sions (Bologna), Pame Kaimakli (Nicosia), and LOOP (Barcelona). Each carried-out activity has undergone impact assessment, specifi cally crafted for the project. This methodology incorpo- rates socio-ethnographic, phenomenological, and aesthetic theoretical frameworks to critically argue how placemaking strengthens social cooperation and helps improve relationships between groups in the community and their relationships with urban environments. KEY-WORDS sustainable education, urban placemaking, creative practice, learning spaces, and impact assessment architecture Špela Verovšek: S KREATIVNIMI PRAKSAMI K USTVARJANJU PROSTORA DOI: https://doi.org/10.15292/IU-CG.2023.11.072-075 UDK: 711:011.83 SUBMITTED: November 2023 / REVISED: November 2023 / PUBLISHED: December 2023 1.03 Kratki znanstveni članek / Short Scientifi c Article 73 THE CREATIVITY GAME – Theory and Practice of Spatial Planning No 11 / 2023 Špela Verovšek: TOWARDS NETWORKED ARTISTIC PRACTICES IN PLACEMAKING: 72-75 1. INTRODUCTION The role of space in shaping individual and communal identity is fundamental, driven by the dynamic interplay among people, activities, and the spatial realities specifi c to a given time period. In the context of global and multicultural societies, the creation of space is a multifaceted process involving numerous actors, di- verse perceptions, and various media (Markusen & Gadwa, 2019; Walker & Marsh, 2018). However, not all community groups consistently interpret the meanings associated with a particular space (Courage, 2020) leading to possible confl icts, or intole- rance within spaces that, due to their diverse user base, could otherwise serve as crucial hubs for multicultural interactions. At the same time, artistic practices can play a pivotal role as catalysts or intermediaries, bridging the gap between spaces and users (Project for Public Spaces, 2007; Redaelli, 2018). They can unveil the diverse meanings of spaces, allowing multiple social groups to concurrently grasp and interpret them. Creative placemaking allows partnership across sectors, deeply engages the community, involves artists, designers and culture bearers, and helps to advance local economic, physical, or social change, ultimately laying the groundwork for systems change (Rosario Jackson, 2022). The creative sector is playing an ever more vital role in promoting global awareness of climate change, encoura- ging sustainable practices and justice in design. Artists, cultural entities, and creative industry leaders are utilising their talents and resources to draw attention to issues, inspire change, and initiate behavioural change. According to Madsen (2019), they are breaking down barriers between aesthetics and politics, asserting culture as a powerful catalyst for sustainability, design justice and participatory decision-making. Moreover, artistic practices also facilitate the formation of connections that tran- scend cultural and physical boundaries, empowering individu- als to establish meaningful ties with spaces beyond the confi nes of culture and physicality. Within this concept, the A-Place program focused on strengthe- ning connections between individuals and urban spaces in six European cities, by employing a diverse range of approaches – from local placemaking actions in the partner cities, networking empowerment, and multimedia production to dissemination and contest activity in frames of three ongoing festival settings: Urban Visions (Bologna) Pame Kaimakli (Nicosia) in LOOP (Barce- lona). The examination centred on the distinctive agency of art in overcoming societal numbness and disconnection from one another and the urban environment. Artistic practices have the capacity to alter perspectives, render the invisible, and facilitate the contemplation of alternative futures (Landesman, 2013). The implemented actions within A-Place explored the unique capa- cities of artists in addressing urban complexity, observing and disrupting patterns, introducing unforeseen social perspectives, and activating the innate creativity of individuals. The diverse range of actions accomplished during the project lifespan aimed specifi cally at addressing the following questions: ■ Can architecture and urban design become more accessi- ble, aff ordable, and widely produced through the targeted implementation of artistic or creative practices? ■ Can artistic and creative approaches in placemaking eff ec- tively convey the profound importance of values in urban systems to foster behavioural change? ■ How can cities—comprising political leaders, business enterprises, and citizens – be persuaded to recognize artists and the creative sector as crucial allies in constructing susta- inable communities? ■ How can arts and cultural institutions serve as valuable partners in local and regional transitions toward urban well-being and contribute to prompting necessary moral leadership 2. APPROACH In the pursuit to explore the role and exploit the potential of networked artistic practices in the process of creating places, in physical and digital spaces, we approached by continuous inter- play of the learning-, research- and design- practices. Namely, the increased necessity to contribute to the humanisation and liveability of places at risk in cities shows through the places that are undergoing transformation processes, resulting from the contemporary movements of migration, acculturation to local life, political activism, sustainability ideologies and other urban trends in the past decade (Hölscher & Frantzeskaki, 2021). The convergence of these complexities enacts creative synergies in research, education, design, and artistic endeavours. 2.1 Shared learning and knowledge construction: placemaking as practice-based research The synergy between participatory action research and place- making is evident in their shared mission to comprehensively comprehend and enhance the world through proactive trans- formation. Both methodologies underscore the empowerment of communities by actively involving them in shaping their environments, fostering a sense of ownership and facilitating improvements in built environments as well as community welfare (Cornish et al., 2023). This symbiotic relationship is closely aligned with the tenets of participatory action research, a methodological approach characterized by systematic inquiry in collaboration with those directly impacted, with the overar- ching objectives of fostering education and eff ecting tangible change through knowledge production (Baum et al, 2007; Cor- nish et al., 2023). Hence, in the context of participatory action research, the primary focus is on empowering individuals and aff ording them increased autonomy over the quality of their living. Similarly, placemaking operates to empower individuals, allowing them to take charge of the spaces they inhabit and forge meaningful connections within them. In participatory action research and placemaking taken in the actions during the span of the project, a collaborative process of shared learning and knowledge construction took place, engaging all partner participants and their networks. This dynamic approach combined experiential understanding, characterized by sensing and feeling the presence of diverse elements, with expert knowledge, which leaned towards conceptual or propositional understanding and tacit knowledge. This interchange among participants that happened in the common activities and joint events, in particular, blurred the distinction between professional research and tacit learning, both engaging in a cyclical iterative process of action and refl ection. 2.2 Cyclical iterative process: plan-perform-refl ect-evaluate In all the placemaking and multimedia production activities accomplished throughout the A-Place program, an iterative approach was employed; it involved sequential cycles of plan- ning-performing-refl ecting-evaluating, which were consistently implemented over the course of the project’s four-year lifespan. Following the completion of activities, a refl ective process resulted in the identifi cation of common target values and the estimation of the level by which the actions contributed towards the eight placemaking targets: 1) creating vibrant IGRA USTVARJALNOSTI – teorija in praksa urejanja prostora Št. 11 / 2023 PROJECT PROJEKT ARTICLE ČLANEK COMPETITION UVODNIK NATEČAJ WORKSHOP DELAVNICA PREDSTAVITEV RAZPRAVA RECENZIJA PRESENTATION DISCUSSION REVIEW EDITORIAL DIPLOMA MASTER THESIS 74 places, 2) building engaged communities, 3) reinforcing a sense of place & belonging, 4) growing sustainability awareness 5) evoking sensory awareness & feeling for our places; 6) building creative societies; 7) celebrating diversity and inclusiveness and 8) creating shared learning spaces. This refl ection was accomplished on a yearly basis, led by a group of social sciences experts from NOVA University of Lisbon. It played a crucial role in drawing the strategies for further program implementations and the construction of a network of places at hand. Each cycle concluded with an evaluation of both the process and outputs. This involved stepping outside the self-refl ective process (Lang, 2017) to adopt an objective position, paving the way for initia- ting the next iteration while incorporating the insights gained from the evaluation. 3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK In parallel to the iterative cyclic process of action and evaluation during the project, the framework for the long-term impact assessment was established, that goes beyond the spatiotem- poral limits of a specifi c placemaking activity. The main targets were set as: a) cultivating innovative placemaking practices that excavate the diverse meanings attributed to shared spaces by individuals and social groups. These practices aim to forge me- aningful connections between places across various cities and cultures; b) establish interdisciplinary learning environments that arise from the fusion of artistic practices with educational programs, spanning from school-level to higher education. These spaces transcend the boundaries between academia and society, as well as between diff erent disciplines; c) investigating the role and harnessing the potential of networked artistic practices within the creative placemaking process. This involves integrating these practices within the community and engaging other stakeholders, such as residents, students, and educatio- nal staff in the co-creation process, both in physical and digital realms; d) leveraging the capabilities of digital technologies to forge new connections between representations of places (including videos, photographs, and narratives) disseminated through digital networks. These eff orts contextualize activities within sociocultural settings where they can be utilized in creati- ve placemaking endeavours. A crucial ongoing consideration has been in determining the extent to which these objectives have been realized. Here, the evaluation leaned upon the aforementioned compilation of eight central values, extracted as the main action- and impact- ambitions of our program, in order to contribute towards 1) creating vibrant places, 2) building engaged communities, 3) reinforcing a sense of place & belonging, 4) growing sustaina- bility awareness 5) evoking sensory awareness & feeling for our places; 6) building creative societies; 7) celebrating diversity and inclusiveness and 8) creating shared learning spaces. These concepts are drawn from the deep connection with past and current placemaking practices worldwide. Most of these values gained traction decades ago when authors, architects, and urban practitioners like Jane Jacobs (1961), Jonathan Sime (1986), Edward Relph (1976) or Taylor (1988) among many others, introduced theories and ideas around the notion of city well-being, urban liveability and designing cities for people. In the context of modern urban development and placemaking, the combination of ideas and ideals from the past are nowadays promoted by initiatives such as the Project for Public Spaces 1 (PPS) and the forward-thinking New European Bauhaus 2 (NEB) that creates compelling placemaking principles. Both PPS and NEB, with their shared focus on human-centred design, sustain- ability, cultural context, collaboration, accessibility, and innovati- on, are forging a powerful alliance that aligns with European Urban Initiative 3 (EUI) objectives as well as the United Nations Sustainability Goal 4 of making cities and human settlements in- clusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. This convergence beckons policymakers and urban planners to align their strategies, chan- nelling resources, and expertise into the creation of inclusive, aesthetically inspiring, and sustainable urban environments, as well as to facilitate the transfer and integration of knowledge. To estimate the relevance of these concepts in the project acti- ons and the level by which they were achieved the evaluation 1 Project for Public Spaces https://www.pps.org/ 2 New European Bauhaus https://new-european-bauhaus.europa.eu/ index_en 3 European Urban Initiative https://www.urban-initiative.eu/ 4 Sustainable Cities and Communities; SDG 11: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/ goal11 Figure 1: The taxonomy of the adopted placemaking concepts, principal liveability values and the main actions and activities taken in the A-Place project as a basis for the impact evaluation framework ... (Madrazo., L.). Špela Verovšek: S KREATIVNIMI PRAKSAMI K USTVARJANJU PROSTORA: 72–75 75 THE CREATIVITY GAME – Theory and Practice of Spatial Planning No 11 / 2023 was meticulously tailored for each placemaking/creative practi- ce activity, considering the expectations of various stakeholders (e.g., artists, planners, citizens) participating in the events/acti- ons as well as the type of the activity and placemaking concepts adopted for their accomplishment. As such the taxonomy fra- mework was formed (Figure 1) as a basis for identifying possible interlinks and integral estimation. 4. CONCLUSION Throughout the project’s four-year duration, diverse methodo- logies were employed to embrace placemaking as a “collabora- tive process, ” aimed at shaping our public spaces to maximise their shared value. Beyond merely promoting better urban design, placemaking was considered a means to facilitate crea- tive patterns of use, paying particular attention to the physical, cultural, and social identities that defi ne localities (Martin, 2023) and support its ongoing evolution. Additionally, it served as a platform for learning and the exchange of knowledge. The project partners adopted a variety of tactics and communica- tion forms to execute activities, enhancing the capabilities of each participating organization. The transfer of expertise that happened in the course of collaborative activities positively af- fected a broad network of places involved in the activities across the partner cities. This contributed to diversifying the issues inherent in each node of the evolving network within the project and their interconnections. The emerging network of knowledge and action was fi nally delivered as a collective digi- tal platform which now serves as a foundation and transferable model for innovative forms of artistic production, placing digital media (such as virtual platforms, personal devices, and online presence with impacts in multiple locations) at the forefront of the creative and artistic process while redefi ning interactions with the public. Literature and sources Baum, F ., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854. Cornish, F ., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. (2023). Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3, 34. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1 Courage, C. (2020). The art of placemaking: A typology of art practices in placemaking. In The Routledge Handbook of Place (pp. 623-633). Routledge. Hölscher, K., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2021). Perspectives on urban transformation research: transformations in, of, and by cities. Urban Transformations, 3, 1-14. Landesman, R. (2013). Foreword. In Michael Rushton (ed.), Creative Communities: Art Works in Economic Development, Brookings Institution Press. Lang, S. (2017). The role of placemaking in sustainable planning: A case study of the east side of Cleveland, Ohio. Madsen, W . (2019). Re-creating community spaces and practices: Perspectives from artists and funders of creative placemaking. Journal of Applied Arts & Health, 10(1), 25-40. Markusen, A., Gadwa, A. (2019). Creative Placemaking. Refl ections on a 21st-century American arts policy initiative. In Cara Courage and Anita McKeown (eds.), Creative Placemaking Research, Theory and Practice. Routledge. Project for Public Spaces. (2007). What Is Placemaking? Retrieved from: https://www.pps.org/ article/what-is-placemaking Redaelli, E. (2018). Creative placemaking and theories of art: Analyzing a place-based policy in Portland. Cities, 72, 403-410. Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness (Vol. 1). Pion. Rosario Jackson, M. (2022). Creative Placemaking. National Endowment for the Arts. https:// www.arts.gov/impact/creative-placemaking Sime, J. D. (1986). Creating places or designing spaces? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 6(1), 49-63. Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological bulletin, 103(2), 193. Walker, J., Marsh, S. (2018). A conversation between a collaborating artist and curator Placemaking, socially engaged art, and deep investment in people. In Cara Courage and Anita McKeown (eds.), Creative Placemaking Research, Theory and Practice. Routledge. PROJEKT PROJECT Linking places through networked artistic practices Krepitev vezi med prostori in ljudmi s kreativnimi praksami ŠT. PROJEKTA PROJECT NO 607457-CREA-1-2019-1-ES-CULT-COOP2 LOKACIJA LOCATION Španija, Belgija, Ciper, Italija, Portugalska, Slovenija LETO YEAR 2019/2023 TIP PROJEKTA TYPE OF PROJECT Project programa Kreativna Evropa (Project under the Creative Europe programme) DELOVNA SKUPINA/WORKING GROUP Tadeja Zupančič (UL FA), Špela Verovšek (UL FA), Matevž Juvan- čič (UL FA) DRUGI SODELUJOČI OTHER PARTICIPANTS Leandro Madrazo, Veronika Antoniou, Maria Irene Aparicio, Luisa Bravo, Maša Cvetko, Simone Garagnani, Mario Hernández, Alenka Korenjak, Ángel Martín, Burak Pak, Petra Pferdmenges, Chrysi Rapanta, Julie Reveillon, Rosie Romero, Adrià S. Llorens, Teresa Tourvas, Ruben Verdú VODILNI PARTNER PROJECT LEADER Šola za arhitekturo La Salle Barcelona (School of Architecture La Salle Barcelona) PROJEKTNI PARTNERJI PROJECT PARTNERS Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za arhitekturo University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Architecture; prostoRož Ljubljana (Slove- nia), KU Leuven Brussels (Belgium), Alive Architecture Brussels (Belgium), City Space Architecture Bologna (Italy), LOOP Barce- lona (Spain), Urban Gorillas Nicosia (Cyprus), New University of Lisbon Lisbon (Portugal), PROJEKT SOFINANCIRAN S STRANI PROJECT CO-FUNDED BY Program Kreativna Evrropa, EU (Creative Europe Programme EU) Špela Verovšek: TOWARDS NETWORKED ARTISTIC PRACTICES IN PLACEMAKING: 72-75