GREEN IS GOOD
PLANNING URBAN GREEN 
SPACES WITH PEOPLE, 
NOT FOR PEOPLE
Martin Poga čar 
Jasna Fakin Bajec 
Petra Kolenc 
Jernej Tiran 
Katarina Polajnar Horvat 
Aleš Smrekar
Ljubljana 2019
UGB ovitek 5k19.indd   1 UGB ovitek 5k19.indd   1 6.5.2019   9:36:24 6.5.2019   9:36:24

GREEN IS GOOD
PLANNING URBAN GREEN 
SPACES WITH PEOPLE, 
NOT FOR PEOPLE
Martin Poga čar 
Jasna Fakin Bajec 
Petra Kolenc 
Jernej Tiran 
Katarina Polajnar Horvat 
Aleš Smrekar
Ljubljana 2019

GREEN IS GOOD:
PLANNING URBAN GREEN SPACES WITH PEOPLE, 
NOT FOR PEOPLE 
Authors:  Martin Poga čar, Jasna Fakin Bajec, Petra Kolenc, 
Jernej Tiran, Katarina Polajnar Horvat, Aleš Smrekar
Reviewed by:  Maja Simoneti, Silvia Gonzalez, and Csaba Bende
Proofreading:  Tadej Turnšek
Photography:  www.shutterstock.com unless author mentioned
Graphic design: Darko Turk
Published by:  Inštitut za kulturne in spominske študije ZRC SAZU
Represented by:  Tanja Petrović
Publisher:  Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU
Represented by:  Oto Luthar
Editor-in-chef:  Aleš Pogačnik
Print: Birografi ka Bori
Print run:  200
First edition, fi rst  printing , Ljubljana 2019
Digital version (pdf) is freely available according to the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence:
https://doi.org/10.3986/9789610501909
Publication was published as a part of the project UGB (Urban green belts - Smart integrated 
models for sustainable management of urban green spaces for creating more healthy and 
liveable urban environments). The work of the ZRC SAZU’s researchers and professional 
sta ff , who were involved in the UGB project, was partly co- fi nanced by the Slovenian 
Research Agency. 
Lead partner: Municipality of 12th District of Budapest (Hegyvidék)
Partners: The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe • Research 
Studios Austria – Studio iSPACE • Maribor Development Agency • Ma łopolska Region • 
Municipality of Padua • Municipal District of Prague 6 • Zadar County Development Agency 
ZADRA NOVA • Municipality of Krakow
CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji
Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana
711.4
712.25
    GREEN is good : planning urban green spaces with people, not for people / 
Martin Poga čar ... [et al.] ; reviewed by Maja Simoneti, Silvia Gonzales, and 
Csaba Bende. - 1st ed., 1st print-run. - Ljubljana : Založba ZRC, ZRC SAZU, 2019
ISBN 978-961-05-0190-9
1. Pogačar, Martin 2. Simoneti, Maja
COBISS.SI-ID 299688192

GREEN IS GOOD
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .4
2  SCENARIOS, ACTIONS, SOLUTIONS.   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 10
2.1 Three scenarios: a general framework  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 11
2.2 Three actions: a general framework    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 15
3  METHODS AND TOOLS .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 20
3.1 ASSESSING THE SITUATION: Stakeholder Map .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 23
3.1.1 SWOT analysis     .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 23
3.1.2 Questionnaire .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 24
3.1.3 Interview  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 26
3.2 GET IN THE FIELD .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 28
3.2.1 Social events  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 29
3.2.2 Competitions  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 31
3.3 COMMUNITY BUILDING AND SUSTAINABILITY    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 32
3.3.1 Participatory budgeting .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 33
3.3.2 Stewardship .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 34
3.3.3 Classroom in the forest/park  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 35
3.3.4 Ethnographic workshops   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 36
3.3.5 World café    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 37
3.3.6 Problem tree  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 38
3.3.7 Parliament in the park  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 39
3.3.8 Community consultative assembly  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 40
3.4 CREATIVE PLANNING: ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 41
3.4.1 Future workshop  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 41
3.4.2 Lotus Blossom     .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 42
3.4.3 Moodboard    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 43
3.5 TACTICS FOR FOSTERING COMMUNITY COHESION .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 44
3.5.1 Format, theme, setting variation .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 44
3.5.2 Problem-solving working group with a chair from underrepresented 
group  .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 45
3.5.3 Creating intergenerational ties .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 46
3.5.4 Disarming the eternal opponent    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 47
3.6 COMMUNICATION    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 49
4  IMPLEMENTED METHODS IN UGB PILOT AREAS    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 52
References    .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 65
ACTIVITY SCHEME .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   . 66

GREEN IS GOOD 4
1   INTRODUCTION

GREEN IS GOOD 5
WHAT IS “GREEN IS GOOD”? 
The “Green is good” motto embodies various meanings that depend on types of en-
vironments (rural, urban) and settlements (small and large), as well as on di ff erent 
historical periods and political systems, and specifi c regional and local developments. 
Recently, facing signifi cant climate changes, pollution, and growing of populations, 
increasing poverty and inequality, the green areas are increasingly being recognised 
as spaces of special importance. It is no longer a groundbreaking statement that green 
spaces can improve people’s health, enhance social interaction and provide the space 
for leisure or recreational activities. In bigger and densely populated areas, urban 
green spaces (UGS) can reduce air pollution and improve climate, contribute to keep-
ing ecological balance, promote biodiversity, reduce noise, and also improve urban 
economy. UGS can foster cohesion between the city and the countryside, and fortify 
territorial cohesion. If the UGS are not in a good shape they can easily turn into a bur-
den and a constant “battlefi eld” between inhabitants and the responsible authorities.
As green spaces and their thoughtful development and management enable us tack-
ling a series of harmful environmental impacts and climate change related risks there 
is a common demand for better functioning operational models for Urban Green Space 
governance. This, consequently, has required new ways of planning processes, which 
have started to include the perception and voice of di ff erent sectors and actors in-
volved in planning and maintenance of UGS: local decision-making bodies, experts 
(urban planners, architect, geographers, anthropologist, and sociologist), businesses 
and civil society. Until recently, civil society (e.g. inhabitants of the city) has been 
often insu ffi  ciently involved in the management of UGS. This led to unbalanced ur-
ban development, poor identifi cation of relevant actors, and the exclusion of various 
marginal groups as well as power imbalance in the investor-authority-expert-citizen 
relations. 
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE TOOLKIT? 
The main purpose of the toolkit is to help users devise approaches and strategies to 
develop and implement integrative approaches to sustainably involving communities 
and other stakeholders into planning, management and maintenance of urban green 
spaces. It features a set of soft tools and methods to facilitate, plan and support 
community involvement in municipalities as well as across municipalities’ borders 
(e.g. Functional urban area, FUA). 
WHO CAN USE THE TOOLKIT? 
The toolkit can be used, for example, by municipalities to provide channels and op-
portunities for community involvement at di ff erent stages of spatial interventions, 

GREEN IS GOOD 6
from planning and development (regeneration – renovation, including design and re-
programming) to management and maintenance (rules of use, valuation).
Moreover, the toolkit can also assist municipalities in improving their capacities to 
listen and to involve the communities in thinking, deciding, planning, designing and 
playing an active part in the development of green areas. Importantly, the process of 
community involvement in green spaces planning and management should start as 
early as possible. 
Crucially, the toolkit also emphasises the importance for citizens and communities to 
exercise their rights, roles, functions and responsibilities in decision-making process-
es, and provides methods and tools for o ffi  cial representatives (e.g. municipalities) 
to develop procedures and practices for facilitating and encouraging participatory 
planning and management.
ABOUT THE PROJECT UGB
This toolkit has been developed during the implementation of Urban Green Belts 
(UGB) project (Interreg, Central Europe, 2018-2019), which main objective was to 
improve planning, management and decision-making capacities of the public sector 
related to urban green spaces, thus creating integrated sustainable UGS planning and 
management systems. 
Special attention was given to functional urban areas (FUA), a functional economic 
unit characterised by densely inhabited “urban cores” and “hinterlands” whose la-
bour market is highly integrated with the cores.
Following a comparative situation analysis, the partners jointly designed innovative 
methods and tools to facilitate sustainable UGS management. They focused  on: 
Green Infrastructure as a smart tool for providing ecological, economic 
and social benefits. 
Community involvement into planning and implementation processes. 
Multi-stakeholder governance.
The solutions, methods and tools were compiled into three UGB Smart Models that 
were tested through Pilot Actions during the project. Presented toolkit has been pri-
marily developed as a Model for a Community Involvement. The presented methods 
and tools for community building were tested in three pilot studies conducted in Mar-
ibor (Slovenia), Krakow (Poland), and Budapest (Hungary) (see chapter 4).  
 
SOME IMPORTANT CONCEPTS: 
Community: a group of local or non-local residents, FUA commuters, children or elderly, 
property owners or investors who identify a longer term interest in certain problematic. 

GREEN IS GOOD 7
Civil initiative: a varied, in-fl ux and ad hoc group of people with shared interests. They 
gather around a specifi c problem for shorter or longer periods of time. 
Sustainability/durability: it is important to facilitate the conditions for community sus-
tainability over longer periods of time. After a specifi c action/project has been completed, 
the interest may wane, and with it a source of new ideas and liveliness of a wider society.
Inclusivity/equity: important element of any participatory activity is equity: Equity means 
making sure that all groups are represented according to their specifi c needs, demands and 
expectations, regardless of attributes such as gender, age, ethnicity or disability.
Notes from the fi eld: 
The UGB Krakow team reports: Unfortunately the level of engagement within the 
municipality of Zielonki (the closest and the most important stakeholder) was very 
weak. This example shows the di ffi  culty in engagement local municipalities as a stake-
holders within the FUA region. However within the Krakow Municipality the value of 
the Witkowice forest was appreciated and in the master plans for next 5 years it was 
decided that the area of the forest will be increased from 15 to 120 ha which among 
others may be the credit of activities led during the UGB project.
WHY IS INCLUSIVE PARTICIPATION IMPORTANT? 
Presented methods and toolkits are based on principles of participatory democracy, 
which requires the inclusion of di ff erent stakeholders. According to the principles 
of participatory democracy, the basis for sustainable and inclusive growth (Europe 
2020), the public has the right to know and have a say about what, why and how is go-
ing on in their green areas. Hence, it is important to facilitate an environment where 
communities are encouraged and enabled to take active part in activities that a ff ect 
the places where they live and work (Bahrain Shuib et al. 2015: 315). 
The best way for a successful participatory process is to combine top-down and bot-
tom-up approaches. Thus, the participatory processes will take into account the needs 
of those in power and those a ff ected by authority decisions. 
Notes from the fi eld: 
The UGB Maribor team reports: “The challenge we faced was setting the time to 
ensure all relevant stakeholder could attend [meeting, workshop]: /…/  If an event is 
organized in the morning, people are at work and it is very di ffi  cult to get anybody, 
who is not present as part of their working obligations. In the afternoon, people who 
would come as part of their working obligations, do not attend as they have other 
private obligations … also, the interested public has very varied obligations and is 
diffi  cult to fi nd a suitable date. As [one of their events] was organized on Saturday 
morning, the interested and general public were present, but no public o ffi  cials at-
tended”.

GREEN IS GOOD 8
WHY ARE CITIZENS IMPORTANT IN PARTICIPATORY PLANNING OF UGS? 
Citizens as the central stakeholders are seen as actors who can decidedly contribute 
to the success of initiatives and actions. It is up to the municipality to fi nd out about 
citizens’ needs and expectations and to provide opportunities for dialogue between 
stakeholders, ensuring equity between stakeholders with di ff erent power roles (for 
example, investors and community groups). Such an integrative environment is the 
necessary precondition for bringing into dialogue various views, problems and solu-
tions (Bahrain Shuib et al. 2015: 312). This is why the toolkit emphasises active par-
ticipation as a process:
of decision making and problem solving, involving individuals and groups who 
represent diverse interests, expertise and points of view and who act for the 
good of all those a ff ected by the decisions they make and the actions that fol-
low (Fisher, 2001: 15). 
Until recently, citizens and NGOs, civil initiatives and also vulnerable or marginalised 
groups were only sporadically involved in planning and managing urban green spaces. 
This resulted in urban development practices that often failed to account for citizens’ 
needs and missed the opportunity to garner new ideas. T oday, the benefi ts of coopera-
tion among di ff erent sectors and actors are clear. Integrative approach involves: local 
decision-making bodies, experts (urban planners, architects, geographers, anthropol-
ogists, sociologists, etc.), businesses and citizens.
WHAT IS MEANT BY PARTICIPATION? 
Participation is a set of principles rather than an ideology, an ethics rather than 
a model … Deep down, participation is about learning to respect and listen to the 
opinions, feelings, and knowledge of those we have in the past “targeted”; being 
transparent regarding our intentions to intervene in their lives … Being careful to 
decentralise and delegate, allowing the less powerful to manage greater resources 
and assume more responsibility; sharing our knowledge and expertise … In short, it is 
about opening up, taking risks and showing trust. (cf. Fisher 2001: 9)
Formal participation is a formalised way of public participation defi ned by laws and reg-
ulations, national or European documents. Other term for this type of public participation 
are top down participation, legally regulated public participation, obligatory participation, 
etc. In essence, the legal frame sets the minimum requirements and obliges the authorities 
to carry out all necessary activities.
Informal participation is more informal, where people more easily express their opinion. 
However, it usually does not include institutions that have direct infl uence on a specifi c 
area. Informal participation may over time transform into formal participation. This occurs 
when public interest and the interest of formal decision making bodies meet, resulting in 
bridging the divide between bottom-up and top-down approaches. The latter makes for a 

GREEN IS GOOD 9
crucial ingredient of any successful example of public participation in planning and main-
tenance of urban green spaces. (adapted from IPoP 2017, 10—11)
IMPLEMENTING PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES INTO PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 
OF GREEN SPACES WILL: 
Enable the citizens to voice their ideas, concerns or demands.
Foster citizen involvement into detecting problems and articulating solu-
tions.
Facilitate creating, elaborating, and implementing solutions through in-
clusion of ideas.
Enable participation in planning and management activities and enable 
cooperation among various stakeholders.
Ensure sustainability of community involvement in green spaces planning 
and management.
NOTE! 
Active community involvement reduces scepticism towards government, builds societal 
trust, and enhances administrative decision-making processes. Participation sets up chan-
nels for expressing people’s perceptions and attitudes and for establishing equity in dia-
logue between stakeholders because it encourages them to explore the values, meanings 
and senses of the places; promotes the realisation that places, the environment, and living 
conditions, and promotes forms of governance (co-)constructed by citizens. 

GREEN IS GOOD 10
2  SCENARIOS, 
ACTIONS, 
SOLUTIONS

GREEN IS GOOD 11
To get the most out of this toolkit, it is essential for the user to do the necessary pre-
paratory work and obtain a thorough understanding of a specifi c location and prob-
lem, as well as the state of urbanisation, economic factors, etc. It is crucial to map 
out the stakeholders, their ambitions, motives, power relations. Most importantly, it 
should be clear what are the views of the communities, among others, residents, 
FUA residents and commuters, youth or the elderly.
The toolkit envisages 3 general scenarios that provide an ideal-typical frame for the 
possible actions a municipality may undertake when planning green spaces: Devel-
opment of new green spaces, Protection of green spaces, Regeneration of green 
spaces.
2.1 Three scenarios: a general framework
MAKING CITIES GREEN: Development of new green spaces
Development of new green spaces is clear in terms of benefi ts, and the situation is rel-
atively straightforward when the “community is there” and it agrees with the planned 
intervention. It may turn out, however, that certain groups oppose planned actions 
(which may also be an opportunity for a community to form) or are not interested 
in the development of new green spaces. In order to decide on further actions, it is 
necessary to:
Identify the current use and status of the area in question. 
Map distrust, fear or possible hidden agendas of the community, urban 
planners, investors and/or owners (transparency is essential). 
Assess the pros and cons, with a view to wider the interests of the com-
munity, including vulnerable and underrepresented groups.
Development scenarios: 
DEVELOPMENT-S1: Area users and owners plan to develop a new green space, and a repre-
sentative of this community asks the local authority and/or private actors for support, to 
assure fi nancial resources, etc. The community is unanimous regarding the development 
idea and the new UGS content (playground, common gardens, place for markets, recrea-
tional facilities). 
DEVELOPMENT-S2: Members of local community are invited to take part in the design 
process, but are incoherent in their interests. In some situations, local authorities (and 
urban planners) want the community involved in the detailed planning of UGS, but it is 
very di ffi  cult to fi nd where the common interest lies, because it is weak or because some 
individuals and groups oppose it. 
DEVELOPMENT-S3: A community is inexistent or the proposed intervention proves to be an 
inadequate motivating factor. For example, the commuters who have been using a specifi c 
site for daily parking might have a tendency to oppose the development plan that would 
limit their parking options.

GREEN IS GOOD 12
In practice:
Bagry Reservoir, Krakow
In 2017, an international student design workshop was held to devise a development 
concept of development for the eastern part of Bagry Wielkie City Park with the 
thematic area “Little Croatia”. It was organised by the Krakow City Hall - the Chan-
cellery of the President, the Krakow Greenery Authority, and the Institute of Land-
scape Architecture, Krakow University of Technology. During the workshop students 
of landscape architecture, architecture and related subjects from Split, Zagreb and 
Krakow worked in international and interdisciplinary groups on conceptual ideas on 
the eastern part of the Park. The design included communication system, composition 
of greenery, beach, elements of small architecture, and educational path on topics 
related to Croatia. The essence of this case is the involvement of the public in the 
fi nancing of the tasks and participation of the international community. The case 
represents a good example of combining and complementing di ff erent tasks of urban 
green development.
Azory, Krakow
The objective was to create a space for recreation and education, as well as to im-
prove the aesthetics and quality of life among the blocks of fl ats in Azory, one of the 
most socially challenging districts in Krakow (varied population, including the elderly, 
families with diff erent backgrounds, etc.). To do so, the authorities wanted to inte-
grate the local community, boost citizens’ involvement, and enlarge the amount of 
green areas in Krakow. A group of local residents interested in creating a community 
garden in their neighbourhood were engaged in the process of creating the project 
and taking care of the area. They created the Azory Community Garden and formed a 
community of about 20 people. The project also included experts working in the mu-
nicipality and from Local Activity Point “Azory” and Municipal Social Welfare Centre 
of Krakow. A number of participatory methods were used: Community meetings (pres-
entation of problems, discussion), workshops with innovative interactive methods 
(word café, trouble tree, brainstorming, working in pairs, etc.), and various social 
events (exhibitions, cultural events, markets, etc.).
SAVE THE GREENS: Protection of green spaces
When UGS are under threat of elimina on (by local authori es and/or investors and/or own-
ers), it is crucial to involve the community (residents, other users). Regardless of whether they 
agree with the planned ac on, they should have an equal role in the proposed planning ac on 
and in the decision-making process. Likewise, the opposing views of the involved stakeholders 
should be presented and discussed to arrive at a solu on. To do so, refer to Ac ons 1–3 and 
select appropriate methods and tools (see chapter 3).

GREEN IS GOOD 13
Protection scenarios:
PROTECT-S1: An investor wants to eliminate the UGS and build an o ffi  ce building. The com-
munity is coherent and empowered to oppose the decision and proposes an alternative, 
but other stakeholders refuse to take the community as an equal partner. In this case, the 
municipality should intervene to provide a setting for equitable discussion.
PROTECT-S2: The community is empowered to resist the investor or initiator of the elimina-
tion of green space, but is unable to come up with a consistent/sustainable solution what 
to do. The municipality should use one or more of the methods (e.g. CCA) to assist the 
community in pooling their resources.
In practice:
Hotels for insects, Krakow
Hotels for insects was an initiative to bring attention to the importance of the small-
est city dwellers. It resulted in four sets of honeycomb-shaped hotel modules, fea-
turing plastic “patches”, specially prepared beams, hollow bricks, or wood. To cor-
respond to various species’ need, each was fi lled with a di ff erent material, such as 
cones or bamboo tubes, to help make the hotel an appropriate nesting facility.
GREEN REBOOT: Regeneration of green spaces
Regeneration (in some cases overlapping with development or protection) may entail 
the renovation or restructuring of green spaces. This may trigger di ff erent responses 
of local residents, users and wider interested urban community, including distrust and 
fear of change. The latter may arise from a lack of information, misinformation, or 
poorly defi ned and communicated planning activities (transparency). It is essential to 
identify the positions and scenarios for further action, with the help of the tools and 
methods that can be adapted for your specifi c situation. 
Regeneration scenarios: 
TRANSFORMATION-S1: The existing solution is far removed from “the green is good” per-
spective, or no longer compliant with environmental standards. Renovation would address 
this issue, but the community distrusts the intentions/motives/interests. 
TRANSFORMATION-S2: The existing solution is recognised as inadequate by the community 
and the proposed action would intervene into the established ways of life. How to balance 
the needs of the community and the “green is good” concept?
In practice: 
Community planning on the Teleki Square, Budapest
The story is an example of worst and best practice at the same time: the municipality 
decided to transform the market building standing on one corner of the square into 
a shopping centre without asking anyone. Parking lots have also been built, so the 
public space was further reduced. Due to strong criticism coming from both profes-
sional organisations and residents, the municipality engaged an external facilitator 

GREEN IS GOOD 14
to redesign the other part of the square (deprived green area) through a participative 
planning processes. This is perhaps the most known example of participatory planning 
in Hungary.
Krakow, Flower meadows 2017 
In 2017, a total of 10 hectares of fl ower meadows absorbing dust were planted across 
the city. The Krakow municipality organised meetings that included presentations, 
explanation from experts, discussion, and consultations about situating the mead-
ows. In addition, they communicated through social media, as well as organised pic-
nics, bus to the park, etc. As part of the “Plant yourself for green” action, the City 
Council organises planting of trees, fl owers, and fl ower meadows across the whole 
Cracow area. All Green Initiative actions are planned from March to the end of May. 
Thousands of trees, bushes and fl owers are planted together with citizens.
Photo presentation of the 
Krakow’s pilot action and its 
future plans on Green lab in 
Nova Gorica. (Photo: Petra 
Kolenc).

GREEN IS GOOD 15
2.2 Three actions: a general framework
Adapt your subsequent community oriented actions depending on the scenario (or any 
variation thereof) that is being played out. When engaging in actions to assist in de-
tecting, forming and maintaining a community, you should have as detailed an idea as 
possible about what is going on. To outline the dimensions of the problem and power 
relations involved, a Stakeholder Map will help. 
It should include: 
stakeholders 
social, political and/or economic statuses and backgrounds 
motives and interests
 
The Stakeholder Map will enable you to get an idea of the stakeholders’ respective 
positions regarding the planned activity, to foreground the equity principle, as well 
as to help anticipate and resolve potential issues. This will enable you to devise a 
consistent and balanced planning and management process.
The Stakeholder Map will help you to respond to the 3 scenarios (see previous sec-
tion). In the process of detailing community involvement, consider adapting to your 
specifi c situation any combination of the 3 actions:
ACTION 1: Initiating community practice (detecting/identifying)
Before you start working with a community, you have to thoroughly understand the 
motives of all stakeholders and take into account local specifi cs, historical back-
ground, power relations, investor motives, and the long-term planning of the munici-
pality. This is the time to make the Stakeholder Map.
Start with a list of guiding questions:
What kind of intervention is planned/proposed (introduction, elimina-
tion, transformation)?
Who is the initiator (community, investor, owner, municipal authority)? 
What are their motives (identification of needs and desires)?
Who is the owner/investor? What are their motives?
Who is the end user?
Who is the community?
What is the position of the community?
Who might be affected? Who might benefit?

GREEN IS GOOD 16
What are the possible community benefits? 
What are the possible environmental benefits/risks?
The Map will help you visualise and assess the situation and identify the problem, 
stakeholders, community (as well as other possible end-users) and chart out the 
stakeholders’ relations.
Methods and tools you can use (see Chapter 3): SWOT analysis, Survey with self-adminis-
tered questionnaire; Interview; Questionnaire
ACTION 2: Developing the community (mobilising)
This action entails methods and tools to mobilise, or in some cases assist in initiating 
the potential community (residents, commuters, the elderly, children, visitors, etc.; 
there may be some overlap with Action 1). Essentially, Action 2 builds (on the results 
of Action 1) and furthers the understanding of the community and its relation towards 
other stakeholders, as well as its position in relation to the “green is good” concept. 
What is more, building on the Stakeholder Map, appropriate selection of methods and 
tools can be selected and adapted to address the issues related to raising awareness, 
collecting ideas and building trust.
identifi cation
management
sustainability mobilisation
COMMUNITY
Four actions for community involvement.
Methods and tools you can use (see Chapter 3): Public/Social events; Social events (e.g. 
lectures, market, sports events); Public interventions; Artistic intervention; Competitions 
(photography, painting, drawing, modelling, essay/literature); Picnic; Local newspaper; 
Social media; Participatory budgeting; Creating intergenerational ties

GREEN IS GOOD 17
Notes from the fi eld: 
The UGB Budapest team reports: Community building is a slow process: regarding 
Phase 1 we started to build up a community through analysing local situations (asking 
stewards about their motivations, asking participants of diff erent programs about 
their wishes), we identifi ed stakeholders and mobilised the wider community through 
events and communication.
A little mole warms that 
the neglected urban area 
in the Hegyvidék district in 
Budapest will soon change 
(Photo: Bendegúz Kovács)

GREEN IS GOOD 18
ACTION 3: Supporting the community (management and sustainability)
Depending on the specifi cs of the situation, a community may dissolve after its mis-
sion has been accomplished (more likely when civil initiatives are involved). Some-
times, however, it is necessary for a community to continue its e ff orts over longer 
periods of time. 
To maintain a functioning community, detect potential lack of interest or waning mo-
tivation. In this case, it is important to encourage the community to build trust, recip-
rocal relationships and networking, to delegate tasks and responsibilities in a way that 
involves people, and to make sure their contributions are acknowledged. Emphasise 
responsibility and appropriate delegation of tasks, give credit for participants’ contri-
butions, and curb hierarchical structures to the minimum necessary. Avoid patronising 
attitudes and statements, and always bear in mind di ff erent power relations among 
stakeholders: contribute to provide an environment where power hierarchies can be 
mitigated so that non-institutional communities, including marginalised groups, gain 
voice, visibility and recognition.
Methods and tools you can use (see Chapter 3): Community consultative assembly (CCA), 
Creating intergenerational ties, Participatory budgeting, Contracts, Stewardship, Format 
variation, Disarming the eternal opponent.
NOTE!
Depending on the specifi c context, as well as on the specifi cs of the community (residents, 
commuters, etc.), certain actions can be omitted, adjusted or any combination thereof 
implemented.

GREEN IS GOOD 19
Your situation
What is the planned acticity
Pick a scenario!
Developing greens
Scenario 1
Make a Communication
Plan
Make a Stakeholder Map
Use:
-Assesing
the
situation
-Get in
 Use:
-Community
building /
sustainability
-Get in the
 Use:
-Assesing
the
situation
Use:
-Community
building /
sustainability
-Creative planning
-Tactics for
fostering cohesion
Detecting / identifying
A1
Mobilising
A1
Management & sustainability
A3
What action BEST suits your situation?
Pick an Action!
Protecting greens
Scenario 2
Regenerating greens
Scenario 3
Flowchart to help design scenarios, actions, and approaches.

GREEN IS GOOD 20
3  METHODS 
AND TOOLS 

GREEN IS GOOD 21
This chapter comprises a list of the methods and tools loosely grouped in thematic 
clusters (some may overlap): Assessing the situation, Get in the fi eld, Community 
building and sustainability, Creative planning: engaging the community, Tactics for 
fostering community cohesion, and Communication. 
Adapt the methods and tools to your specifi c needs and requirements.
The methods and tools presented in the toolkit correspond to di ff erent situations and pro-
vide guidance for various Actions (1—3) for community involvement in planning and man-
agement of urban green spaces. 
It emphasises the importance of continuous work with community (identifi cation) and ad-
dresses situations where community cannot be formed (mobilisation) or has troubles with 
internal communication (management), and where the future life of the community is at 
stake (sustainability).
NOTE!
GENERAL TIPS FOR SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE METHODS 
Consider the following set of principles when organising a meeting, interview or 
public event/installation.
Set the context
The place where the meeting/event takes place is an important factor in ensur-
ing balanced participation of di ff erent groups. Deformalizing the setting by breaking 
up the formal structure and including elements of, for example, World café, can 
contribute to creating a pleasant, unintimidating atmosphere, facilitating a relaxed 
discussion environment. In addition, sensitive design ensures that the members of 
underrepresented groups get attention.
To design the setting, use local, easily recognisable venues, structure the space using 
tables and lights, include snacks and drinks.
Create hospitable space
Note the importance of creating a hospitable, safe and inviting space. When par-
ticipants feel comfortable, they can do their most creative thinking, speaking, and 
listening. In particular, consider how your invitation and the set-up contribute to 
creating a welcoming atmosphere.
Explore questions that matter
Find relevant questions that resonate with the real-life concerns of the group. Pow-
erful questions help attract collective energy, insight, and action. Depending on the 
timeframe available and your objectives, you may explore a single question or use a 
progressively deeper line of inquiry.
Encourage everyone’s contribution
People often not only want to participate, but also to actively contribute and make 
a diff erence. It is important to encourage everyone in your meeting to contribute 
their ideas and perspectives, while also allowing anyone who wants to participate by 
simply listening.

GREEN IS GOOD 22
Connect diverse perspectives
The opportunity to move between tables, meet new people, actively contribute to 
the discussion, and link the essence of the discoveries to ever-widening circles of 
thought. As participants transfer key ideas or themes to new tables, they exchange 
perspectives, greatly enriching the possibility for surprising new insights.
Listen together for patterns and insights
The quality of our listening is perhaps the most important factor in any public or 
private debate. Through practicing shared listening and paying attention to themes, 
patterns and insights, we begin to sense a connection to the larger whole. Encourage 
people to attentively listen to what is being said and paying attention to nonverbal 
communication.
Share collective discoveries
Conversations at diff erent tables or meetings will result in complementary, opposing 
ideas or solutions which refl ect a pattern of wholeness that connects with the con-
versations at the other tables and meetings or events. Making shared achievements 
visible to everyone even over longer periods of time is invaluable. 
Presentation of the Hegyvidek/ Budapest’s  pilot action and its future plans on Green lab in 
Nova Gorica (Photo: Petra Kolenc).

GREEN IS GOOD 23
3.1 ASSESSING THE SITUATION: Stakeholder Map
3.1.1 SWOT analysis 
SWOT analysis provides a point of entry into an unknown territory and allows for an 
analysis of di ff erent challenges faced by communities and their green areas. It is a 
method of determining the basic characteristics of a specifi c situation. Use it to assess 
the strengths (S), weaknesses (W), opportunities (O), and threats (T) of a solution to 
a problem (on local, FUA, national or even international levels). 
SWOT involves specifying the objective of the project and identifying the favourable 
and/or unfavourable internal and external factors that may a ff ect the planning or 
maintenance process. In the fi eld of community participation in planning and man-
agement of green spaces, SWOT analysis can be adapted and applied to get a wider 
picture: to make a Stakeholder Map or indicate potential paths forward. 
Applicability: SWOT analysis is used to fi nd out internal challenges of community and UGS 
(strengths and weaknesses), the position of community in relation to external challenges 
(e.g. national, international). SWOT analysis may also be used as a tool used to structure a 
brainstorming session or to collect ideas about a particular issue or problem. As a result, a 
problem or process that’s addressed using the SWOT tool may itself be thought of in terms 
of actions. Not least, it will help conceptualise, carry out and evaluate activities.

GREEN IS GOOD 24
3.1.2 Questionnaire
Questionnaire, structured or semi-structured, allows you to probe opinions and feel-
ings of a wider sample of people. Questions have to be carefully selected, clear and 
to the point. Adapt it to the specifi cities of the situation:
Self-administered questionnaire: respondents complete the questions 
without interviewer’s involvement. This is a convenient way to collect 
large amounts of data for statistical analysis. If designed and implement 
properly, it presents a good chance to get an overview of opinions of the 
general population or specific target groups. A self-administered ques-
tionnaire has to be simple and short, which requires a lot of effort in 
its design. This survey mode can also affect the quality of results, as we 
cannot ask people all we would like to. 
Online survey: use one of the tools available (e.g. SurveyMonkey, Survey-
Gizmo) to design and distribute your survey, and collect feedback. This 
approach can be very efficient, yielding substantial amounts of data, but 
be aware of the generation gap.
Semi-structured, structured: depending on the specific context and 
situation, adjust the questionnaire to suit your needs for, for example, 
more fluid, open collection of ideas and opinions, or more targeted re-
sponse to a specific issue.

GREEN IS GOOD 25
Avoid closed questions; ask one question at a time; do not use complex questions, 
but rather several simpler ones; avoid questions that suggest answers. Always keep 
in mind: know your topic and your goal, prepare questions thoroughly, engage a test 
reader.
Applicability: When you need to know about citizens’ views regarding green areas in their 
community, who, why and how visits/uses them, what mode of transport they use, are 
they satisfi ed with existing green spaces, what would they like to improve, what are their 
motivations for visit etc. 
Questionnaire allows you to collect and analyse results by demographics and socio-econom-
ic characteristics. The results will help you design urban planning policies and take into 
account residents’ opinions and needs.
For example, the municipality would like to probe the public mood regarding planned elim-
ination of green spaces: using a questionnaire will help assess how people feel about it and 
detect the degree of interest among residents/citizens.

GREEN IS GOOD 26
3.1.3 Interview
Interview is a (semi-)formal meeting between two or more people (the interviewer 
and the interviewee/s) where the interviewer aims to collect information, attitudes, 
wishes, ideas. It is an opportunity to hear various voices and become more familiar 
with their problems, needs and experiences. It is also an opportunity to collect ideas 
about how to approach challenges. Interview will allow you to inform and raise indi-
vidual/community awareness about the pressing issues. Thinking and discussing ‘hot 
topics’ will enable you to deepen the knowledge and to devise an approach using dif-
ferent, innovative perspectives and points of view. Interview is particularly useful in 
pursuing in-depth information, as it allows you to ask follow-up questions.
Adapt it to the specifi cities of the situation: 
General interview guide approach: the guide approach is intended to 
ensure that the same general areas of information are collected from 
each interviewee (to ensure comparability); this provides more focus 
than the conversational approach, but still allows a degree of freedom 
and adaptability in obtaining the information from the interviewee.
Informal, conversational interview: useful when gathering basic infor-
mation on a topic; to remain as open and adaptable to interviewee’s na-
ture and priorities, ask no predetermined questions: “go with the flow”.

GREEN IS GOOD 27
Standardised, open-ended interview: the same open-ended questions 
are asked to all interviewees (t ensure comparability); this approach fa-
cilitates faster interviews that can be more easily analysed and com-
pared.
Closed, fixed-response interview: all interviewees are asked the same 
questions and requested to choose answers from among the same set of 
alternatives; useful for those not versed in interviewing.
Focus-group interview: more interviewees are involved in the interview.
Applicability: Use it when you need to hear and compare the voice of the residents (lo-
cals), it o ff ers you a possibility to become much more familiar with certain needs/prob-
lems/wishes of the community. Questions should be clear, possibly open-ended, to allow 
for potential new/unanticipated topics. Ask person’s opinion about the topic; ask about 
their feelings rather than what they think; still try to get facts about the topic, etc. Con-
cluding questions may give the interviewee space to provide any information they think is 
important. 
Also think about the setting; record the interview if possible and if the interviewee agrees.
NOTE! Tips for conducting the interview: 
The successfully complete the interview, you need to consider the following steps: 
Explain the purpose of the interview to the interviewee.
Address terms of confi dentiality.
Explain the format of the interview.
Indicate how long the interview usually takes.
Allow interviewee to clarify any doubts about the interview.
Prepare a method for recording data, e.g. take notes, and check if the tape recorder 
works.
Be tolerant, sensitive and patient to provocative and unconventional opinions (re-
main as neutral as possible).
Control the course of the interview to avoid digressions from the topic.
Test the reliability and validity of what the interviewee says.
Ask one question at a time.
After the interview: 
Check if the tape recorder, if used, worked throughout the interview.
Make any notes on your written notes.
Write down any observations made during the interview.
Prepare the interview material for analysis.
Determine the validity of the interview fi ndings.
Communicate fi ndings of the study based.

GREEN IS GOOD 28
3.2 GET IN THE FIELD
Various types of public interventions, which are the central idea behind Get in the 
fi eld approach, help open up the space for public communication. Public and social 
events, as well as competitions and artistic interventions, can be used to create a 
‘positive disruption in public space’ (picnic, exhibition, talk, library under treetops, 
etc.). Such events have the potential to challenge the established confi gurations of 
urban public space and public relations: they make people stop and think, engage 
with the topic actively and informally, and interact with other people. It is about tak-
ing participants out of their comfort zones and represents a good opportunity to raise 
awareness, spark, promote and collect new ideas.

GREEN IS GOOD 29
3.2.1 Social events 
Social event in Hegyvidek (Budapest) (photo: Tamara Tarnoki)
Social events (e.g. lectures, picnics, markets, sports events) are useful when you 
need to attract wider population (or specifi cally targeted community) to meet in a 
public space. An event can be an informal, networking gathering that provides an 
opportunity to get in contact with others in a setting that encourages discussion. 
The social event can serve as an umbrella event for other type of activities (e.g. a 
picnic can also include a public debate). When preparing for the event, think about 
the nature of the problem; the goals you want to achieve; the sort of community you 
want to attract; if needed, prepare a questionnaire; bring a voice recorder, camera 
(consider GDPR). Events can be organised in a public space, park, botanical gardens, 
marketplace, square, etc.
Adapt the event to a specifi c situation:
Sports event: a great way to combine socialising and discussion with 
food and drinks, and add an element of competition. It is an opportunity 
to informally talk to and bring in dialogue people from various areas, 
with different backgrounds. It is also an opportunity to test the atmos-
phere and promote the prospective UGS planning activities.
Sensory tour: organise a tour through the area in question, invite partic-
ipants to take part in actively, viscerally experiencing the surroundings: 
feel, touch, smell, go barefoot, observe, listen. Particularly suitable for 
children.

GREEN IS GOOD 30
Picnic: A picnic is an opportunity to socialise and informally discuss is-
sues. Incorporate gastronomical elements to reduce tension and stress, 
engage participants in preparation process: delegate pleasant tasks (buy-
ing ingredients, preparing the venue, making food, cleaning up) as well 
as enjoy the fruits of everyone’s labour (dancing).
Open-air classroom: This is an opportunity to invite people to the site of 
planned intervention, to make them feel the connection to the site, or 
to determine whether such a connection exists. Ideally, open-air class-
room will entice people to take part in a semi-structured setting, where 
the facilitator presents an idea, followed by a discussion. During the 
process, facts and statistics, as well as good practices can be correlated 
with people’s understanding of problematics. The basic idea is to put the 
community in dialogue with other stakeholders.
Art intervention: Use it to raise awareness of the green spaces and to 
gain new ideas about what to do with/on public greenery in the city 
(“What would you do if you could decide?”). It can be made by interac-
tive map exhibited at the main point (the green space you want to put 
the attention to) in the public space where every passer-by can express 
their opinions regarding what to do with a specific public green area in 
the city (offer a few different possibilities so that citizens can choose 
among them, or offer new ideas).
Applicability: When you want to get feedback from people - but not yet a concrete solution 
- about certain green area in the city (not a part of neighbourhood or city quarter), how 
important it is to them, etc. Such events can be organised in a green area that “belongs to 
no one”. Participants can be actively yet anonymously involved in the process.
A rewarding approach to getting people interested is to invite local fi refi ghters to demon-
strate their skills and show the equipment. This is applicable in locales where voluntary 
fi refi ghters exist. Inviting fi refi ghters will contribute to a friendly atmosphere and at the 
same time facilitate connections with residents, visitors.

GREEN IS GOOD 31
3.2.2 Competitions 
Photo: Cancer July, shu erstock.com
Organise a competition (e.g. photography, painting, modelling, essay/literature) and 
invite participants to make and submit their work. For example, organise a photo-
graphic competition about a specifi c green space or a pressing planning issue. Encour-
age them to think about and refl ect on their attitudes and expectations, as well as on 
potential infl uence of existing and changed green spaces on the people, how modern 
society and/or technology can be used in the development or regeneration of a study 
area positively or negatively. 
Competitions involve: call of the contest theme, competition of photographers, se-
lecting the winner(s), prize ceremony and photo exhibition.
Applicability: Competitions are useful when you want to involve younger generation or 
when you want to reach people with di ff erent cultural backgrounds (marginal groups, new 
residents, …). Artistic competition can be designed to speak to wider audiences. In particu-
lar, photo competition is highly useful in an age of social media. 

GREEN IS GOOD 32
3.3 COMMUNITY BUILDING AND SUSTAINABILITY
Given the often highly unstable nature and potentially low interaction levels in loose, 
instable, ad hoc communities (or initiatives), it can be di ffi  cult to detect and mobi-
lise one; particularly when people have little or no immediate (personal) interest, or 
when the authorities are unable or unwilling to acknowledge it. 
It is unreasonable to expect that people will get involved in many participatory activ-
ities, unless provoked or adequately mobilised, or when immediate interest is recog-
nised. The authorities should be able to see their stake in active involvement of com-
munities, and to understand that longer-term community involvement and integration 
into planning and management will contribute to comprehensive and lasting solutions.

GREEN IS GOOD 33
3.3.1 Participatory budgeting
Participatory budgeting is a form of direct democracy, where people decide togeth-
er on the use of public funds, enabling involvement of the citizens in allocating the 
municipality budget. During the participatory budgeting process the transparency of 
the use of public funds is increased and the active involvement of the community 
becomes visible.
Participatory budgeting generally involves four basic steps:
Community members identify spending priorities and select budget dele-
gates (percentage of budget dedicated to participatory budgeting).
Budget delegates develop specific spending proposals, with help from 
experts. Proposals should be realistic and should contribute to the re-
alisation of the public interest in community (city area, unit); proposals 
should be carried out on properties owned by the municipality (public 
space).
Community members vote on which proposals to fund.
The municipality implements the selected proposals.
Applicability: It allows citizens to identify, discuss, and prioritise public spending projects, 
and gives them the power to make real decisions about public spending. It is used on local 
level (municipality) where residents are intimately aware of their community needs, and 
should therefore be actively involved in joint decisions on public spending. Every citizen 
of the municipality has the opportunity to participate in deciding which projects to imple-
ment in the immediate local community in which they live, but also to propose projects 
that will improve their living environment. 

GREEN IS GOOD 34
3.3.2 Stewardship
Planting in 
Hegyvidék 
(photo: 
Bendegúz 
Kovács)
The defi nition of stewardship is far from clear. The long-established “management” 
sense of stewardship has recently evolved to a more positive meaning: “careful and 
responsible management”. This meaning is today commonly found in contexts such as 
“stewardship of the environment”. Despite its elusiveness, the concept of steward-
ship is wide-ranging and is applied to many settings and activities. To understand it, 
one has to look at the practice of stewardship from a practical perspective: while it 
is often perceived as the ownership of a place, it is also used to refer to something 
that cannot be owned or is even decidedly communal. Another contradictory set of 
assumptions is that stewardship work is intended for the benefi t of others or the com-
munity as a whole, as opposed to personal benefi t. These instances demonstrate a 
wide spectrum of attitudes or assumptions about stewardship, as well as its relevance 
for the community. 
One crucial aspect of stewardship, which should also be taken into consideration when 
designing stewardship programmes, is that it starts at the individual level (voluntari-
ness, accountability, responsibility, commitment), grows out into the community, and 
fi nally becomes a more communal construct (relationships, interactivity, awareness of 
being part of the environment, cultivating healthy relationships).
Applicability: Stewardship is a useful method for engaging people in taking on the respon-
sibility for maintaining the greens in their neighbourhood. It is a fl exible method that can 
be applied in cooperation with local residents, school children, the elderly or it can be 
somewhat formalised in cooperation with NGOs. Given its small-scale approach, steward-
ship can also assist in reaching out: through everyday interactions, stewards can promote 
not only a specifi c project, but contribute to raising awareness about the importance of 
green spaces. Not least, it can serve an educative function as people who take part in such 
initiatives have to learn about the greens (cycles, rhythms of nature, plant specifi cs, etc).

GREEN IS GOOD 35
3.3.3 Classroom in the forest/park
Classroom in the park (photo by Agata Wesolowska)
This method is inspired by kindergartens in the forest. It is about reinterpreting a park 
(or any other urban green infrastructure) as a classroom and the place of meeting and 
developing ideas. It invites the organisers to think about various didactic approach-
es, to develop and use learning methods in nature and with nature, and has positive 
impact on the well-being and on the development of the community and its values. 
Classroom in the forest/park is not only strengthening knowledge about nature, but 
also enables the participants to develop their individual abilities in the best possible 
way, the whole “class” (community) develops as a group and strengthens the social 
network. In nature creative inspiration and cooperation will override restlessness, 
alertness, feeling of constraint, stress, competition, lack of self-confi dence, which 
are uneasy companions to our contemporary way of living. It is a way of “community 
building”, particularly suitable for the young.
Applicability: Use it when a question of raising awareness and gathering data arises. A 
park (or any other urban green infrastructure) as a classroom is the source of ideas for all 
objects or areas of the curriculum, encouraging participants to think about various didac-
tic approaches. Make sure you have a clear idea of what you want to achieve. Promote it 
through emphasising the importance of education about nature, trees in the park, history 
of the place in a specifi c park or forest (discuss about why green is good). When designing 
it, focus on one concrete problem in the fi eld – on the spot – so that the solutions of the 
problems (on the spot) are concrete (on the spot).

GREEN IS GOOD 36
3.3.4 Ethnographic workshops 
Ethnographic workshop is an educational, social and cultural event, when partici-
pants – together with a mentor (who can be an expert or member of community with 
special skills) – research, perform, present, or upgrade ethnographic/vernacular tan-
gible or intangible elements, identifi ed as local cultural heritage. The purpose of the 
event is not only to gather new knowledge and do something for the preservation and 
utilisation of local cultural heritage, but can also allow practitioners to familiarise 
themselves with other problems and challenges. Not least, it can be a way to fi nd 
common solutions to personal and community challenges. If participants come from 
diff erent social and professional backgrounds, or if they work in di ff erent public or 
private organisations, the collaboration among di ff erent sectors can develop, poten-
tially leading to further more professional networks. 
Workshops can be organised for children, students or elderly in order to do some re-
search in the community. You can also organise one to promote local heritage or past 
experience with the management of green spaces, getting traditional skills or trigger 
creative solutions for adapting traditional knowledge to contemporary needs, tech-
nologies and approaches.
Applicability: In the framework of community building and green spaces challenges, the 
ethnographic workshops can be used to provide informal opportunities for developing fruit-
ful social relations among members of community and enhance social coherence. Moreover , 
ethnographic workshops organised in a green space also enable the promotion of the impor-
tance of sustainable content and approach in reviving green spaces. This can additionally 
motivate local green spaces users, as well as investors.
Ethnographic workshop, Open-air pottery 
workshop for children during a folk 
festival (photo: Dimitrina Lavchieva, 
shutterstock.com)

GREEN IS GOOD 37
3.3.5 World café
Roundtable or 
world cafe (photo: 
Bendegúz Kovács)
World café is one of a new generation of participatory methods that attempt to 
achieve collective change by bringing all members or stakeholders of the system to-
gether in one place: it is a highly structured process of movement to create fl exi-
ble and coevolving networks of conversations. Preparations include the selection and 
motivation of participants as well as conceptual preparation. Include a broad range 
of participants that are a ff ected by the matter discussed; create the feeling of an 
informal meeting, a relaxing and comfortable environment where trusting commu-
nication is able to fl ourish. This is why the venue of this meeting is set up as a café. 
Break discussions into smaller sections, allowing for the participants to change tables 
and participate in di ff erent conversations. At the end, ask the participants to present 
their conclusions. It is very useful in conversations about living situations concerning 
individuals and society. It fosters constructive dialogue, access collective intelligence 
and creates innovative possibilities for action, particularly in groups that are larger 
than most traditional dialogue approaches are designed to accommodate. Small, in-
timate conversations link and build on each other as people move between groups, 
cross-pollinate ideas, and discover new insights around questions or issues that really 
matter to their life, work, or community.
Applicability: Local community decided to change a parking lot into a green space, but 
would like to discuss this issue with residents: which type of green space would be the most 
suitable, should residents be included in its maintenance, and to what extent. In the World 
café session, awareness should also be raised about the importance of green space instead 
of other land use. Roundtable hosts present the community ideas, than the participants 
give their own view to try to improve the initial idea.

GREEN IS GOOD 38
3.3.6 Problem tree
Problem tree is a method that can be used to identify causes (the roots) and e ff ects 
(the branches) with potential solutions attached as fruit to the tree. Start by drawing 
a tree trunk on a large piece of fl ip-chart paper on a wall (it works best if you have 
2 or 4 sheets stuck together to make a big area to work on). Describe and explain 
the problem that the project is trying to solve on the tree trunk and start the group 
off  with your own ideas to show how the exercise works. At the bottom of the trunk, 
draw a root (cause of the problem), then draw a branch coming out of the top of the 
trunk (the e ff ect or consequence of the problem). Then stick a fruit (circle cut from 
red paper/card) with blue tack to the branch you have drawn with the ideal policy 
solution to the problem.
Applicability: Use it when you want to identify causes and e ff ects and you need to discuss 
the potential solutions, especially when di ff erent stakeholders or participants identify the 
causes and the solutions to the same problem.

GREEN IS GOOD 39
3.3.7 Parliament in the park 
Parliament in 
the park (photo: 
Tamara Tarnoki)
Taking inspiration from the Greek agora, Parliament in the park is one of the “on the 
spot” methods. It o ff ers an opportunity to encourage and empower people to occupy 
the public space and at the same time o ff ers a solution to concrete problems in a 
concrete public green space. The parliament in the park is an opportunity to probe 
community’s interest and also to collect ideas, evaluate submitted proposals, vote 
on proposals, etc. Submitted proposal can be represented as a part of solution what 
to do with green space and be o ff ered as a negotiation platform to decision-makers.
Applicability: You can invite people of small city quarters to be involved in the decision 
about certain public green space in their neighbourhood. Parliament takes place in the con-
crete green space where you want to achieve solutions. The turnout of interested people 
demonstrates who is really interested in changing/developing certain public space. This is 
a community parliament where everyone has the right to vote. 

GREEN IS GOOD 40
3.3.8 Community consultative assembly 
Modes of organisation 
(Photo: Supanut piyakanon, 
Shutterstock.com)
Community Consultative Assembly (CCA): a semi-formal body comprised of commu-
nity representatives, who either have the necessary skills and competences to enter 
dialogue with other stakeholders, especially decision makers, planners, experts of 
other offi  cials, or are motivated enough to ensure continued engagement. 
In some situations it will become clear that longer-term activities (e.g. green spaces 
management) are required on the part of the community, including participating in 
discussions/negotiations with other stakeholders. In such cases it is advisable to sup-
port a soft formalisation of a community. 
The CCA is envisioned as a soft tool to “informally formalise” a community to ensure 
soft hierarchy when discussing issues internally (within a community) and externally 
(with stakeholders). It should be fl exible and responsive to the needs of the commu-
nity. CCA will enable the community to select a person (or more) for di ff erent tasks, 
particularly applicable in creating CCA or choosing delegates to take part in talks with 
other stakeholders. Task allocation is carried out by selecting candidates and a com-
munity-wide election procedure. 
Applicability: When it is important to have a partner in your talks, encourage the com-
munity to form a CCA. It will facilitate engagement, joint division and allocation of tasks, 
and contribute to actively engaging various community members’ skills and competences.

GREEN IS GOOD 41
3.4 CREATIVE PLANNING: ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY 
3.4.1 Future workshop
Future workshop method was originally created for citizen groups who want to infl u-
ence decision-making, yet have little resources to rely upon. Future Workshop con-
sists of four phases: preparation, critique, fantasy or visionary phase and, fi nally, 
implementation phase. Future workshop is a method that aims to help the community 
design their desired future, i.e. the interventions in the local green spaces, avoiding 
constraints imposed by experts or organisations. It is focused on collecting and elab-
orating ideas outside of the design team. This method allows for discovering what an 
intervention into green space may look like.
Applicability: A local community organises a future workshop on urban green spaces and 
invites di ff erent stakeholders, for instance experts, representatives of the municipality and 
residents. During the workshop, stakeholders develop scenarios for future urban develop-
ment, which takes into account the need for green spaces. In Berlin, for example, a future 
workshop on urban green spaces resulted in the calculation and visualization of the e ff ects 
of housing densifi cation in urban green spaces. Exercises with visualization that involved 
the di ff erent stakeholders were useful for informing stakeholders and for further discussion 
on the topic (IUCN 2015).

GREEN IS GOOD 42
3.4.2 Lotus Blossom 
Lotus blossom is a creativity exercise that can be used to generate ideas based on 
a predetermined central theme. A number of conceptual themes grows out from the 
main theme and each of them can be used as a central theme to generate more 
themes. This is exploration at its best. It is particularly useful when a large number 
of ideas needs to be generated quickly. Using the fi rst set of ideas as a basis can help 
expand ideas further or, via feedback loop, generate new ideas from particular suit-
able elements.
Applicability: A facilitator works with the group in order to articulate and document the 
central idea to be explored, for instance management of an urban green space. The group 
then brainstorms and creates sub-ideas related to the central concept. The original dia-
gram is called the ‘Lotus Blossom’, while sub-ideas act as ‘seeds’ for more blossom – each 
sub-idea becomes the central concept, which is divided into new sub-ideas. At the end, a 
3x3 square emerges with the original diagram (central idea) at the centre, surrounded with 
sub-ideas. These diagrams are used for further discussions or analysis.

GREEN IS GOOD 43
3.4.3 Moodboard
Moodboard is a collage of images, words and/or samples of materials that can be 
used when the community needs to be more directly involved in planning. It helps the 
community form an emotional image and overall ‘feel’ of the intended design. The 
fi ndings of the future workshop can be fruitfully implemented. A moodboard is useful 
to convey the ‘feel’ of the plan (in terms of general emotion, aesthetics, experience, 
etc.). 
Applicability: For example, use the moodboard to understand how residents visually rep-
resent the meaning of green spaces and pollution in their neighbourhood. Participants are 
arranged into smaller working groups (4–5 people per group). A facilitator from the advo-
cacy group explains the purpose of the activity. Then, each group has a limited amount of 
time (60 minutes) to visualize di ff erent themes proposed by the facilitator – for instance, 
ecology and pollution. During the discussion, the facilitator asks di ff erent questions: how 
diffi  cult was it to graphically visualise, what kind of resources were missing for this task, 
etc. During the evaluation, participants are asked to express their opinion about the meth-
od and whether they consider it to be relevant for the issue of urban green space and 
pollution in their neighbourhoods.

GREEN IS GOOD 44
3.5 TACTICS FOR FOSTERING COMMUNITY COHESION
To contribute to the sustainability and cohesion of a community, as well as to smooth running 
of a community mee ng (e.g. CCA, see above), consider adap ng and using tac cs for fostering 
community cohesion from among the selec on below. These tac cs will provide a tool to an c-
ipate and prevent or assist in resolving poten al confl icts within the community.
3.5.1 Format, theme, setting variation
When (co-)organising a community meeting, it is critical to design the setting in a 
way to promote non-intimidating, comfortable environment. This can be achieved 
using format, theme, and setting variation. Flexible, inclusive and open meetings 
will necessarily be less formal, more conducive to a discussion, and will prevent the 
strengthening of informal hierarchies. Use Chair rotation to involve di ff erent people 
in various structured positions (chair, minutes, etc.). While a community may have a 
number of people appointed to take care of di ff erent expertise- or personality-specif-
ic tasks (public relations, negotiations with other stakeholders), rotating the chair of 
a meeting will enhance a sense of responsibility and increase a sense of participation 
and inclusion. To contribute to trust- and responsibility-building encourage/task peo-
ple to prepare a short presentation of a problem, of community’s needs and ideas for 
future development. Engage them in problem presentation/lecture which will assist 
in garnering responsibility as well as a sense of belonging and individual’s e ff ect on 
the process.

GREEN IS GOOD 45
3.5.2 Problem-solving working group with a chair from underrepresented group
A variation of Chair rotation, engaging a chair from an underrepresented group is a 
good opportunity to facilitate wider social cohesion, as well as to improve the social 
and cultural sensibility of the involved stakeholders/participants. It is important to 
prepare a non-intimidating and safe environment where opinions can be expressed 
freely. The event should preferably be organised in a way to enhance the underrep-
resented participant/group position and voice, and to enable the moderation of the 
debate. To make it an inclusive event, invite a member from the underrepresented 
group to chair the meeting. Tasking them with responsibility and giving them a lever 
to express their potential, skills and competences may prove benefi cial to the entire 
group, not just to empowering the underrepresented.

GREEN IS GOOD 46
3.5.3 Creating intergenerational ties
Intergenerational 
ties (photo: Tamara 
Tarnoki)
Developing connections between the young and the old can provide an opportunity for 
them to learn new skills and to get common solution of how properly develop green 
spaces. Both generations can understand generations-specifi c fears, experiences and 
expectations and bringing them in dialogue will facilitate a better mutual under-
standing as well as garner common ideas about what plans and how to implement. 
Children can understand and later accept the problems with aging and thus they will 
be more respectful towards older people in green spaces. Conversation with children 
will help older to reduce the likelihood of depression and isolation. One of the ways to 
enhance intergenerational ties is using an interview, where children ask the elderly 
about their past experiences and worldviews. Moreover, an interview gives also the 
opportunity to establish a personal connection and get opinions and ideas about the 
specifi c issue. It is also an opportunity to involve di ff erent segments of the population 
and bridge generational, social, cultural boundaries. After the analyses of the gath-
ered data, children prepare a public presentation of the results and suggestions. It is 
important that the facilitator moderates a constructive debate.

GREEN IS GOOD 47
3.5.4 Disarming the eternal opponent
It may happen that a member of a community is the so-called ‘eternal opponent’, 
never satisfi ed with anything, always opposing any solution. This may prove detrimen-
tal to the e ff ectiveness of constituting/running a community (or a CCA) as well as to 
trust-building. Not least, it may signifi cantly hinder discussion, as well as planning 
and implementation process. Therefore it is important to detect potential community 
members who might be prone to such conduct, as well as people with strong so-
cial, motivational competences. Think in advance on what task to delegate to whom, 
based on their personality traits. Disarm the eternal opponent by tasking them with 
a presentation of a problem, asking for a detailed, researched and argued explanation 
of their view, or request that anybody who wants to talk has to present a solution and 
their contribution to its realisation.
Tips for hosting a community meeting
Preparation and invitations: determine the objective of the meeting and desired out-
come, utilise assets within the community, follow up with invitees and track responses, 
prepare materials for use prior to and during the meeting, determine the expectations of 
the participants.
Determine roles and rules for conducting the meeting: designate a person to facilitate 
the meeting, designate a person to take notes, which may be useful for determining which 
stakeholder feedback to include in your report, record the meeting (this can be useful for 
the summaries of the discussions held at the meeting).
Review the objectives for the meeting: Review the impacts and planned activities or oth-
er content-related information consider giving an overview of key information (including 
future goals) in a brief presentation, let participants know the importance of this meeting, 
allow time for questions and answers.

GREEN IS GOOD 48
Meeting wrap-up: determine if your meeting has achieved its desired outcome, discuss 
how the feedback will be reviewed and used, review next steps, including reporting process 
and timeline, invite additional feedback.
NOTE! 
Evaluate the meeting
To evaluate, answer the following questions: 
Who participated in the meeting?
What was the main aim of the meeting?
How did you set up the meeting? What did you present and what were the main topics 
of the meeting? 
Which methods and tools were used? Did you use other forms of group discussion and 
to encourage inter-personal learning and discussion?
Which topics/problems/solutions were most discussed/most popular. Present them 
briefl y. 
Which aspects were least discussed/least popular? Discuss the reasons briefl y. 
Did you have any problems when planning and performing the meeting?
What challenges and resistances did you come across when planning and performing 
the meeting? How did you overcome them (or not)?
What have you learned from planning and performing the meeting? 
What feedback did you get from participants? (prepare an evaluation paper for the 
participants)
What were the specifi cs of the context that may prove useful in future meetings?
What were the main conclusions?

GREEN IS GOOD 49
3.6 COMMUNICATION
An important part of work preparation, selecting and adapting tools and methods, is 
also a Communication Plan. Depending on your specifi c situation, it will be necessary 
to decide on what content you want to communicate to whom. The Stakeholder Map 
will help detect and reveal the relations and contribute to the design of a sound Com-
munication Plan.
To make the plan, fi rst determine the target group (FUA commuters, residents, visi-
tors, youth, elderly, etc.), prepare the content (keep your messages short, sharp and 
clear), and disseminate (depending on your target audience and expected communi-
cation goal, choose the most appropriate communication channel/s).
When preparing the content, it is important to take into consideration also the type of 
green space intervention – whether it best corresponds to Actions 1, 2 or 3 (see above) 
– as this will a ff ect the content and sometimes the channel. And when selecting the 
most appropriate channel, think about whom you want to address and reach.
NOTE!
Various media channels can be used in many ways to:
- inform people about planned and/or ongoing activities
- invite people to attend workshops or other community involvement events (see 
Chapter 3)
- provoke reaction – to raise awareness about the importance green infrastructure 
and attract more citizens to the topic
- inspire people to get involved in the maintenance of green areas.
Use mail to distribute, for example, leafl ets with basic information about planned 
activities, invitations to social events or competitions. Mail is a good way to start as 
it will reach residents regardless of their age group or social status. Make sure the 
content is well crafted, accessible, communicative. Similarly, in terms of public out-
reach, TV and radio can be useful channels to reach the wider public, although they 
may prove more costly, not least because the message you want to get across has to 
rely also on sound and/or image. On the other hand, this is a channel that allows for 
a more e ff ective communication actions, the use of live footage, recorded voice, im-
ages, etc. In addition, local newspaper has an important role in informing local resi-
dents about things going on in their town, part of the town (district), city centre, etc. 
When you organise a press conference to present your idea or to show your purpose 
to a wider community, be advised to express your idea in a clear and focused manner , 
supported with illustrative examples. To reach primarily younger , mobile populations, 
use one or more social media platforms, which allow for viral spreading of textual, 
audio and visual messages, including short announcements, supported by video, short 
updates on ongoing activities. This allows you to reach users via desktop computers 
and mobile technologies that enable sharing, co-creating content, as well as o ff er a 
place and opportunity for discussion. 

GREEN IS GOOD 50
NOTE! 
Set up a Facebook/Twitter/Instagram profi le to share photos and videos; initiate a 
debate and always make sure to complement social media activities with activities 
in other media as well as on the ground. Avoid quantifi cation, emphasise content; 
use engaged, personal language but keep it short and concise. Link to other relevant 
actions; include input from the community.
Project meeting of UGB team in Nova Gorica (Photo: Petra Kolenc).

GREEN IS GOOD 51

GREEN IS GOOD 52
4  IMPLEMENTED 
METHODS 
IN UGB PILOT 
AREAS

GREEN IS GOOD 53
MARIBOR PILOT ACTION – A SMALL-SCALE REHABILITATION 
PROJECT 
Situation
Maribor is a regional capital and is subject to sizeable daily migrations from the Po-
dravje FUA. There is a number of degraded green spaces in the municipality, as well 
as throughout the Podravje FUA. The authorities on both levels see great potential in 
adopting participatory approaches to the renovation of these spaces and transform-
ing them into multifunctional open areas. The common challenge is mixed ownership 
(public, private) and various views and ideas about the possible uses of the green 
spaces, both formalised (spatial planning) and informal (civil initiatives, communities).
MRA has undertaken a project to regenerate the area around the Karantena build-
ing, the former Prison Maribor – KPD Maribor, built before 1900 as a fi ve-pointed 
typical building, one of the most advanced in the then Austro-Hungarian state. The 
pilot area, including the facility and its immediate surroundings, is classifi ed as cul-
tural heritage. The area is divided into several plots of land with di ff erent owner or 
co-owners – private (companies) and public (such as Maribor Development Agency, 
Maribor Municipality). For several years, the area around the building has been used 
as a “wild” parking space.
Pilot area in Maribor 
consists of 3 separate 
spatial units: (1) 
unused backyard, 
(2) shared parking 
lot owner by Maribor 
Municipality, (3) 
Entire pilot area.

GREEN IS GOOD 54
Challenge
The main challenge was the formation of a community: there are many di ff erent 
users, but no residents. Therefore, the rehabilitation of degraded green area had to 
be negotiated between owners, users (renters, employees and engaged visitors), and 
local service users.
The MRA mission was to set up a feasible and transferable concept of community-led 
planning, including owners and citizens, to regenerate the degraded urban green are-
as characterised by mixed ownership and low involvement of particular private own-
ers.
In their pilot activity, Maribor Development Agency (MRA) set out to fi nd a solution 
to the problem of how to rehabilitate a semi-abandoned park behind the Karantena 
building, currently home to several small businesses, cultural activities, as well as the 
MRA. At present, the area is primarily used by FUA commuters for parking.
Approach
The objective of the pilot activities was to reach an agreement about the rehabilita-
tion of the pilot area (ca. 30,000 m
2
) with the stakeholders (community, owners and 
users) and to prepare the conceptual design (as part of construction plans) for area 
rehabilitation as the input for the subsequent tender dossier for works.
To do so, the Maribor Development Agency’s (MRA) pilot activity tested several partic-
ipatory methods on a small-scale rehabilitation project aimed at facilitating commu-
nity-led planning of a rehabilitation of Maribor’s green area. The project was imple-
mented in the Maribor city centre.
The pilot activity was based on three activities (activity circles) aimed at di ff erent 
stakeholders/communities: 1) Organisations located in the MRA o ffi  ce building whose 
employees use the parking lot owned by the Municipality of Maribor; 2) Employees 
working in the Karantena building: unused backyard owned by MRA; 3) Entire pilot 
area: public and private owners and all entities who use their premises (including 
questions of parking, wild plant life, road and parking infrastructure, hydrants, drive-
ways, green areas, etc.). The MRA task was to:
Prepare the methodology/design of the participatory process. 
Map the stakeholders. 
Organise participatory processes (e.g. workshops, focus groups, public 
consultations) for owners and stakeholders, as well as for users (for each 
group separately, and then for all groups together), engage students of 
architecture to design possible solutions, and incorporate expert knowl-
edge.
Present the agreement for area rehabilitation to the interested public at 
a public event.

GREEN IS GOOD 55
Tools and methods
The MRA pilot activity tested two types of participation: consultative participation 
and selfmobilised participation. This allowed for the testing of the three actions: In-
itiating community practice (detecting), Developing the community (mobilising), and 
Supporting the community (sustainability). Awareness raising was achieved through 
participation at social and cultural events that promote green spaces, drawing atten-
tion towards the pilot area.
In the small-scale rehabilitation pilot activities, MRA has chosen the following meth-
ods (see Chapter 3) and approaches (see Activity scheme) from the toolkit:
Initiating community practice (detecting); Bring them in: One of the 
identified problems with the area is the lack of users’ involvement, as 
they generally work in the area and are therefore less motivated to dedi-
cate extra time to contribute to the green area. Therefore, the focus was 
on raising the quality of the working environment, thus combining their 
activities with their work.
Developing the community (mobilising); Structure space and brainstorm: 
Involvement at thematic social events dealing with green issues, where 
different ideas can be developed about the best usage and design for the 
green areas.
Supporting the community (sustainability); Forming a Community Con-
sultative Assembly (CCA): Upon facing possible “eternal opponents” and 
“trolls”, tasks were handed out to them, to present the problem in as 
detailed manner as possible. In this way, they got new insight into how to 
improve the situation and gave the people an opportunity to reflect on 
and contextualise their criticisms.
Supporting the community (sustainability); Building responsibility: In or-
der to ensure the sustainability of the rehabilitated small-scale area, a 
simple protocol of responsibilities was set up among the users.

GREEN IS GOOD 56
KRAKOW PILOT ACTION – WITKOWICE GREEN LIVING LAB
Situation
The Greenery Authority aimed to implement the pilot project WITKOWICE GLL in the 
Witkowice Forest. The project included the revitalisation and transformation of ex-
isting tourism and recreation infrastructure, and the implementation of innovative 
practices of nature education. The aim of this action was to involve local community 
into the planning procedure.
The Witkowice GLL (Green Living Lab) is located in the north-western part of Krakow 
– in the district IV Pr ądnik Bia ły. This district has 2,341.87 ha and a population of 
68,385 (density 29 people per km
2
). The average VV2BV and UVI indices of the district 
for living comfort in terms of green participation are 2.99 and 6.07, respectively (the 
values for the whole city are 0.64–15.64 for VV2BV and 0.73–94.33 for UVI).
Challenge
The guiding question was: How to e ff ectively manage the area? To fi nd out, the pilot 
activities focused on what they want to achieve and how, and tested several methods, 
including community involvement, to facilitate community involvement. In addition, 
crucial aspects were the co-operation between municipality units and institutions, 
and cooperation between municipalities and institutions at the regional (FUA) level.
Pilot activities were designed to point out that the forest extends across the two 
The map of the Krakow pilot study area.

GREEN IS GOOD 57
municipalities. With this in mind, the Krakow Greenery Authority wanted to show the 
importance of cooperation and community involvement – including with measures to 
encourage people to speak out and become a part of the decision making process. 
That is why the cooperation was multilevel and multilateral.
The fi rst challenge was related to the ownership structure of the land, which was 
a mosaic of municipal land, the state treasury, and private property. The second 
challenge was related to participation: Who needs to be involved? How to involve 
residents and institutions, including those from so-called di ffi  cult areas (areas that 
are undeveloped and schools with young people who face di ffi  cult social conditions)? 
What solutions are e ff ective? 
Wooden footbridge in 
Witkovice (Krakow forest)
The pilot study concluded the importance of:
Involving many parties.
Establishing dialogue with locals, listening to their needs and ideas.
Convincing people to support certain initiatives, such as the Citizens’ 
Budget and the Green Incubator Initiative.
Using good practices – mutual learning and the use of ready-made solu-
tions is really important; learn and gain knowledge from others, check 
solution and challenges.
Informing the inhabitants that the existing green spaces can be devel-
oped further.
Engaging the business sector (how and when).
Promoting bottom-up initiatives.

GREEN IS GOOD 58
Third challenge was related to the management of green areas: How should an e ffi  -
cient and sustainable UGS management system look like? How to build a city’s poten-
tial in this area?
Approach
The Krakow Greenery Authority pilot activity aimed to revitalise existing tourism and 
recreation infrastructure and implement innovative directions of nature education 
with mobile application. It included transformation of green spaces and development 
of the existing one.
To do so, the following actions were planned: 
Installation of field devices designed with local natural materials, such 
as wood and stone.
Installation of information boards for educational pathways for the im-
plementation of an educational and recreational program, footbridge 
over the Bibiczanka stream for cyclists and pedestrians.
Securement of the existing paths.
Introduction of parking places for bicycles and vehicles for disabled peo-
ple.
Placement of the elements of small architecture from round wood.
Placement of the field elements necessary for the implementation of the 
mobile application.
The pilot conclusions show:
Green space management is multicomponent and multilevel.
Land ownership is a challenge.
Management is a dynamic issue, so it is necessary to think longterm and 
respond to current changes: changes in law, social changes, etc.
There is a need to integrate green areas into regional planning.
There are not many development plans.
There is a need for transformation and development of the existing green 
area.

GREEN IS GOOD 59
The main objective was to combine citizens’ wishes for Witkowice GLL with the exist-
ing infrastructures, and to demonstrate that cooperation is possible. The main chal-
lenge in the consultation process was how to involve people in action.
Tools and methods
Witkowice GLL pilot activity involved a mixture of actions: 1) the development of 
green space: the important issue in this case was that the area was not a new green 
space, but rather an existing one; 2) transformation of green space: the introduction 
of small infrastructure. The pilot tested community involvement methods based on 
consultation process and interactive participation with the help of stakeholder’s plat-
form or group of di ff erent stakeholders from di ff erent sectors, and aimed to show the 
possibility of cooperation on FUA level.
The main challenge in the consultation process was how to encourage people to par-
ticipate actively. Taking into account the three Toolkit’s Actions: Initiating community 
practice (detecting), Developing the community (mobilising), Supporting the commu-
nity (sustainability), a number of activities were organised: 
Consultation based on needs.
Picnic – citizens approach.
Survey in the form of an questionnaire, distributed at school in June. 
They received feedback from about 100 respondents and were able to 
gather same information about the Witkowice GLL. The questionnaire 
was really simple, primarily for the pupils but also to involve parents in 
the consultation process.
Art competition “My Witkowice Forest”.
Educational walk for the people to get to know the area: professional 
tour guided by a nature and education specialist; it was an opportunity 
for people to get in touch with nature: smell the forest, learn about 
trees, fungi, birds, animals, etc.).
In addition, the Krakow Greenery Authority organised additional activities to involve 
the citizens of Krakow: 
“Practice in the green” – classes in 4 parks.
“Parkobus in the green” – Parkobus rides from July to September (three 
times a month, they travel with the residents from one side of the city to 
the other, showing them the green areas across the city).
“Picnic in the green” (about 2,000 visitors daily).

GREEN IS GOOD 60
BUDAPEST PILOT ACTION – PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL 
STEWARDSHIP
Situation
Budapest is sensitive about environmental planning, as well as climate change chal-
lenges. Although compared to other similar European cities, Budapest has relatively 
few green areas, Hegyvidék, Budapest’s District 12, has signifi cant urban green spaces, 
mainly connected to the larger , FUA green areas. E ff ective green spaces management 
thus calls for cooperation among all stakeholders. Yet, community involvement is rel-
atively weak in Hungary, and community involvement methods are not yet included in 
mainstream urban policies. For the Municipality of Hegyvidék – which values its green 
spaces as an extraordinary asset and intends to use them to promote proenvironmen-
tal behaviour and environmental consciousness among its residents – this presents a 
signifi cant challenge, particularly in the context of local communities and their high 
expectations regarding the municipality’s green space management.
Planting in 
Hegyvidek (Photo: 
Bendegúz Kovács)
Challenge
The central challenge was to fi nd a way to use urban green spaces as a tool to change 
residents’ mindsets about the importance of green spaces, as well as about the crucial 
contribution that the communities can make to planning and maintenance. To that 
end, the pilot action aimed at creating a community of volunteers through a newly 
installed Stewardship Programme, thus also promoting proenvironmental attitudes.
The main stakeholders were the stewards and the wider community. Stewards were 
fi ne-tuning and partly implementing the pilot activities in order to build up trust and 
community spirit, but also a sense of ownership. In addition, stewards were asked to 
give feedback to the municipality regarding the pilot and share ideas related to the 
planned activities. This informal group of stewards and other active citizens should 
later on play a key role in the district as advocates of “green issues”.

GREEN IS GOOD 61
Approach
The most important goal was to create a real community of residents – stewards – 
to take care of a plot. The aim was to create a strong, environmentally conscious 
community which will hold regular meetings and discussions. In the future this will 
contribute to higher ‘green awareness’ among stewards and promote pro-environ-
mental behaviour in the public. In the long run, they seek to reward residents for their 
pro-environmental behaviour by means of fi nancial or other rewards, for example 
through discounts, credits, prizes.
Pilot activities were planned along 5 main lines: 
Programs for volunteers participating in the Stewardship Programme: 1. 
Within the first one, they planed indoor and outdoor community work-
shops for stewards: team building, lessons and discussions around gar-
dening at the spots, and also co-creation of the Steward’s Festival pro-
gramme.
Programs for the residents: 2. As regards the bigger community (i.e. 
residents), they planned different interactive sessions: 1. five thematic 
walks linked to local UGSs; 2. two sessions of Hegyvidék Games; 3. trans-
formation of the biggest local festival to the Green Fest, thus promoting 
the “green is good” concept way and including the Stewards Festival; 4. 
Thematic Installations linked to green spaces; 5. 100 Picnic Blankets – 
Closing Community Picnic.
Green Club at the Green Office: 3. Also targeting smaller group, they 
planned regular thematic sessions as an open university to build pro-en-
vironmental capacity in a – hopefully – increasingly bigger group, starting 
with the topics related to composting. This was be called Green Club.
Co-designing the concept of the Mobile Green Info Point within the Green 
Club: 4. This point was elaborated within the Green Club, but as it paves 
the way for the long-term sustainability of the pilot action, was high-
lighted it as a separate action.
Communication Activities: These activities were enhanced by a tailored 
communication campaign.
The central goal was to:
Bring residents together to support, affirm and validate new behaviours 
into accepted norms (accelerating the stewardship programme); 
Provide residents with data and feedback on the impacts of their behav-
iour, information and awarenessraising campaigns (through the mobile 
Info Point); 
Develop a proenvironmental sensibility through direct ex   perience of the 
value of natural systems (actions for the public).

GREEN IS GOOD 62
Tools and methods
The pilot action Hegyvidék tested a collaborative service method (co-management of 
small green areas) through the reinforcement of a self-organised group.
Action 1: Initiating community practice (detecting) (situation analysis, identifi ca-
tion of stakeholders, mobilisation of the community): Situation analysis was the core 
theme during the fi rst joint session of stewards, involved in fi ne-tuning some activi-
ties. As for Action 1, the most important tool selected were “installations” in public 
spaces to raise awareness among the wider public (residents).
Action 2: Developing the community (mobilising) (detecting community and raising 
awareness): the most important mobilisation tool in connection with the wider com-
munity were FB pages (one created by the stewards, one for the Green Club, sharing 
information on Green O ffi  ce’s and the municipality’s main FB page). However, local 
newspaper also played a crucial role, reporting about this initiative and the local “he-
roes”. Social events (picnics) focusing on green spaces were organised together with 
a local festival in 2018. 
Action 3: Supporting the community (sustainability): This was the most important 
tool. They focused on team building and social events. In the long-term, the commu-
nity of stewards and people behind the Green Club will continue work as a Community 
Consultative Assembly. Within the pilot action, Municipality of Hegyvidék created a 
strong community , based on the volunteers applied within the Stewardship Programme 
of “small green areas”.
Community 
mobilisation in 
Hegyvidek (Photo: 
Bendegúz Kovács)

GREEN IS GOOD 63

GREEN IS GOOD 64

GREEN IS GOOD 65
References
  Bahrain Shuib, Kamarul, Habsah Hashim, and Nurul Akmaniza Mohd Nasir. 2015. 
“Community participation strategies in planning for urban parks.” Procedia – So-
cial and Behavioral Sciences 168: 311 – 320.
  Bole, David and Federico Bigaran. 2013. “Introduction.” In: Bole, David, Mateja 
Šmid Hribar, and Jani Kozina (eds.). The synergy of culture and tourism for the 
development of rural areas. Ljubljana: ZRC Publishing.
  Fisher, Fred. 2001. “Building bridges between citizens and local governments to 
work more effectively together through participatory planning. Part 1: concepts 
and strategies.” UN Habitat document.
  Gilbert, Paul. 2015. “Participatory Urban Planning. Planning the city with and for 
citizens.” Montréal Urban Ecology Centre.
  Kersten, Wouter C., Marcel Crul, Daphne Geelen, and Franken V . 2015. “Engaging 
beneficiaries of sustainable renovation – exploration of design-led participatory 
approaches.” Journal of Cleaner Production 106: 690–699.
  Müller, Emanuel and Rike Stotten. 2011. “Public Participation Manual.” Lucerne 
University of Applied Sciences and Arts.
  Participatory Techniques and Tools – A WFP Guide, Booklet 1: Concepts of Partici-
pation and Partnership. 2001. Strategy and policy division world food programme, 
Italy: Rome.
  Stöger , Gabriele. 2010. “Participation as Basic Principle.” In: Stöger , Gabriele and 
Judith Cerwenka, (eds.). weReurope: How to design Intercultural Conferences to 
promote dialogue and participation. Vienna.
  IUCN. 2015. “Vision for the Future: Addressing Berlin’s challenges by safeguard-
ing urban green spaces.” 14 January. https://www.iucn.org/content/vision-fu-
ture-addressing-berlin%E2%80%99s-challenges-safeguarding-urban-green-spaces. 
Accessed 24 October 2018.
  Get involved, Department of conservation, http://www.doc.govt.nz/get-in-
volved/run-a-project/community-project-guidelines/group-planning, Accessed 
1 November 2018.
  IPoP . 2017. Priro čnik za boljše in lažje sodelovanje z javnostjo pri urejanju pros-
tora. Ljubljana. 

GREEN IS GOOD 66
ACTIVITY SCHEME
Challenge: How to map stakeholders and identify the community?
Approach: Get in the fi eld
Use in: Action 1
Methods and tools: (Quantitative): SWOT analysis, Survey with self-administered ques-
tionnaire, Interview, Questionnaire; (Qualitative): Public/Social events, Social events (e.g. 
lectures, market, sports events), Ethnographic workshops
Challenge: How to mobilise the community?
Approach: Raising awareness
Use in: Action 1/2
Methods and tools: Social events (e.g. lectures, market, sports events), Public interven-
tions, Artistic intervention, Competitions (photography, painting, drawing, modelling, es-
say/literature), Picnic; Local newspaper, Social media, Creating intergenerational ties
Challenge: How to collect ideas?
Approach: Structure space and brainstorm
Applicable to Action 1/2/3
Methods and tools: Interview, Questionnaire, Public interventions, Artistic intervention, 
Competitions (photography, painting, drawing, modelling, essay/literature), Creating in-
tergenerational ties, Voting, Problem-solving working group with a chair from underrepre-
sented group, Local newspaper, Social media
Challenge: How to involve the community in planning?
Approach: Engage in creative planning
Use in: Action 2/3
Methods and tools: Future workshop, Moodboard, Lotus Blossom, Planning Groups
Challenge: How to build trust in the community?
Approach: Playful management / Get people involved
Use in: Action 2/3
Methods and tools: Social events (e.g. lectures, market, sports events), Public interven-
tions, Artistic intervention, Competitions (photography, painting, drawing, modelling, es-
say/literature), Picnic, World café, Problem tree, Classroom in the forest/park (especially 
appropriate for the young), Parliament in the park (direct democracy), Ethnographic work-
shops; Participatory budgeting, Creating intergenerational ties, Voting, Format variation, 
Disarming the eternal opponent, Problem-solving working group with a chair from under-
represented group

GREEN IS GOOD 67
Challenge: How to ensure sustainability of the community? 
Approach: Build trust and responsibility
Use in: Action 3
Methods and tools: World café, Problem tree, Classroom in the forest/park (especially 
appropriate for the young), Parliament in the park (direct democracy), Ethnographic work-
shops; Participatory budgeting, Creating intergenerational ties, Voting, Format variation, 
Disarming the eternal opponent, Problem-solving working group with a chair from under-
represented group, Local newspaper, Social media
Challenge: How to form a CCA?
Approach: Build trust and consensus
Use in: Action 3
Methods and tools: World café, Problem tree, Classroom in the forest/park (especially 
appropriate for the young), Parliament in the park (direct democracy), Voting, Format var-
iation, Disarming the eternal opponent, Problem-solving working group with a chair from 
underrepresented group
Challenge: How to balance “eternal opponents” and “trolls”?
Approach: Channel energy
Use in: Action 3
Methods and tools: World café, Problem tree, Classroom in the forest/park (especially 
appropriate for the young), Parliament in the park (direct democracy), Ethnographic work-
shops, Creating intergenerational ties, Voting, Format variation, Disarming the eternal op-
ponent, Problem-solving working group with a chair from underrepresented group
Challenge: How to engage underrepresented groups?
Approach: Bring them in
Use in: Action 3
Methods and tools: World café, Classroom in the forest/park (especially appropriate for 
the young), Parliament in the park (direct democracy), Ethnographic workshops, Social 
events (e.g. lectures, market, sports events), Public interventions, Artistic intervention; 
Creating intergenerational ties, Voting, Format variation, Disarming the eternal opponent, 
Problem-solving working group with a chair from underrepresented group, Local newspa-
per, Social media

GREEN IS GOOD 68
NOTES

GREEN IS GOOD 69
NOTES

GREEN IS GOOD 70
NOTES

GREEN IS GOOD 71
NOTES

GREEN IS GOOD 72
NOTES

GREEN IS GOOD
PLANNING URBAN GREEN 
SPACES WITH PEOPLE, 
NOT FOR PEOPLE
Martin Poga čar 
Jasna Fakin Bajec 
Petra Kolenc 
Jernej Tiran 
Katarina Polajnar Horvat 
Aleš Smrekar
Ljubljana 2019
UGB ovitek 5k19.indd   1 UGB ovitek 5k19.indd   1 6.5.2019   9:36:24 6.5.2019   9:36:24