Flirtatious consultation
Beyond contemporary modes of consultation , a speculated alternative Name : Carl Munyuthe Course : BAASO Stage 3
Dissertation
Content Prologue: Longfield listens – a personal account
1
Introduction: Consultation as flirtation
3
Brief History of Peckham
5
1. Peckham is a place for plural agendas.
6
I.
Tram depot proposal
6
II.
Dialogue as a form of democracy
7
III.
Agonism as a form of democracy
8
2. Dynamics of Consultation I.
10
Peckham Tram Depot Consultation
11
Speak now or forever hold your peace
14
III.
Peckham vision model making workshop
16
IV.
Peckham Co- Design
19
Placatory Participation
23
II.
V.
3. Traffic mimes and red cards in Bogota
24
4. Reflections and Conclusion: The promiscuous architect 29 5. Bibliography
31
6. Appendices
33
Acknowledgment I would like to thank my tutor Gunter for his encouragement and guidance throughout this project, Eileen and Cany for their continued help and patience and my peers who inspired and contributed to the ideas in this essay
Consult: To ask the advice or opinion of1 Flirt: Behave as though sexually attracted to someone, but playfully rather than with serious intentions.2
1 2
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consult, online, accessed, 17/3/15. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/flirt
List of Key terms Facilitator: A person who helps someone to do something by giving advice rather than telling them what to do3 Participant: A person who is involved in an activity or event4 Process: A series of actions that produce something or that lead to a particular event.5 System: a set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an organized scheme or method.6 Hegemony: Influence or control over another country or group of people.7 Deliberative democracy: A mode of democracy that believes the purpose of democratic institutions must be to resolve conflict. (Giddens, 1994,p116.) Dialogic democracy: An inclusive non-hierarchical mode of democracy where by controversial issues can be resolved or at least handled through dialogue. (Giddens, 1994, p21.) Generative politics: A politics, which seeks to allow individuals and groups to make things happen, rather than have things happen to them. (Giddens, 1994,p21.) Life Politics: A politics of lifestyle it concerns disputes and struggles about how we as individuals and as a collective humanity should live in the world. (Giddens, 1994,p21.) 足足The political: An antagonistic dimension of society as a result of plural values ( Mouffe, 2005, p.25) Politics: The establishment of compromise between differing competing forces in society (Mouffe , 2005, p.25) Agonistic democracy: A conflict driven mode of democracy that seeks to provide conflict legitimate forms of expression to contest established hegemonic orders. ( Mouffe, 2005,p10)
3 4 5 6 7
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/facilitator , online, accessed, 17/3/15. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/participant , online, accessed, 17/3/15. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/process , online, accessed, 17/3/15. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/system , online, accessed, 17/3/15. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hegemony , online, accessed, 17/3/15.
Prologue Longfield listens, a personal account
Figure 1 The longfield listens community consultation project “…. We need your help”, said the frustrated surveyor to a disgruntled audience. On the 15th of January 2015, I attended the Longfield listens consultation meeting at the Longfield hall, Brixton. Present were 30 to 40 members of the local community and a panel of professionals. The purpose of the consultation was to discuss the way forward for the aging building The evening began with each team of professionals introducing who they were and their field of expertise. First were a team of young surveyors, they presented themselves as accessible, inquisitive, curious and ambitious for change. They intended to create a public survey with the help of the local residents to understand current uses and research possible future uses of the building. 1
Second was an architect, who also attempted to be equally as accessible as he carefully avoided using architecture jargon. Whilst he was explaining the steps that should be taken to renovate the building two hands were raised in interjection. First to speak was Mrs McAlpine who ran the ballet academy, she was concerned over how the renovation would interfere with schools programme, second was Mrs Williams who ran a kindergarten and was concerned as to whom and how the consultation process would be managed. Real concerns raised by engaged participants. Not wanting to offend anyone or say the wrong thing, the architect gave vague and ambiguous answers, in order to avoid being misquoted or arouse conflict. Daisy Froud, an experienced practitioner of consultation and participatory projects, gave the last presentation. Sensing the crowds tension she abandoned her prepared presentation and decided to take a conversational tone, an attempt to establish a balanced dynamic with the audience. After her presentation concluded it was time for the question and answer session by this time, there was a palpable tension in the room, the question that I imagined lingered in everyone’s head, “what are the real motivations and outcomes of this consultation?” If there were ever a time the ability to read minds would be useful, it would be now. The harboured tension created a fertile arena for the accusatory nature of the questions. As the meeting ended the local participants were visibly agitated and the atmosphere felt antagonistic. At the end of the Q and A the experts had become highly defensive and this is when the survey team interjected and said, ‘we are here to find out what need to be done but we can’t do it alone…We need your help’8
8
Consultation meeting at Longfield hall , meeting , attended 15 /1 /2015
2
Introduction
The concept of consultation as flirtation The Idea of consultation as a form of flirtation was informed by the unsuccessful measures of public engagement I had witnessed at the Longfield Hall consultation. I wondered why was there so much tension between the facilitators and participants, what were the actual motivations of the consultation and if there are better approaches to conduct consultation, how? In this essay I interrogate these questions by considering consultation as a form of seduction or playful conversation if you will, that is used to break down tension between different parties and build an atmosphere of dialogue and later mediated conflict.The concept relies on a dialogue driven approach prior to consultation that is used to lay ground for conflict driven decision-making during consultation. At the fore of this concept are two conflicting ideas, agonistic democracy and dialogic democracy. It is imperative that I state that the aim of this essay is not reconcile dialogic democracy and agonistic democracy into a single idea but to explore the area where both ideas overlap. Dialogic democracy is an inclusive non-hierarchical mode of democracy where by controversial issues can be resolved or at least handled through dialogue. (Giddens, 1994, p21.) Whereas agonistic democracy is a conflict driven mode of democracy that seeks to provide conflict legitimate forms of expression to contest established hegemonic orders. (Mouffe, 2005,p10).The marrying of the two ideas is a speculated alternative that was informed by the studying of three case studies of public consultation in Peckham. Peckham is an area within South London undergoing increased development and with it increased consultation. The studying of the three case studies considered the roles, the approaches, the motivations and the outcomes of the various modes of consultation. The comparison of three different approaches allowed for the creation of an analytical framework and by speaking to the actors involved, it helped create a link between reality and theory.
3
Secondly to understand how the concept can be applied I studied the traffic interventions of former Mayor of Bogota Antanas Mockus.The interventions were praised for their idiosyncratic approach to reforming Bogota’s traffic. The interventions will be studied to understand alternative methods of public engagement. The main body of research considers the dynamics of consultation, specifically the role of the participant and the facilitator, it looks at strategies and approaches used to inform participants prior to consultation and considers how they influence the process of consultation. The first part of this essay will challenge bureaucratic forms of hegemony, which seeks to establish influence or control prior to consultation through the allocation of roles and goals within specific time frames and processes. I will argue against the bureaucratic worlds established orders and campaign for a potentially playful nature of public consultation that engages different parties and interrogates varying interests before decisions are made. I hypothesise that people participate legitimately within decision-making processes if they are motivated and empowered to do so. Later I will advocate for consultation to happen initially as a light, interesting, playful form of dialogue (flirtation) that challenges the formal routines and stiffness of contemporary modes consultation and instead builds a fertile arena for legitimate adversarial relationships.9 Through the use of empirical research and case studies I will test my hypothesis by analysing, the roles, processes, motivations and outcomes of contemporary consultation and apply the idea of flirtatious consultation as an alternative. In doing so I hope to expose the potential of flirtatious consultation and ask, Can consultation be flirtatious?
9
How is architecture political?, lecture, attended 6/12/2014.
4
Brief History of Peckham In the early 19th century Peckham a hamlet of the Parish of Camberwell consisted mainly of rural fields and a few large houses for the elite. However, by the late 19th century improved transport via railway and horse tram transformed it into a suburb occupied by a new young and relatively prosperous population. By the mid-20th century Peckham’s population consisted mainly of the working class some of whom lived in poor conditions. In 1960, as part of a rehousing effort by the UK government, social housing was built. Popular to begin with, the estates became crime ridden due to crime and high unemployment within the area. At the same time Peckham became a highly multicultural neighbourhood due to an influx of Nigerian immigrants escaping the Biafra War during this period.10 Later in 2000, the UK government implemented a 290 million pound project to improve Peckham’s council estates. Whilst the project was underway 10-year-old Damilola Taylor was murdered within the North Peckham estate. His death stigmatised Peckham as an especially crime ridden area.11 The stigma drove down the property prices within Peckham, which attracted creative enterprises to Peckham due to its affordability. In 2006 as part of the redevelopment of Peckham TFL in conjunction with Southwark Council announced the planning of a tram depot.
5
10 A history of south east London Suburbs, online , http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/ southwark/assets/histories/peckham, accessed 1/1/15 11 Damilola Taylor :How his Killing shocked a nation, online, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/magazine-11848488, accesed 3,1/15
1. Peckham is a place for Plural agendas This part of my dissertation will provide a context for the analysis of the subsequent case studies and a context from which to illustrate my theoretical background. Tram depot Proposal, Struggle between Peckham Vision and TFL In 2006 a group of Peckham residents launched a campaign against the proposed construction of a tram depot on a historic, post-industrial site. The proposal- a tram depot, developed by Transport for London in conjunction with Southwark Council argued that the Copeland Park site was currently underused and should instead be converted in to a tram depot with maintenance facilities.12 The campaign was generated by informed discussion between Peckham residents. Peckham residents opposed the plan firstly, because they felt the tram depot proposal was an “intrusive� plan developed without considering how existing communities used the area. Secondly, the site with its late nineteenth century buildings served as a historic reminder of Peckham’s past of which residents opposed their destruction. After fierce campaigning, the planning proposals for the tram depot were rejected and the campaign gave birth to a grassroots organization aptly named Peckham Vision as they shared a similar vision for Peckham-Peckham should develop organically. With the aid of Peckham Vision the site is now a resource for the Peckham community. An example is the Bussey building, constructed for the manufacture of cricket bats and firearms it is now a mixed-use facility, which includes over 60 artist studios, bars, galleries, workshops and fitness studios for the community.
12
(http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Tram_depot_proposals#Proposed_tram_ depot_location, online accessed 5/11/14)
6
Dialogue as a form of democracy According to Sociologist Anthony Giddens the public engagement of individuals within Peckham Vision can be attributed to the workings of a dialogic democracy which he calls, “a way of creating a public arena in which controversial issues – in principle- can be resolved, or at least handled, through dialogue “ (Giddens, 1994,p.24), Giddens expands his conceptualisation of dialogic democracy from formal politics to the informal matters of personal life by claiming that dialogue allows individuals to order their relationships rather than depending on embedded power. He reconceptualises this sphere of informal politics as life politics – a politics of lifestyle as it concerns disputes and struggles about how we as individuals and as a collective humanity should live in the world (Giddens, 1994,p21). Giddens approach to democracy relies on informal exchanges to generate a sense of interest that allows the individual to embed him/herself within the political sphere through social movements such is the case for Peckham Vision. The dialogic approach also implies a greater sense of transparency within decision-making process creating a sense of accountability amongst representatives. Conversational encounter within an African Grocery Store In the early stages of my research I befriended the manager of Kumasi Market13 Tony Opoku. After a series of visits and successful informal conversations I felt that I had built a rapport with him and could approach him for a formal interview. He agreed and as the interview began, I sensed a change of atmosphere, what was once free and effortless conversation became sterile and cumbersome. The interview did not run its entire course before Tony had to excuse himself to resume his duties. In retrospect if the informal dialogue that had seemed to previously engage Tony was part of the interview, I doubt he would have lost interest so quickly. His ability to engage with me had been severed due to the formal ordering of our conversation. I had become the facilitator and him the passive participant.
13
An African Grocery store located on the intersection of Rye lane and Peckham High street
7
Agonism as a form of democracy According to political theorist Chantal Mouffe the conflict between Peckham residents and its council is due to what she calls ‘ the political nature of social life. She defines ‘the political’ as an embedded conflict within societies that can never be universally rationalized due to the diverse and differing interests of individuals within a society (Mouffe, 2005, p.25). This dimension, which she labels antagonistic, is similar to a friend and enemy relationship. Knowing this she then re-conceptualises antagonism in to agonism- where conflict is turned to fair and legitimate challenge contest between adversaries (Mouffe C, 2005, p.32). She states the intention of agonism is not create consensus but to challenge the powers in control and encourage a ‘political’ relationship. (Mouffe C, 1999, p754) To illustrate this concept, I will use the analogy of a football match. A football match has two teams who play against each other in order to determine a victor. Despite wanting nothing more than to defeat each other, there are certain rules set in place to create an arena for fair challenge. These rules are what Mouffe terms as a conflictual consensus (Mouffe, 2005,p32). The rules allow for a competitive atmosphere without compromising individual interest and allow for a competitive atmosphere where conflict does not involve the destruction of your opponent but legitimate contestation. Most football matches have a referee and in my conceptualisation of consultation as flirtation. I will consider the architect as a sort of referee who intervenes to create an arena for legitimate and fair challenges.
Figure 2 Football player being sent off due to a foul 8
Using the theoretical frameworks provided by Mouffe and Giddens we begin to realise that democracy is not purely made of conflict or dialogue but like a series of events one comes after the other. In an endeavour to understand the applications of this hybrid, I will now analyse three case studies of consultation in Peckham identifying the range of approaches, roles, intentions and outcomes. From these analyses I will identify strengths and weaknesses of the different modes of consultation and use them to reimagine a more flirtatious mode of consultation.
9
2. Dynamics of Consultation
10
An analysis of Consultation strategies in Peckham The choice of my three case studies was guided by its different facilitators and although the case studies chosen deal with different issues, the fact that the three consultations happen as a series is relevant because each case study is to some extent influenced by its predecessor. The case studies chosen are, the Cross River Tram Consultation (CRT), which was facilitated by TFL, the Peckham vision model-making workshop that was facilitated by Peckham vision, and the Peckham Co-design, which was facilitated by Ash Sakula, architects on behalf of Southwark Council. I. The Cross River Tram Consultation Prior to the planning proposal of the Cross River Tram (CRT),TFL created a public consultation document in the form of a brochure and a questionnaire. The document was distributed as part of a 3-month consultation process that was punctuated by events and exhibitions. The intention of the document was to inform the public on the CRT and then gather public opinion, which would then be used to decide on suggested route options.
Figure 3. TFL consultation document, 11
The brochure section of the document argued that, the CRT will significantly improve access to job opportunities in London and offer an alternative to crowded travel.14 The brochure does not discuss that with the CRT, there will be a Tram Depot within the selected routes, which we saw earlier was the main area of contention of the proposal. TFL uses the brochure as a tool to emphasise the benefits of the CRT and influence public opinion in its favour.The exclusion of controversial topics within the brochure suggests that TFL’s strategy was to create a sense of majority consensus first and then gather public opinion, which is problematic. The problematic nature of the consultation arises not from TFL propagating the construction of the CRT, instead it arises from the position TFL held as facilitators of the consultation process.As the facilitators of the consultation, they had the agency to dictate the realms of discussion.To reuse my football analogy, this would be the equivalent of one team acting as the referee as well as the opponent. According to Mouffe “The possibility of a universal rational consensus has put democratic thinking on the wrong track. Instead of trying to design the institutions, which through supposedly “impartial” procedure would reconcile all conflicting interests and values, the task for democratic theorists and politicians should be to envisage the creation of a vibrant agonistic public sphere of contestation where different hegemonic political projects can be confronted. “ (Mouffe C, 2005, p.3)
Consultation TFL
Peckham Vision
14
http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/images/b/b3/Crt-main-brochure.pdf
12
Figure 4 TFL acting足as the facilitator of the consultation What Mouffe means by the wrong track is, the designing of systems that reconcile conflicting interest undermine democracy as those with more power in society will have a greater say than minorities. In the case of the CRT proposal, TFL who have more resources as an organization have the ability to create a sense of consesus of a higher number of people in comparison to minority groups such as Peckham Vision who are a grassroots organization. The imbalance established by the consultation creates unequal representation. How would this imbalance be addressed? Surely by treating unequal groups equally would lead to the further increase of this imbalance. For Mouffe the addressing of this imbalance happens through hegemonic struggle i.e. the challenging of existing power relations (Mouffe C, 2005, p.56). This is where dialogic democracy and agonistic democracy tend to differ the most. Whereas dialogic democracy seeks to bring together competing parties to converse, agonistic democracy intends to create distinction between adversaries (an us and they) in order to create a new system of power , a new hegemony. So in a sense the unfairness in terms of dynamics was necessary for the campaign that countered it one process unintentionally brought fourth another, a cause and effect. Conversation with Eileen Conn, a personal account In the month of September a group of students and I chatted with founding member of Peckham vision and community organizer Eileen Conn. During the conversation Eileen stated that she had been barred from speaking at some council events and that when she now deals with the council she tries to appear positive and non-combative to avoid being labelled as a troublemaker. So, whilst it is true that the partisan conflict over the construction over the Tram Depot proposal gave Peckham residents a voice, it also distanced Peckham Vision from its council.The limits of an agonistic mode of democracy arise from its application in the sense that despite its connotations of positive conflict, in reality it is impossible for it to completely detach itself from antagonistic labelling.
13
Speak now or forever hold your Peace.
Figure 5 Akin to wedding ceremony consultation tends to bear heavy tension As mentioned earlier TFL’s consultation process was punctuated by two-day events and exhibitions near the proposed site options. The time frame for the exhibitions was entirely dictated by TFL, and if one missed one of the specified events there wasn’t any mention of rescheduled dates. Is it fair for people to organize their lives around consultation processes considering how busy day-to-day life can be; does this pressured form of consultation work? Personally,TFL’s consultation feels like the brief moment in a wedding where the priest announces, “ if there is any reason why this couple should not be wed, someone should speak now or forever hold their peace.” This is due to the short time frame given to make critical decisions. Firstly it places an enormous amount of pressure on its citizens to make a decision. The short time frame also works against public campaigners who have a limited amount of time to raise awareness. The chosen medium of consultation the brochure acts as an analytical filter also regulates the exchange between the facilitator TFL, and the participant the Public. Since TFL created the consultation document they decided on what topics they wanted to consult the public on. Their role as the facilitator of a process gives them the upper hand, it enhances their agency within the discussion, they not only act as mediators but also as regulators of facilitation, determining how much the public can participate and on what terms. 14
TFL
brochure (analytic filter)
Public
3months
Figure 6 The use of a brochure as an analytical filter allows TFL to have an indirect exchange with the public. Eyal Weizmann labels this dynamic as the paradox of participation, “ a closed system in which the options available for choice and those who present them, cannot be challenged. Seeking to force the subject in to compliance�.15(Miessen, 2010, page 9). This paradox refers to the contradictory nature of participatory processes in that they appear to give participants the power to affect decisions but in reality only offer a predetermined selection of choices to chose from limiting what decisions participants can make and in a sense giving the participants no real actual choice. So far we have seen how the CRT’s consultation stated intention and actual intention greatly differ. As an institution driven process it made decisions through consensus, pressured timeframes and pseudo democratic systems.This raises the question of whether an inclusive people driven process would be a better alternative? To explore this question my second case study examines a consultation project done by grass-roots organization Peckham vision.
15
15
Markus Miessen, The Nightmare Of Participation (Berlin: Sternberg Press, 2001),9
II. Peckham Vision model making workshop Conversation with Eileen Conn, a personal account Tucked away within an Arcade along Rye Lane Peckham, I listened to Peckham resident and member of Peckham vision Eileen Conn tell the story of how she organized a model making workshop of the Copeland park site. She describes the workshop as a turning point in recruiting members for Peckham vision’s campaign.The intention of the workshop was, to inform, communicate, interest, teach and engage local people on the tram depot’s effects.
Figure 7 Peckham vision model making workshop participants pose with their model
16
Empowered Participants and sustained discussion Eileen’s recruitment strategy featured a variety of face-to-face encounters individually and collectively in public spaces or in people’s own spaces (appendix b). The phrase face to face implies conversation or direct exchange.According to Giddens conversation or dialogue is a key component of dialogic democracy in that relies on the social reflexivity of day-to-day activity and the development of personal relationships through sustained discussion (Giddens, 1994,p71). He continues to define social reflexivity as the active shaping of one’s identity and not passively inheriting it (Giddens, 1994,p118). From this we can deduce that Eileen’s face to face conversation were informed by the day-to-day activities of its participants hence their varying locations. This deduction is supported by Peckham visions approach to community engagement, which they describe as creating and nurturing connections between people who live, work and run businesses in Peckham. 16 Her conversations therefore occur as an organic result of its place its situation and its participants, as a result her encounters carry a sense of shared authorship as its participants were not passively inheriting the process but actively shaping its identity. For Giddens this shared authorship is part and parcel of a mutual/shared knowledge, which permeates the most inconsequential forms of daily talk (Giddens, 1993. p.95). The model-making workshop Eileen states ‘was structured to be inclusive’. Participants did not require previous model making skills as participants were taught how to make models by Peckham based architect Benedict O’Looney. Moira Tighe 33 who made a model of 133 Rye Lane said, ‘I got involved because I really liked the idea of a subtle social revolution, I liked the way I could be influencing where I live by sitting at home with a scalpel making a model’. According to Mouffe the aligning of an individual’s passions with a collective identity is core to them being able to act politically (Mouffe, 2005, p.31).
17
16
http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Peckham_Vision:About accessed 20/2/2015
What she terms as collective forms of identification are as a result of an antagonistic political view, in the sense that members of Peckham Vision differentiated their interests from those of TFL. This differentiation of interests created what was discussed earlier as an ‘us and them’ relationship that does not seek to reconcile nor gain consensus. This form of political identification is guided by what she calls passions. These passions are finally turned into agonistic struggle by taming them and mobilizing them for democratic ends (Mouffe, 2002). So far, we have seen that dialogue carries an important role in the engaging of political interests and agonism provides a sphere for these interests / passions to be acted on politically but, as discussed earlier agonistic relationship cannot in reality be dissociated from their antagonistic labels and to quell antagonistic conflict would be to deny minorities a legitimate form of contestation. This observation raises the question can agonistic democracies work on their own or do they have to be mediated and if so by whom? In response my third case study examines the Peckham Codesign a consultation project by Southwark council that was mediated by Ash Sakula architects.
18
III. Peckham Co-design
Figure 8 Peckham Co 窶電esign Play workshop 19
5 years after the planning depot consultation, Southwark Council in conjunction with Network Rail commissioned architecture firm Ash Sakula to conduct a public consultation.The commission was due to a public outcry over earlier work by Weston Williams to redevelop Peckham rye station’s forecourt. (Peckham’s public and the institutions that represented them had by this time clearly developed an us and them relationship).The intention of the consultation was to interrogate local residents visions for Peckham by involving as much of the local community as possible.17 The project aptly named Peckham Co-design took part between March and November 2014. It was based at the entrance of Peckham Rye station and conducted as a series of workshops, talks and community meetings.
Figure 9 Peckham co-design workshop outside Rye Lane station Conversation with Cany Ash, a personal account On the 7th of January after a series of emails18, I had a telephone interview with Cany Ash director of Ash Sakula, during the interview I asked, what approach did you take to engage the locals to participate in the CoDesign? She replied, “ If you take the time to get to know people and then weave them in, they participate… you are not completely commandeering the process.” 17 18
http://www.bdonline.co.uk/5068963.article (accessed 17/3/15) See appendix a
20
Generating opinions Cany’s strategy was to tailor events that were aligned with the interests of local residents. An example of such an event was the spoken word poetry performed on Rye lane. The nature of the event meant that Cany provided a framework whilst Peckham residents like spoken word artist Lateisha Davine Lovelace Henson informed its content. For Jeremy Till, the relevance of any given project is only found when it is informed by the voice of the insiders19. Informalising consultation and giving participants a stake of ownership allows for the addressing of not only relevant issues but it also creates a platform for minorities to be heard. This informal dimension is where I think the success of consultation as an organic conversation lies, it allows the participant to inform the process according to his /her needs. By allowing consultation to feel informal it creates an atmosphere of familiarity, an everydayness that makes unfamiliar topics appear more approachable.
Figure 10 Lateisha Davine Lovelace-Henson performing spoken word on Rye lane.
21
19
Till Jeremy, The King is Dead! Long live the Queen!
Despite its successes in providing the people of Peckham a sense of ownership Cany states that, “We were not empowered or able to empower local people to make decision.”20 This is due to the fact that although the people of Peckham were consulted on their views, they did not have direct input towards the decided outcome. At the end of the co-design process the views of Peckham residents were compiled in to a document called the ‘Atlas of Aspirations’ that was handed to the Southwark council to deliberate.
Peckham Co-design Southwark Council
Atlas of Aspirations
Ash Sakula (Mediator)
Public
Formal exchange In-formal exchange
Figure 11 The Co-design Network
20
See appendix a
22
Placatory Participation In 1969 author Sherry Arnstein devised the ladder of participation- a visualisation of different forms of participation with manipulation at the bottom and citizen control at the top. Consultation falls under the category of tokenism-a perfunctory gesture towards the inclusion of minority groups21. This classification leads me to question the role of consultation as a process. As identified in the Peckham Co-design an informal setting, strategies of engagement and a flexible framework gave Peckham residents the feeling of empowerment. Giddens categorises this feeling of empowerment amongst individuals within the category of Generative politics: A politics, which seeks to allow individuals and groups to make things happen, rather than have things happen to them. (Giddens, 1994,p21.) The transformative nature of generative politics is questionable. According to Carole Pateman, ‘the amount of participation that is actually obtained is just the amount that is required for stable democracy’ (Blundell, Petrescu,Till, 2009, p.26). Let us refer back to Mouffe’s challenging of power relations.As we earlier saw the practise of destabilising existing orders is key in giving unrepresented groups or minorities legitimate expression. The lack of avenues for contestation highlights the danger of engaged but placatory modes of consultation, in that it deceives the participants in to believing that their opinion will be manifested in to actual outcomes while in reality there is no such assurance. I therefore argue that the role of consultation must evidence itself within decision-making process in order to legitimise its participation, why ask for opinions if you won’t use them?
21
23
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tokenism accessed 10/12/2014
3. Traffic mimes and red cards in Bogota Application of flirtatious consultation Until now, the past three case studies have shown that,firstly consensus driven consultation is not entirely democratic, secondly bottom up consultation although empowering creates antagonisitic labelling between competing parties and thirdly that mediated consultation although more inclusive still leaves the agency of facilitation to those who pick the mediator. The case studies have been useful as they have allowed us to see the limits of current modes of consultation and speculate an alternative approach but they have not provided insight of an applied alternative. In order to understand how the overlap of dialogue and agonism may be applied I have chosen to study the traffic interventions of former Mayor of Bogota Antanas Mockus. Although the interventions chosen are to different ends, I think the strategies are similar to those of a flirtatious consultation in that they carry dialogic and agonistic attributes. By studying the interventions I hope to gain insight as to how the idea of flirtatious consultation may be realised.
Figure 12 Former Mayor of Bogota Antanas Mockus dressed as the Super citizen, a moral figure he used to set examples for the Bogotรก public 24
Before Mockus’s tenure as mayor, Bogota was a city whose traffic was lawless and its traffic police corrupt. By the time his term was ending the number of traffic related fatalities in the city had plummeted by 50 per cent. (Mc Guirk, 2014,p.209). He achieved this result through a series of two interventions. Mockus’s first intervention was to employ mimes to replace traffic police. The act was characteristic of Mockus who is described as the ‘clown mayor “ due to his unusual approaches. According to Mockus beyond the visual spectacle, the intervention was to ‘increase obedience to co-existence of norms’ (Mc Guirk, 2014,p.214) this notion is similar to Mouffe’s conflictual consensus, as the mimes were not meant to act as authoritarian figures and hence could not impose fines, but they were meant to create a sense of critical discourse, an awareness to the meaning of ones actions and their practical consequences. Visually the spectacle engaged residents of Bogota and it’s unusual nature created a sense of conversation amongst the public. Permeating into the informal sphere of Giddens life politics.
25
Figure 13 A mime directing traffic in Bogota “Mockus’ seemingly wacky notions have a respectable intellectual pedigree. His measures were informed by, among others, Nobel Prize-winning economist Douglass North, who has investigated the tension between formal and informal rules, and Jürgen Habermas’ work on how dialogue creates social capital ”22 The second intervention he used to address the traffic problem was the printing of 35000 red cards similar to the ones used by referees. The red side had thumbs down and the white side had thumbs up icon.The intention was that drivers could chide one another for selfish behaviour or breaking the law or applaud on another for patience and generosity. Catalysing a process Mockus states that the intention was to build tools for people to regulate each other.The cards provided the drivers of Bogota a legitimate expression of conflict. It is interesting to see how the experiment became self-sustaining once initiated. Mockus used the mimes to create a sense of public interest, he seduced the Bogota public to care about an issue. After which he created a democratic framework that had a partisan nature, you either fell into the good driver category or the bad driver category. Although he initially facilitated the experiment the participants kept it alive by implementing the system, and through their self-regulation also became mediators of the experiment. Although the experiment did not seek to challenge the established political hegemony it did challenge the civic hegemony and created a new civic identity amongst the citizens of Bogota.
22
Academic turns city into a social experiment , article , online http://news. harvard.edu/gazette/2004/03.11/01-mockus.html
26
Figure 14 Video stills showing the red cards of Bogota
27
28
4.Reflections /Lessons / Further potentials Conclusion – The promiscuous architect At the early stages of this research I assumed that if architects had more political agency they would be able to conduct more effective consultation, as they would have access to public funds and agency within formal institutions. Through the study of three case studies I came to see that this was not the case. I came to realise that for consultation to be effective it not only has to engage participants but also be meaningful to those participating. From the study of dialogic approaches and the application of agonistic systems, I have learnt that how participants are informed is crucial in creating a sense of public engagement. It is evident that dialogue that allows political issues to permeate within the sphere of public life as it allows the individual not only to inform the discussion but also to align this information with their personal passions. The danger of the dialogic approach lies in it being used as a tool for placation where participants are made to feel included within decision-making processes when in reality they are not. This is why I advocate for consultation to not only become organic and accessible through the use of dialogue but to also be transparent and accountable and open to contestation.There must be evidence of how opinions are gathered to create decided outcomes. Potentially the process of consultation could re-invent itself to one of legitimate contestation of opinions. We have discussed that the main hindrance for legitimising consultation is how the opinion and outcomes will influence the decision making process. Probably if consultation went beyond the seeking of opinion but allowed the contestation of interests within an agonistic sphere, not only would it legitimise the collection of opinions but it would cease being a perfunctory gesture of inclusion.
29
Just as the role of public participants within the process of consultation must be re-imagined so must the role of the architect. The concept of combining dialogic democracy and agonistic democracy requires the re-imagination of the role of the architect. My re-imagination of the role of the architect borrows the term promiscuous architect from Bjarke Ingels and bastardises it as the ability of the architect to navigate as both a referee and a free agent .My speculation is governed by the inequalities that persist within society between institutions and minorities. The role of the referee is to guarantee equal representation and fair contestation whilst the role of the free agent implies the possibility of engaging through interventions, workshops, dialogue and so on.This speculation also relies on the ability of the architect to detach him/herself from institutions and conduct consultation with an individual /dialogic approach and then later mediate conflict. To my understanding consultation involves communities and individuals who lead day-to-day lives and unless an attempt has been made to deinstitutionalize the process of consultation, engage them as people through dialogue and allow for fair contestation, consultation processes will remain unproductive. We need to learn to apply consultation as form of playful yet critical conversation. We need to learn how to flirt.
30
5. Bibliography Mouffe, Chantal. 2005. On the political, London Routledge, Print. Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism? , The new school , online , http://www.jstor.org/stable/4097134 , accessed 12/3/15. Mouffe Chantal, 2002. Politics and Passions . https://www.westminster.ac.uk/__ data/assets/pdf_file/0003/6456/Politics-and-Passions.pdf accessed 18/3/15 Giddens, Anthony. 1993. Sociology. Cambridge [England]: Polity press. Print. Giddens, Anthony. 1994. Beyond Left And Right. Stanford: Stanford University Press, Print. Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The constitution of society. Cambridge [England]: Polity press. Print. Miessen, Markus. 2010. The Nightmare Of Participation. New York: Sternberg Press. Print. Mc Guirk, Justin. 2014. Radical cities,Verso Books, 1st Edition, 2014, Print Jenkins, Paul, and Leslie Forsyth. 2010. Architecture, Participation And Society. London: Routledge. Print. Peter Blundell Jones, Doina Petrescu, Jeremy Till, Architecture and Participation, Taylor and Francis , New York , Print. Bjarke Ingels- Hedonistic Sustainability, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=ogXT_CI7KRU , accessed 11/1/2015. Till, Jeremy. 2014.The King is Dead! Long live the Queen!, https://jeremytill. s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/post/attachment/13/2011_The_King_is_ Dead_.pdf, accessed 12/03/2015. Improving civic behaviour https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=bwgWM3h_l-4 accessed 23/12/15
31
Images Figure 1 The longfield listens community consultation project, Photo courtesy (http://carverhaggard.com/news/, accessed 9/03/2015. Figure 2 Football player being sent off due to foul play, Photo courtesy http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2010/mar/06/aaron-ramseybroken-legryan-shawcross, accessed 6/03/2015. Figure 3. TFL consultation document, Photo courtesy (http://www. peckhamvision.org/wiki/images/b/b3/Crt-main-brochure.pdf, accessed 2/02/2015. Figure 4 TFL actingﾂｭas the facilitator of the consultation. Self Figure 5 Akin to wedding ceremony consultation tends to bear heavy tension. http://static.guim.co.uk/sysimages/Guardian/Pix/ pictures/2010/4/23/1272034869532/Rowan-Atkinson-in-Four-We-002.jpg accessed 14/12/2014 Figure 6 The use of a brochure as an analytical filter allows TFL to have an indirect exchange with the public. Self Figure 7 Participants pose with their model http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/File:IMG_2269_-_PV_ modelmaking_12-06-2014.jpg accessed 24/12/2014 Figure 8 Peckham Co 窶電esign Play workshophttp://peckhamcodesign. org/ accessed 5/02/15 Figure 9 Peckham co-design workshop outside Rye Lane station Figure 10 Lateisha Davine Lovelace-Henson performing spoken word on Rye lane. Figure 11: The Co-design Network.self https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8aNgy3G8Cc , accessed 15th March 2015. Figure 10 The Co-design Network self Figure 12 Former Mayor of Bogota Antanas Mockus dressed as the Super citizen, a moral figure he used to set examples for the Bogotﾃ｡ public, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/ colombia/7754170/Colombias-Antanas-Mockus-hopes-his-Super-Citizenpast-will-help-make-him-president.html , accesed 16/02/2015. Figure 13 A mime directing traffic in Bogota http://news.harvard.edu/ gazette/2004/03.11/01-mockus.html , accessed 18/02/2015 Figure 14 Video stills showing the red cards of Bogota https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=bwgWM3h_l-4 accessed 23/12/15 32
6. Appendixes APPENDIX A Email correspondence with Cany Ash Carl Munyuthe: Hello my name is Carl Munyuthe, I am a student at central saint martins writing a research paper on public consultation. One of my case studies is the Peckham co-design, I would like to ask if i could have an interview discussing how public consultation within architecture practise is changing and how this can inform the role of the architect as a mediator. I am looking forward to your reply, all the best , Carl Munyuthe. Cany Ash: Have you some specific responses to Peckham CoDesign that would challenge me or get me talking in the right way? I can talk tomorrow morning say 8.45am. Best Cany Ash Carl Munyuthe: The interview will be an interrogation of motivations and outcomes The discussion will be focussed on how the architect positions him/herself when they are working for multiple stakeholders i.e the public and the council. To be frank, the interview would interrogate the processes chosen by the co-design, considering that public consultation and participatory design has often been accused as means of gaining consensus rather than that of critical decision-making. Fundamentally, I would like to understand your position and how it came about to be considering Peckham’s context. See you tomorrow at 8:45. Best Carl. Cany Ash: Motivation was to explore new tools in participation and be paid for it. To be frank, the interview would interrogate the processes chosen by the co-design, considering that public consultation and participatory design has often been accused as means of gaining consensus rather than that of critical decision-making. The process was complicated or perhaps enriched by the ambiguities in the brief. But it was made very clear to us that the council were interested in a genuine enquiry not a tick box exercise. We were not empowered or able to empower local people to make decisions. That hopefully is going to come through in the next phase.
33
APPENDIX B Email correspondence with Eileen Conn Carl Munyuthe: Happy New year Eileen ,I am writing to you to as a student from Central Saint Martins studying Peckham for my research project .I have admired the work Peckham vision team has done within it’s community , and I would like to ask how did Peckham vision manage to build it’s networks within the community and were there any challenges faced along the way. Fundamentally, how does one engage a diverse a community such as Peckham. Thank you and I am looking forward to hearing from you soon. Best , Carl. Eileen Conn: Dear Carl, It is a long story and many challenges. Can you tell me what your research project is and how this information will contribute to it? What will you be writing and can we have a copy for our website? Finally, can you be more specific in Qs to make it easier to respond? I am very short of time and if I understand better what you are after maybe I can give you some webpage links.
Carl Munyuthe: Hey Eileen, thanks for getting back to me. The research project is a written dissertation on the topic of public participation. The information would be used to speculate improved forms of public participation. Peckham vision is one of my case studies due to it’s successful community projects, such as the saving of the Bussey building. Three specific questions would be, 1) What strategies did you use to engage Peckham’s communities to join the campaign to save the Bussey building. (Did you knock on doors , send emails ?) 2) In terms of demographics who were the most receptive participated and possibly why.
34
3) Looking back what were you main challenges in gaining public engagement? Best, Carl. Eileen Conn: Carl The strategies use every tactic that we can think of to inform, communicate, interest, teach and engage local people. Social media and a variety of face-to-face encounters individually, collectively in public spaces going to people’s own spaces - domestic and meeting places. Posters, leaflets and petitions. Etc Building up trust that the info we give out is credible, accurate and in the interests of local people. Have a look at the links below and see if you can see what our strategies and tactics are.You can email me when you have some views on this and I can let you know if you have missed anything important. Do you get any views from that on the demographics of people engaged? Our biggest challenges have been countering the lies and and obstructions put in our way by the Council, and too much work for dedicated volunteers. Eileen: Meetings, events http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Peckham_Town_Centre_Forum <http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Peckham_Town_Centre_Forum/meetings> Engaging people in Planning http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Planning Multi storey car park <http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Multi-Storey_Car_Park#August_2014_Camp aign_to_protect_Peckham.27s_rooftop_views> http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Multi-Storey_Car_Park Station Gateway http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Peckham_Rye_Station_Gateway http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Gateway_comments http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Art_Deco_Quarter Latest campaign <http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Transforming_Central_Rye_Lane#Central_
35
Rye_Lane:_Two_New_Green_Paths> Bussey Building campaign http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Visions_for_Peckham http://www.peckhamvision.org/wiki/Cross-River_Tram Eileen
36