Reinventing public spaces in community garden projects in Berlin and Rotterdam

This research is an empirical study on community engagement in public urban spaces in the example of community garden projects in Berlin and Rotterdam. The topic is based on the interest in participatory approaches to urban development that aim at liveability and social sustainability in urban neighborhoods. Community garden projects are interesting examples where citizens get involved in the creation and the maintenance of public or semi-public urban spaces. In most cases empty, abandoned land is used and upgraded and community spaces as well as access to urban nature are created. The research involves an `intercontextual' study of two case study projects in different cities, in order to investigate the universality of the phenomenon of community gardens that exist in many places all over the world. The research objective is to explore why people get involved in community projects in public space, focusing on the concerned social and place-bound processes. The aim is to investigate the meanings of the garden projects for the different participating and non-participating actors and the benefits gained from the engagement. The central research question is: Which social processes and project features make the community gardens be understood by the organizers, participants, and surrounding neighbors as projects that foster processes of place-making and social connectedness? The main concept investigated is place making. In my definition, based on the empirical results and the theoretical literature, it means the active physical and social appropriation of space to make it a place to meet and `to be', which involves feelings of engagement and a sense of belonging. The study focuses on so-called community or neighborhood gardens which usually are legal or formally recognized and based on grass-roots initiatives and self-organization. They can be defined as incorporating individual but mainly collective gardening activities on an urban site granting semi-public or public access to other users. The two case study projects were selected with regards to these characteristics. The community garden projects were systematically analyzed concerning their place characteristics, social and organizational features, aspects of partnership with public institutions and dimensions such as public vs. non-public accessibility and collective vs. individual gardening. A topic that was identified to play a crucial role is civic engagement with its different forms and functions. The research design is characterized by two case studies and three respondent groups as well as by the triangulation of qualitative empirical data sources: semi-structured in-depth interviews, questionnaires, and participant observation. Ethnographical film research is included in the data collection (all interviews were recorded with digital video) and analysis. It is used as documenting tool resulting in a research film that is aimed at a broader non-academic and practice-based public. Thesis - Reinventing public spaces in community garden projects in Berlin and Rotterdam The data analysis was conducted on the basis of the transcribed interviews, questionnaires, and field notes that were coded and categorized. The resulting categories were further analyzed concerning their interrelationships based on the methodology of Grounded Theory, resulting in a systematically developed and empirically grounded conceptual model. This conceptual model comprises all main empirical findings. The findings are categorized into cross-cutting meanings or central features of the community garden projects, specific personal benefits and the overall central concept of place-making. Briefly summarized, the different central features of the garden projects (`to have a place to be', `to do together /joint activities', `to create something', `to be free to leave and to do what you like' and `to search for togetherness and community') and the personal benefits gained from the engagement define what the community gardens mean in the perception of the respondents. This relates to processes of place-making and the creation of spatial and social ties. Social contacts and networks are created, accessed and used within the project group but also by the users of the community garden project. These processes are inherent to the gardening activity in both garden projects. In the study the findings are related to different theoretical concepts. Place-making in the community gardens is connected to the notion of `parochial realm territories' (Lofland 1998) and to `the social production of place' through actions and social relations by the users of (public) space (Blokland 2001). The findings show that appropriation of space can lead to feelings of ownership and belonging. At the same time it can involve unintended exclusionary effects for people who feel like entering a "home territory" when entering the garden. The developed conceptual model can be used as a tool to understand and analyze community garden projects, especially concerning the conditions for a long term, well balanced and well functioning project. So, it can be applied to the practice of creating such garden projects and to community involvement in public space projects in general. My findings show that community gardens and the involved place-making processes have a potential for social urban development in practice and the creation of urban place quality. From the analysis of the project approaches lesson can be learned for the functioning of community gardens, for the implications on neighborhood development and for partnerships between government and civil society organizations. Thereby, this research can make a contribution as an empirically grounded theoretical analysis that can be directly applied in the practice of urban development and management. Keywords: public urban space, community engagement, place-making, social connectedness/social capital, social urban development