SEiSMiC Creative Dialogues
TOPIC:Regulation for Commons - background, content, results and further developments / Author: Koos van Dijken (Platform31)

Results of the questions addressed by the group

Introduction and key note of Pietro Garau
Dr. Pietro Garau is a researcher at the first Faculty of Architecture of the University of Rome. Before he worked for the United Nations Center for Human Settlements (Habitat) as senior advisor to the Executive Director of Habitat in Nairobi, as director of the Habitat Office at the United Nations in New York and as head of Habitat's Europe office in Geneva. In Geneva Dr.Garau set up the Maison de l'Habitat as a partnership between the UN, academia, local authorities and civil society organizations. His research contributions focused on settlement management, institutions and policies. He was involved in the establishment of the UN Advisory Committee of Local Authorities (the first advisory body of local authorities to a United Nations agency) and he was one of the initiators of the Charter of Public Space.
The Charter of Public Space
The Charter of Public Space was adopted in Rome during the final session of the Biennial of Public Space (May 2013). The Charter is translated in eight languages, presented at different international conferences and adopted by the Italian city of Naples. It will be developed further for the third Conference of the UN-HABITAT in 2016.
The Charter of Public space defines public space and describes some principles to create, manage and enjoy public space that cities, urban actors and citizens could endorse and embrace. The good practices and the good principles are meant to inspire civic action and to mobilize citizens. The concern behind the charter is that cities all over the world show a worsening of economic, social, ethnic, cultural and generational inequalities. Public houses, public transport, leisure and sport facilities etc. have been privatized. Public space is the only public good that has not yet been privatized and is not yet become a commodity of urban life. Public space should remain the place where citizenship rights are guaranteed and differences are respected and appreciated. All users of public space have the same rights and duties with regard to public space. The objective of the Charter is to keep, to safeguard and to make public place the banner of urban civility.
Public spaces are all places publicly owned of or public use, accessible and enjoyable by all for free and without a profit motive. Examples of good things you can do in the city and in good urban space which do not require money: walking in a park, resting on a bench, drinking from a water fountain, play football in any open space, admire spaces and architecture, walks streets, piazzas and sidewalks, ask directions of an unknown passer-by, offer directions to an unknown passer-by, take kids for a walk, ride a bicycle, fall in love in a park et cetera, et cetera.
Some principles in the creation of public space are (see Charter for more detail):
every public space should be designed with full consideration for diversity;
public space is the gymnasium of democracy, an opportunity for creating and maintaining over time the sentiment of citizenship and the awareness of the roles that each of us has and can have with regard to one’s daily lifestyle and to one’s living environment;
the interconnection and improvement of public space as a strategy for upgrading peripheries and suburban areas should include improving connections, the enhancement of multifunctionality and access and the reduction of phenomena of privatization and exclusion.
Some principles in the management of public space are (see Charter for more detail):
the management of public space is a prevalent responsibility of local authorities with the active collaboration of citizens, civil society and the private sector;
reduce private automobile traffic in cities is a primary condition for improving environmental conditions, enhancing public space and making them more liveable;
public space improvements determine significant value increments; consequently at least part of them must be recaptured for the benefit of the community.
Some principles for the enjoyment of public space are (see Charter for more detail):
all citizens and users should have access to public space and should be able to enjoy it in complete freedom, this requires democratic processes, dialogue and regard for diversity;
the peaceful use of public spaces for rallies, marches, demonstrations and urban public art is an integral expression of democracy.
The wider context to inspire civic action and mobilization of citizens
It is not only the Charter of Public Place that tries to inspire civic action and to mobilize citizens. In different countries and cities central and local governments try to use the energy, knowledge, ideas and initiatives of society to improve urban life. Ordinary people are invited as commoners to enter into a co-design process to manage public spaces, urban green zones, abandoned buildings and other urban issues. Citizens are empowered to take initiatives. This development is stimulated by the awareness that many citizens are well educated, possess all kind of relevant knowledge and want to participate in the governance of their environment. This development is also stimulated by the reduction of public budgets.
To stimulate this develop central governments and cities are drawing new legal frameworks by which the city can enter into partnerships with citizens for a variety of purposes such as social services, collaborative services, maintaining buildings, streets and greens and digital innovation. These collaborations compromise a new vision of the sharing city or commons-oriented city.
Examples of this Regulation for Commons are besides the Charter of Public Space the Charter of Public Space (IT), the Bologna Regulation for the Care and Regeneration of Urban Commons (IT), the CO-Mantova project (IT), the Localism Act (UK) and the neighbourhood rights (NL).
The Bologna Regulation offers a regulatory framework for local authorities, citizens and the community at large to manage public and private spaces and assets together. The CO-Mantova project is a new kind of collaborative/poycentric governance in public-private partnership with five key sets of actors: social innovators, public authorities, businesses, civil society
organisations and knowledge institutions. The Localism Act gives communities, community organisations and individuals the right to bid, to buy assets of community value (shops, pubs, playing fields) and to develop neighbourhood plans. Inspired by the Localism Act in England the first local governments in The Netherland define “neighbourhoods rights” that give citizen initiatives the ‘right to challenge’ for better public service delivery, the ‘right to bid’ for community assets and the right of ‘neighbourhood planning’.
What were the main points of discussion?
Does the emphasis on non-commercial access to public space in the Charter mean that private activities and events for which you have to pay a fee are not good? Can public spaces be created without profit motive? Must public space be safeguarded against privatisation, pressure groups and commercialisation?
We should also have an open eye to the tension between public space and regulation; to wisely use the scarce resources and to minimalize the ecological footprint we should minimalize land use and open space, we should stimulate multiple use and nature-based solutions that need also space. What is the relationship between indoor and outdoor space?
How to concord the different interests and priorities of citizens? How to reconcile the different rights and interests? E.g. the rights of shops, cafés and restaurants versus the rights of other users of public space. How to find balances also between the different generations (youngsters, adults, elderly people)?
Are public amenities (space to move, toilets, waste bins etc.) part of public space according to the Charter?
Do you need regulations or can much be organised by common self-interests and participation? What is the role of money because to create, use and maintain public space you need money?
Is European regulation needed? Can the Charter of Public Space or other Regulations for Commons achieve the same position as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Is a vision and a long term perspective needed to improve public space, to stimulate citizen’s participation and to achieve long term results?
The definition of regulation for commons and the regulation of public space, and the differences?What is the use of defining a city as commons?
Results?
Public versus private in public space
The Charter does not define ownership, but defines accessibility. Public space is civic space. The arena where citizens and civic bodies come together to give life to the promise of the city. The Charter does not exclude that parts of public spaces are from time to time fenced for events and that you have to pay an entrance fee to gain access. In these cases public space is not enjoyable to all. The real concern is the invasion of public space by shopping centers and malls.
Public space as the Urban Equalizer
With cities becoming marketplaces, i.e. places where essential goods such as housing and basic services are increasingly being offered as market commodities to be acquired individually, public space is the remaining “urban good” that is offered as a resource and right of all and for free. As such, it benefits primarily the less privileged. In that way public space has become the great “urban equalizer”.
For public space to act as “great equalizer” it is important to broaden its meaning. Public space is not only physical space open to unlimited and free public use. It is also the “space of the public” where “polis” becomes “politics”, and where the public sector – local government, public delivery of services - is enabled to perform its role. Public space is also more that “happy streets” and making desirable places for people to roam and consume. Good public schools and efficient public services are also vitally essential “public spaces” for those who cannot afford expensive private education and health care. Public spaces needs to be conceived as “public service”.
Alternatives of regulation
Regulation is in most of the cases needed because of the public or common good character of public space and because you need some sort of financing. But sometimes the regulation can be lighter of easier, or can be replaced by some form of citizen/stakeholder agreement or mediation.
In theory the Regulation for Commons (Bologna Regulation) has in its different forms advantages of limiting political conflict and ideological factionalism. Because goals are mutually set and programs are co-designed, everyone’s focus is more on working through differences than trying to “beat” the political opposition. The openness of the process could also help to avoid NIMBY-ism. Unlike a bureaucracy, the regulation and new approaches are designed for rapid citizen feedback and constant iteration. In time, citizens could realize that they can adopt a different attitude towards government and become meaningful participants in the process of self-governance. The city truly belong to them. In the creative dialogue will be discussed whether these theoretical advantages are already visible in different countries.
We could also decide in our cities that: “we need regulation unless we decide that we do not need them (because we know how to reconcile different interests)”.
Definition of public and commons
There was some confusion about city for commons, regulation for commons and public spaces. ‘Public’ has not to do with the service provider (a public body) but with the characteristics of the good. Public goods have two characteristics:non-rivalry (this means that when a good is consumed, it doesn’t reduce the amount available for others) and non-excludability (this occurs when it is not possible to provide a good without it being possible for others to enjoy; e.g. erecting a dam to stop flooding, or having an army to defend the country). The rivalry distinguishes public goods from common goods. Common goods are rivalrous and non-excludable. Wild fish are an example of a common good. They are non-excludable, as it is impossible to prevent people from catching fish. At the same time they are rivalrous, as the same fish cannot be caught more than once.

Which key issues have to be addressed by policy and/or research to strengthen social urban innovation?

Research Issues
Make an inventory of good practices so that practitioners can learn and exchange experiences. In all countries there are good examples, but they are not readily available in a transparent and easy accessible way.
We need more measurement (change of turnover, less accidents, rents going up etc.) and more monitoring about the importance of public space and the effects of improvements in public space. With better measurement and monitoring research can add to the policy debate. And not only in the inner cities but also in the less popular neighbourhoods.
What is the role of regulation and principles to create, use and maintain/enjoy public space. Are there alternatives to regulation that stimulate also far-sighted visions, that are goal oriented and that enable/stimulate participation. Which conditions have to be fulfilled so that principles can be beneficial for public space.
What are the similarities and the differences between private, public, public-private and commons when we create, use and maintain public space. Are principles, agreements and regulation in the public domain different than in the domain of the commons. Does the focus on ‘commons’ lead to other participatory processes in and with the community.
Policy Needs:
To create, use, improve and maintain public space local public authorities can use the principles of the Charter and can show their commitment to these principles. This step is also facilitated because public space is an important element of the 11thUN Sustainable Development goal.
Provide good practices and use the evidence of other cities. Also of other instruments and approaches that reconcile the needs of different groups differently than by regulation. There is a wealth of evidence from all over the world thate.g. closing streets or areas for cars can increase the turnover of shopkeepers, bars and restaurants. The apparent conflict of interests can be lessened by showing results and evidence from other cities (Bogota, Curitiba, New York, Stockholm, London etc.).
To create, use and maintain public space money. This is probably hard to achieve by participatory processes. Therefore, regulation is important.
Some people and actors are benefitting from the improvement of quality of public space. Values and rents are increasing and more people are using the public space. Because you need money to use, improve or maintain public space you can charge the beneficiaries and usurpers of public space. The money charged can also be used to compensate the people that do not benefit from the improvement.
Good Practices
The following good examples were discussed during the creative session.
The city of Curitiba in Brazil is renowned by its choice to connect all parts of the city and all citizens (also the people living in the favelas) by high-capacity busses on dedicated lanes. This gives the bus the same performance as a metro against one tenths of the costs. The system reaches about 90% of the population. In the concept and design of the city transportation systems, living and working together are combined. The bus system is utilized by 45% of the population. Central areas of the city have also been closed to cars. The bus system and the road closures have led to a drop of 22% of car use, to dynamic economic growth for local shops and the development of community space for pedestrians. The principle of Curitiba is to work fast, just start, learn and adapt; you do not know all planning answers at forehand.
In the city of Bogota they give great value on equity, democracy and value sharing. Equity for children (health, education, sport etc.). Democracy because a bus with 80 people on special bus lanes has more right to use scarce public space than 1 or 2 people in a private car, and because priority is given to bicycle lanes and pavements. House owners and shop keepers that benefit from improved public space and the new rapid transit line are charged. In this way resources are recruited for further public improvements (creation, use and maintenance).
In the city of Rio de Janeirothey focused on being environmental friendly, provide high capacity transportation with busses on bus lanes also to the favelas, to provide high quality basic services (education, health care) in the favelas as well and use technology to monitor the city and the city services. This are the four commandments that create a liveable and vivid city according to the city executive of Rio de Janeiro.
The city of New York gives (illegal) immigrants a minimum bundle a rights. They can use the city gardens and a city card give them access to basic health care, ambulances, telephone cards and the charging of their mobile phones (accessibility of public services as “public space”).

GROUP members(we did not register the participants)

Name / eMail / phone

1