Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity: Difference between revisions
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
include = #How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? | include = #How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? | ||
</DPL> | </DPL> | ||
The analysis of the process of "participation" in Suleymaniye case can be defined as consisting of a clear axis of a non-dialective actors of managers and audits. The main process was actually settled on a network of technical bodies and authorities at local and national level who is in charge of monitoring and controlling the interval steps in order to pretend it from the timing failures throught the process. However, a network of authorities and audits is potentially and by definiton have been missing to create resolutions model to mobilize the inhabitants in order to design an opportunist idea of involving the inhabitants to generate not only an economical but also social rehabilitation outcomes. As a source of problem on this paralel is some specific survey questions that posed to the renters by the local administration. | |||
in order to analyse a specific step of the process, a question for the renter surveyors is below: | |||
Do you want to own a property in the area?......................Yes/No | |||
Do you want to continue to live in the area as renter?..........Yes/No | |||
The concern of "participation" is implied in the survey as the idea of mapping the demand on willing to have a property in the area or willing to live in the area after the regeneration process. No questions were posed to the surveyors in order to map the economical and social destruction of the process to design a set of specific policy interventions for the survivor inhabitants. | |||
=== In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs?=== | === In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs?=== | ||
Revision as of 02:09, 15 December 2008
Case Studies of this working group
The list includes all case studies categorised in this group and the respective answers to the first question "Rationale:Why is this case study interesting?"
Attention: this is a dynamic page list, do not edit this paragraph!
<DPL>
category=Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity mode=ordered include = #Rationale: Why is this case study interesting?
</DPL>
Core Questions of this Working Group
Core questions as identified during the first group meeting on December 3rd 2008:
- Who was involved in the participation process? (Agnieska)
- How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)? (Camilo)
- In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs? (Liliana, Martina)
Notes:
- The names behind the questions identify those people that take up a kind of editor's responsibility for the questions. All group members are asked to integrate all questions into their case study report. The respective question editors will then compile the different answers and report back to the group plenary on December 19th.
- People who did not attend the session on 3rd of December may have additional proposals for core questions. Feel free to add these questions as proposals to the list above and discuss it via e-mail or using the discussion page.
- Please integrate the questions soon and try to deliver some draft answers before December 15th - otherwise it will become difficult to create a synthesis report for December 17th.
Synthesis of Core Questions
Who was involved in the participation process?
Agnieska , Harun <DPL>
category=Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity mode=ordered include = #Who was involved in the participation process?
</DPL>
How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)?
Camilo
<DPL>
category=Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity mode=ordered include = #How was the participation process implemented (methods applied)?
</DPL>
The analysis of the process of "participation" in Suleymaniye case can be defined as consisting of a clear axis of a non-dialective actors of managers and audits. The main process was actually settled on a network of technical bodies and authorities at local and national level who is in charge of monitoring and controlling the interval steps in order to pretend it from the timing failures throught the process. However, a network of authorities and audits is potentially and by definiton have been missing to create resolutions model to mobilize the inhabitants in order to design an opportunist idea of involving the inhabitants to generate not only an economical but also social rehabilitation outcomes. As a source of problem on this paralel is some specific survey questions that posed to the renters by the local administration. in order to analyse a specific step of the process, a question for the renter surveyors is below:
Do you want to own a property in the area?......................Yes/No
Do you want to continue to live in the area as renter?..........Yes/No
The concern of "participation" is implied in the survey as the idea of mapping the demand on willing to have a property in the area or willing to live in the area after the regeneration process. No questions were posed to the surveyors in order to map the economical and social destruction of the process to design a set of specific policy interventions for the survivor inhabitants.
In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs?
Liliana, Martina
<DPL>
category=Working Group Public Space and Civic Identity mode=ordered include = #In how far does/did the project respond to people's needs?
</DPL>