Urban agriculture, civil interfaces and moving beyond difference: the experiences of plot holders in Dublin and Belfast

Recent literature suggests that a “shared politics of place” attained through joint activities fosters social integration and provides people with a means to practise co-operation [Baumann, G., 1996. Contesting culture: discourses of identity in multi-ethnic London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Sanjek, R., 1998. The future of us all: race & neighbourhood policies in New York City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; Sennett, R., 2012. Together: the rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. UK: Penguin]. Such a “shared politics of place” is most likely to occur in the context of public space conceptualised broadly as “the setting for everyday spatial behaviour of individuals and communities, emphasizing ordinary activities of citizens” [Lownsbrough, H. and Beunderman, J., 2007. Equally spaced? Public space and interaction between diverse communities. London: Demos, p. 8]. Here we explore one element of such public space – urban agriculture sites – with a view to identifying the extent to which a “shared politics of place” can be created and nurtured among the cultivating citizenry. The paper draws on data collected on allotment gardening sites in two urban contexts: Dublin (Ireland) and Belfast (Northern Ireland) over the period 2009–2013. We demonstrate the centrality of allotment cultivation to the generation of solidarity, mutuality and trust among participating citizens. Individuals engaging in allotment gardening in both Dublin and Belfast create and sustain civil interfaces – dismantling barriers, exchanging knowledge, challenging stereotypes, generating empathy and getting on with the business of simply getting on with their lives. The modus operandi of allotment gardening is predicated on a willingness to disregard social and ethno-national categorisations while on site. This is not to deny that such differences exist and persist, but allotments offer a “space of potential” where those differences are, at least for a time, rendered less salient

Ethnographic understandings of ethnically diverse neighbourhoods to inform urban design practice

The aim of this paper is to inform urban design practice through deeper understanding and analysis of the social dynamics of public outdoor space in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods. We hypothesise that findings from ethnographic research can provide a resource that improves cultural literacy and supports social justice in professional practice. The primary method is a meta-synthesis literature review of 24 ethnographic research papers, all of which explore some dimensions of public open space use and values in UK urban contexts characterised by ethnic and racial diversity. We summarise thematic understandings and significance of neighbourhood places of shared activity, parks, spaces of passing-by and of retreat. We evaluate the implications for intercultural social dynamics, exploring the spatial and temporal dimensions of conviviality and racism in public open space. We then argue that it is possible to develop principles for urban design practice informed by this work, and propose four for discussion: maximising straightforward participation, legitimising diversity of activity, designing in micro-retreats of nearby quietness and addressing structural inequalities of open space provision. We conclude that ethnographic research can provide detailed insights into the use of the public realm and also inform a more nuanced understanding of outdoor sociality relevant for an increasingly diverse society. The challenge is two-fold: for ethnographers to become less cautious in engaging with decisions and priorities regarding how cities change, and for urban designers to explicitly embed informed understandings of difference into their broad desire for inclusive public space

‘Fourth places’: the Contemporary Public Settings for Informal Social Interaction among Strangers.

This paper introduces ‘fourth places’ as an additional category of informal social settings alongside ‘third places’ (Oldenburg 1989). Through extensive empirical fieldwork on where and how social interaction among strangers occurs in the public and semi-public spaces of a contemporary masterplanned neighbourhood, this paper reveals that ‘fourth places’ are closely related to ‘third places’ in terms of social and behavioural characteristics, involving a radical departure from the routines of home and work, inclusivity, and social comfort. However, the activities, users, locations and spatial conditions that support them are very different. They are characterized by ‘in-betweenness’ in terms of spaces, activities, time and management, as well as a great sense of publicness. This paper will demonstrate that the latter conditions are effective in breaking the ‘placelessness’ and ‘fortress’ designs of newly designed urban public spaces and that, by doing so, they make ‘fourth places’ sociologically more open in order to bring strangers together. The recognition of these findings problematizes well-established urban design theories and redefines several spatial concepts for designing public space. Ultimately, the findings also bring optimism to urban design practice, offering new insights into how to design more lively and inclusive public spaces. Keywords: ‘Fourth places’, Informal Public Social Settings, Social Interaction, Strangers, Public Space Design