|
|
| (24 versions intermédiaires par le même utilisateur non affichées) |
| Ligne 1 : |
Ligne 1 : |
| {{Objet média | | {{Objet média |
| |Type de document=Fiche | | |Type de document=Fiche |
| |Description=:This document is a overencompassing guide that explains how to properly create the foundation of a charter written with the objective to assist in the self-governance of an urban green commons. | | |Description= |
| | :This document is a overencompassing guide that helps to create a commons charter written with the objective to assist in the self-governance of an urban commons. |
|
| |
|
| :Ce document est une tentative de guide pour la création de charte des communs urbains écologiques (green commons). | | :Ce document est une tentative de guide pour aider à la création de chartes des communs urbains. |
| | |Fait partie de= |
| |Auteur=GUTTMANN Alexandre, SULTAN Frédéric | | |Auteur=GUTTMANN Alexandre, SULTAN Frédéric |
| |Producteur=Remix the commons | | |Producteur=Remix the commons |
| Ligne 9 : |
Ligne 11 : |
| <tabber> | | <tabber> |
| EN= | | EN= |
| This document is divided in a series of chapters describing the content and the process of creation of a charter of the urban commons : relevant players in the charter development, and key tasks for following the tactical chartering guidelines for urban commons. | | This work (in progress) is one of the results of the project [[Atlas des chartes des communs urbains|Atlas of the charters of the urban commons]]. |
| | | |
| People interested in being involved in the commons can determine their role in the development of the charter by carefully going over each chapter of this document. With that said, this document can be viewed and used in different perspectives. While this document is supposed to provide general guidelines, there are specific tasks or components of the document that pertain to specific goals of each commons. | | :This document is divided in a series of chapters describing the content and the process of creation of a charter of the urban commons : relevant players in the charter development, and key tasks for following the tactical chartering guidelines for urban commons. |
| | | : |
| The format is supposed to allow linkages between each component and each commons. Such components come from key concepts found in the Remix of the Commons website and from other sources of scientific and academic literature. In addition, documented experiences of tactical chartering are highlighted here to review lessons learned on charters that were created in the past. | | :People interested in being involved in the commons can determine their role in the development of the charter by carefully going over each chapter of this document. With that said, this document can be viewed and used in different perspectives. While this document is supposed to provide general guidelines, there are specific tasks or components of the document that pertain to specific goals of each commons. |
| | | : |
| The document is intended to be open, so interested peoples can review, modify, and provide feedback and support for this document. | | :The format is supposed to allow linkages between each component and each commons. Such components come from key concepts found in the Remix of the Commons website and from other sources of scientific and academic literature. In addition, documented experiences of tactical chartering are highlighted here to review lessons learned on charters that were created in the past. |
| | | : |
| | :The document is intended to be open, so interested peoples can review, modify, and provide feedback and support for this document. |
| | : |
| |-| | | |-| |
|
| |
|
| FR= | | FR= |
| Ce document est divisé en une série de chapitres qui décrivent les contenus et les processus de création de chartes des communs urbains. Les personnes engagées dans les communs urbains peuvent s'appuyer sur ces documents pour définir leur rôle dans l'élaboration de la charte, identifier les acteurs pertinents et leurs rôles dans le développement des communs, les taches clés à réaliser, etc. | | Ce travail (en cours de progression) est l'un des résultats du projet [[Atlas des chartes des communs urbains]]. |
|
| |
|
| Ce document peut être consulté et utilisé dans différentes perspectives. Ils propose une approche générale, mais inclue aussi des éléments qui se rapportent à des communs spécifiques. Le format permet de faire des liens entre les différents éléments | | :Ce document est divisé en une série de chapitres qui décrivent les contenus et les processus de création de chartes des communs urbains. Les personnes engagées dans les communs urbains peuvent s'appuyer sur ces documents pour définir leur rôle dans l'élaboration de la charte, identifier les acteurs pertinents et leurs rôles dans le développement des communs, les taches clés à réaliser, etc. |
| et des communs urbains spécifiques. Ces liens constituent des concepts clés proposés dans le site Remix of the Commons auquels s'ajoutent d'autres sources de littérature scientifique et académique. | | : |
| | | :Ce document peut être consulté et utilisé dans différentes perspectives. Ils propose une approche générale, mais inclue aussi des éléments qui se rapportent à des communs spécifiques. Le format permet de faire des liens entre les différents éléments et des communs urbains spécifiques. Ces liens constituent des concepts clés proposés dans le site Remix of the Commons auquels s'ajoutent d'autres sources de littérature scientifique et académique. |
| En outre, les expériences documentées de commoning permettent d'identifier les leçons apprises à travers les expériences des chartes créées dans le passé. Le document est ouvert afin que les personnes intéressées puissent examiner, modifier et fournir des commentaires qui pourront améliorer ce travail. | | : |
| | :En outre, les expériences documentées de commoning permettent d'identifier les leçons apprises à travers les expériences des chartes créées dans le passé. Le document est ouvert afin que les personnes intéressées puissent examiner, modifier et fournir des commentaires qui pourront améliorer ce travail. |
| |-| | | |-| |
| </tabber> | | </tabber> |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| ===UNDER-CONSTRUCTION - EN CONSTRUCTION === | | ===Resources === |
| | | ====Tactical Urbanism ==== |
| ===Bibliography=== | | *[https://laferme.wiki/stockage/index.php/s/Ec8L6W4aPQMq5ax TActical urbanism vol 1] |
| | | *[https://laferme.wiki/stockage/index.php/s/tkHjMe7dPMCHagE Tactical urbanism Vol2] *[https://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol_2_final Tactical_urbanism_vol_2 Externe] |
| [https://www.dropbox.com/s/xz5b9n5uousd2qh/How%20to%20make%20a%20Community%20Charter.docx?dl=0 How to make a Community Charter.docx] | | *[https://laferme.wiki/stockage/index.php/s/bwtMxntxcGXSbNZ Tactical urbanism Tactical Guide To Materials And Design] |
| | |
| ===Resources to be registred in Remix the commons / Atlas des chartes des communs urbains ===
| |
| *[https://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol_2_final Tactical_urbanism_vol_2] | |
|
| |
|
| | ====Community chartering ==== |
| | *[https://laferme.wiki/stockage/index.php/s/p6okoQz3RKHtYP2 The Community Charters in Scotland and England] Stir on I. Carlisle. |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| ===Vocabulary === | | ===Vocabulary === |
| ; Table of concepts mentionned in the Tactical Chartering Manifesto :
| | (See also [[Tactical Chartering Manifesto/ 10 Definitions]] |
| ''{{#ask: [[{{PAGENAME}}]]
| |
| |?Est intéressé au concept=
| |
| | mainlabel=-
| |
| |format=list
| |
| }}''
| |
|
| |
|
| | ; Concepts mentionned in the Tactical Chartering Manifesto : |
|
| |
|
| ====Definitions====
| | {{#ask: [[A une page parent::Tactical Chartering Manifesto]] |
| | | |?Est intéressé au concept=Concepts described in the page |
| 1. {{C|Knowledge City}} ({{P|Yigitcanlar}}, {{P|O’Connor}}, and {{P|Westerman}} 2008) - An integrated knowledge based cluster or geographical entity (in an urban setting) that physically and institutionally combines locally focused innovation, science, creativity within the context of an expanding globalized and interconnected economy by emphasizing on the development and advancement of technologies and vibrant socio-economic activities that focus on conserving rich natural environments, quality built environments, presence of tolerance and acceptance of multiculturalism, democratic, transparent and visionary governance, and enriched human capital
| | |?Est associé à la personne=Author / Auteur |
| | | |format=tables |
| Layers that comprise a city include:
| | |order=ASC |
| # Knowledge base - including educational institutions and R&D activities
| | }} |
| # Industrial Structure - affect progress and initial development of a KC
| |
| # Quality of Life and Urban Amenities - ensures a KC has necessary elements knowledge workers are attracted to build a strong knowledge base | |
| # Urban Diversity and Cultural mix - as an instrument in encouraging creativity
| |
| # Accessibility - encourages and facilitates transfer of knowledge and its movement
| |
| # Social Equity and inclusion - minimizes social disparity and negative tensions
| |
| # Scale of a city - larger KCs tend to offer greater knowledge pool, greater diversity, and choice for knowledge workers and businesses
| |
| | |
| :Contrast to Kenworthy 2006 definition of an Eco City - Ten critical eco-city dimension to support urban sustainability and encouraging development | |
| # Cities have a compact, mixed-use urban form that uses land efficiently and protects the natural environment and biodiversity and food-producing areas
| |
| # Natural environments diffuse in city’s spaces and embraces cities, at the same time the cities surrounding areas provide a major proportion of its food needs
| |
| # Highways and road infrastructure are less emphasized in comparison to public transit, walking, and cycling infrastructure, having a special emphasis on rail (making car and motorcycle use diminished)
| |
| # Extensive use of environmental technologies for water, energy, and waste management (the city’s life support systems become closed loop systems)
| |
| # City centers and sub-centers within the city are human centers rather than automobile centers, emphasizing access and circulation by modes of transport other than the automobile, to which they absorb a high proportion of employment and residential growth
| |
| # Cities have a high quality public realm throughout, expressing public culture, community, and equity along with good governance (including the transit systems and all environments associated with it
| |
| # Physical structure and urban design of a city (especially with its public environments are highly legible, permeable, robust, varied, rich, and visual appropriate/personalized to human needs
| |
| # Economic performance of the city and employment creation are maximized through innovation, creativity, and the uniqueness of the local environment, culture, and history, as well as the high environmental social quality of the city’s public environments (tackling issues like environmental racism)
| |
| # Planning for the future of the city is a visionary “debate and decide” process, not a “predict and provide”, computer-driven process
| |
| # All decision-making and sustainability-based, integrating social, economic, or environmental considerations has to be based on compact, transit-oriented urban form principles - Such decision making processes are democratic, inclusive, empowering, and engendering of hope
| |
| | |
| | |
| 2. {{C|Urban green commons}} (Colding 2011b) - physical green spaces in an urban setting of a diverse land ownership that depend on collective organization and management that allow individuals and interest groups participating in management to hold a rich set of bundles of rights, including rights to craft their own institutions to decide whom they want to include in such management schemes
| |
| | |
| 3. {{C|Allotment Gardens}} - physical spaces comprised of publicly/privately held vacant lots in cities that allow neighborhood locals to grow food and plants, conduct urban greenery, and work together to achieve self sufficiency
| |
| | |
| Community Garden [[Permanency]] - The process designed to protect a community garden that is only temporary set up until the vacant lot it sits on is under construction. This process is based on collective action and strong local governance in developing a strong appearance or aesthetic that adds to the character of the neighborhood
| |
| | |
| 4. {{C|Community garden}}s - multiple garden plots of equal size, often on municipally owned land, constituting well managed flower, bush, and tree rich sites that provide lot holders with a variety of locally resourceful flora (including vegetables, fruits, and ornamental flowers) (Colding et al. 2006)
| |
| | |
| 5. {{C|Urban Resilience Management}} - A management process within an urban setting that contains three important characteristics:
| |
| # Amount of change the system can undergo and still retain the same controls on function and structure
| |
| # Degree to which a system is capable of self organization
| |
| # Ability to build and increase the capacity for learning and adaptation
| |
| | |
| 6. {{C|Cognitive Resilience Building}} (Colding & Barthel 2012) - a mental process of human perception, memory, and reasoning that people acquire from interacting frequently with local ecosystems, shaping peoples’ experience, world views, values towards local ecosystems and ultimately towards the biosphere
| |
| | |
| 7. {{C|Socio-ecological Memory}} (Colding & Barthel 2012) - the combined means by which knowledge, experience, and practice of ecosystem management are captured, stored, revived, and transmitted over time - forming a shared memory of a changing physical environment linked to socio-economic fluctuations, and local responses to such fluctuations
| |
| | |
| 8. {{C|Municipality}} (Andrew Sancton 1985) - While also being providers of services, they are democratic mechanisms through which territorially based communities of people govern themselves at a local level — having municipalities amalgamate with each other to make them a stronger unit is ineffective because it erodes the foundations of our liberal democracies, undermining the notion that there can be forms of self-government existing outside the institutions of the central government
| |
| | |
| 9. {{C|Park Conservancy}} - nonprofit organizations raising large sums of money to co-manage large urban parks in partnership with local governments (Foster Collective Action and the Urban Commons)
| |
| | |
| 10. {{C|Regulatory Slippage}} - a process where government control or oversight of a resource significantly declines — in such circumstances, users may be tempted to use or consume this resource that degrade the value or attractiveness of the resource (even creating rivalrous conditions and adding on to the continuous degradation of a resource)
| |
| | |
| 11. {{C|Friends Group}}s - groups of participative citizens living near a commons (such as a park) (outside of government or private oversight) to respond against regulatory slippage and invests in commons upkeep, mobilize a plan and raise support for restoration, maintenance, and preservation
| |
| | |
| 12. {{C|Park Conservancy}} - nonprofit organization raising large sums of money to co-manage large urban parks in partnership with local governments (in the collaborating, planning, design, and implementation of capital projects).
| |
| | |
| 13. {{C|Business Improvement District}} - nonprofit entities formed by property owners or businesses in commercial areas of city, providing street level services, small scare improvements to streets, parks, and other common areas beyond what local government is willing to hold responsibility for (Foster Nicole Stelle Garnett’s definition) - territorial subdivisions of a city in which property owners are empowered to leve, and obligated to pay, special assessments to fund supplemental public services - Well managed BIDs allow private entities to collaborate closely with local government officials to invest significant resources in a wide range of quasi-governmental services
| |
| | |
| 14. {{C|Open Source Urbanism}} (Nikos Salingaros) - a cooperative model allowing active users to freely adapt and modify theories, research, and practices following the proven experiences and based upon specific needs and intuitions
| |
| | |
| 15. {{C|Peer-2-Peer Urbanism}} (Nikos Salingaros - A model stemming directly off of the open source urbanism model with 5 distinct principles:
| |
| | |
| Defends the fundamental human right to choose the build environment in which to live
| |
| | |
| All citizens must have access to information concerning their environment so they can engage in the decision-making process
| |
| Users themselves should participate on all levels in co-designing and building their city, being stakeholders in any changes that are being considered in their environment
| |
| | |
| Practitioners committed to generating and disseminating open source knowledge, theories, technologies, and implemented practices for human-scale urban fabric
| |
| | |
| Users of built environments have the right to implement evolutionary repositories of knowledge, skills, and practices, giving them well-adapted urban tools
| |
| | |
| Definition by G. Camarillo - P2P if the elements that form the system share their resources in order to provide the service the system has been designed to provide. The elements in the system both provide services to other elements and request services from other elements
| |
| | |
| 16. {{C|Open Co-operativism}} - a theory combining commons-oriented open peer production models with common ownership and governance models such as those of the co-operatives and the solidarity economic models
| |
| Creative Commons (CC) Non-Commercial (CC) License - offers protection to individuals reluctant to share, but not those who want to commercialize on their work and receive a reward them their hard work and or labor
| |
| Peer Production License (PPL) (designed by Kleiner 2010 and Filippi/Vieria 2013) - allows commercialization based on demand for reciprocity - designed to enable a counter-hegemonic reciprocal economy combining commons open to all that contribute, while charging a license fee for profit seeking enterprises who want to use it without contributing
| |
| Co-Operative model - Immaterial commons field develops from free contributions and universal use for the users —> physical production based on reciprocity —> sustainable abundance in material goods
| |
| | |
| 17. {{C|Cultural Commons}} according to Hardt and Negri - “is dynamic, involving both the product of labor and the means of future production. This common is not only the earth we share but also the languages we create, the social practices we estab lish, the modes of sociality that define our relationships, and so forth.” These commons are built up over time, and are in principle open to all.
| |
| | |
| 18. {{C|Social Practice of communing}} (Hess 2008) - producing/establishing a social relation with a common whose uses are either exclusive to a social group or partially/fully open to all and sundry
| |
| | |
| 19. {{C|Enclosure}} of commons (Hess 2008) - the gradual and sudden decrease of accessibility of a particular resource
| |
| Reasons for enclosure - increased scarcity through over consumption brought from new populations, natural disaster, neglect
| |
| Enclosure is visible where new technologies have created the ability to capture recently uncapturable goods (or when informational technologies expand copyright and definition of what is patentable through new legislation, enable enclosure of previously openly accessible areas of information
| |
| | |
| 20. {{C|Neighborhood Commons Sector}} ((Hess 2008))- incorporating both urban and rural commons where people living in close proximity come together to strengthen, manage, preserve, or protect local resource
| |
| | |
| 21. {{C|Infrastructure Commons}} (Hess 2008) - to describe physical resource systems made by humans for public consumption
| |
| This includes transportation systems, communication systems, governance systems, and basic public services and facilities
| |
| | |
| 22. {{C|Academic commons}} - a community of faculty, academic technologists, librarians, administrators, and other academic professionals who help create comprehensive web resource focused on liberal arts education
| |
| | |
| 23. {{C|Education Commons}} - virtual community of academic systems users, designers, and systems implementers sharing knowledge, experiences, and best practices - they organize to create an open and transparent system of communication between diverse groups committed to advancing the state of education worldwide
| |
| | |
| 24. {{C|Global commons}} - oldest and most established “new commons”, from climate change to international treaties to trans-boundary conflicts
| |
| Global commons include - economics of global commons, property rights, biodiversity, deep-seas, governance of the global commons, climate change, Antarctica and the Arctic Sea, atmosphere, global social diversity and interconnectedness, protection of the environment as a global commons, sustainability, globalization, outer space, commercial space, global genetic commons, global inequality, knowledge as a global commons
| |
| | |
| 25. {{C|Polycentric order}} (David Harvey, Rebel Cities) - “where many elements are capable of making mutual adjustment ordering their relationships with one another within a general system of rules where each element acts with independence of other elements” according to Vincent Ostrom
| |
| | |
| Definition of {{C|Commons}} according to Blackmar (2006) - common property is an individual’s right not to be excluded from the uses or benefits of resources, and these resources are accessible within the confines of a community, following a shared principle that is neither public or private
| |
| | |
| Definition of {{C|Commons}} according to Raj Patel’s book The Value of Nothing - A commons is a resource, most often land, and refers to both the territory and the ways people allocate goods that come from that land. The commons has traditionally provided food, fuel, water, and medicinal plants for those who used it, and it was the poorest people’s life support system
| |
| | |
| {{C|Collective Action}} according Gilbert (2006) - A process where individuals with the same interests potentially form a group, and pursue these interests and gain forms of value from within their group by working collectively and agreeing upon decisions that are harder to make in a group
| |
| | |
| {{C|Public and Collective Good}} according to Samuelson (1954) - a good that is non-excludable, meaning that everyone has a right to use that good without any form of exclusion, and non-rivalrous, meaning that a user consuming that good cannot affect another user’s consumption of that good
| |
| | |
| {{C|Free-riding}} Problem - A process by which members of a group deliberately provide less or participate less than is required to achieve a common goal (Olsen 1968)
| |
| | |
| {{C|Common Property}} (Hess 2008) - formal or informal legal regime that allocates various forms of rights to a group (including access, extraction, management, exclusion, and alienation rights)
| |
| | |
| {{C|Common Pool Resource}} (Hess 2008) - a resource shared by a group where the resource is vulnerable to enclosure, overuse, and social dilemmas. Unlike a public good, it requires management and protection in order to sustain it
| |
