Expanding participatory and network-centred engagement in urban nature, aiming at collective action and long-term benefits is a complex balance act. This article discusses a case in Copenhagen, Denmark, where the aim has been: (a) build active collaboration of actors engaging in improving urban nature (NaTur i Byen); (b) strengthen dialogue among land owners, public bodies, research, and entrepreneurship to pave the road for collaborative actions; and (c) develop new models for ecological and economic benefits in the long run. An analysis of the first phase of the project is carried out, using a multi-dimensional model. It shows that relations were developing, but a stronger set of aesthetic and knowledge sharing tools giving primacy to place could strengthen impact towards practical actions. The article discusses how such primacy of place and aesthetics could lead to an impact on urban nature, more focus on biodiversity, green spaces, and other climate change-related benefits for urban sustainability. A process model is suggested for improved public value and creation and governance of urban nature-based solutions.
BuijsAElandsBHavikG, et al. (2016a) Innovative Governance of Urban Green Spaces. Learning from 18 Innovative Examples Across Europe.
Wageningen:
Wageningen University.
9.
BuijsAEMattijssenTJVan der JagtAP, et al. (2016b)
Active citizenship for urban green infrastructure: Fostering the diversity and dynamics of citizen contributions through mosaic governance.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability22: 1–6.
10.
BuizerMElandsBVierikkoK (2016)
Governing cities reflexively – The biocultural diversity concept as an alternative to ecosystem services. Environmental Science and Policy 62: 7–13.
11.
BulkeleyHCoenenLFrantzeskakiN, et al. (2016)
Urban living labs: Governing urban sustainability transitions. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 22: 13–17.
DesseinJSoiniKFaircloughG, et al. (2015) Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development. Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability. Jäväskula: University of Jäväskula.
16.
DielemanH (2012)
Organizational learning for resilient cities, through realizing eco-cultural innovations. Journal of Cleaner Production50: 171–180.
17.
DuxburyN, et al. (2015) Cultural Mapping as Cultural Inquiry.
London:
Routledge.
18.
Fagerstöm V, Katrine VP and Øystein L (2018) Community-based Living Labs South Harbour. Aalborg University, Copenhagen.
19.
FosterC (2016) Being a Beast.
London:
Profile Books.
20.
Francois J (2009) Les Transformations Silencieuses. Grasset.
21.
Frank TR and Marie T (2005) University-incubator firm knowledge flows: Assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Research Policy 34(3): 305–320.
22.
GandyM (2013)
Marginalia: Aesthetics, ecology, and urban wastelands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers103(6): 1301.
23.
Gerald T and Eli T (2016) Public Value Theory: Reconciling Public Interests, Administrative Autonomy, and Efficiency. Review of Public Administration and Management 4(2): 1–7.
24.
GoodbunJ (2010)
Gregory Bateson’s ecological aesthetics – An addendum to urban political ecology. Field: A Free Journal for Architecture4(1): 35–46.
25.
GorissenLVranckenKManshovenS (2016)
Transition thinking and business model innovation – Towards a transformative business model and new role for the reuse centers of Limburg, Belgium. Sustainability8: 112.
26.
GottsNM (2007)
Resilience, panarchy, and world-systems analysis. Ecology and Society12(1): 24.
27.
GrahamM (2009) Neogeography and the palimpsests of place: Web 2.0 and the constructions of a virtual earth. Available at: www.geospace.co.uk/files/Neogeography.pdf.
28.
GundersonLHollingCS (2001) Panarchy: Understanding Transformation in Human and Natural Systems.
Washington, DC:
Island Press.
29.
HardersAK (2014) Stædige infrastrukturer og genstridige praksisser: Et praksisteoretisk studie af byudviklingsprojekter mellem vision og realitet. PhD-afhandling, Aalborg Universitet, Denmark.
30.
HawkesJ (2001) The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability: Culture’s Essential Role in Public Planning.
Melbourne:
Common Ground Publishers.
31.
Heynen N, Kaika M and Swyngedouw E (eds) (2006) In the Nature of Cities – Urban Political Ecology and the Politics of Urban Metabolism.
London:
Routledge.
32.
HuiY (2016) On the Existence of Digital Objects.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
33.
KaganS (2011) Art and Sustainability. Connecting Patterns for a Culture of Complexity.
Bielefeld:
transcript Verlag.
KoefoedO (2008) Zones of sustension: An exploration of eventality, culturality, and collective intuition in life and work. In: Kagan S and V Kirchberg (eds) Sustainability: A New Frontier for the Arts and Cultures. Bielefeld: VAS Verlag, pp. 59–92.
38.
KoefoedO (2015) From mapping to urban cultural ecosystems: The legacy of cultural work. In: Proceedings from conference on cultural mapping, debating spaces and places, Valletta, September 2015. Valletta: Valletta 2018 Foundation.
39.
KoefoedO (2016) Into the fringe: On cultural interventions for sustainability and resilience. In: Ziehl M, Rabe C and Haupt T (eds) City Linkage: Art and Culture Fostering Urban Futures. Hamburg: Taschenbuch, pp. 33–48.
40.
KoefoedOKaganSDielemanH (2011) Sustensive intercultural chronotopes. In: Paulsen M, Koefoed O, Ydesen C, et al. (eds) Learning from the Other: Intercultural Metalogues. Århus: NSU Press, pp. 43–96.
41.
KoefoedOPaludanK (2018) Wiring the wildings – Place-branding and urban nature-based entrepreneurial commons. In: Living Cities, Liveable Spaces: Placemaking and Identity. Conference Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Valletta 2018 International Conference on Cultural Relations in Europe and the Mediterranean, held in Malta in 2017. Valletta: Lulu & Valletta 2018 Foundation.
LatourB (1999) Politiques de la Nature. Paris: La Découverte.
44.
Lazzarato M (2002) Puissances de l'invention: La Psychologie économique de Gabriel Tarde contre l'économie politique. Éditeur: Les empêcheurs de penser en rond, Paris.
45.
ListerM (2015)
Citizens, doing it for themselves? The big society and government through community. Parliamentary Affairs68: 352–370.
46.
McPhearsonTAnderssonEElmqvistT, et al. (2015)
Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services12: 152–156.
47.
ManningE, et al. (2012) Affective attunement in a field of catastrophe. A conversation between Erin Manning, Brian Massumi, Jonas Fritsch and Bodil Marie Stavning Thomsen, July 12 2011, Montreal. Peripeti, tidsskrift for dramaturgiske studier. Available at: www.peripeti.dk/2012/06/06/affective-attunement-in-a-field-of-catastrophe/.
48.
MeynhardtT (2009)
Public value inside: “What is public value creation?”Intl Journal of Public Administration32(3–4): 192–219.
49.
Michel B and Vasilij Kostakis (2014) Network Society and Future Scenarios for a Collaborative Economy. Palgrave-Pivot.
50.
MogelLBhagatA (eds) (2008) An atlas of radical cartography. Journal of Aesthetics and Protest Press, Slp edition.
51.
MortonT (2013) Hyperobjects. Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World.
Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
52.
NevensFFrantzeskakiNGorissenL, et al. (2013)
Urban transition labs: Co-creating transformative action for sustainable cities. Journal of Cleaner Production50: 111–122.
53.
OfengendenT (2014)
Memory formation and belief.Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences7(2): 34–44.
54.
Oleg K and Anders Frøslev (2015) Siteness - a new regime for Education and Sustainability. In Peter Kemp and Sune Frolund (eds) Nature in Education. Philosophy of Education. Zürich: Institut International de Philosophie/LIT Verlag.
55.
OstromE (2010)
Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review100: 641–672.
56.
Phoebe D, et al. (2018) The ‘natures’ of planning: evolving conceptualizations of nature as expressed in urban planning theory and practice. Journal of European Planning Studies 26(3): 480–501.
57.
Rasmus GW (2014) World Navels. Cartouche. Canadian Cartographic Association 89: 15–21.
58.
RizzoAGalanakisM (2015)
Transdisciplinary urbanism: Three experiences from Europe and Canada. Cities47: 35–44.
59.
RydinYPenningtonM (2000)
Public participation and local environmental planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local Environment5: 153–169.
SantamariaG del Cerro (2018)
Towards transdisciplinary urbanism: Megaprojects, power and the urban imagination. The ATLAS – Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science9: 23–36.
62.
SchröderA (2017) Aesthetics as a middle way in an ethics of sustainability. In: Soini K, et al. (eds) Cultures in Sustainability. University of Jäväskula Press, pp. TLX.
63.
SeravalliAAgger EriksenMHillgrenP-A (2017)
Co-design in co-production processes: Jointly articulating and appropriating infrastructuring and commoning with civil servants.CoDesign13(3): 187–201.
SteenKvan BuerenE (2017)
The defining characteristics of urban living labs. Technology Innovation Management Review7(7): 21–33.
68.
StieglerB (2013) What Makes Life Worth Living. On Pharmacology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Original French version, 2010: Ce qui fait que la vie vaut la peine d’ètre vécue.
69.
TrappeJM (1987) Phylogenetic and ecologic aspects of mycotrophy in the angiosperms from an evolutionary standpoint. In: Safir GR (ed) Ecophysiology of VA Mycorrhizal Plants. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 5–25.
70.
TsingAL (2015) The Mushroom at the End of the World.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton Edu Press.
WBCSD Ecosystems (2016) Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Scaling up Business Solutions: Company Case Studies That Help Achieve Global Biodiversity Targets.
Geneva:
WBCSD.
