LIFE Platform Meeting

Summary Report

URBAN RESILIENCELIFE+ projects and European policies

4-5 April 2014, Colombes, FR

Urban Resilience: LIFE+ projects and European policies

4-5 April 2014 – Colombes – Agrocité unit (4 rue Jules Michelet, Colombes 92700 - FR)

Aim and topics

Urban resilience can be defined as the ability of an urban territory/community exposed to hazards such as Climate Change, disaster, economic and social poverty, to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from these. A resilient approach addresses the following stakes: - Reduction of the environmental impacts of the cities/territories (pollution/wastes) - Mitigation/Adaptation to climate change - Answer to economic and social issues

The objective of this LIFE+ platform meeting is to bring together practitioners from all over Europe to discuss on the urban resilience challenges: • To share and benefit from the experiences of completed and on-going LIFE projects focusing on the diverse aspects of the urban resilience (successes, problems, needs, etc.); • To discuss the current stakes, key issues, mechanism to address them as well as the necessity of improved tools – how to foster the change at institutional level to local level; and • To conclude on recommendations on how the LIFE programme and the European Commission in general could support this topic (for example through its Reference Framework for European Sustainable Cities – the project EU Cities Adapt, etc.). The platform will focus on three thematic of the resilient approach and put emphasis on the methods and tools common to all these aspects:

- Infrastructures and planning, - Waste management, - Resource management (energy, water, etc.).

Friday 04/04

Timing Duration Programm 8h45 15m Coffee 9h00

40min

Definition of the urban resilience, stakes and objectives. - presentation of the LIFE+ project R-URBAN - presentation of the agenda of the platform meeting

9h45 2h15

1) EC and LIFE+ funding presentation, and participating LIFE + projects presentation

12h 1h30 Lunch break - Buffet - Visit of the AgroCité unit 13h30 1h 2)Workshop 1: resilient infrastructures & urban planning 14h30 10min Break 14h40 1h 3) Workshop 2: waste - management, recycling and reuse 15h40 20min Break 16h 1h 4) Workshop 3: Ressources: water, energy , close circuits 17h 1h 5) Debate on transversal issues (1h) Towards increasing resilient strategies for territories 18h 1h30 Visit of the Recyclab unit and buffet

Saturday 05/04

Timing Duration Programm 9h15 Coffee 9h30

1h45

Exchange of experience with local stakeholders, through R-Urban project and othe resilient approaches: - inhabitants and associations - private companies - institutional representatives Session 1 (30mn): Participatory approaches and local governance of resilient projects

12h

45min Meeting conclusion

12h45 1h30 lunch and informal exchange

Presentations and discussions – 4 April

Presentation of R-URBAN and the main project stakeholders (AAA, FR & Public Works, UK):

We are a professional practice, an organisation with a strong interest in participatory approaches to architecture and design. R-urban was conceived in 2008/9 (started in 2011), around the time of the global economic crisis. We were thinking about how to act when government actions and global responsibility is seriously lacking. We wanted to act locally against this crisis, which for us meant producing food locally, generating our own energy, reducing waste, etc.

We wanted to focus on dissemination and connecting with other groups, in London and Istanbul for example, to create a movement to fight global crisis with local action.

We wanted to create a strategy for intervening in existing sectors, to introduce a more collective way of local governance; by creating, connecting and nourishing circuits and ensuring that they maintain traction. So how to make European cities more resilient?

Then, in contact with Colombes, people identified space for us to use. We started in 2009 to be in contact with local organisations, mapping actors and possible networks. With a precise location and setting, we started to think about the logistics in terms of what can actually happen, where circuits can be, who to involve and how. We decided on this location as being used to create Agrocité – a site for pedagogy and culture, a non-consumerist shop, a farm, a place for diverse local economies and local knowledge production/sharing. Recyclab was also a site marked by local people as available. It was an unused and empty cul-de-sac, so we decided to put shipping containers in, taking up half of the road, as an experimental way of imagining how roads can be used and look when they are no longer dominated by cars. EcoHab is another pilot project that is in the planning and construction phases, but due to the recent municipal elections we are unsure of whether it will come to fruition.

Our methodology has been to mediate change before the buildings are built and establish continuity. To do this we started experimenting and having conversations with local stakeholders early, so they will hopefully run the project in the future.

Andreas runs the R-Urban London project, located at the site of the London 2012 Olympics. In recent years, due to the Olympics, the area underwent a massive transformation including the privatisation of public space as well as the construction of gated communities. London WICK is a mobile recycling unit that taps into existing practices of resiliency by local actors and works to connect their practices so that a wider audience can benefit and learn from these actors. To give an overview of some of our activities; we hold debates where we invite experts and local actors to facilitate discourse and the collaboration of ideas. We do transect walks, so walking around and mapping the area to show actors the different projects and spaces around. We hold exhibitions so to create a space where knowledge can be exhibited, shown and talked about. We facilitate the learning about different cultural practices through stakeholders, producing different outputs. We have a tool library for the sharing of tools and expertise (an initiative sparked after learning the statistic that a tool is used for an average of four minutes in its life!). So we are interested in these streams of casual dissemination and connecting different actors. For example we had a session recently, hosted by a great project operating out of the area called re-juice, which is focused on channelling surplus fruit and vegetable (before it turns into waste) towards the cycle of production, so by transporting it to different kitchens to produce goods such as food, juice, biogas. We try to help make these efforts, and the efforts of others to be in conjunction and partnership with each other, to build their resilience and the resilience of the area.

EC and LIFE+ funding presentation, and participating LIFE + projects presentation

European policy strategy and LIFE + Program

Presentation by EU representative (Hervé MARTIN) began with informing the group that the EU is undergoing a new phase of programs with a new function framework for 2014. Most importantly there is a slight increase in the budget for environment. The main EU Programmes of relevance in particular for Urban resilience include: Structural funds, Horizon 2020, CIVITAS Programme (MOVE) and LIFE program. The main differences and synergies between these funding programmes are that structural funds are more invested in infrastructure, H2020 in research and innovation, CIVITAS in demonstration for urban transport and LIFE in demonstration and replication.

LIFE programme implementation is intended to tackle all domains, so waste management, urban mobility, air and water quality, etc. Yet difficulties exist as not all member states are in agreement and countries need to learn from each other. Life already proposed valuable solutions regarding the reduction of the need for mobility, the number of conventional vehicles, logistic optimisation, easy mobility services and ecological sustainability. Only one or a few areas have now been subject to good proposals. The stakeholders capacity to choose among these solution or to propose combination of solutions as well as integrated approaches should however be encouraged. Identified sectors need to learn from each other and adapt.

The breakdown of the budget can be seen in figure 1. Here the budget for Life + has slightly increased which is a success. There has also been an integration of environment and climate action budgets.

LIFE Programme €3,456.7 (2014-2020)

Sub-programme for

Climate Action

€864.2 (25% of LIFE budget)

Climate Change Mitigation

Climate Change Adaptation

Information & Governance

Sub-programme for Environment

€2,592.5 (75% of LIFE budget)

Nature & Biodiversity

Environment & Resource Efficiency

Information & Governance

€1,155 min (55% of ENV Sub-progrm)

Integrated projects are those that aim at implementation of plans, programmes or strategies required by EU environmental or climate legislation or pursuant to other acts, or developed by member states authorities; that are in the areas of nature/biodiversity, water, waste, air, climate change mitigation and adaptation; that are large-scale (e.g. regional, multiregional, national); involve stakeholders; and are sustainable (by mobilizing other / private funds like state funds for example). Integrated projects in the urban sector contribute to the implementation of air quality plans and programs, as well as support the implementation and monitoring of local and regional air quality plans as defined by Directive 2008/50/EC with the ultimate goal of contributing to National Air Pollution Reduction Programmes.

The integrated approach very seems relevant for urban projects. Several persons in the audience revealed interested in “integrated projects”.

PRESENTATION OF PARTICIPATING PROJECTS (see power point presentation in annex)

INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLANNING

1- Carolyn Bragg from Groundwork London on climate proofing social housing landscapes in the UK.

Main objective: To climate-proof vulnerable urban environments through retrofitting green and blue infrastructure into European social housing landscapes and develop institutional adaptive capacity.

Groundwork is a UK wide charity, focused on regenerating green spaces. Specifically, how to retrofit green and blue infrastructure into existing stock, how to have a substantial environmental impact while using materials and innovations at low cost, low technology, and in ways that are widely accessible to the social housing sector. Groundwork are looking for ways to reinforce a broader institutional adaptive capacity, working with local actors to increase their resilience to climate change induced threats and vulnerability. The project appeals to LIFE+ Programme’s priorities of development of practical climate change proofing methodologies and standards for adaptation measures at project level in specific sectors, increasing adaptive capacity of public institutions and private organisations by education, training and development of adaptation plans and develop best practice examples of participative models for ensuring public acceptance of and investments in low carbon technologies and projects. The project aims to increase the knowledge and experience of Housing sector practitioners and housing estate residents so that they are able to independently improve their adaptability to climate change.

MAIN ACTIONS MAIN RESULTS EXPECTED

Transferable methodology for designing Green Infrastructure (GI) measures into social housing landscapes

Feasibility Assessments spatially overlaying environmental threats and opportunities

Retrofitting GI measures in three different types of social housing landscapes

2500m2 enhanced green infrastructure

Implementation through employment programmes for long-term unemployed beneficiaries creating local jobs

35 work placements and 12 jobs created

Training programme for housing and grounds maintenance professionals on the whole cycle of adaptation and green infrastructure relevant procurement systems, design, retrofit and maintenance

Accredited training programme

Transferable methodology for resident stakeholder engagement

3 Climate Change Adaptation Plans

Evaluation methodology capturing technical performance and social return on investment

Transferable and comprehensive methodology for monitoring the environmental impact of climate change adaptation through GI measure

Interactive e-learning materials incl. a film to inform local, national and EU policy, strategy and best practice

Project film, educational materials and layman’s report

At the end of our feasibility studies we had mapped a range of environmental threats and opportunities for each site, including water management datasets and maps by residents themselves of their perceptions and ideas, yet there is a real need for analysing them together. It has been interesting to link how we are interpreting environmental threats and how local authorities are thinking about it, and its urgency. We are beginning to explore how climate change adaptation through GI (Green Infrastructures) measures could also support devolved government priorities driven by resident engagement and tightening maintenance budgets. We are also beginning to develop specific processes for implementing climate change adaptation works as part of training programmes for the long-term unemployed.

2 - Florencio Conde on sustainable environmental balances in the recovery of the natural peri-urban area of ‘Las Arcillas’ in Tereul, Spain

Our objective has been focused on forest regeneration, specifically the recovery of ancient clay quarries, degraded as a result of mining exploitation. In the recovery of these quarries, our goal is not only for the creation of leisure space and its integration into an urban environment, but also the promotion of sustainable mobility by creating and connecting shafts pedestrian and cycle paths, planting a range of suitable species to halt the loss of biodiversity, control and monitoring of soil erosion and ozone pollution, and improve air quality. The project specifically targets sustainable development, air pollution, climate change, protection of nature and biodiversity and soil protection.

The project has been implemented through a physical restoration of mines, linking to city centre with cycle lanes, civic involvement and engagement, and tourist promotion activities. CO2 emissions were monitored before and after to see the effect the project has had in improving air quality. We want to fight against ozone pollution, erosion, soil loss etc., while also contributing to economic development, citizen participation, appropriation of space, cleaning up of the area and promoting biodiversity.

The project links with urban resilience in the recovery of degraded areas, the reappropriation of space, changes in mobility models, large forest regeneration, and reducing the need for travel for leisure.

The list of stakeholders includes universities, cultural associations, tourist associations and ecological association.

The successes we have noticed are the construction of green axis- improving the quality of urban life, contribution to economic development, the creation of a network of plots and witnesses of vegetation control, debris removal and disposal of tailings, citizen participation and the improvement of biodiversity.

3- Isabelle Chatoux from Yvelines on green planning for the SeineCityPark, Chanteloup Loop, Paris

The objective has been to promote green urban infrastructure by linking five sites of environmental and ecological projects with green infrastructure. Our goals are to bring nature to the urban setting, to rehabilitate a disused quarry and improve biodiversity along the seine ecological corridor. In the framework of the project Seine City Park, we aim to show how the socio-economic development of a 1,700ha urbanised area can be combined with the improvement of local environmental issues through the creation of a green urban infrastructure.

The SeineCityPark LIFE+ project has set out to establish an ecological, landscaped and human network linking up the Seine, the Peuple de l’herbe departmental park, the Nouvelle Centralité and the Coeur vert to the Hautil massif in the north of the Chanteloup loop. Developing the park is the first step in creating this network. The project aims to establish transition areas between open spaces such as the Seine and the fallow land and urbanised areas that form the urbanised fringe of Carrières-sous-Poissy, and the future development projects on the drawing board. A central goal is to bring nature into the town. Nature plays a key role as a backbone for urban development, and as a tool for the spatial organisation of urban and peri-urban areas. To do this we will rehabilitate a quarry by creating a departmental park listed as an Espace Naturel Sensible (sensitive natural area) – this allows the département to protect natural areas by buying up the land – and rehabilitate former orchards in the centre of the loop. Lastly the project seeks to raise public awareness of environmental issues.

Our main actions have been to facilitate the transition from the town to the park’s natural area, and between the park’s natural area and the bank of the Seine, creating urban fabric that spans chanteloup loop and environmental education initiatives (linking all the areas and learning at same time).

The resilient aspects of our approach involve the diversification of flora and fauna, nature regeneration, connecting the urban with natural environments, promote soft (green) modes of transport- walking and bike riding and awareness raising. The scale of action is between local authorities, municipality, public stakeholders- inhabitants, associations, and agglomeration.

4 – Outi Salminen on creating an Urban Oases in Finland: Shaping a sustainable future through environmentally functional landscape features.

Project started in 2012 and will continue until 2017.

The project addresses water in urban landscapes, specifically urban flooding and urban planning. We are focused on the sustainable management of urban landscapes, particularly rainfall runoff and the pollution associated with it, through constructed landscapes. By constructed landscapes I mean constructed urban wetlands filled by storm water runoff from urban areas. The wetlands areas are used for a range of activities such as science camps, leisure and recreation areas, reconnection of habitats through redirecting water into these wetlands, and as a place for education to increase the awareness of, and connection to, natural processes. The pilot project seeks to mitigate the challenges of urbanization, climate change and land-use related impacts on the water environment (flood +water quality, wildlife+ habitats+ fragmentation, GHGs) through innovative landscape designs. Specifically, the construction and maintenance of wetlands is low energy, while wetland park vegetation binds carbon much more efficiently than lawnscape (yet e.g. release of methane is higher). The resilient aspects of the project include water and soil environment protection, habitat protection and creation, recreational amenities, environmental education opportunities.

The project is in partnership with local institutions such as the university, municipality, regional environmental legislator and local lake protection association. The main EU policies targeted are the Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risks (including storm water and snow melt water), the Directive 2000/60/EC EU Water Framework Directive on water policies, Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora in urban areas, Directive 2008/56/EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive on the Baltic Sea.

The site is a 550-hectare and watershed area, and what we have made is a prototype of urban design, implementing a functional landscape element at varying scales (wetlands+swales, habitats+corridors, street crossings, nature awareness-increasing-parks) to increase the overall sustainability of urban landscapes. Through the project we are trying to protect endangered clay streams and provide slow flows to keep the habitats. To do this we are monitoring and demonstrating land-use impacts on water, monitoring four seasons to demonstrate the gained ecosystem services, including flood control, water quality control, vegetation establishment and biomass, GHG sink/source, wildlife + habitat, value to locals. We are also focus on the dissemination of information learnt, carrying this out through an interactive website, stakeholder events, nature trails, nature schools, professional development events.

In terms of our successes, we have transformed a degrading storm water ditch into a centrally located chain of water environment mitigation parks designed and implemented as multifunctional ‘urban oasis’. We have created networks of involvement and dissemination, a synergism across many disciplines and stakeholders. An endangered habitat type (clay stream) with its flora and fauna has been created and local nature reconnected with urban dwellers. The established pilot and educational events have been well recognized.

The difficulties we face are changing perspectives of people to recognize the beauty of native fauna and flora and the importance of conservation. We need to assure policy changes are long lasting so that project motivation, awareness and knowledge of environmentally sound practices do not get lost with an individual, for example when they retire.

WASTE MANAGEMENT

1 - Clare Standish from UP and Forward operating in the Greater Manchester, UK

(Urban Participation and Focus On Reusing Waste And Recycling Development Communications)

Up and forward is a part of the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority (GMWDA), serving a population of around 2.27 million. GMWDA are focused on recycling and reducing waste. As signatories of the 2009 contract for Recycling and Waste Management, with partners Viridor Laing Ltd, GMWDA are working to recycle 50% of all waste and divert at least 75% away from landfill over the next 25 years. UP and Forward are responsible for the Greater Manchester Communications Campaign.

The Up and Forward project is predominantly interested in engaging the pockets of community’s who do not often recycle, and adopt a more focused plan to appeal to these actors in changing their behaviour. Through targeted approaches, Up and Forward can pilot new approaches from which to prototype and share learning’s. The project started in June 2013, to end in January 2015, encompassing 42 campaigns across 9 districts, targeting 1500 households within the greater Manchester.

The campaign structure of the research project involves baseline monitoring, precampaign monitoring, door knocking and surveys, focus groups to hear their solutions, engagement, post campaign monitoring and producing output for other regions. The themes we are operating with are focused around; Deprivation (‘communities in disadvantaged areas’) through recycling rewards (for example a golden ticket system), community events (suited to their community to raise awareness of recycling) and business recycling; Transience (‘areas with a high level of rental properties or student rental accommodation’) through distributing information in the private rental market, the golden bin initiative (getting people to take rubbish selfies and posting on web), and recycling games (often physical activities to engage with students, for example a competition where players have to wear beer goggles and find recyclable things in student apartments) ; Faith and Culture (‘areas with a strong religious or cultural background’) through faith campaigns (involving a lot of community consultation to find out opinions, suggestions, and eventually placing culturally appropriate information booklets in sites of religious activity), culture campaigns and activities to bridge diverse communities (such as pop-up community centres) ; Apartments (areas with a high level of low rise or high rise apartments) through handing out bags and caddies, employing ambassadors (or community researchers) with training on how to ask questions and information about recycling and waste reduction, and improving the facilities for people to recycle ; and, Innovative Media to engage with people using new approaches and industries such as filming and the latest platforms in gaming to reach a wider audience (associated with Bolton university and MMU respectively).

So far, UP and Forward have successfully engaged with ‘hard to reach’ communities, significantly affected the behaviour and attitudes of residents towards recycling, and increased recycling participation and tonnage in the majority of campaign areas. They have been politically supported throughout all the districts. The difficulties they are facing are in engaging with residents in high-rise apartments and recruiting ambassadors in some campaign areas. The operational variations between districts in some campaign areas have made monitoring challenging.

The project aims to improve the resiliency of the local through engaging communities to establish what the real issues are, and forming solutions to fit these identified problems, making them relevant and pertinent to the community. The project is focused, with large reaching impacts. The ultimate aim is to increase recycling and participation rates and tonnages, as well as increase waste prevention, to achieve an overall goal of zero waste to landfill.

2- Philippe Naudet from EWWR- European week for waste reduction- Association of Cities and Regions for Recycling and Sustainable Resource Management (ACR+)

Based in Brussels, working within the EU to raise awareness of European citizens on waste reduction, reuse of products and materials recycling. By demonstrating how possible it is to reduce, while also increasing our selective consumption of materials, the project ultimately hopes to prevent waste from reaching landfill. The projects objectives are to highlight actions and good practices, strengthen stakeholders’ capacities (targeted communication tools and trainings) and assess the impact of communication actions. The project is targeting schools, companies, administrations/associations and individual citizens through the coordination of awareness raising actions implemented during one week per year (22-30 November 2014). The project is carried out by country coordinators engaging multiple stakeholders to implement the three r’s (reduce, reuse, recycle) within a large network, involving top down and bottom up approaches throughout EU-28. Urban resiliency is targeted through the preservation of material resources and closing the loop of products and resources, thereby improving waste and resource management and reducing CO2 emissions, leading to healthier citizens and safer cities within the EU-28 and beyond. This year is the fight against food waste.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

1- Arancha Simo from MAC Eau- www.jeconomiseleau.org, Gironde, France

15/7/2012- 31/12/2016

The project addresses the overexploitation of deep groundwater aquifers in Gironde. The project seeks to protect the water resource from the current situation of overuse, which is ruining both the quantity and quality of the water resource. As the aquifer provides 99% of drinking water for people in the territory, its protection is crucial. A water management scheme has been approved in 2003 regarding the preservation of the groundwater resources (the first in Europe). The goals are to find new resources and to save drinking water at a regional scale. MAC Eau is specifically addressing the household distribution of water (making up half of the total usage [26% lost in network distribution]). This is predominantly used in bathrooms and kitchens. The strategy is working in collaboration with local management plans, and contributing towards urban resilience through the sustainable management of water and adaptation to climate change through demographic evolution.

The priority for MAC Eau is to preserve groundwater resources in the Gironde region (to save over 1.9 million m3 per year). To do this they aim to improve current data (i.e. knowledge of water use), change behaviour through awareness and mobilization to limit usage of the drink water supply (by providing water saving kits, rainwater tanks), and improve watertightness of the water distribution network (by using pressure modulators). The project adopts a transposable method, on a sample territory composed of both households and public buildings.

The opportunities highlihgted are: - Develop a regulatory tool for the protection of groundwater resources in Gironde - Liaise with other existing instruments - Transposable method presenting the best and bad practices: project engineering - Measure the effectiveness of different measures for water savings: determine the recommendations for the generalisation of the measures (public policies).

- Create a strong local and departmental dynamics around water savings - Associate social and economic stakeholders in the process - Bringing people closer to the local authorities - Involve and benefit families in social difficulties - Mobilization of young people to change behaviours - Effect of the crisis (+ and -): + Savings on water invoice / - Disenchantment with Europe

Some of the successes of the project thus far include communication (publications), dynamism of public institutions and appraisal for their social approach. At the time, the main constraints and threats identified are: -The distribution scheme of water saving kits based on voluntarism (lower participants than expected). In addition, the number of permanent distribution points and available staff remains low. The filling of the form in order to obtain a kit ask for the water invoice, therefore, this constraint restrain the inhabitants’ participation. -The local elections of March 2014 slowed down the project implementation process, as well as the change of municipal teams. -The public institutions involvement differs from municipalities. -Sustainability of the process and the continuation of the local dynamics in the long term is a challenge to be addressed. -The ownership of the decisional tool and results of the project is still under discussion.

2- Wolfgang Seidel from EKO-LIFE, Volarlberg, Austria

EKO-Life is part of the energy institute of the University of Vorarlberg, interested in sustainable lifestyles and reducing our carbon footprint. The project recognises the largely ineffective outcomes of climate change posters and communications in changing people’s behaviour towards the environment. While they acknowledge there may be a change of consciousness gained from such campaigns, EKO-LIFE are interested in how to facilitate this transfer into behaviour, into affecting peoples every day lives. EKO-LIFE experiment aims to foster new routines with target groups, to redesign their way of living, through addressing mobility and nutrition.

The project has two target groups, representing 22% of the population. With these participants, EKO Life run entertaining pilot projects, focusing on mobility and nutrition, as those issues essentially contribute to the personal carbon footprint. A kilometre piggy bank where every kilometre saved (by not using your car) earns 20 to 42 cents into the piggy bank, to inspire people into changing their behaviour. Another experiment is the slaughter of an animal in order to show the value of meat in our daily meal and talk about and offer alternatives. After the completion of each experiment (24 in our project) they support the participants to multiply their experiences and lessons learned into their surroundings – and become change agents for EKO-LIFE. EKO Life targets those people already involved in a voluntary organisation, such as sports clubs, fire brigades and music associations, to capitalise on their existing sense of companionship and common ground. They support participants to multiply their experiences and become change agents, to inspire others to adopt more eco-friendly lifestyles. Their slogan is ‘give it a try’ in the local language. By the end of the project (midth 2016) they are going to have changed measurably daily behaviour of 2.000 people. Further 25.000 people know about EKO-LIFE. And 1.700 tons of GHG will be saved annually. Successes: detailed elaboration of stereotypes (personas) representing the target groups helps surprisingly well working very focused and result-orientated throughout all conceptive activities. A survey within the target groups in the beginning of the planning phase was costly but very helpful.

Main Recommendations: - Being creative and bold, but also coherent and focused on target groups’ views seems to be a good way in developing project activities and communications. Early foreseeing and planning the evaluation of communicative measures helps verifying their effects as the retroactive addition of indicators is mostly impossible. - They spent quit a lot of time with preparatory actions and the planning of our activities, which is a factor of success in the project implementation. - The involvement of several stakeholders took place very early in the project and is ongoing. 3- CLIMATE – Changing Living Modes: Acting in our Territories for the Environment– Essone, France

CLIMATE is a localised initiative in Essone County Council, focused on reducing the greenhouse gas emissions of the territory, with hopes of extending successes to inform large-scale policy. The project aims at developing eco-business in Essonne, particularly in the field of waste and energy, providing information for professionals and private individuals who want to green their industry (or carry out renovation works using environmentally friendly methods), providing information for citizens about alternative modes of transport to private cars, taking action against fuel poverty and reducing the councils own greenhouse gas emissions (to become an ‘exemplary council’).

The project began in 2010 and finished at the end of 2013, in which a housing information centre was established and is recognised for its quality of advice, providing an energy renovation platform for local actors (local authorities, citizens, professionals and pupils), with trainings, exhibitions and brochures for local authorities, citizens and pupils about energy efficient building. CLIMATE has also created a mobility website to develop the available information to residents about alternative modes of transport; an online library about local efficient energy projects; a carbon accounting system to assess the impact of Essone Council’s activities in terms of greenhouse emissions; and, trainings for social and community workers.

CLIMATE has been praised for their innovation with tools for local authorities, including their carbon accounting system for administration bodies (Alliance Carbone), the housing information centre where all the local actors and a sustainable building reference table. Essone County Council has thus become recognised as an effective driving force by local actors in mobilising sustainable building and mobility. Yet despite these successes, the project needs more time to give results considering the changes that have occurred due to the crisis. It has been difficult to assess exactly the reduction in carbon, as the new carbon assessment (Bilan Carbone) shows a global stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions. The fight against climate change depends on a change of habits, which is not today economically inspiring for the majority.

This CLIMATE challenge was huge for a County Council that is not a city and that accounts for many different policies and stakeholders.

2-3-4) 3 chaired thematic workshops: feedback on tools/methods

Workshop 1: Infrastructures and planning: Chairs: Carine Dartiguepeyrou (EAK CG 92, Institut Futurs Souhaitables), Renata Tyszczuk (University of Sheffield)

Wetlands - Finland

The tools and methods adopted with the wetlands project have been effective in prototyping new and effective water management systems. In regards to the technical aspects of the project, the watershed based urban planning approach acknowledges imperviousness and green spaces for better environmental outcomes, while the functional green infrastructure effectively manages storm water, creates new habitats and contributes to dweller well-being.

To ensure the sustainability and effectiveness of the wetlands initiative, the project has actively tried to mobilise local actors in taking part and becoming water environmental stewards. Some of the ways this has been done is by engaging local actors as volunteers, giving local actors the opportunity to create the names for the wetlands (making it more meaningful for their locality), and encouraging them to take ownership over the project. This is important as volunteers help to ensure the longevity of the project as well as making it cheaper to run. In terms of the financial aspects, the management of storm water and snowmelt water with the wetlands scheme is much cheaper than conventional methods, as well as being more environmentally friendly. This is because conventional anti-ice measures use salt to melt the ice, which then goes on to harm watershed management through salination and degradation of natural resources (water quality, species loss, etc). This project monitors the harm caused by existing conditions and offers potential solutions through constructed landscapes (wetlands). Some examples of the indicators the project uses to monitor harm include water quality, species, biomass, and GHG levels. The project will also monitor changes of zoning, planning implementation and management, dweller awareness and willingness to pay (an average 20€ annual storm water fee) to garner people’s acceptance and appreciation of the wetlands project. The project offers the urban area a high level water treatment option while also accommodating for the more aesthetic things people appreciate in urban areas, for example open water as well as marshes (a natural water purifier).

The established wetlands have significantly improved water quality after having passed through, being an important factor to consider in watershed management. The existing challenges remain constraints over land use, through zoning laws on both above and below ground hardscape, as well as public and private property ownership. In terms of future replicability and sustainability, institutional restructuration and recognition as a legitimate planning and management unit could be useful so that zoning requirements would promote water sensitive, cross-disciplinary and cross-governmental unit planning that recognises storm and snow water as important resources, as

opposed to waste. Environmental and local nature awareness raising is crucial to these kinds of projects and the project has found that educating children educates adults, so in this vain the project works with local schools, as well as universities, municipalities and local watershed associations and citizens to create pride and care by celebrating local water elements. There is the opportunity to add fees and fines for the management of watersheds and wetlands. The threats lie in how to make watershed and water-sensitive planning and management long lasting and wide spread? Nevertheless the project attempts to get their work out through awareness raising campaigns and stakeholder involvement in planning, implementing and monitoring phases.

Las Arcillias – Teruel, Spain

The main objective of Las Arcillias is to recover and bring recognition to ancient clay quarries as an important heritage of the area. The project contains a laboratory for control and monitoring of problems caused by years of mining exploitation (such as erosion and soil degradation, ozone pollution and CO2 pollution), plantations of various and suitable species to halt the loss of biodiversity, as well as the creation of leisure spaces and nature trails to connect the urban to nature and foster more sustainable and mobile lifestyles. Along with environmental recuperation, the project aims to generate economic development for the territory and bet for cultural and heritage tourism. The project has a clear goal of replicability, so making the demonstration of results possible to be transferred on to similar environments.

Citizen participation has been important in building support and direction for the project, involving local actors in both the design and dissemination of project. Dissemination has taken the form of technical conferences with experts, citizen conferences with local actors, as well as billboard and bus advertisements, publications, newspaper references, posters, and expert/community consultations. The project is in a signed agreement with local schools and universities, connecting with students to be involved and act on proposals, as well as constituting a CITIZEN FORUM with the City Council (involving collectives, institutions, associations). The project is actively involved in networking with other projects and the creation of a European Meeting of Landscaped Territories with Stonework, as well as signatories in contracts with at least 8 European territories.

Groundwork Green housing- West London, UK

In terms of institutional restructuration, there have been large changes happening to UK policy on water retention and green infrastructure in recent years. While this is great for our collective mission, namely to make the urban more resilient in the face of climate change, these changes are focussed on the field of new developments, meaning that existing stock remains largely excluded. For example there is soon to be set up sustainable advisory boards within planning authorities within the local authority level, to carry out environmental impact assessments of new stock. Yet unfortunately these same tools will not be available for retrofitting old stock. Groundwork is predominately interested in working with what is already there, what is accessible to all sectors of society and working in ways that are manageable and lasting. Our technologies are low impact and cost efficient, so for example we are proposing rain gardens and green roofs. We provide training and employment to people who are young and/or otherwise excluded from the work force, both to educate them on sustainable practices, to provide a form of economic stability and integration and as a means of social inclusion. Yet despite this, local authorities need to feel confident in applying these sorts of schemes, they need incentives, and through the duration of the project they will hopefully see the kinds of benefits that can come with retrofitting green infrastructure on social housing.

Groundwork is an apolitical organisation working in a large range of sectors. As such there has been pressure to align politically for achieving reforms, to repair sewerage systems for example, but the organisation remains non-political to maintain its reach and transparency.

Yvelines- SeineCityPark- France

The project is interested in open, green spaces, specifically linking sites of environmental and ecological projects with unused urban space to create parks and welcoming ecological avenues. The project actively promotes sustainable urban mobility, such as bicycle riding and walking. The major challenge, at this point, lies with communication. Teamwork is very important and the project cannot be realized if all people do not communicate effectively. The project is in early stages and is not quite in a place where it can be presented and evaluated impressively.

Discussion

What are seen as the major issues facing these projects?

For all of the projects, time is an issue. When you are given 4 years, you are either working with or against time. For the Wetlands project, the application process required a lot of time. For example applying for permits, carrying out feasibility plans, as well as assigning adequate time for people to have their say; this requires a substantial amount of time. Perhaps luckily for the wetlands project, effective scheduling in early stages helped the organisers look into possible constraints and how to navigate them. For Las Arcillias, organisers followed the steps they had set out but during that time they were asked for proof from the project, yet it was early stages and there was not enough time for evaluation.

For Groundwork there is an advisory group within the charity organisation so they are in frequent conversation about how each are responding to specific sites and an almost continual evaluation. With feasibility plans, look specifically how you increase action and reach.

There is a watershed international advisory board with whom the Finnish project regularly meet and communicate with, yet the implementation is more lengthy (i.e. dredging for the creation of wetland ponds can only be done a couple of weeks in a year due to weather conditions. Here you can see there are certain time pressures involved in these types of infrastructure projects).

Question / comment from audience- There seems to be certain key words that have come out of all these presentations, specifically ownership, or land ownership, as a common and central issue. What would you say to that, would you agree?

Watershed- Regarding the question of land ownership, you have to go towards the local inhabitants in the initial stages, to be humble and involve them in the projects to limit constraints. As an outsider planning to intervene you are already met with suspicion. For the project to gain momentum and inspire motivation you need to network with local associations and actors.

Because the specificity of Life + focuses on implementation, as project organisers you need to involve the user and ask questions like ‘is this something that works, will continue to work when the project is finished?’

Groundwork- For us, the most important thing was to involve the local government body from beginning stages. We don’t want to get into a situation where local residents are forced to cover the levy on infrastructure. We want them to have zero financial impact from maintenance going

forwards; and it really matters on how people perceive costs. It comes back to building imperviousness.

Workshop 2: Waste management, recycling, reuse: Chairs: Olivier Carles (Objectif Carbone), Christine Aubry (INRA Paris AgroTech)

Up and forward – Through campaigns, the project has reached a wide range of actors and increased participation in recycling and waste management. Throughout the entire engagement, the project has been bottom up and led by community perspectives on how they want to do it. So we have been approaching these issues in a very different way than traditional models, for example innovating with social media and monitoring using common provisions, which we have noticed are met with enthusiasm and considered a success.

EWWR, ACR+ – At ACR+, we focus on waste prevention awareness raising on a European scale. The project networks with local and regional authorities, being key waste players, and works to redirect flow chart of waste. For example, local and regional authorities are at the centre of waste collection, waste taxation, waste treatment performance /recycling targets, waste permit registration, waste planning strategies, product reuse/recycling promotion (public procurement), and lastly but perhaps most importantly, citizen awareness (waste prevention). As the project is reaching beyond nation states we have developed a set of internet tools addressing pre-waste and mini-waste, to share our pre-waste methodology, provide examples, DIY tools, information about selective collection and recycling and news of upcoming events and workshops. We have also trialled different actions to meet citizens in their everyday lives such as re-use fashion shows and flash mobs, etc. The project also organises a library to borrow clothes instead of books in Sweden, a re-use and repair network in Austria, mini-waste closed loop garden in Belgium, and Love Food Hate Waste centre in UK.

So far, what we have learnt from the project is there is a need to be consistent, to involve stakeholders, repeat the message, and never underestimate budgets. Local authorities need to show a good example, and an integrated approach based on waste hierarchy is important. The project focuses on sharing good practices and learning’s from each place and developing instruments or tools to assess and compare results with Europe.

R-Urban – R-Urban has used a participative approach to building a series of commons for creating resiliency in the local area. All of the buildings have been made with reclaimed materials. Take for example RecycLab, in which the wood was upcycled from transport boxes and the container bottom was second hand shipping containers. The project networks with the local area through mapping local businesses and actors. More is to be said on this project in the next section.

Discussion

In terms of production and consumption, waste is useful index of our destructive practices over the past 200 years. We have been critical of the ways in which we designate waste, like storm water, wood, shipping containers, which are in fact not waste but resources.

UP and FORWARD- Yes, and that is seen in the UP and Forward project where local companies are using what we collect as ‘waste’ to generate electricity. However going green and investing in green infrastructure is not always the cheapest option, so one really needs to be committed to sustainable long-term solutions for zero waste.

Constantin- The ecological aspect needs to be mixed in with economical aspect. It’s hard to be completely local. For example there is an interesting shop in the city, selling reused or upcycled waste from India. But the interesting thing is that it was our own waste, taken to India, modified, and sold back to us.

Up and Forward- There is a value to waste now, see for example waste contracts, putting a cost on the things that get put in to fuel, to make electricity. Everything is determined by national agenda, some local but mostly dictated from above. Now that waste has a value, it almost contrasts with the goals of prevention.

EWWR- There is a need for local actors on the ground to relay information and push local governments to make the right decisions. Lots of people together can be more persuasive. There needs to be a balance between the economic and the social.

People have too much waste in their homes. We should have a Local Ebay.

Anne- The ordinary French person doesn’t know where their waste goes. We are just told to obey without informed perspectives on what happens once we put in the bin. Bins should be in proportion, meaning that organic waste should be bigger while mixed waste smaller. And there should be explanations.

UP and Forward- that is one of the things our project is trying to rectify. By working on local levels and providing people with accurate information you can wash away urban myths, telling people what happens, why and how.

Constantin- We are showing how it happens at Recyclab but the issue of how to store in an urban setting where time is limited is more difficult.

Comment- what is the value of us sitting around talking about these projects when you are actually living the rhetoric? What are the obstacles to reducing demand? (Question aimed at Olivier Carles)

Olivier- Stop consuming, don’t use petrol, do the minimum, save energy. Keep it small scale.

Positive reinforcement can be an interesting approach to inspiring people to be more ecologically conscious. For example, sometimes when you join an environmental organisation you get given a small gift of appreciation that is often not always environmentally produced. It is important not to be showing mixed messages between your actions and the information you are trying to get across.

Doina- there is use in these projects because waste comes back to you, to use and to see what happens. When you maintain closed circuits of production and consumption you can begin to see the value of everything, to become beneficiaries in these cycles, and this value is both cultural and monetary.

Question- does it cost a lot of money to have campaigns like this?

Up and Forward- In our project, the drivers we employ, as well as the individual actors are saving money. But on the other hand, one campaign costs 3-6,000 pounds for example dealing in the hard to reach / “problem” areas targeted.

EWWR- yes there is a cost, but it’s reduced – organisations can look to local authorities for available grants and funding. There are ways to find money. It can be difficult because communication is costly and not quickly reimbursed, but it is worth it in the long run.

Waste already has a value. There are certain sectors in which a resource works (or recycles) well, for example in redirecting construction materials for re-use. However when recycling household waste, it has an identity, it has already been transformed into something dirty, to be put away. On symbolic level something needs to be changed.

It could be useful or effective to rename waste for different legal access to it. In the meantime there is still the urgent need to reduce what we consume, waste can be okay, manageable even, as long as we are reducing it.

Workshop 3: Resources management and close circuits (1h): Chairs: Andreas Lang (Public Works – University of Sheffield, UK), Jean-Christophe Aguas (LUA / Sommer Environnement)

Mac Eau- The project aims to reduce drinking water usage on a regional scale to protect the future of water resources. To do this, Mac Eau distributes water saving equipment (for toilets, sinks and showers) as well as rainwater tanks and education initiatives for local residents. Agreements are signed with actors who receive these products (including public institutions and households) to ensure they maintain equipments and good practices, even after the end of the project. These agreements are part of an attempt to gain civic participation and inclusion in the resource conservation project. In terms of the technical aspect, the project is innovating with sampling methods of representation of different socioeconomic situations and deployment on a regional scale. As the first water management scheme for the area (and Europe) regarding the preservation of groundwater resources, the project is important in setting a good example for the sustainable use of water in Europe in the long term. Examples of the indicators the project is using to measure effectiveness includes the amount of water saved and number of households involved. The organisers have found that public institutions and local authorities need to set a good example in order for the wider acceptance and following of citizens. Some constraints they have come across are in motivating people to use the product, as distribution is based on voluntarism (from households and public institutions who have to travel to pick up the materials). Also for feedback to monitor the socio-economic impact of water consumption requires participants to fill out form and pass on water invoice. Potential threats lie with local elections and garnering support from opposing parties, and retaining levels of public institutional involvement. While there have been some savings on water, we are afraid there will be a growing disenchantment with Europe.

The distribution of free equipment (as it is the case in the MAC EAU project), can be problematic because the people participating can be less involved (they didn’t pay so they don’t have nothing to lose is they do not participate properly in the end).

Voluntarism works but often not as expected, therefore, as it is the case for the MAC EAU project, the dissemination strategy had to be adapted (the water saving kits will be distributed in work places to increase the distribution rate).

Climate project- the project is interested in changing behavior which is systemic. The difficulty is that action is seen in the future. Also political leaders are only elected for 5 years so it is hard to gain a sense of political stability. Another difficulty is that it is not as easy to measure GHG emissions, as it is to measure water and climate.

EKOLIFE project- Is also interested in changing behaviour. The project is targeted at different age groups, for example the ‘adolescent’ who is typically interested in endless consumption, and the ‘conservative’, who is older and more interested in quality over quantity. The project hopes to inspire civic participation by identifying one person in each social club who is interested in similiar things, to activate their networks into being engaged and begin to think and act in similar ways. The project then goes on to support these participants as disseminators of information and agents of change. To monitor the effectiveness, the project uses survey methodology, which then helps to prepare future communications campaigns.

The project has come into confrontation with regional authority, as they wanted to unite campaigns about reducing emissions, to boost communication. Eko Life did not accept, because they want people to be send off messages rather than the local government, and thus relations have not been entirely smooth.

Discussion

With all of these projects there seem to be these underlying questions of both how to renegotiate humans and nature, and how to overcome the human to human dimension so that projects can work efficiently. In regards to the renegotiation between humans and nature, we need to learn from the problem and innovate with solutions. And in terms of overcoming the human – human interaction, its only through dissemination and effective communication that we can really move forwards. Mobilising change agents for example is a good way of reaching people and sharing these ideas in a participatory way.

Question - How does the water project address our usage, for example why we use so much? How does it address the beginning of the change? It could be interesting if projects were addressing cities’ over use. In the future we have to think of the immediate effects and how to produce infrastructure.

The social pressure is very big question, how to change social models. In starting with small projects, how to pioneer new places, new realities and new practices. Not just experiment with these ideas, but being inside the project.

In regards to the challenges of dissemination, a useful tool we have come across is using national banks and supermarket regional networks to get out information. So for example to put material into every one of their branches so that all people can see.

Anne- Coming back to the water project in Gironde, why cant all of France have the water saving kits? Is the project replicable to all of France?

No because it is not cost efficient, one kit costs 15 Euros.

The issue is consumption; we need to start thinking about who is responsible? Draw the consumer to a sense of responsibility. It is important to recognize the moment we’re in; the problems of water and waste come at a same period of the erosion of trust in institutions and state actors. Now we have a too narrow range of answers, and lack of confidence in testing things. Where are the

environmental NGOs in this? In the past, NGOs have been vital as cultural entrpreneurs in revealing the facts of our problematic or dangerous relationship with nature. For many people NGOs are considered trustful and yet they won’t typically engage in this area because they’re anxious about going into our private lives and telling us to reduce water, which might offend their membership base and donors. So my question, or thought, is, where are the largescale environmental NGOs in all of this?

At this time and in order to gain traction, it is more about conversations than lectures. We need to form common ground and move forward with practical solutions. Is it that instead of solving a problem (in society) we are embellishing another (of the output of society’s ills, such as waste)?

It is interesting to note that larger scale interventions are missing from our presentations. It seems as though the renegotiation of relationships between human and nature are not addressed at national scale politics. The only way that these conversations can really begin on a larger scale is through largescale political processes.

However it is difficult to tackle largescale political processes due to the political time fragmentary and current state of political instability, supporting only short projects. Funfind from the European Union will hopefully support longer time projects.

We already knows what needs to be done, we are capable to resolve our problem, but who is going to do it.

J-C Aguas (LUA) mentioned that providing devices such as water saving kits can make believe that the problem of water resources is solved, whereas the main part of the problem is the urban sprawl and the consumption of space that drastically increases the pressure on water resources.

Some concepts are abstract to citizens:

- Climate change, greenhouse gases emissions due to energy consumption: the fact that energy and CO2 emission are “hidden everywhere” is difficult to understand.

- Another example would be that the impact of the urbanism and damage of storm water: it would be more understandable if the draining pipes system, currently invisible to the citizens, would be visible.

5) Debate on transversal issues: Towards increasing resilient strategies for territories

It has been interesting that the kind of data sets collected by government institutions are not supporting the kinds of needs we have, for the services we are trying to provide. There is no readily available data on impervious resources. There is a need to change what is regulatory data collection on specific issues on a European, multinational scale, which can then go on to inform policy and design.

In terms of LIFE + funding, projects need to focus on replicability - in both policy and monitoring – at all levels, so that the good aspects of it can be transferred to other settings. There needs to be accountability within project management, for example we once paid 2000 Euros for a project and afterwards there was nothing. Ther needs to be a move to more governance issues, more interest on the sustainability of a project than information dissemination. We are targeting ones that use private money because there is no money in public institutions. So basically you need to ensure projects have more application, visibility and accountability of impacts, and transferability. However for R-urban, they didn’t have mechanism to engage money locally, meaning it was not approved by the time of the annual municipal budget. LIFE + can’t sign a contract in advance, with donor deadlines being very difficult. Life + pays 50% and projects need to find another partner to pay other 50%. The application process for LIFE + has been mechanized as it is outsourced to another organisation.

LIFE + provokes other support from organisations, putting in place networks. It always helps to get money from local institutions with the EU as facilitator. The ambition is bigger, as it is not regulated by local government policy. It is not easy to have access to the national level authority and funding in a transparent way.

It almost functions better between the local and EU, skipping national bureaucracy. For example, the EU have air quality legistlative framework and other environmental legislations but they cannot implement them on national levels because 16 out of the 28 member states refuse the legislation.

The purpose of these projects is to build not only a knowledge base, but importantly an application base, for policy making. Otherwise we extract information of past projects, but don’t do anything in terms of sharing that information. So we have reallocated LIFE+ to make sure the link is there, in the doing, as well as the knowing. That is why we are organising conferences between projects, like today.

It is the same situation as with the need for data, it is currently not being sought, just as we need the links, which has not been sought by EU. This kind of platform is a way to network, to identify together barriers for funding and technical barriers and to find pathways to solutions together.

Local Intermediary scale (National/Regional) Europe

Policies and monitoring

- The public authorities should assess systematically the result of their policy to identify successes and failures. - Necessity of local relay of the overall EU policies. - Necessity of EU organised meetings to network, to share the good practices and to fill the gap between the field and the European political level.

- Regional/national levels should be intermediaries between EU and local policies. Improve and foster the enforcement of EU directives - Limit the regulatory constraints and if necessary break the conventional law for the innovative projects. The bottom-up feedback should lead to adapting regulations constantly.

- Define and maintain long-term strategies. - Necessity of data availability: systematically collect and gather the quantitative results to get comparable data and to share it. Implement and promote the good practices which proved to be successful. At each level: Europe/national/regional/Local. - Ecological fees, fines and taxes. The provided public service price must be consistent with the level of environmental impact. - Encourage more local governance.

Institutions

- Change the urban planning practices by integrating the resilience issue at very first stages. - Create links between institutions and associations. Create structures to ensure sustainability of the innovative projects on the long-term (cooperative, creation of a social bank…) - Improve budget adaptability.

- Adapt the scale of governance with the scale of the phenomenon analysed. - The public institutions tend to prioritise the investment expenses rather than the running expenses. The social economy and locally led projects may be a solution to run the project without public expenses.

- Simplify the funding application process and more generally the administration. - Role of the NGOs which are more trusted than conventional institutions. They can promote long-term policy beyond the political time. - Improve traceability of the bottom-up feedback and its use in the policies adjustment.

Project management

- Carry out bigger-scale and more integrated projects (i.e. new LIFE+ program). - Define common objectives shared by all the stakeholders and involve all the relevant partners in the project steering. Always take into account the local acceptance in the steering process. - Take into account imperviousness and provide contingency solutions. - Develop business plan for the projects at the application stage

- Focus on replicability, sustainability and transferability of the funded project. At each level: Europe/national/regional/local.

Civic participation

- Develop volunteership and local involvement --> Use and train local “ambassadors” already involved locally. - Educating children educates adults. - Involve the most deprived by teaching skills for instance to valorise “waste”: new range of jobs. - Use original and creative dissemination activities. Use adapted message for specific communities.

- Organise clear, accessible and direct information: example of the sorting bins in our housing: not enough explanation and not clearly enough for the ordinary citizen. - Wide communication campaigns through all the media and social networks is necessary.

- Possibility to diffuse the most efficient communication means to the projects within the same thematic.

18h00 - Visit and buffet at the RecyLab unit

In the frame of the LIFE+ project R-URBAN, the RecycLab, an ecologically built unit has been developed to promote urban recycling and provide support for cultural and educational activities.

Ex: “repair café” : service exchange.

The aim of the unit is to create a network with companies which have waste to recover. A shop will make available the products created. Link all the resources pre-existing in the vicinity, in order to make the process sustainable. There is also a connection with the local schools/universities. This can also be a kind of “business incubator”, connecting people in a Co-working and social economy framework.

The objective is to create a local market with accessible price. The inhabitants are also given the possibility to learn production and repairing skills.

Next Day 5 April, morning:

Exchange of experience, with local and institutional stakeholders

3 different type of stakeholders invited to share with the project managers and experts:

- Inhabitants and associations

- Private companies

- Institutional representatives

Each one will talk about its experience through the LIFE+ project R-URBAN. The discussion will then be extended to other kinds of projects/initiatives, and more generally to the vision and expectations regarding the concept of urban resilience. The method and detailed description of this workshop will be specified after the first elements of the thematic presentations are received.

Chairs (tbc) : Constantin Petcou (AAA), Capucine Dubois (Astrale Geie)

Presentation from RECYCLAB

Introduction by Elodie, a service designer who takes care of the space. She was designer in residence for 3 months at RecycLab, with 3 others. Together they designed local products out of local materials.

Now she works full-time. Thomas was recently hired to take charge of the economic model of the place

RecycLab started with popular activities to make the place visible, for example flea markets. Over the past year they have hosted Repair Café’s at Recyclab, which is a service exchange event where inhabitants can come and learn to repair their goods. It has been another way of mapping possible sources to be recycled and skills to be part of the network.

RecycLab consists of different spaces, for example a tool bank and fab lab, workshop space for carpenters to work from the area, kitchen come café, as well as a space for artist/designer residences. We have started to map the organisations that could be involved, as well as the resources or collectors of materials who could provide skills or transport of materials. We are starting to develop a scheme for a co-working partnership with a local technical college to involve more local stakeholders and give an opportunity for the students to learn and build things. So for example, the school brings the know-how (of how to make certain things) and we provide the recycled materials.

Question- what is co-working, what are the characteristics of that sort of relationship?

It can be understood as a relationship between companies, local actors, and us, bringing each other mutual benefits. We are dedicated to recycling and nourishing social economies through the collaboration between different kinds of makers. So, co-working on a social economy, through local redistribution, negotiation and partnerships. There are different arrangements, for example people on paid salaries, social entrepreneurs, and volunteers. This could be seen as a difficult part of co-working as designers get paid and locals don’t.

Q- How do the students from the technical college perceive recyclab, do they want to work for free? Can it be during school time?

The negotiation of the partnership is still in the process. Using the workshop or repair cafe would be outside of school, but we have to propose something to the school. We are still trying to figure out the logistics of the relationship.

Right now for RecycLab we are trying to imagine an economic model, how to produce original models at accessible prices. We are creating an agenda for projects to promote r-urban activities, for example through the creation of composters, garbage bins, vertical gardens, gardening boxes, etc, so people can buy agrocite products at recyclab. We will then have a showroom for products, to create a desire to use it by others. So we are developing processes, products, and possibilities to learn how to use and make these products, so that people can come and learn or teach other ways of doing things. It is a more complex process because you are learning the logistics and service of and around these products.

Presentation by Benoit, President of garden association, and Yvon, Master Composter. They became associated with R-urban because of an ambition to create new economic models, to build a circuit between production and consumption and to consolidate the things going on. They came here to bring savoir-faire (know how) to the ways of composting properly, and reconceptualising food waste.

R-Urban is a good place because it brings together community with food growing practices. Thanks to partners for bringing it together

Yvon offers training to become master composters, he has already trained 7 master composters and has two modules coming up in the summer. They arrived when the project was getting off the ground three years ago and formed their idea based on the thought that there is too much waste in France, so how to create a project that tried to recycle as much as possible, to create short circuits to reuse and recycle waste. They realised immediately that there was an opportunity to work with residents around the area, of which there are thousands, as well as commercial networks who are a very good source for giving the resources to use in the garden.

Their first step was to get organized, map out the markets for vegetables. Yvon’s speciality is earthworms, so he started a worm farm here. For Yvon, worms are first inhabitants of this planet and have most rights; they are the most important beings. He tries to compost as much as possible and to demonstrate as well as learn good practices. This is much bigger than on site, ways to bring in more circuits and pilot new projects. Thanks to Agrocite he was able to establish a composting business here, which is an excellent opportunity because it create a platform to train other actors to learn about and become composters. It also invites schools to learn and get children involved in food processes.

Is the master composter course recognized?

This training part of a formation course, recognized by employment agencies. Unemployed people can come and do the course and recieve recognizable training. While the title ‘Compost Master’ not yet officially recognized, the training process is. At the moment we are training individuals and in the future company representatives. The new profession of compost master is complex, the profile is supposed to have skills in different domains, for example legislation, social worker, social and pracitical skills.

How long is the training? 5 days.

Presentation by Patricia from AMAP, local inhabitant and stakeholder in R-Urban

AMAP is community supported agriculture (CSA), a service bridging a connection between urban users and farmers, so that both partners share the risks involved with agriculture (such as drought or flooding) as established in the rules. The farmer who comes here is called Louis, who lives 50 kilometres away and comes every week on Thursday.

The relationship is underwritten financially, people consuming vegetables pay in advance, for three month contracts. This is a short period for CSA, normally it is 6 months to a year. There are some trying to push contract further for 6 months for goal of changing participant behaviour, for example pushing users to take more of a risk, so that they will think more and be more solidary. People have to be organized to take responsibilities, to contribute more. It is not just a product but involves many different interactions to help it take off.

The benefits is that you receive fresh vegetables weekly, that are locally produced, diverse (often types of vegetables you can no-longer find in normal supermarkets), and for a fair price. Each week you receive 7 varieties of fruit or vegetable, costing 7 euros for small, 14 for big. AMAP is a way of creating stronger direct links between people consuming and producing food, removing the intermediates and providing more security for farmers. It also transforms our behaviour as a consumer. It is an education process, you have to transform the vegetable yourself, to peel off the dirt.

As well as creating a stronger ethic of consuming and producing, it also creates social and solidarity economies, by creating social networks as every Thursday. People come here to pick up the vegetables and meet, it becomes a ritual. They come from 2-3 kilometers around, forming networks amongst consumers, and more than often they stay around and discuss ideas of recipes.

It is a very different scheme, its more than being trendy and cool to eat organic, rather it is more about the financial and personal / mutual investment. There was a situation where vegetables were ruined, and through this kind of scheme people can begin to understand that perfect vegetables that happen to be organic don’t just appear, they learn to understand and engage in the risks that farmer faces.

Question - Why do some people renounce it?

Olivier- The size of the farm is an issue for some. I thought the initiative should be to support small farmers and farms, but it is actually a big farm doing this scheme. What are the political aspects of this, why support large-scale agriculture? If it is a big farm that employs people it is not traditional agriculture anymore.

Patricia - But to maintain the demand of boxes, it needs to be a big one. Not necessarily exploitatory but a new system, a small farm couldn’t offer the same quantity.

Presentation by local government representative.

Agrocité was an important learning curve for the local municipality, and it was important for the people involved within the government. Every part of the project was outside of normal rules of the municipality, for example we had to find different means to get water. There were big changes inside the municipality to think about and be engaged with Agrocité – to check the laws, mount new systems to allow the dry toilets and shipping containers, all of these issues really challenged professional capacities. In the end, everyone was very pleased, the project worked very well and really changed the ways administration works in area. Many actos take pleasure to be involved.

Were very sceptical at the beginning stages, as it asks us to be imaginative to think about other ways to do things, to come around to finding new solutions. We wanted to work to mounting projects for inhabitants. After 4/5 years, there is the idea that people run it themselves and do other projects from this space. We hope it will get bigger however it hasn’t been easy to change the mentality of some actors.

Question- Why does it work within this municipality and not others?

The city of Colombes was the first to say yes, we will give money with LIFE +. We were looking at three other locations in Paris, but we couldn’t go ahead because we didn’t have enough financial, administrative and logistical capacity. Colombes already had an environmental movement tryng to start, with Benoit and others fighting for green space for at least two years. So they were already somewhat interested, or sympathetic, to the idea.

In introducing our project to new ears, we knew the administrators were going to laugh, they would not understand. But we had Benoit and 80+ people on the ground already trying to implement something, this showed a following which translated into political motivation and it took off from there.

Question- In terms of the projects resilience, has it become embedded enough in community, can it survive with the withdrawl of funding? Will it run itself?

If it is a bigger organisation that has the capacity to sustain a project long term, it needs management capacity. Our main issue in this case is how to work in these two years we have left, after life +, how to put in place a strategy for people to manage and govern the place, how to protect them. We are thinking of setting up a cooperative trust at the end for supporting the future of it, which we will start talking about in the next year how to do this. There are two levels working here, institutional and cultural. Institutionally its European reaching, and culturally it is here, the support is here, amongst the network of people in colombes, we can imagine what kinds of things need to be done and carry it out.

Question- If the government wants to sell land- will there be enough resistance by the people?

Its hard to say. For example with Eco box the people didn’t want the government to take the land so they went to court to fight and ended up renegotiating a new place. In this instance it is difficult for the government to say no.

This project is supported on multiple scales and levels. Already, the changing of the political climate since the projects inception has been immense. If you remain two years more, you can retain a network of political questions. In 4 years, we have seen the context changed, there are more initiatives in France and Europe, but not yet national thinktanks or international platforms to think about ways for collaborating with municipalities to share ways of working together.

It is more important to create new sites, then to push for this facility and institutions to follow us. We are working on research, our last publication about co-creating urban resilience through building a network of academic instutions working with municipalitlies to formalize findings into user guides. We are part of this application and hope it will be useful, to uncover. We have a connection with a resiliency platform with Sheffield uni.

We don’t know yet if this way of working is creating more resilience.

Since the crisis there has been a shift towards investment into a context where people are not willing to pay extra. We need more resilient solutions that are suited to this current situation. The potential is here. Funding salaries to build social economies is the key.

In order to meet challenge, we have to create a project that exisis longer, we need to channel social networks, move outside of people, into the other world of those who are just consuming things and not thinking about it.

Presentation by Daniela Dossi

Daniela is a designer in residence. She has developed a project based on Prod-action- a pro-active instruction based model for open shop.

She is developing a collective workshop, and ready product, which encompasses a space to exchange skills, experiment with flexible production and to try to create different alterative circuits. Here participants become prod-actors, working with new ways to find materials and to use them in new ways.

She is currently working with a group of residents to create frameworks and facilitate systems of prod-action, however it is still in the experiment stage. They are working to establish some planning practice, so how to do it in a way that can help us teach others through practice. The group are having collective experience through collective workshops, where they invite people to join, think about prices, material sourcing, collective processes. The project has helped them to think about how to reflect, work with residents with different backgrounds, how to prepare instruction and recipes. There is a possibility to join forces with RecycLab later down the track, to bring in the elements of prod-action and generate new design practices.

She started by mapping what is here, who is around, what are they interested in, what resources are around and how we can build that further, so it is more about creating different possibilities out of these existing factors. Once prcesses are more solid it can respond to the different needs in neighbourhood, to study how system can be more solid.

Question- did you find anything surprising?

The exchange has been interesting, evn from the start. Right now we have a small group, it has been interesting to see the support and time put it. Initially it has been all women, but now some men are taking part.

Andreas Lang- End Discussion

To bridge the two days, we started with perspectives of the user of facilitity (or LIFE +) and ended with the municipality, on the ground floor. Yesterday was largely on a European level. How to connect experience?

We can see how the projects are a learning curve for the local municipality, there was a clear affect on actors within. Being on the ground, in the space, is important to have a direct observation of LIFE +, it is a good feedback moment and opportunity to see concrete examples of what goes on. Perhaps this could be a point, should we invite a wider audience? To make it more normal, not just focus on LIFE +, but invite policy makers pushing into EU policy making, to discuss the importance of these projects to influence policy.

This is a question about scale, the scale of participation. At R-Urban we offer opportunities for local people to act in larger scale, which is not usual for someone who doesn’t have a special profession. For example, sending someone (a local actor) on a research or learning trip to other initiatives is great way of bringing in and circulating new knowledges, using this structure and network to open opportunities for local actors to see different actors and different scales, new ideas, to open the local to the global. This is very important to create and support alternatives from big business, by connecting different local experiences, connecting the small scales.

There is a political absence as a way to talk about politics that sits behind the scaling up of some of these ideas. There seems to be three words present in these projects that had successes (not always all), these are; permission to break the rules, demonstrating that things are possible; important moments of decision, where things might be possible; and renevue flow, which is essential, perhaps added together from other revenue.

All things create projects that mean something elsewhere. The quality of stories that travel, for example from Finland, which was a beautiful and economically sensible approach to water management, and everything else, from the reduction of mental health and social services, translates into stories that can travel. Perhaps this is more important than networking, identifying strong things that tell the truth of the wisdoms inside these places. These projects talk about communication, changing behavior, impluses, publicity, self-learning, participation, things that are meaningful for individual not just as institutional representatives. This is the strongest feeling to take away, which enables a self-learning. And this happens across different scale. Personal learning goes a long way but simple communication doesn’t allow that. Trying to solve and adapt together has a resilient effect. We need it to find solutions together to things presented as problems. This is inherent to resilient thinking and acting.

Constantin- In terms of permission and decision, I don’t agree. You need to create the precedent in which to find the opportunity in order to break rules. By pioneering, exploring to create new opportunities for decisions to follow. You need to be responsible to recreate another space to give capacity and freedom to other social realities.

What encourages people to consider is when they see economic gain. How to make these things continue, get global knowledge about context so they vote next time for people who continue in these things. For example, if you build wetlands next to houses, the prices of houses are going up.