Tom Avermaete, 2016

tWorkshop introduction Over the past few years, a panoply of innovative activism, scholarship and projects that focus on ʻthe commonsʼ have gained momentum. This rapidly growing movement is based on new thinking in the domains of economy, political and social sciences, suggesting radically different ways to organize our societies. In her seminal publication Governing the Commons (1990) Nobel prize winner Elinor Ostrom put forward an idea of the commons as ʻcollective actionʼ that challenges our understanding of politics, economy and culture. More recently Silke Helfrich and David Bollier in Die Welt der Commons (2015) have coined the commons as a matter of ʻshared resourcesʼ that allow us to conceive our everyday life beyond the dominant discourses of market economy and state intervention. In these theories, however, there is little attention for the value of urban space as a shared resource and one of the main tangible forms in which ʻthe commonsʼ exist in society. This lecture series claims that the new conceptions of ʻthe commonsʼ can radically alter the way that we think about the role of the architect, the character of the project and the relation between architecture and the city. The five lectures relate ‒for the first time – the conception of ʻthe commonsʼ to the field of architectural design, in order to develop a new architectural theory of intervening, transforming and maintaining urban environments. Looking at the history of architecture but also studying contemporary design practices, each of the lectures will start to delineate different aspects of the commons and their relevance for the architecture-city nexus. The lectures will alternatively look at the commons as a matter of ʻpool resourcesʼ, understood as collectively-held goods that can be used by individuals; of ʻcommonersʼ defined as communities of people that share resources; of ʻcommoningʼ, referring to the social practices that create and reproduce the commons; and of ʻshared knowledgeʼ erasing the differentiation between the ʻexpertiseʼ of elites and the know-how of regular citizens. Together, these different perspectives will construct the outline of another approach to architecture and the city. This series is composed of five complementary lectures that together aim to outline an architectural understanding of the character, role and operations of the commons: 1. The Commons and its Tragedy: Introducing a Notion 2. Lex Communis: The Commonality of the Discipline and the Discipline of the Common Place 3. Praxis Communis: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Cooperation 4. Res Communis: Common-Pool Resources in Architecture and Urban Design 5. The Architecture of the Commons: A New Path of Contemporary Logos and Praxis Studio Assignment Next to the lectures there is a studio assignment in which students will work, as well analytically as projectively, with the notion of the commons in the Japanese city. Drawing Ecologies Starting from the threefold notion of the commons – as Lex communis, Praxis communis and Res communis – this studio sets out to offer an analysis of the commons in the Japanese city. Students will go in to the city and analyse the common pool resources (green space, open space, water, materials, typologies, etc). They will investigate, draw and understand these resources as elements of an ʻecologyʼ (see Reyner Banhamʼs study of LA) of human and non-human actors. Special attention will be paid to the role that the built environment, from ʻcity to chairʼ, plays in articulating, defining and unlocking these common pool resources. Students will ask questions as: What are the commons of the Japanese city? What role does architecture play in this commons ecology? And how can we draw these commons? The result of this first phase of the studio will be a drawing of the ʻcommons ecologyʼ. Articulating a Project In a second part of the studio students will explore what a ʻdesign projectʼ for the commons can be, beyond a simple plan for a building. Starting from the information that was assembled by the entire group in the previous phase, students will be asked to reflect upon how they ‒with architectural means (which need to be identified)̶ can act within the ecologies that they have mapped. How can a project for the commons be articulated? With which instruments and approaches can they intervene in these commons ecology? Which material or immaterial interventions are needed to unlock the common pool resources in a new fashion and for a wider group of citizens? The result of this second phase will be a representation/ drawing that articulates what a project for a common can be, beyond a simple plan for a building.