m stangel, a szóstek: empowering citizens through participatory design: a case study of mstów,...

1. INTRODUCTIONAlthough there is a growing awareness regarding theimportance of public participation in both urban andrural design and planning in Poland, the real-life casesmeet several challenges. Public participation isrequired by planning legislation but in practice it

means – in the best case – debating about projects pre-pared by professionals at the final stages of decision-making when major changes are nearly impossible tomake. This case study presents an approach, whichaimed at redefining key spaces in a rural area inSouthern Poland through participatory design tech-niques involving local citizens. The project addressed

EMPOWERING CITIZENS THROUGH PARTICIPATORY DESIGN:A CASE STUDY OF MSTÓW, POLAND

Michał STANGEL a, Agnieszka SZÓSTEK b

a DSc; Faculty of Architecture, Silesian University of Technology, ul. Akademicka 7, 44-100 Gliwice, PolandE-mail address: [email protected]

b Dr.; Design Department, Warsaw Academy of Fine Arts, ul. Myśliwiecka 8, Warszawa, PolandE-mail address: [email protected]

Received: 31.10.2014; Revised: 6.11.2014; Accepted: 19.01.2015

A b s t r a c tWhile Polish towns have begun to realize the role of public space and started several development and improvement pro-jects, these activities were usually conducted in a top-down manner, where solutions were imposed on the local communitywithout much understanding of its needs and expectations. Mstów, a village in Southern Poland with several amenities, cur-rently seeking new development possibilities, has been chosen as a platform for a research project within the “Design in theField” program organized by the Regional Government of Silesia Region aiming at promoting the participatory approachto forming a local strategy. Given the opportunity of conducting this workshop, the authors chose to apply the participato-ry design process, which aimed at engaging local inhabitants and leaders to conjointly define the development possibilitiesand opportunities for the village. The goal of this research was to identify local needs and opportunities, and propose arange of design interventions, which showed a promise to develop local potential to shape both usable and experiential spacefor residents and tourists.

S t r e s z c z e n i eW ostatnich latach w wielu miejscowościach w Polsce realizuje się wiele projektów zagospodarowania i rewitalizacjiprzestrzeni publicznej. Działania te są jednak często prowadzone odgórnie, a rozwiązania narzucane lokalnej społecznościbez dogłębnego zrozumienia jej potrzeb i oczekiwań. Mstów, wieś w południowej Polsce wielu walorach turystycznych,poszukując sposobów zagospodarowania przestrzeni publicznej zgłosiła się i została wybrana do programu „Designw Terenie”, organizowanego przez Urząd Marszałkowski Województwa Śląskiego. Celem programu była promocja tworzenialokalnych strategii zagospodarowania przestrzeni przy wykorzystaniu metod partycypacji społecznej. W ramach programuautorzy zostali zaproszeni do przeprowadzenia warsztatów, w których przy zaangażowaniu lokalnej społeczności i liderówpowstała wizja rozwoju dla kluczowych przestrzeni publicznych w gminie. W ramach tego procesu przeprowadzono badaniamające na celu zidentyfikowanie lokalnych potrzeb i szans oraz zaproponowanie szeregu interwencji projektowych, rozwi-jających lokalny potencjał tak, by tworzyć użyteczne i atrakcyjne przestrzenie dla mieszkańców i turystów.

K e y w o r d s : Participatory Design; Design Thinking; Design Charette; Rural development.

1/2015 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 47

A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N TThe Si les ian Univers i ty of Technology No. 1/2015

M . S t a n g e l , A . S z ó s t e k

aspects such as: participatory urban design, User-Centered Design and interdisciplinary cooperationbetween design and architecture students. The com-bination of these elements made the process a uniqueexperience, which might be used as a model foraddressing urban space design in a participatorycharette-style approach aimed at understanding localneeds, defining relevant goals and suggesting designsolutions.

Design SilesiaDesign Silesia is a project run by the RegionalGovernment of Silesia Region, funded by theEuropean Social Fund (ESF) through HumanCapital Operational Programme, sub-activity 8.2.2.Regional Innovation Strategy. “Design in the Field”(„Design w terenie!”) was a design charette whichaimed at generating ideas for improving the publicspace of one of Silesian towns. Mstów has beenselected from twelve other boroughs in a competitiveprocess, which aimed at identifying a place with bothdesign potential and a real need for improvement.While other boroughs have already had their strate-gies defined and hoped for design support to helpthem to implement their visions, Mstów was a placewith no development strategy and with a few discon-nected investments, which could not be easilybrought together into a consistent development plan.As such it has appeared to be a place where we wouldbe able to apply a participatory design process ratherthan just developing specific design solutions.

MstówMstów is a village with 2000 inhabitants located inSouthern Poland, near the town of Częstochowa, inthe so-called Polish Jurassic Highland. It is a relative-ly attractive location, with several amenities such aspicturesque landscape, Warta river, historic marketsquare, a monastery, etc. (see: Fig. 1 and 2).In the last years the character of the village has beenchanging from agriculture to the touristic and resi-dential base for Częstochowa. While there haverecently been some investments in the public space,the details of the realization lacked functionality andwere strongly criticized by its inhabitants. Theseinvestments included the change of the marketsquare, where greenery and the facilities werereplaced by an empty stone-brick flooring and a cre-ation of a recreation area with a swimming pond,which has been realized ad hoc, concentrated onexpensive yet not functional paths and at the sametime lacking facilities such as electricity and sewage.Interestingly, the recreational area turned out to be agreat success as a summer tourist magnet, which hassurprised the authorities unprepared to accommo-date a heavy traffic. Such a situation led to furtherfrustration of the local citizens, particularly those liv-ing in the neighborhood of the recreational area, asthe village got entirely jammed with the incomingtraffic and tourists tended to park anywhere due tothe lack of sufficient number of parking lots. In sucha situation the local authorities decided to apply forthe “Design in the Field” project hoping for sugges-tions regarding sustainable village development.

48 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 1/2015

Figure 1.A map of Mstów with its attractions: old barns, the church and the river with its leisure area, hand drawn by local Children

EMPOWER I N G C I T I Z E N S T HROUGH PAR T I C I PAT OR Y D E S I G N : A C A S E S T UD Y O F MS TÓW, PO L AND

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKPlacemakingAs previously mentioned, the majority of publicallyfinanced architecture and urban design in Poland isstill led in the top-down design manner. However,there is a growing interest in alternative attitudes,which concentrate on the sense of place and a partic-ipatory design process.Worldwide, the notion of participatory design datesback to the 60s and 70s, when several urbanists suchas Jane Jacobs (1970), Christopher Alexander (1977),Gordon Cullen (1995) and others, begun to realizethe reasons behind the failures of modernist urbanplanning and architectural design in creating success-ful and vibrant public spaces. Since the 80s, the NewUrbanism movements advocated creating urbanspaces with the qualities of traditional cities (denseurban grid, mixed use, public spaces with activefrontages, etc.). While addressing an urban form,New Urbanism also praised the participatory designmethods, namely a design charette, where a team ofprofessionals would work in a limited time (andspace), closely with representatives of the local com-munity, to achieve an optimal design solution, which

addressed the key requirements of different stake-holders.In Poland, while there is a growing awareness of theimportance of public participation in urban design,and the issue has been a subject to professionaldebate, the real life cases face several challenges.Although public participation is formally required byplanning legislation, practice usually means debatingabout ready made projects prepared by professionalswith little space for any real influence. In severalcases it is even further limited to the possibility ofsubmitting motions at the early planning process, andcomments and protests in the final stage.While new design methods have usually been imple-mented in larger cities rather than towns and villages,the rural environment such as Mstów has severaladvantages including a small and close local commu-nity and local authorities, which are personallyknown by citizens. In a smaller community, it is rela-tively easier to attract the attention of a representa-tive section of local inhabitants. The participatoryprocess also allows marginalized voices to participateand express their opinions and expectations.

Participatory DesignThe Participatory Design (PD) approach emerged inthe 80s in Scandinavia out of the labor unions push forworkers to have democratic control in their environ-ment (Ehn, 1988; Greenbaum and Kyng, 1991; Schulerand Namioka, 1993). It is a design practice involvingdifferent non-designers: potential users, external stake-holders and team members who come from disciplinesother than design such as marketing, engineering, sales,etc. in a variety of co-design activities throughout theentire design process (Sanders, Brandt andBinder, 2010). Carroll and Rosson (2007) state that:“Participatory design integrates two radical proposi-tions about design. The first is the moral propositionthat the people whose activity and experiences willultimately be affected most directly by a design out-come ought to have a substantive say in what thatoutcome is. The moral proposition is that users havea right to be directly included in the process ofdesign. The second is the pragmatic proposition thatthe people who will need to adopt, and perhaps toadapt to an artefact or other outcome of design,should be included in the design process, so that theycan more offer expert perspectives and preferencesregarding the activity that the design will support,and most likely transform. The pragmatic propositionis that directly including the users’ input will increase

AR

CH

IT

EC

TU

RE

1 /2015 A R C H I T E C T U R E C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G E N V I R O N M E N T 49

a

Figure 2.Pictures of Mstów, seen from a local hill. (photo M. Stangel)


the chances of a successful design outcome”.While the early work in PD mainly stemmed fromresearch attempts to democratize the design of ICTsystems, participatory design today spans across abroad range of fields (commercial, research as well ascommunity oriented) applying a large variety of toolsand techniques. The tradition of Scandinavian designput a strong emphasis on cooperation betweendesigners and non-designers called by Ehn (19088): “ameeting of language games with prototyping of sharedartefacts as a centerpiece of design dialogues”. Suchdialogues can also incorporate collaborative explo-rations of daily practices, habits and routines (Binderand Brandt, 2008; Buur and Bødker, 2000). The mostpopular techniques include scenario techniques stem-ming from theatre, design games used as a platformfor the design dialogue and prototyping that supportsparticipants in a joint creation of concepts and mock-ups (Sanders et al., 2010).Alternative PD approaches are concerned withenabling non-designers to articulate their ideas, sothey could become a foundation for the subsequentdesign work (e.g., Muller, 2007; Sanders, 2008). Yetanother approach promotes using infrastructures ortoolkits supporting users and appropriating technolo-gy designed by others (e.g., Goodell, Kuhn, Maulsbyand Traynor, 1999). Mattelmakki (2006) showed howprobing techniques could prove productive in co-design projects due to the richness of their character-istics. Westerlund (2009) further shows how to com-bine probing and prototyping while Brereton andBuur (2008) apply tools created for a singular partic-ipatory workshop and embed them long term whileexploring user context over time.

Research through DesignIn our view, designing urban solutions requires anapproach, in which the research does not always pre-cede but rather becomes a part of the design activity.Therefore, we proposed to apply research throughdesign approach (Frayling, 1993) as a means to formu-late and test the solutions to stimulate local communi-ty of Mstów. The model proposed by Frayling definesways, in which designers can engage with wicked prob-lems and presents design artifacts as outcomes aimingto transform the world from its current to a preferredstate (Rittel and Webber, 1973). The term: a wickedproblem was coined in reaction to the inability of sys-tem architects to apply scientific methods to addresssocial problems such as, for example, urban crime. Awicked problem was seen as a problem, which cannot

be properly modeled due to the conflicting perspec-tives of the involved stakeholders. The authors arguedthat many problems could never be appropriatelymodeled, which creates an opportunity for designresearch to provide complementary knowledge byapplying methods unique to the design processes.Design research grew out of the need to address theincreasing complexity of solutions (such as battle-ships, airplanes, rockets but also ever more complexurban spaces) designers were asked to create(Bayazit, 2004). These challenges created a need fornew design methods that were more predictable andcollaborative. Such an approach seemed to advance,Schön’s (1983) idea of seeing design as a reflectivepractice where designers reflect back on their actionsto improve design methodology. Design researchersdescribe their work as: “the study, research, andinvestigation of the artificial made by human beings,and the way these activities have been directed eitherin academic studies or manufacturing organizations”(Bayazit, 2004, p.16).In this context, research through design approachaims at providing the designer with insights regardingthe specific user-solution relationship (Desmet et al.,2001). It underlines the role of a prototype as aninstrument of building design knowledge where theprototype serves as a means to define, develop andevaluate that knowledge (Keyson and Alonso, 2009).Observations of how the prototype is experiencedguide an iterative design process.Zimmerman, Forlizi and Evenson (2007) proposed amodel, which represents ways in which designersengage with wicked problems by integrating thebehavioral theories with the technical opportunities.Through ideation, iteration and critique of alterna-tive concepts design researchers keep on reframingthe problem as they attempt to make the right thing(Greenberg and Buxton, 2008). Such a processresults in a problem definition, an articulation of theideal state and a collection of artifacts-models or pro-totypes accompanied by documentation of theprocess itself. The model supports designers in iden-tifying new opportunities or advancements of currentsolutions. By evaluating the performance of the arti-fact in the real world it helps to discover unanticipat-ed effects and provide a platform for bridging contextof use with the needs of various stakeholders. Whenfacing a challenge to develop urban solutions that arecomplex in terms of function and context, researchthrough design helps to provide a way to increase thevalidity of the proposed concepts (Zimmerman,Forlizi and Evenson, 2007).



3. METHODOLOGYA chosen methodology was a combination of toolsand techniques strategically chosen to serve a specif-ic purpose. The PD tools are best applied throughdrawing upon three types of activities: making, tellingand enacting. For example, telling activities such asdiaries could be used for face-to-face enacting of sce-narios from the present situation, while making activ-ities, such as prototyping might be used to inspire theformulation of future scenarios (Sanders, Brandt andBinder, 2010).Based on the aforementioned arguments we havedesigned a design process that consisted of the fol-lowing steps:observations,interviews and questionnaires,vision development through creative sessions,iterative design process, concept evaluation.The consecutive steps are described in detail in thefollowing sections.

ParticipantsThe design team was built out of ten master students,five out of which studied design and five of architec-ture. Students voluntarily applied to the program andhave been chosen based on their portfolio and a let-ter of application. The team was led by two expertswho combined professional and academic practice: aUser Experience designer and an architect. The pro-ject was prepared together with local authorities,which were the providers of knowledge regarding theregion and also enablers with respect to the contactswith the local community.

User studiesThe project lasted seven days. The entire team hasmoved to Mstów for this period and run all activitiesfrom the local Culture Center.In the first two days the aim of the team was to learnthe specificities of the village during site visits, obser-vations and meetings with local leaders and stake-holders. The representatives of the local authoritiespresented the most important places in village: themarket, the remains of nineteenth century barns, andthe recently developed recreation area on the WartaRiver with the so-called “Rock of Love”. The teamvisited one of the several orchards and learned aboutcultivation of apples. They also visited the major localemployer – Demar factory (one of the largest Polishshoe manufacturers).

Furthermore, fifteen members of the local communi-ty (including the mayor, the headmaster of the pri-mary school, the local journalist, the owners of localbusinesses and the citizens) participated in a series ofinvited lectures and discussions about the village, itspotential and its problems (see: Fig. 3).

InterviewsIn order to truly get to know Mstów better, the mostimportant stage was to talk to the citizens who knewbest what their village was like and what it needed.The students carried out a total of 30 interviews withresidents of various age and occupations, which pro-vided a complex picture of the village. They learnedabout the problems, needs and opportunities forMstów as seen with the eyes of its inhabitants. One ofthe mot important aspects regarded the split betweenthe local community who often descended from thearea and the community treating Mstów as a suburbof Częstochowa, which led to stagnation of the entirecommunity. Another important issue regardedunused possibilities in leveraging local agriculture.The students also asked about how the citizens wouldsee short and long term development of their com-munity. The main opportunity for Mstów was seen interms of making the town a tourist attraction, whichwould subsequently lead to the increase in well-beingand new job opportunities. These talks also helped tolearn, which things the residents were proud of andwhich elements needed to be further developed.During the visits the students identified the followingproblems to be further considered:lack of a bridge on the river which separates two sidesof the village,lack of sufficient roads and paths,lack of tourist information and appropriate marks

AR

CH

IT

EC

TU

RE

a


Figure 3.The students discussing local problems and possibilities withthe representatives of Mstów community. (photo M. Stangel)


leading to the leisure area,lack of attractions in the market square,small accommodation base,devastation of the old barns.The interviews became the starting point for subse-quent stages of design, which are described below.

Defining the design spaceAfter the interviews, the residents were invited (by aposter announcement) to a creative session, whosepurpose was to discuss and group the most importantissues for Mstów using an affinity diagraming tech-nique (see: Fig. 4).

The session led to defining the following needs forthe local community:– Providing infrastructure for activities related active

leisures particularly to kayaking, bicycling andwater recreation, as well as the ice rink, sleigh andskiing spots for the winter. A new playground anda swimming pool were desired, as well as a leisure

space for children, which could be used through-out the year. A larger number of accommodationand catering facilities, as well as a tourist informa-tion centre would encourage visitors to stay longer;

– Providing tourist infrastructure, including parkinglots, sidewalks, bicycle paths, public toilets, morebicycle racks and dust bins, as well as better light-ing, especially surrounding the swimming area.Residents also asked for a police station in the vil-lage;

– Market square development, which could be mademore attractive by increasing the amount of green-ery, creating charming places to meet and organizethe vending stalls;

– Developing the banks of river Warta, which shouldbecome an attraction rather than a threat. It wasimportant to regulate its banks and to create atleast two footbridges. Residents would also like a“boulevard along the Warta River” stretching fromthe bridge in Mstów to the springs under the hill.They further wanted to renew the tradition ofwooden sculptures by the river, which until recent-ly had been the landmark of the town, as well as toexpose the Rock of Love in a better way;

– Conserving the area with the remains of the barns,which should be retained and made a touristattraction, revealing the landscape and the islandrocks. This area could be used for an open-airmuseum of objects related to the agriculture andanimal breeding, where tourists could see and feelwhat life is and was in the countryside;

– Promotion of regional products, including applejuice and processed fruits from nearby orchards;

– Cultural development, including regular events andcultural attractions. Cultural center should bemore open, and besides offering group activities tothe inhabitants, it should also serve as a meetingplace of relaxation and self-development;

Identifying the key problems and needs of the resi-dents helped the team to define the most promisinggrowth opportunities for Mstów:– a charming place, where tradition meets modernity,– a place of recreation, where one can relax the spir-

it and flesh,– a unique place where you can taste the local cuisine

with an apple theme.In short, the local community wanted to live in aplace, which they could be proud of and where theycould find jobs for themselves and their families.


Figure 4.Affinity diagrams defined during the created session wherethe students and the representatives of the local communitydiscussed the potential areas of improvement for Mstów


An iterative design processThe results of discussions and consultations with res-idents led to choosing three aspects of Mstów to becreatively developed. The team applied researchthrough design approach (Frayling, 1993) as a meansto formulate and test the solutions to stimulate localcommunity of Mstów. In such a process, a designerstarts with exploring complex issues in a realistic con-text and reflects them back on the prototype, which isthen exposed to the users. Observations of how theprototype was experienced guide an iterative designprocess.The students formed three independent teams, eachworking on one of the identified aspects. The firstgroup aimed to propose a solution that would leadtourists to the most important tourist attractions, sothat none of them would be missed. The secondgroup saw the challenge in proposing a new life forthe area of old barns. Members of the group won-dered how to give the ruins new features to empha-size their uniqueness and make them become aprominent attraction in the region. The third groupdealt with improving the market square and the TownCultural Centre together with its inner courtyard.Participants found an opportunity to develop thesesites by linking various activities happening in andaround them. The primary objective was to makethese places more open and accessible to residents.The proposed projects formed a coherent vision root-ed in the needs and expectations of residents. Theconcepts showed a range of possible ways to uncoverand develop local potential and opportunities inorder to form a new quality of unique places for res-idents and tourists.First, each group proposed two design alternativesbased on the following criteria: short versus long-term development, and low versus high budgetrequired to realize the vision.All concepts were visualized in a form of posters anddiscussed with local community (see: Fig. 5). Threeconcepts were selected for further development.Interestingly, the selected concepts were thoserequiring long-term investment. The citizens arguedthat, although they might need to wait longer to seethe results of these projects, they consider them asmore sustainable to the entire community comparingto quick and cheap fixes.

4. RESULTSThe above-described process led to the definition ofthree concepts for Mstów: a tourist route around alllocal attractions, a redesign of a market square andthe local cultural center and eco hotels built using theremains of the ancient barns.

Tourist routeThe first project aimed at exposing the attractionsthat await tourists in Mstów. The trail consisted of sixsites that relate to different spheres of life: culture,tranquility, folklore, reflection, sport, recreation andhistory. The proposed path seen on the map forms aletter “M” (see: Fig. 6). This shape (which may alsoresemble local elements such as rocks, or the barnwalls) could be a starting point for visual identifica-tion for the municipality. In each of the six points ofthe route there are specially designed informationaland recreational spaces with seating, containinginformation on places visited and the successivepoints of the route. These sites could become placesof picnics, meetings, etc. In such a way, the teamwanted to ensure that the visitors in Mstów could eas-ily find their way around the village and to be provid-ed with resting spots while exploring the neighbor-hood.

AR

CH

IT

EC

TU

RE


Figure 5.Verification of design alternatives with members of localcommunity. (photo Radosław Kazmierczak)

a


Market Square and the local cultural centreThe second project concerned the revitalization ofthe Market Square and adaptation of the inner court-yard of the municipal cultural center (see: Fig. 7).

These objectives were to be achieved through socialmobilization. Residents were to be invited to jointlyengage in a change of the public space by equippingit with their own, now redundant objects (e.g., furni-ture such as tables and chairs) as well as renovatingand painting the walls of the inner yard for the pur-pose of a summer cinema. Such activities aimed toresult in that space being treated more like their own,and thus to stimulate its opportunistic use by the res-idents. The team suggested that the inner courtyardof the Cultural Centre could be divided into threezones: a zone for fun with coffee tables, a zone forentertainment with the space for dancing and a zonefor culture, where an open-space cinema could becreated. As the cultural center opens up onto theMarket Square some of the spring and summer activ-ities, such as classes for children organized by thelocal social organization, could then be extended intothat space by simply moving some of the furniturearound.


Figure 7.The proposal by Dominika Wójcik, Sara Sacała and Damian Chomątowski of a new design for the local market square and also forthe inner courtyard of the cultural center

Figure 6.The concept proposed by Joanna Jaroszyńska, Ewa Leśniakand Sebastian Dewerenda: the visualization of the six attrac-tions of Mstów forming a letter M, which could become avisual identity for the municipality and also the visualizationof the picnic place repeating the same shape in a form of atable, seats and the bicycle racks


Eco HotelsThe third project considered a meadow with theremains of old barns. There used to have been about80 barns on a hill and their remains – limestone wallsstanding in the lush grass bring to mind southernEuropean picturesque landscapes. The team pro-posed the creation of “eco-hotels”, which wouldcombine ecological lifestyle accommodation allowingfor relaxation and recreation as well as various otheroptions for active recreation (see: Figure 8). The

hotels could be based on four scopes of activity: envi-ronmental, social, cultural and economic. The con-cept promoted ecological lifestyle, in line with cur-rent global trends. Local products, the calm beauty ofthe landscape and environmentally sound operationof eco-hotels aimed to constitute the main advan-tages of the proposed development. The project sug-gested a typology of construction related the barns’remains, ranging form simple wooden platformsaligned to the barn walls, through temporary tensileconstructions, to whole new buildings with woodenwalls and glass openings.

Idea evaluationAll three concepts were presented to the entire localcommunity during the last day of the project in theform of an open-air exhibition built on the MarketSquare (see: Fig. 9, 10, 11 and 12). The exhibition wasaccompanied with testing local products (see: Fig. 12)and final discussion with the teams, which had thefinal chance to discuss their ideas both with the resi-dents and local authorities. Interestingly, the venuealso created space for an open discussion betweenthe authorities and the inhabitants regarding thefuture steps for the village.

AR

CH

IT

EC

TU

RE

a


Figure 9.The project by Sabina Sujecka, Marcin Lubecki, Ewelina Czajka and Katarzyna Pyka of eco-hotels built using the remains of the oldbarns

Figure 8.Prototyping the proposed new facilities for the inner court-yard of the cultural center, by means of adhesive tape andchalk drawings. (photo M. Stangel)


5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSMany villages such as Mstów seek new opportunitiesfor enhancing their competitiveness, enriching touristexperience and improving the quality of life of a localcommunity. The participatory research through design

approach, which took place within the “Design in thefield” programme resulted in a range of design pro-posals based on a deep analysis of the potential of theplace and the needs of the local community. The ver-satile and interdisciplinary group composed of thestudents and professionals engaged in that process,which – despite the short time span (just one week) –


Figure 10.Final exhibition on the Market Square of Mstów (photo M. Stangel)

Figure 11.Local youth trying out the idea of a Hyde Park-like wallaimed for the inner yard of the Local Cultural Center (photoRadosław Kazmierczak)

Figure 12.Local children trying out the concept for the resting spacesalong the tourist route (photo M. Stangel)


included important elements, such as: an analysis,evaluation, prototyping, getting feedback and refin-ing design solutions. The obtained results were high-ly valued by the local community and authorities.Other outcomes included the activation of the localcommunity, stimulating interaction between variouslocal stakeholders, inhabitants and authorities. Oneof the ideas pertaining to the promotion of the localproducts has been taken up by the local governmentand led to creation of an “Apple Day” – a local cele-bration day, during which the local orchards are pro-moted. We strongly believe that the proposedapproach combining participatory methods fromarchitecture and design could offer a new way ofbuilding sustainable and responsible strategies forplaces all over the world.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis paper was based on the experiences and resultsof the Design Silesia project, operated by theRegional Government of Silesia Region and fundedby the European Social Fund (ESF) through HumanCapital Operational Programme, sub-activity 8.2.2Regional Innovation Strategy. The describedcharette workshop – “Design in the Field” – wasorganized by the Academy of Fine Arts in Katowice.

REFERENCES[1] Alexander C.; A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings,

Construction. Oxford University Press 1977[2] Bayazit N.; Investigating Design: A Review of Forty

Years of Design Research. Design Issues 20, 2004[3] Binder T. and Brandt E.; The Design: Lab as platform

in participatory design research. In Binder, Brandtand Gregory (Eds.), CoDesign, International Journalof CoDesign in Design and the Arts. Vol.4, No.2,June 2008; Taylor & Francis

[4] Brereton M. and Buur J.; New challenges for designparticipation in the era of ubiquitous computing.CoDesign, 4(2), 2008

[5] Carroll J. M. and Rosson M. B.; Participatory design incommunity informatics. Design Studies 28.3, 2007

[6] Cullen, G.; Concise townscape. Routledge 1995[7] Desmet P., Overbeeke K., and Tax S.; Designing prod-

ucts with added emotional value: development andapplication of an approach for research throughdesign. ALDERSHOT, 4:32-47, 2001

[8] Ehn P.; Work-oriented design of computer artifacts.Falköping, Sweden: Arbetslivcentrum/Almqvist andWiksell International, 1988

[9] Frayling C.; Research in Art and Design. RoyalCollege of Art Research Papers 1, 1, 1993

AR

CH

IT

EC

TU

RE


Figure 13.The local choir serving apples and hot apple juice to the visitors of the exhibition (photo Radosław Kazmierczak)

a


[10] Goodell H., Kuhn S., Maulsby D. and Traynor C.; Enduser programming/informal programming, ACMSIGCHI Bulletin, Volume 31, Issue 4, October 1999

[11] Greenbaum J. and Kyng M.; Design at work:Cooperative design of computer systems. HillsdaleNJ: Erlbaum 1991

[12] Greenberg S., Buxton B.; Usability evaluation consid-ered harmful (some of the time). Proceedings of theSIGCHI Conference on Human Factors inComputing Systems. ACM, 2008

[13] Jacobs J.; The economy of cities. The economy ofcities. Vintage, 1970

[14] Keyson D. V. and M. Bruns A.; Empirical researchthrough design. Proceedings of the 3rd IASDRConference on Design Research, 2009

[15] Mattelmäki T.; Design probes. DA Dissertation.Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki, 2006

[16] Rittel H. W. J., Webber M. M.; Dilemmas in a GeneralTheory of Planning. Policy Sciences 4, 2, 1973

[17] Sanders E.; An evolving map of design practices anddesign research. In Interactions – experiences, peo-ple, technology. ACM. Volume XV.6, 2008

[18] Sanders E. B-N., Brandt E. and Binde T.; A frameworkfor organizing the tools and techniques of participa-tory design. Proceedings of the 11th biennial partici-patory design conference. ACM 2010

[19] Schön D.A; The Reflective Practitioner: How profes-sionals think in action. Temple Smith, London 1983

[20] Schuler D. and Namioka A. (Eds.); Participatorydesign: Principles and practices. Hillsdale NJ USA:Erlbaum 1993

[21] Westerlund B.; Design space exploration: Cooperativecreation of proposals for desired interactions withfuture artefacts. Ph.D. Thesis, Human-ComputerInteraction, Stockholm: KTH 2009

[22] Whyte W. H.; The social life of small urban spaces.Conservation Foundation, 1980

[23] Zimmerman J., Forlizzi J., Evenson S.; Researchthrough design as a method for interaction designresearch in HCI. In Proceedings of CHI’07, ACMPress 2007


m stangel, a szóstek: empowering citizens through participatory design: a case study of mstów,...

Documents