The Common as Project
Among the primary causes of the imbalance between the impacts generated by urban spaces on their environment and this environment’s capacity for resilience, one theory posited by the studio is the wide gap between the conceptual approach and the notion of the “common”. In all its forms: common resources, common spaces, shared design, common sense.
A primary translation of the notion of “common”, often overlooked, is represented by the “common goods” such as the natural resources and ecosystems on which our lives depend. An extension of common goods, “common interests/objectives” are a second facet of this notion, which can be integrated into the conceptual approach to increase the sustainability of a project. The third facet of “common” could be understood as “common design”; it has emerged as a relevant tool for involving, raising awareness and uniting the various actors, combining diverse imaginations, and mobilizing local expertise, in order to define a desired and supported project that values opportunities and respects the legitimate sensitivities of an operational context. Finally, this notion of the “common” can take the form of “joint action” to bring about urban transformation by pooling capacities for action, bringing together public and private parties, and involving citizens in the weaving of the city fabric and the development of urban practices.