Search

Rendre les projets urbains pertinents, en accord avec les besoins et aspirations du terrain, voici à quoi rime – du moins en théorie – l’ambition de la participation urbaine. Comment ces aspirations sont-elles réellement tenues et composées ?Et comment pourrait-on améliorer la pertinence des projets vis-à-vis du terrain ?Ces deux questions sont ici abordées par le biais d’un cas vivant et complexe, celui de la mise en place d’une vaste zone piétonne dans le centre de Bruxelles. Plus spécifiquement, elles sont abordées sous un angle d’approche particulier, celui des objets. Qu’est-ce que cela fait de rendre compte de la participation vue au prisme de ses objets ?Objets de la planification, objets de la communication, objets quotidiens, objets critiques, choses publiques… L’approche « objectale » et les tendances concomitantes de l’attention accrue à la matérialité, à l’esthétique et aux entrelacements plus qu’humains nous permettront d’esquisser un programme pour la participation :prendre en compte les objets et les faire compter, afin d’améliorer notre « responsabilité » vis-à-vis du terrain. Making urban projects relevant by having them match the needs and aspirations of their publics, is – at least in theory – what urban participation aims for. But how are these aims pursued and fulfilled? And how can urban projects become even more relevant to the situation in which they intervene? This paper addresses both questions through a lively and complex case study: the recent development of a large pedestrian area in the centre of Brussels. More specifically, this case study is approached through the lens of the objects of urban participation, such as objects of planning, objects of communication, everyday objects, critical objects and public things. Thanks to this “objectal” approach, and an increased attention to materiality, aesthetics and more-than-human entanglements, we prepare the ground for our main claim: in order to improve their “response-ability”, both scholars and urban planners involved in urban participation processes need to take objects into account, not only by accounting for them but also by making them count, by bringing matter to matter., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Dans cet article, nous proposons d’interroger la persistance de critiques de la ville opérées par les marges, c’est-à-dire, à partir de ce qui diffère et peine à trouver sa place dans l’ordre urbain. Ces critiques, qui émergent historiquement avec les luttes urbaines et les avant-gardes artistiques, visent la prise en compte de différences habitantes et créatives :des formes de vie multiples mais aussi des singularités de création et d’expression. Ces critiques se sont peu à peu stabilisées, allant jusqu’à alimenter un modèle de la « bonne ville » :une topique de la ville des marges. Au cours des dernières années, leur institutionnalisation a signé l’émergence de deux nouvelles topiques – de la ville du bien-vivre et de la ville attractive – où se dessinent des compromis inédits avec les exigences du développement économique et de mises en garanties des qualités urbaines. En suivant l’émergence, l’absorption et la relance de cette critique à Bruxelles, il s’agit de contribuer à une pragmatique de l’ordre urbain, attentive à la fois aux formes d’émancipation et d’oppression contenues dans différents modèles de ville.In this article, we address the persistence of urban critiques operated from the margins, that is, from what differs and struggles to find its place in the urban order. Those critiques, which historically emerged with urban struggles and artistic avant-gardes, aim at taking into account inhabiting and creative differences: multiple forms of life but also singularities of creation and expression.They have graduallystabilized, going so far as to feed a model of the ‘good city’: a ‘topic’ of the margins. In recent years, their institutionalisation has led to the emergence of two new ‘topics’ – the well-being city and the attractive city - in which new compromises have been made with the demands of economic development and the need to guarantee urban qualities. By following the emergence, absorption and revival of this critique in Brussels, the aim is to contribute to a pragmatics of the urban order, attentive to both the forms of emancipation and oppression contained in different models of the city., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

In this text, the right to the city is used as a prism to analyse the transformations of Brussels’s city centre, notably in relation to the edestrianization of the central boulevards. Drawing on four case studies that analyse this development plan from different perspectives – the participatory process, the experience of homeless people, the representations and practices on the edges of the gay district, the interactions between public spacesand residential spaces – the aim is to cross-reference their respective contributions with the concept of the right to the city and its specific articulations in this context., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

info:eu-repo/semantics/published

In this article, we address the persistence of urban critiques operated from the margins, that is, from what differs and struggles to find its place in the urban order. Those critiques, which historically emerged with urban struggles and artistic avant-gardes, aim at taking into account inhabiting and creative differences: multiple forms of life but also singularities of creation and expression. They have gradually stabilized, going so far as to feed a model of the ‘good city’: a ‘topic’ of the margins. In recent years, their institutionalisa- tion has led to the emergence of two new ‘topics’ – the well-being city and the attractive city - in which new compromises have been made with the demands of economic development and the need to guarantee urban qualities. By following the emergence, absorption and revival of this critique in Brussels, the aim is to contribute to a pragmatics of the urban order, attentive to both the forms of emancipation and oppres- sion contained in different models of the city.