Madrid

Madrid_case

This case seeks to answer three main research questions. First, how are the different types of participatory governance evolving in the context of the crises?

Urban governance has two main features since the beginning of the crisis in Madrid. On one side there is the retrenchment of the often weak, traditional institutional mechanisms of participation; and on the other side there is the increase and densification of citizens’ initiatives aimed at participation in the management of urban policies.

Second, we analyse the new forms of participation and urban activism, including new strategies of community cooperation. Around this idea we find multiple citizens’ initiatives such as self-managed public spaces for social use or the community gardens network. In parallel, there is also a trend in critical thinking projects being developed from some flagship cultural public facilities leading to a certain paradoxical relation between practices and discourses in the city of Madrid.

Finally, we explain what is the relation between existing structures of participatory governance and collective action in the context of the crisis. Bottom-up initiatives seem to have developed autonomous governance networks aside from public governance. This does not imply the lack of relations between public institutions and social movements.

Final Report: English

TRANSGOB Report Series, July 2016 Number 5, Madrid

Final Report: Spanish

TRANSGOB Report Series, Julio 2016 Número 5, Madrid

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s