THE GREEN IN BETWEEN: connection by design

Draft of an essay on my observations and empirical research in Umbrian villages, to inspire COLLECTIVE HOUSING MODELS in our villages and cities.

INTRO

City, village, landscape and nature … One can only exist by the grace of the other. And through the lack of distinction or our urban sprawl, variation and differences disappear and so do our landscapes and villages. Indeed, research by VITO among others, shows that urban sprawl increases infrastructure costs, car-use, paved surfaces and groundwater decline. But these planet and cost orientated numbers, don't tell another important story. Namely what density or more specific built fabric and human size does to our communities, to connection or better, simple human needs. In their ‘sustainable product policy’ the European Union states, over 80% of a products impact on it’s environment is determined at the design stage. Could the same be true, when it comes to the design of our social fabric or connection?

Julianne Holt-Lunstad research shows that sociale isolation, a the lack of connection or chronic loneliness are even more deadly then being overweight, smoking 15 cigarettes a day or excessive drinking. In addition, it increases our risk to strokes, dementia, coronary heart disease, depression, anxiety and affects our immune response. Causing inflammation or a cytokine storm. For the real nurds, like me, it’s situated on IL-6. In her systemic approach, exact and human sciences seem to collide. So-called dismissible ‘feelings’ emerge in numbers. The top two predictors to Julianne Holt-Lunstad’s systemic research question: ‘What reduces the chances of dying early the most’, are both about our social fabric. In first place there’s ones social behavior, openness or curiosity towards others. Does one inter-act? In second place, are our closest relationships. The ones we can really count or lean on, when things go south. Not implying our ‘yes-people’, fans or so-called echo-chambers. But those helping us up, still seeing that part of us, able to do better. So I believe ‘how’ we DESIGN our society, communities, neighborhoods and build-environment can have a huge impact on our life-span and -quality. Researchers that are looking at the cause of people reaching such a high age in Acciaroli, Italy, and Lanjarón, Spain, are looking at similar things. On top of a healthy traditional Mediterranean diet, less stress, more exercise and more connection contribute to the Mediterranean 'fountain of eternal youth'. Besides this, enough sleep and breaks, have a beneficial health effect too. As shown in sleep-research by Johan Verbreacken (UZA) and the research by Elke Van Hoof (VUB) on human resilience. And that’s something Spain and Italy share, namely their ‘siësta’ and moments of ‘dolce far niente’. Like our children, we need ‘blanks’ or open space in our schedule. Like neuroscientist, Veerle Visser-Vandewalle states, our brains need recharge- or wander-room, for a mixture of serendipity and creativity to surface. Our hyper fast, efficiency focused, ‘always on’ technological society, seems to break our human resilience. Leaving little room for ‘real’ connection, to learn these social skills and built this fabric. But in our reactive virtual world, their’s a greater risk in getting ‘lost in translation’. Because without multi-perspective and sensory storytelling, we don’t witness ‘what happens to the heart’, to quote Leonard Cohen. As the bigger picture, our common humanity, tends to fall outside our personal ‘zoom-frame’. Empathy through connection, ‘feeling’ with the other, like Brené Brown describes it, doesn’t only happen with mirror neurons in our brains. But is felt and stored in our whole bodies. Although technology can be designed as an initiator or addition, nothing beats the SMART’ness of natures design. In this case: real human connection.

So can we design invitations for real ‘face to face’ connection into the fabric of our villages and cities? Can our build-environment be an antidote against isolation or loneliness? Connection and loneliness are related. Brené Brown PhD in social work, describes connection as, the energy between people when they feel seen, heard, valued and can be themselves. Mixing Brené Brown’s, Vivek Murthy’s, Luc Goosens and Marlies Maes research findings on loneliness, gives this definition. Namely, loneliness is the difference between, the connection we are ‘served’ and the ‘quality’ of connection we humanly desire or need. Besides, according to them, loneliness comes in three forms. One, ‘intimate’ or individual loneliness; the longing for a trustworthy close friend, a ‘bestie’ or a partner. Two, ‘social’ loneliness; the longing for a circle of supportive, quality friendships or a family. Three, ‘collective’ loneliness is the need for a ‘community’, with a shared purpose. Besides Luc Goosens and Marlies Maes state, this third layer is also determined by our position in society; social-economical status, our neighborhood and the type of society we live in. According to Vivek Murthy, people need all three aspects fulfilled, to bloom. Even when only one of the three is missing, we can feel lonely. So to bloom we need a healthy, nourishing soil or context. In design, I believe, it’s opposite, that is universal design, inclusivity or belonging, like Brené Brown calls it, plays its role on all three levels too. So as I see it, loneliness is our canary in the coal mine, highlighting room for positive change or design adjustments. As in times when our population ages, family seizes shrink and the core-familie stopped being the norm, the quality of our communities gains importance. Although yesterdays solutions, won't solve tomorrows problems. Nor can we ignore historic wisdom in design. 

Where better to observe this, then in dense Umbrian villages, with their clear distinction between nature and village and their historic knowledge on heat resistant architecture. Places where a generation-mix, families, elderly, disabled and foreigners resolve in the community, like the sugar in your cappuccino. No segregation, but involved communities. Where life takes place in the collective space: a slow food piazza, card play, movies on the square, opera, Jazz, football with pizza, in short: accessible culture and shared emotion. Sociale cohesion versus strict social controle: two sides of te same coin? Can design balance the two? The dense grid within the village wall shows a subtle interaction between public, semi-public, semi-private and private. They stand in stark contrast to our apartments and detached single-family developments, as an one-sided answer to the Belgian housing demand. 

These 'inclusive islands' in a green sea with their walkable grid and human size, create a sense of community. And their image does relate to mixed generation-living and new collective housing models, that inspire so many architects and planners.  

FORM FOLLOWS ENVIRONMENT   

Our environment is warming-up. Eventually we'll have a more Mediterranean climate, normally found 1000 km south. With periods of heat, droughts and some with heavy rain. In addition to restoring the damage done, we’ll need heat resistant sponges. This will change the way we'll need to design our buildings and collective space. Or like architect, Sofie Pelsmakers, states it in her book ‘The environmental design pocketbook’: ‘future- and climate-proofing our build-environment will be the cheapest option.’ So without copy/pasting, historically tested passive solutions, warmer regions can inspire us. We can learn from them. Along with a contemporary translation of our own familiar, region specific typologies, materials or colour palette, it can even strengthen the individual character of our villages and cities. Preserving a sense of place, it’s genius loci or the spirit of the place. Preserving diversity. Like seen in the beautiful design of the Z33 museum, by Francesca Torzo, subtly wearing the color-pallet of Hasselt as its clay skin. In circulair design, the once so popular axiom, 'form follows function', is replaced by form follows environment or context, and function is adaptable to changing local and individual needs. The Umbrian villages offer some effective historic solutions to increasing summer temperatures. Wandering through these streets, is like going through Sofie Pelsmakers design-checklists. 'Their characteristic, organically grown grid with narrow streets, courtyards and small squares create shade and lower the heat-island-effect. Check. The prevailing wind direction orientates the main streets and one or two-story variations in rooflines bring light and a cooling windflow to the street level. check. Light colored material, reflect heat. Check.’ More greenery is yet missing. But there’s something more going on here. Namely their coherent materialization, that harmonizes. So instead of our typical identical rooflines, urban-gorges and incoherent materialization, our extreme individualism, you see the opposite. Creating individuality, as well as coherence. The architects from that time, got the basics right. Without a design-checklist, they knew. Furthermore these residents know how to live 'with' this climate. Instead of air-conditioning, they gratefully use terminal mass and cross-ventilation for night cooling, by strategically opening and closing shutters and windows. In architecture, technology facilitated us to build what-ever, where-ever. Facilitating a sense of dis-connection to context, to nature plus human-nature.

While form follows context, technology can supplement good design, without replacing it. So 'glocal' answers for local needs, can result in adaptive and evolving villages and cities, retaining their authenticity. 

COME A LITTLE CLOSER … THE GREEN IN BETWEEN  

‘Come a little closer, hope a little spark will come our way …’ in Selah Sue’s beautiful song: ‘You’, one can hear pieces of connection. As when we come a little closer, move a little slower, there’s time and space to connect, for serendipity to happen. In this our typical Belgian ribbon development, isn’t helpful. In Umbria ribbon development is more rare. The rural is still green and dense villages form islands, in the green in between. Around it, in a ten-minute walk-, bike- or vespa-radius you'll find farms, B&B's or farms converted into collective housing. Village centers reach densities of 70 to 150 dwellings per hectare. While the capital, the city, Perugia, reaches a density of 250 to 275 dw/ha. Like architect, Leo Van Broeck, also stated about Tuscany, this is a major difference in comparison with our Flemish spacial structure plan, prescribing minimal densities of 15 dw/ha for villages and 25 dw/ha for cities.

The village-wall now forms a car-border. In which lively squares, courtyards, narrow streets and shortcuts create space and opportunities to meet. The historically narrow streets of 4 to 6m width, now offer protection against cars. These car-free or semi-car free villages are a pedestrian paradise. Resulting in more exercise and social interaction for young and old. Design inviting one to walk and interact. With some goodwill, one can recognize the basics of 'circulation-plans' of some of our Belgian cities, like Ghent. Or one can see similarities with more ‘community and village seize’ car-free districts like in Barcelonas super-blocks. In Umbria the two-, tree- to five-story, attached and semi-attached, houses form a dense organically grown grid for pedestrians or the occasional delivering Fiat Panda. Sight-lines and squares at the village edge, give spectacular views on the surrounding green landscape. These villages are like rare peals of organic densification, without apartmentization, blind urge for profit or loss of identity. The contrast with our ribbon development and urban sprawl can't be any bigger. 'Oh ugly Flanders!'. In a circular transition, sparing raw materials, one can question if this Flemish freedom+happiness-attitude, also gives us 'the right to ugliness'. With the loss of coherence, authenticity and diversity between villages and cities as a result. Yes, there is no arguing about taste. But their IS about quality. Taste means, one can prefer David Bowie over Ella Fitzgerald. But talent or quality are not questioned here. Quality is timeless, feels true and universal. It’s worth cherishing, as it becomes heritage. That’s what makes design quality sustainable. So should our freedom be limited, to the point where it jeopardizes another’s, the public interest or the bigger picture? Can we have some healthy boundaries?

The direct contact with the street level, of this kind of mid-rise developments, has better sociale results. In comparison with high-rise developments, you see more diversity, social controle and a higher sense of security. Furthermore Luc Goosens and Marlies Maes state, research confirms that areas with more social engagement or citizenship, connectedness and well-kept public spaces, tend to lower our sense of loneliness. Here, in Umbria, in villages that really feel good, the central village square is by definition, not a parking-lot. It’s the meeting place and the glue of a community. The open plinth on the ground floor, with restaurants, small shops and cafes offers lively nourishment to the beating heart of the village. All the main circulation routes of the village 'coincidentally' pass the central square, creating togetherness. Centuries ago these Umbrian planners knew how to plan a collective space, how to create the cement of a neighborhood, togetherness and a WE.  

THE GRADUAL TRANSITION BETWEEN WE, US AND I

Translating Brené Brown, grounded theory on connection to architectural and urban design, a focal point could be: privacy. Especially in times when smart technology, that’s collecting our data, is entering our pockets, bodies, homes and public space. Data used to profit shareholders, rather then the common good. In one of her presentations on collective housing, urban planner, Peggy Trotté said: ‘without privacy, no collectivity’. I believe it even goes beyond this. That is, without enough privacy there’s no togetherness, yet more closing off and separation. The remarkable thing I observed was, residents ‘experiencing’ a context lacking their need for privacy, would add additional view-barriers themselves, like plants. So their behavior and adjustments indicated the need for design improvements. They indicated where the designer, missed a step. Site plans of collective housing offering a private, as well a communal outside space and a gradual transition, between the two, creates a balance. When it comes to human relations, our build and virtual space, if WE can only exist, by sacrificing safety or privacy of us or me, it stumbles because of domination. So designs should safeguard the room for WE, us and I to recharge and stay in-connection. Apparently, togetherness, needs a fabric, transitioning between collectivity and privacy. One is an invitation for togetherness, the other gives peace and privacy to the family or 'framily'. To create the same gradation within the home, between family-members, the couple and the individual. Distance and proximity, as always, it's all about the right balance between I, us and WE. Currently only 10% of the flemish population would opt for cohousing. So a lot of WE is not for everyone. For the other 90% it’s to close, to much WE. But it’s milder form, in particular collective housing models, smell like a village, a warm, connected Umbrian village.  

‘Without boundaries, no trust. Without trust, no connection. So which boundaries need to be in place, to stay in ones integrity and still have the most generous assumptions about the intentions of ‘the other’?’, a reinterpretation of a quote by Brené Brown.

A CONNECTED SOCIETY

Is this romantic picture of an involved and caring community a form of self-reliance. And therefore partly the result of the shrinking social protection in Italy? In that sense, we have to be cautious that our Flemish call for 'socialization of care', may not become a poisoned gift, hollowing out our social protection. Or is a less individualistic and more community minded mentality the cause? But Luc Goosens and Marlies Maes state, loneliness research doesn’t show significant differences between individualistic and collectivist countries. Moreover, they concluded, European research indicates more tolerant, inclusive, prosperous cultures with a just distribution of power and more righteousness, lower our sense of loneliness. Continuing on their conclusions, this could speak against the meritocratic myth, as in inequality. In the context of more righteousness, these findings could endorse a critical free press and a well functioning justice system, absent of corruption or power and class distinction. Undermining our sense of fairness and accountability. Still we can’t lose sight of our common humanity. Economist Paul De Grauwe, believes a just distribution of power, equals a just distribution of money. Referring to a tax on capital for the richest 5%, while safeguarding the remaining 95% of citizens. To much money, seems to lead to to much power, lobbying against our common interest, so costs. Keeping sustainable solutions in the closet, holding back innovation and an inclusive transition. All the books and research I have read, these last years, by experts in their field in sociology, anthropology, psychology, philosophy, biologie, economy, history, etc. basically conclude the same thing. Lean-economies, with their phantom growth, seem to race our natural and human recourses, to the bottom. So, eventually their own consumers too. They self-destruct, taking that top 5% along for the ride. In short: we all lose. While winning together, makes a lot more sense. Furthermore on an individual level: status, budget and poverty influences ones social life. In this way a less ‘tangible’ segregation, accessible housing, culture and a social-life would correlate with more connectedness. Leaning towards the Italian way of approaching culture, good food, coffee or apero-get-togethers as accessible. It also promotes the cooperative Swiss approach, in their ‘wohngenossenschaften’, offering affordable housing and a more anonymous form of social housing. By actually supplementing, already affordable unidentified units, with a ‘social rent subsidy’. Hence offering privacy to ones financial and social status, while avoiding segregation and stigmatization. In addition, some of these cooperations even create opportunities for ‘distribution of wealth’ between co-residents, through their rents. So one can anonymously support a struggling neighbor.

Don’t get me wrong, as seen in other contexts, corporations are not magically solving everything. Our Duch neighbors and Belgian farmers and those who had Arco shares, will confirm this. Good governance, integrity and a supportive legal and tax framework are still needed. And context matters too: in Switzerland, ones home is not an essential pension pillar. Pensions are higher, covering elderly care. In the current Belgian context, a ‘shares plus rent’ approach, instead of private ownership, would only shift the financial deficit over time, without actually solving some of the root causes. So as always, local context matters. But lets remember too; contexts like culture, are not set in stone either, they evolve when wise. What cooperate structures do provide, is a tool or framework stabilizing a runaway market, undermining gouvernement budgets. Because if we want to provide more on a budget, our ‘affordable housing’ budget and how we spend it, needs to become more circulair too. LRM, in my province applies similar tools, for their budgets.

However, apart from these general insights, something more seems to be going on in some of these Umbrian villages, particularly: group size and an organically grown fabric. 

THE HUMAN SEIZE & FABRIC OF CONNECTION

Which group or community size, transforms a neighborhood, cluster or district into a caring community, is food for sociologists and anthropologists. Though for enough carrying capacity and anonymity, in co-housing projects, it is assumed 15 people is a minimum. Evolutionary anthropologist, Dunbar, suggests in his research there’s a cognitive upper limit of people with whom humans can maintain a stable social relationship. Nowadays ‘Dundar’s number’ of 150 people, is widely used in psychology, statistics, even to develop social software. But according to anthropologist R.Carneiro, 100 people is an upper limit for ‘familiarity’. Possibly there's still a difference in 'distance' between involvement and familiarity, as well as cultural differences in ‘distance’. Collective housing models in Belgium, mostly have a lower limit of 15 and an upper ‘cluster’ limit of 30 units. Which is in line with Carneiros maximum of 100 people for familiarity. Although some Swiss ‘wohngenossenschaften’ go up to around 190 units or approximately 500 people. But when designing neighborhoods, districts or residential towers, should we apply the same limits? A livable or human limit, in which we're 'still able to’ engage, connect and support each other.

The organically grown fabric of some of these Umbrian villages is the purest form of 'social design'. The collective space is an invitation to meet 'by chance', for mutual support and neighbourly relations. And by interweaving different social classes, generations and functions, they don't create segregation but diversity within their common story, one of citizenship. In Belgium an aging population and healthcare crisis, does demand more informal care too, and a build-fabric that facilitates this. It is needless to ask if our Belgian standard apartments and detached developments are a sufficient solution. Quite the contrary, they even encourage disconnection and separation through avoidance of ‘differences’, by design. Normal human, individual differences, are not spoken of, shielded by a hedge while ‘keeping up appearances’. In her research on cohousing anthropologist, Ruth Soenen, concludes that regular detached developments reinforce avoidance of ‘differences’. In contrast to more collective typologies, she noted, where residents learn to deal with differences together, by a continuous dialogue and creative solutions. Psychologist, Lieven Migerode, seems to agree, ‘ignoring or a lack of dialogue’ towards individual ‘differences’, even in couples, are a clincher for connection. Is this space ‘in between’ our differences, when open and curious, the birthplace of creative problem solving? A common ground for curiosity, about ‘the other’? Just like the ‘in between’ buildings can be, in social design. According to Dr. Vivek Murthy, in his book ‘together’, a bare necessity for ‘dialogue’ about differences, is ‘relation’, something to relate to. Implying that a common belief, purpose or ‘inner why’ is needed. So dialogue apparently requires a shared narrative or incentive, despite our individual differences. Is this the same ‘inner why’, Simon Sinek states, distinguishes great leadership? Finding common ground, leading towards a common goal. Can these insights be ingredients for citizenship, for a WE, while moving towards a super-divers society? In traditional Japanese art and culture, this space ‘in between’ or open space, called MA, is equally important. Architects call this the ‘interesting in between’. For the Japanese, the space ‘in between’, holds possibilities and ‘hope’. Hope, to bridge over differences. This ‘in between’, psychologist, Lieven Migerode calls, ‘the pauze, after kneading, for the rising of the bread. Because understanding, each-other can only happen in dribs and drabs’. It’s not as fast as swipe left, swipe right or force feeding ducks with one narrative. That’s not a participatory democracy. Organic growth of our urban fabric, needs pauze, transparency and participation. Meaning: open ears and hearts, to let diverse and new ideas in. Like nature and culture, when wise, our urban fabric evolves by learning from good examples and past mistakes. Learning from history, by falling and rising. Creating ‘common ground’ is a gradual and participatory proces, a transition. But our much needed common space for rest, for play-full creativity, the ‘green in between’, is a scarcity these days. And drained lemons, don’t make lemonade.

‘Depth over distance every time, my dear. And this tree of ours may grow tall in the woods. It's the ROOTS that will bind us here, to the ground.’, wise words by Ben Howard in his song ‘Dept over distance’.

In ‘Housing, building-blocks for a habitology’, philosopher, Silvain De Bleeckere, reinterprets Bollnow’s three key elements for democratic coexistence. Three elements creating binding roots. First, belonging and security. Second, equal opportunity plus participatory citizenship. A heard voice. Here friction can arise, as it assumes dominant forces create room, share power, while moving from paternalisme to eco-emancipation. The third element is ‘feeling at home’. A ‘feeling’ Silvain De Bleeckere sees materialized in the ‘community-square’. In this centralized space his philosophy, Brené Browns social research and ART seem to merge. As in ‘feeling’ with the other, one creates the ‘connecting’ cement of WE. It’s materialized multi-sensory storytelling, through a shared language. Unraveling ‘the other’ as equally human. A space of seeing and understanding ‘each-other’. Where binary ‘sides’ collide, into WE. The connecting cement of shared emotions, like joy, grief and meaning. An infinite dialogue human-beings, tend to sublimate in our rituals, art and culture.

‘She never looked nice. She looked like ART, and art wasn’t supposed to look nice; it was supposed to make you FEEL something.’ Rainbow Rowell, Eleanor & Park.

So how does ‘human nature’ grow roots or attaches oneself to a place? Zooming-in a smaller scaled petri-dish, when looking at how people attach to a partner or ‘framily’ is by ‘being enabled to create a life together and being included into something real, a shared future. Meaning a shared story and mapping out the travel route together.’ Surprisingly while reading, urban planner, Ivan Nio’s research on VENIX neighborhoods, how WE attach to people and to places, is actually similar. Referring to anthropological research he moreover states ‘attachment only arises by creating individual and collective memories, by ones imbedding in local networks and daily routes, the neighborhood, having a heard voice in the design of common space.’ But how can this happen when our urban design keeps us segregated? Keeps us apart? When serendipity is prevented by context or design? And yes researches conclude that one feels best when surrounded by similar people. But who we are has more layers that lasagna, so there’s always some layer, experience and passion we share.

INCLUSIVE OR UNIVERSAL NEIGHBORHOODS BY DESIGN

On the other hand, well kept and lit public space, in an ‘urban-village’ with its social cohesion and its corresponding social engagement, in which we speak up for others, creates more gender-friendly neighborhoods. In her research and book, ‘The invisible women: data bias, in a world designed for men’, Caroline Criado Perez, concludes traditional zoning laws are sorely based on male lifestyles, travel patterns and biases. Referring to the purely ‘functional designed modern city’, ignoring half our population. Caroline Criado Perez also believes, ‘designs should account for violence against women’. Stating design needs to protect women and account for the way these risks are always on a female mind. I agree, women and LGBT’s do subconsciously plan safe routes, though our public space. Moreover social cohesion and it’s engagement feel OK, to the well-intended, while very irritable for those who are not. A similar ‘evening walk home’ in Brussels versus Zurich, can make any women ‘feel’ the difference gender-friendly design makes. Its experienced safety. A well kept and lit, walk ‘in between’ these ‘wohngenossenschaften’, with their social cohesion, human seize, generational- and social mix, feels OK and safe. But I’d like to add that 85% of this violence happens behind the facades of our buildings, by acquaintances. Inequality through a power imbalance, for e.g. by a pay-gap, even in our design sector, can push singles including their children into working poverty. Stay or go? What does ‘she decide’, when the ignored reality here, is a choice between the plague and cholera? I hate to brake it to you, but to actually ‘have’ a choice or autonomy of choice, one needs money to cover the basics and a voice not silenced by power. The latter happens in families, communities, workplaces, on virtual village squares and worst of all in our court rooms. All while amplifying the debilitating consequences and costs of this violence even more. If brave female victims of domestic or any other form of power abuse finally do speak up, these places seem to become institutionalized places of boundless victim abuse and blame. Proving the bias. While causing more harm, to the vitim and every future victim. Isn’t justice what love looks like in a society? And how long can we allow just and justice to be ‘two different’ things.

Martin Luther King said, ‘In the end, we will not remember the words (or deeds) of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.’ … Did he mean our neighborhoods, our communities and our society too?

In Umbria, villages elders and disabled are still active, full-fledged members of their community. Community and ‘family’ are important, including elders. Staying at a elderly-care-center is more rare in rural communities. Aging is not shielded from their communities. Qualities like inclusivity, engagement and mutual support in ‘framilies’, one also finds in well designed collective housing projects. Offering support as well as privacy. In Belgium privatized elderly care is currently being questioned. Reflections are ongoing about more human, smaller, decentralized or local care. Incorporated into communities. Besides, half of our elderly generation, prefers to stay at home for as long as possible. To quote Wim Dries, the mayor of Genk, on collective housing: ‘As a designer, if you don’t want to live in it yourself, return to the drawing-board.’ I guess he gets Nassim Taleb’s ‘skin in the game’. Besides, human wellbeing requires autonomy, mastery and purpose at any age. Their wisdom or master in ‘the school of life’, still has added value in our communities. And there’s no excuse, to deny ones basic human rights. So are there other ways to approach this? Can we mix elements of the Swiss and Italian approach, with ‘female travel patterns’? And while we’re at it, add some democratic, Swedish ‘Tubbe’-participation into the recipe? Integrate all four ingredients into collective housing? This could look like small-scaled, elderly-living-groups, even clustered two bed- and bathroom apartments, in collective housing projects, are an option. This last typology would still enable elderly-friends- or sister-living. Besides, an universally designed and mixed-generational approach is also mindful of ‘female travel patterns’. Whilst bridging the technology generation gap. Preserving a participatory, Tubbe-modeled, connection to a local care-center, can still be preferable. Because remote healthcare technology creates the opportunity to connect those with a care-need, to a (day) care-center, home-care and other local entrepreneurs and services. Could this create financial room for better equipped clinical-centers, refocusing on complex care-needs and a trained medical staff? In addition, this approach reduces the financial risks of a future over-supply of service-flats. Plus two bedroom apartments have and maintain better market value. And since precisely these living-typologies, with spacious private terraces and shared gardens, also appeal to young-families and -professionals, it’s an adaptive- and circular design approach, moving along with, the evolving ‘circle of life’ in our communities. So I guess the actual question here is, can we offer them inclusion, purpose and autonomy of choice?

SHORT SUPPLY CHAINS & LOCAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP

The surrounding Umbrian landscape of these villages, is made up of nature and its farming-garden. Farmers sell their produce at local farmers markets, village shops and restaurants. In places where the community meets. No flown in beans or pineapples, but an unbroken tie between farmer and plate. One can recognize an analogy to community supported agriculture, farm shops, food forests, alternative food networks, bio land funds and urban farming. Like in urban aquaponic urban farming. Ideas and innovations where proximity, fair payment emerge. Solutions where human and planetary health collide.

These short supply chains and the presence of local entrepreneurs and makers nourishes the liveliness and connection on Umbrian village squares and in their communities.    

On top of the climate impact, our fragmented, long supply chains or 'modern' consumption behavior impacts our centres. Centralized production, big shopping malls and online-shopping have disruptive consequences: shop vacancies. And in lifeless streets, one does not meet, there's less social engagement and no WE. Affecting the social cohesion of our communities. And without the lively nourishment, by locale entrepreneurs on our streets and squares, the beating heart of our villages and towns stops. In this the local consumers behavior plays a major role too. Because before a village shop disappears, they’ve stoped buying there. So despite of big global chains and the digital platform monopoly, the need of neighborhoods and people for a close social fabric, for connection has not changed. And companies like Amazon, ‘greening’ their delivery fleet, will not change that. Observing these effects on whole systems, conscious of all pieces of it, one wonders: is this desirable? Or should we set some healthy boundaries for our local and European markets?

‘The global only exists, by the generosity of the local.’, Koen van Mechelen.

SILENCE, GENTRIFICATION & TOURISM  

A frequent problem in rural Italy is depopulation. But here silence seekers and ‘city quitters’ from big cities like New York, Londen and even Antwerp buy vacant buildings in and around some of these Umbrian villages. A full year of city-craziness, became to much for them. The beauty and authenticity of some of these villages and their cultural events, protected them against depopulation and falling property prices, while reviving socially, culturally and economically. But the outside interest also increased property prices for locals. For local authorities it is a permanent search for a fragile balance between locals, the individuality of the village and the much needed economic input. But like Ilja Leonard Pfeijffer summarized it beautifully: ‘the one thing that attracts tourism in the first place, authenticity, can also destroy it.’ Like we see in Venice and Cinque Terre, becoming outdoor museums with performers. So a primary focus on tourisme, tourist shops and touristic entrepreneurship may not be the best option for our communities, villages and cities. Because a surpassed strength, can also become a trap. Like in nature, diversity creates healthy eco-systems.

With these city quitters, the rise of 'eco-realistic' mega cities and our -‘always on’ - tech society, one can wonder if space, privacy and tranquility will become a 'rare good' for the happy-few. German research, by Meyer-Lindenberg, has shown that 'urban-brains' have an over-active amygdala, our danger sensor, which is linked to emotion controle, anxiety and depression. Over-stimuli, noise, lack of personal space and privacy can be deadening and cause irritability. Consequences that are rarely a catalyst for connection, let alone mutual support. With the demographic transition in mind, is this motto 'let's all go urban' desirable and human? When urban-brains and bodies tell another story? Or do we need to think differently about the design of cities, districts and buildings, so they carry more characteristics of a village community? Offering a greener, healthy environment, familiarity and a human size. 

References: Research by VITO on ‘urban sprawl’ - “Architettura povera, the art of the ordinary”, Alfredo De Gregorio, architect. - Fondazione Burri, Alberto Burri, painter. - “The environmental design pocketbook” on sustainable design by Sofie Pelsmakers, architect. - All books and podcasts by Brené Brown, social studies, to develop a deeper understanding on connection and loneliness. - ‘Housing, building-blocks for a habitology’, Sylvain De Bleeckere and Danny Windmolders, philosopher and architect. - ‘The invisible women: data bias, in a world designed for men’, Caroline Criado Perez or read this Dezeen article - Helmut Bott in ‘Sustainable urban planning’ edition DETAIL 2019 - ‘Housing apart together’, 2019, Genk, exhibition by ‘architectuurwijzer’ and the lecture by Ruth Soenen, anthropologist. - LaBiomista, Koen Van Mechelen, Artist. - Z33, Hasselt, Architecture by Francesca Torzo, exhibition, ‘The work of Time’. - ARTEFACT Leuven, 2020 ‘Alone together’, by Luc Goosens and Marlies Maes, both developmental psychologists in their lecture : “Alone together: about loneliness and being alone, lessons for 21 first century”. - “Sorry we missed you” Touching movie directed by Ken Loach, denouncing the systemic social consequences of our ‘LEAN’ economy and fast consumption behavior. What a sole focus on ‘flexibility and efficiency’ without humanity costs a family, costs two children. - “A beautiful day in the neighborhood“ - Heartwarming movie directed by Marielle Heller with Tom Hanks - VPRO documentary series, ‘the future is fantastic’, a mixture of science plus satire - Fieldwork, observations and empirical research on ‘Human seize & connection’ in Umbria, Italy 2016-2018 & Cera coop Study trip to Zurich, Switzerland, 2019 by Imca Paesen, architect.

With special thanks to an extraordinary community, a village in Umbria, to my local friends, for their very warm welcome. For Graciella, Mauricio and PJ, for being my safe haven, while exploring Umbria and a little of Tuscany ‘SOLO’.

Note: This research is currently being updated, due to additional data, that needed more research. This small part, or draft, of a bigger scope was written before the pandemic. Sometimes you’d rather be wrong, but you’re not … this is sometimes. Like for so many of you out there, lots of loved ones, globally, died others are still at risk for covid, heart breaking times.