Civic design: towards a relational ontology in connecting the logics of community initiative and the logics of public institutions

This paper builds on insights from a conversation held at DRS2024 in Boston (De Kreek et al.), where we explored the challenges posed by the contrasting logics between grassroots civic initiatives and institutional approaches. Civic initiatives typically rely on community-driven, human-centered design strategies, but they often encounter difficulties in sustaining their efforts and scaling their impact when interfacing with institutional structures that operate with more hierarchical, policy-driven approaches (DiSalvo, 2022; Dixon, 2020; Manzini, 2015). In this context, we explore how a civic design approach can enhance the sustainability and significance of local initiatives within these institutional frameworks, using empirical insights from case studies in Rathlin Island, Amsterdam Nieuw West, and Eindhoven.

Our analysis focuses on four critical areas of inquiry that emerged from the Boston conversation: 1) listening to citizens, 2) fostering collaborative relationships, 3) ensuring continuity through funding, and 4) scaling or spreading local civic initiatives. Each case study offers distinct lessons in addressing these areas.

For example, the Rathlin Island case illustrates how grassroots community initiatives can effectively cultivate the fostering of collaborative relationships with governmental institutions ultimately leading to a sense of shared ownership and more effective and scalable opportunity development. Similarly, the Amsterdam Nieuw West and Eindhoven cases provide insights into how effective partnerships between civic initiatives and governmental or academic institutions can enable scalable solutions that integrate community input while benefiting from institutional resources and legitimacy.

Through these examples, we propose ways of working that seek to integrate a relational ontology—one that emphasizes the interconnectedness of citizens, their communities, and their environments, which is central to civic initiatives—into the more structured, policy-driven approaches characteristic of public institutions. This integration fosters mutual learning and collaboration, allowing civic initiatives to leverage institutional resources without losing their community-driven nature, while also encouraging institutions to adopt more flexible, human-centered approaches (cf. Huybrechts et al., 2017).

Ultimately, this paper contributes to the broader discourse on how design can evolve within public administration. By highlighting the potential for civic design to bridge the gap between community and institution, we offer actionable insights for fostering more integrated and sustainable forms of civic and institutional collaboration. This work aims to contribute to the future of civic design and its role in shaping governance models that are both innovative and inclusive.

DiSalvo, C. (2022). Design as democratic inquiry - putting experimental civics into practice. The MIT Press.
De Kreek, M., van de Mosselaer, F., Newell, K., de Waal, M., Gordon, E., Vlachokyriakos, V.,
Hamm, A., Ferri, G., Jaskiewicz, T., Smeenk, W., Choi, J. (2024). What is Next for Civic Design?. Conversation presentation. DRS2024, Boston.
Dixon, B. (2020). From making things public to the design of creative democracy: Dewey’s democratic vision and participatory design. CoDesign, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1555260
Huybrechts, L., Benesch, H., & Geib, J. (2017). Institutioning: Participatory Design, Co-Design and the public realm. CoDesign, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2017.1355006
Manzini, E. (2015). Design, When Everybody Designs. An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation. In Design, When Everybody Designs. MIT Press.