Christine Prefontaine

TASCHA Talk: Maria Garrido

This TASCHA Talk, in conjunction with the iSchool Research Conversation series, examines the different uses of information and communication technology (ICT) tools in the trajectory and evolution of the April 6th Youth Movement in Egypt. The April 6^th Youth Movement emerged from a Facebook page created by two activists and bloggers (Ahmed Maher and Israa Abdel Fattah) to support the workers strikes in Mahalla in April 2008. It evolved into a broad social movement, providing a powerful narrative for social struggle as well as innovative strategies for collective action and mobilization, garnering a broad level of support that crystallized around the January 2011 protests. In making this historical event happen, Egyptian youth utilized old and new media, online spaces and offline street presence. These different tools became effective conduits for organizing, documenting, and communicating their Revolution, either nationally to fellow citizens or worldwide to a global audience. The researchers will discuss some of the factors that empowered the April 6th Youth Movement to mobilize and to make the leap from a Facebook page to a grassroots movements and the elements that shaped their use of technologies, and how did technologies influence their choice and strategies.

About the presenter

Maria Garrido is a Research Assistant Professor at the Technology & Social Change Group’s Information School. Her research explores how people in communities facing social and economic challenges use information and communication technologies to promote social and economic development and advance social change. Much of her work focuses on technology appropriation in the context of social movements and in international migration.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

TASCHA Talk: Chris Coward and Michelle Fellows

February 2, from 3:45 to 4:45 pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room
Or via Adobe Connect

Public libraries play vastly different roles in providing Internet access and information services around the world. In some countries they are active players and have adopted new technologies to help people meet their information needs. In other countries, libraries are routinely overlooked when new information access initiatives are deployed. TASCHA’s new perceptions of libraries as development partners study aims to understand the opportunities and challenges for libraries to become more prominent actors in ICT and development initiatives. The research involves stakeholder interviews with library leaders, ministry officials with library oversight, ministry officials with ICT and/or digital inclusion oversight, representatives of national public access initiatives, and representatives of international development organizations. The sample is comprised of 12 countries at differing levels of development and public library penetration. In this talk, Chris and Michelle shared the research design and results of the first set of interviews.

About the presenters

Chris is co-founder, Principal Research Scientist, and Director of the Technology & Social Change Group.  Chris specializes in designing research programs that improve policy and practice. His work focuses on examining the social and economic impacts of information and communication technologies (ICTs), with particular attention to the role of libraries and nonprofit organizations in developing countries.

Michelle is a Research Analyst at TASCHA. She holds degrees in Public Administration (MPA) and Library and Information Science (MLIS) from the University of Washington and Geography (BA) from the University of California, Berkeley.

You may view the presentation here.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

TASCHA TALK: Samantha Becker & Rebecca Sears

Date December 1,  from 3:45 to 4:45pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

Rebecca Sears discussed TASCHA’s new project to develop a framework for digitally inclusive communities. In cooperation with the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and as part of the U.S. National Broadband Plan, this framework will provide communities with a resource for assessing and building the capacity of public libraries and community-based organizations to meet the public’s information needs. In this talk, Rebecca discussed the process and substance of the project, including:

• Who is involved and how is the project engaging a broad range of stakeholders to shape the framework?
• What are examples of different types of frameworks, and how did the project determine an appropriate structure for the digital inclusion framework?
• What are some of the contents of the framework and why are they important?

You may download this video as an iPhone-friendly mp4, or as a radio-quality mp3.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

TASCHA TALK: Cortney Leach

November 17, 2011, from 3:45 to 4:45 pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

Conducted in 2009, the U.S. IMPACT Study provided evidence that use of public access technology services offered at U.S. public libraries has a profound and measurable impact on individuals and communities. The IMPACT Survey project aims to extend the benefits of the study by making its patron web survey component available for all public libraries to use in their local data collection, evaluation, and advocacy efforts. This TASCHA Talk reported on the frameworks underpinning the web survey project, provided a progress update, and discussed design challenges and lessons learned.

About the presenter

Cortney is a research analyst with the U.S. IMPACT Study Research Group and holds a Masters of Public Administration and Masters of Library and Information Science from the University of Washington. Her research interests include design thinking, program evaluation, public access technology policy, library capacity-building and partnership models.

You may download this video as an iPhone-friendly mp4, or as a radio-quality mp3.

You can also view the presentation slides

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

TASCHA TALK: Araba Sey and Chris Rothschild

October 27, 2011, from 3:45 to 4:45 pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

The Global Impact Study surveys were designed to collect comparable data on uses and outcomes of public access ICT use in five countries on three continents. Araba and Chris reflected on a range of research design and project management issues encountered during various stages of the survey project.

About the presenters

Araba is the research lead for TASCHA’s Global Impact Study. She is interested in the social and economic implications of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in developing countries. Araba holds a PhD in Communication.

Chris is a Research Analyst working on the Global Impact Study. His research focus is on the impact of information access users and non-users of technology venues. Chris holds Master’s degrees in  Public Administration and International Studies.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

TASCHA TALK: Joe Sullivan

November 3, 2011, from 3:45 to 4:45 pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

In September 2011, members of TASCHA, Mozilla, Aspiration Technology, and the East West Management Institute convened “Open Cambodia 2011″–an un-conference to mobilize makers/doers in Cambodia. The event brought together more than 100 open-source technologists, human rights activists, and civil society representatives to share their work and experiences. This TASCHA talk will reporedt on projects and issues that were featured at the conference and the latest development in nonprofits, libraries, and development in Cambodia.

About the presenter

Joe’s research interests include visual communication, evidence, design thinking, and evaluation, especially in community technology settings. He has explored themes of employability, youth, social development, philanthropy, organizational development, and design. Joe is completing a Masters degree in Human Centered Design and Engineering and holds a Masters of Public Administration degree from the University of Washington.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

This Friday join Ricardo Gomez, Fernando Baron, and Brittany Fiore-Sifvast for a coding pizza party.  Help code a slew research papers on information and communication technologies for development, as part of an ongoing iSchool study — ICTD Narratives Study, 2000-2010 — that explores a decade of ICTD discourse. Results may be presented at the ICTD2012 conference next in Atlanta.

In exchange for your time and insight we will offer eternal glory, hands on participation in research, and yummy precursor to Friday’s happy hour. If you’re interested, please send Ricardo an email (otherwise the people-pizza ratio may be suboptimal!).

April 29, 3:30-5:30 pm
COM 302 computer

You can review our research instrument. Research questions include:

• What are the notions of development and of the relationship between ICT and society in the dominant ICTD literature?
• How have they changed over the past decade?
• What is the nature of the contribution to the field of ICTD research?
• What are the preferred epistemology, ontology, & research methods?

Three threads to explore:

• Analysis of narratives in the academic literature
• Milestones in the ICTD timeline (1995-2010)
• Key documents in industry, donor, and international organizations (if possible)

Corpus:

• 2000-2010 issues of ITID, ITD, EJISDC, IJICTHD, JOCI journals, as well as ICTD conferences
• ID, IT&P, IFIP 9.4 (if possible)

Journals

ICTD Conferences

2010 London
2009 Doha
2007 Bangalore
2006 Berkeley
IFIP 9.4 Computers & Society

TASCHA Talk: Chris Coward and Melody Clark

April 28,  2011, from 3:30 to 4:30pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

Telecenters have long been one of the most prominent examples of ICT4D activity. Since their appearance in the mid-80s in Europe and North America, they have spread around the world, largely spurred by the interest to harness digital ICTs for development. With funding from national and local governments to foundations and social investors, the aim of the telecenter movement has been to bring underserved populations into the information society through computer and internet access, along with training and other services. To support this movement, IDRC launched telecentre.org at the World Summit for the Information Society (WSIS) in Tunis, 2005. After five years of incubation in IDRC, during which the second forum was held in Malaysia in 2007 at the GK3 summit, telecentre.org was spun out as an independent foundation in the Philippines. On 5-7 April, 2011 the 3^rd Global Forum on Telecentres was held in Santiago, Chile.

In this TASCHA Talk, Chris Coward and Melody Clark will reflect on their experiences at the Santiago Forum. You will hear two different perspectives. Chris attended the first two forums and has been a longtime follower of telecenters through his research. Melody comes from the library field and for her this was her first encounter with the telecenter community.  The “talk” will begin with opening thoughts from Chris and Melody, to be followed by discussion. Some of the questions we faced in Santiago and will bring to the session are: What has been the evolution of the telecenter movement, and where is it headed? What has been the position of libraries within this movement? What should it be moving forward? What are the implications of the gulf between practitioner and academic commentary on the impact of telecenters and other public access venues? How can TASCHA research contribute to this community?

About Chris and Melody

Chris is co-founder, Principal Research Scientist, and Director of the Technology & Social Change Group.  Chris specializes in designing research programs that improve policy and practice. His work focuses on examining the social and economic impacts of information and communication technologies (ICTs), with particular attention to the role of libraries and nonprofit organizations in developing countries.

Melody is the Research Coordinator for TASCHA’s Global Impact Study. Recently she worked as a research assistant for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Global Libraries Initiative. Melody’s areas of interest include impact measurement, sustainability, ICTs in public libraries, and program evaluation.

TASCHA Talk: George Sciadas

April 21,  2011, from 3:30 to 4:30pm
Roosevelt Commons Building, fourth floor multi-purpose room

This presentation will be a guided tour in the area of information society statistics and analysis.  George will describe, synoptically, the evolution of quantitative research in ICTs from the early days and the preoccupation with access through major milestones such as the digital divide, e-commerce and the ICT sector, to its present state of affairs internationally. This domain provides the common ground for multi-disciplinary research including the quest for “impacts.”  The presentation will also link to TASCHA’s Global Impact Study. The exposition will rely on George’s own involvement and experiences.  Stops for close-ups will be offered on request.

About George

George Sciadas, Statistics Canada, is interested in all matters related to the Information Society. He collaborates with United Nations bodies, development agencies, national statistical offices, NGOs, and numerous researchers globally. George plays a leading role in the Global Impact Study as a member of the Research Working Group and chair of the Survey team. George holds a Ph.D. in Economics from McGill University.

You may download this video as an iPhone-friendly mp4, or as a radio-quality mp3.

You can also view the presentation slides.

TASCHA Talks are bi-weekly sessions to share, discuss, and advance new ideas around topics related to technology and social change. Learn more at tascha.uw.edu/taschatalks.

Notes from the 2011 Libre Graphics Meeting in Montreal…

How to keep and make productive libre graphics projects?

We need many types of people:

• programmers
• designers
• UX experts
• project managers
• journalists
• technical writers
• event organizers
• etc.

Need to better communicate that these skills are needed and show folks how they can get involved. Instead, main sites (Gimp, Scribus, InkScape) focus on downloading and documentation, and a few links. On Gimp they do a bit better with the get involved.
Also after folks download there is an opportunity to connect with them that we don’t use.

Enthusiasm is important! It is a resource.

Practical examples…

• Fedora set a goal: One new contributor every three monthsTactic: Bi-Weekly Bounty with a prize, competing for inclusion (access to subversion)“Fedora Design Bounty Ninja #3”
• Another tactic: “Build it” eventPremise: There are folks who want to get involved but don’t know how. Ran it for Vidalia and Gimp, advertised through Twitter and blogs. Make contributing more fun.
• Talk: “Debian for shy people” = Making contributing suck less. Used a mentors list. People upload patches but 10% of emails are unanswered. If mentors put in more time reviewing packages that would help. So set goal to reply to all emails within four days. Even if just to say sorry no-one has been able to review your package. Respect contributors. So then more folks starting stepping up and percentage of unanswered emails went down.
• PiTiVi: There are a lot of bugs… huge list. New contributors may have difficulty prioritizing. So wrote a wiki page highlighting low-hanging fruit. Indicate level of difficulty. Needs to be managed by hand. Makes it easier to get new contributors involved.
• Gimp… Use this page to direct new folks who are interested in contributing: gegl.org/contribute.html

Discussion snippets…

• Nurture your own enthusiasm for outreach. Don’t put a lot into caring when others are not.
• Never talk about how much you hate doing _______________. Say nothing rather than mean things. Some folks on your list may actually like doing these things.
• Sometimes better to reach out to smaller groups, one to ten people.
• Find a not-intimidating way to show people what it is like to be a contributor.
• One idea may be to copy-paste relevant parts of a wiki or FAQ page instead of just sending folks to this page. More personal touch. Then can send to the whole page.
• Bart Kelsey: Let folks make friends, hang out, get involved. If you are too task-oriented at first you may scare folks away. Let them care about the project first. (opengameart.org)
• This is what “Built it” events are supposed to do. To show what life is like as a contributor.
• Run events with concrete time periods. Make them fun and not intimidating.
• You could create a style book on how to respond to folks. Example: Use the person’s name because right away recognize as an individual. Wiki has helped us a lot. Then you can through the volume at them. Good for complex questions. Ask after if it was useful. Phrase responses in a way that are welcoming. Remember to be people-friendly.
• Ask what works and what doesn’t in documentation. That is really important.
• IRC channel or mailing list. When folks come in and ask a question the first answer is ‘read the FAQ’ — can be okay… but think about why you’re answering that way.  Be friendly. If it is two sentences then just answer directly.
• Issue for FAQ is that understanding of English varies a lot. We ask folks if they’ve understood.
• Being welcoming and inclusive. Issue with getting women involved. Sometimes unintentional. Cultural. Folks don’t realize how they come across. Resource for reaching out to women: adainitiative.org.
• See community anti-patterns video for fail stories
• Also found similar issues with shy men | south asians | insert other group here…
• Debian does specific outreach. Lots of diversity sources in free and open software. Bigger issue is exclusion in general.
• Scribus: Women users. But on the programming side only one woman.
• Hard to get non-hackers up to speed on your project quickly.
• Suggested strategy: When you are on an IRC channel the person assumes you don’t care about them. So what can you do to show them that you care about them? We have to do things and take actions that show folks that we care.

OpenHatch created a set of cool training missions to teach folks how to contribute to opensource software projects. Looks awesome — can’t wait to try it out!

Tom Lechner provided impressive updates on improvements in Laidout — a Linux-based desktop publishing software, particularly for creating multipage, cut-and-folded booklets — from the last 12 months, such as onscreen imposition folding, integration of the polyhedron unwrapper, and multi-mouse/multitouch capabilities. Sorry I could not blog much on this… too busy looking at the super-cool onscreen demo! I hope there is a video somewhere.

Oh yes there is. Here is the a video on imposition folding. Wow.

Liveblogging from the Libre Graphics 2011 meeting in Montreal… The joys and challenges and processes used to create Libre Graphics Magazine — which is made with all F/LOSS software! Yeah.

ginger coons

Produced using all libre software. Show what can be produced with open software. Print several hundred to a few thousand conferences four times a year. Distribute at conferences, to students, and sell to cover costs. Issue 1.1 was released in November 2010. Issue zero was produced in May 2010 — in three days!

The magazine serves

• Designers and artists who are ‘like us’ — to connect them
• The F/LOSS-curious designers and artists, to raise awareness
• Software developers (and folks who establish standards and processes) to show them what folks do with their work

Feels like a design magazine. Not a tutorial or showcase or how-to magazine, addressees discourse and design issues. Shows off excellent work. High design values. Collaborative and iterative. Important step in showing how to produce print with a F/LOSS workflow.

All-proprietary tools, in long view, are a blip on the radar.

Have an ISSN, on worldcat.

Wins

• Featured on Boing Boing
• Supported by larger Linux and hacky geeky community

Challenges

• Funding (supported with advertising, subscriptions, donations)
• Getting contributions
• Sticking to production schedules (like any publication!)
• Being taken seriously

See video of ginger giving a similar talk at FOSDEM.

Ana Carvalho

Design choices and workflow.

Inspired by Emigre, Eye. Also looked at Linux Magazine.

Layout guided by Bringhurst’s The Elements of Typographic Style. Use a six-column grid with eight rows. Careful about details.

Workflow: Took from software development version control so that could collaborate with distributed team and have a central repository. No separate versions all over the place. Transparent. Use Sparkleshare with Gitorious to share files (over 3BG and works great so far). Can see comments from ginger, the editor. Creates a nice timeline that others can see. Look into how decisions are made. Nice!

14-year old Python hacker in Porto’s hackspace shared a script to render images from type.

Ricardo Lafuente

Manufactura Independente design studio. Getting used to libre methodologies. Four years now have been only using F/LOSS software.

We wanted our own typeface. Not much time to design from scratch. Took something that existed — NotCourier Sans, by OSP — and hacked it a bit with FontForge. A monospace font and updated the spacing to make it proportional. Call it PropCourier Sans. Improve the font with every issue so it evolves gradually (kerning, spacing, punctuation, etc.). Example: Used a python script to import spacing from another font that had already figured out the fine details.

Liveblogging from the Libre Graphics 2011 meeting in Montreal! Christopher Adams presentation.

Google web fonts — Good place to learn about type on the web. Get a demo via font previewer. Creates code to embed into style sheets.

Traditionally type design very collaborative. Then got more individual. Now going back to more collaborative. Uses launchpad as bug tracker. We can file bugs (e.g. Nate ____, News Cycle).

Open Baskerville. Use github to manage and collaborate. Can view font source code. Can watch modifications in real time. Can fork the font if we want. This was not possible before: make a copy, modify. Check out license to see what is okay. Opening up and demystifying process of creating a font.

OSP Foundry. Some cool fonts. They are also running a git server where you can pull latest files. Get access to source code.

How can we help this movement?

Fabricatorz project: Open Clip Art Library. Idea of doing this for fonts.

Now re-launching….. the OPEN FONT LIBRARY. Yippeeeeee! Version 0.2

You can:

• Load font files
• See language availability/support
• Identify ways to contribute or provide feedback
• Search by license
• Take each font for a test drive
• Check out the wiki (need volunteers to edit content and move it to the guidebook)
• Submit bugs via Launchpad
• Will show version history (inspired by github)

All fonts are available under a free license (SIL Open Font, GNU, CC0), which are embedded in the metadata.

Want to get people to upload and use fonts, join community, get on mailing list, provide feedback.

This week I’m attending the sixth annual LGM — Libre Graphics Meeting — in Montreal. LGM gives software developers, artists, designers, and other graphics professionals the opportunity to collaborate and learn from each other. The meeting emphasizes the collaboration, innovation, and ideas— and it’s FREE to attend. Yippppee!

Libre graphics software — like GIMP, Inkscape, Scribus, the Open Clipart Library, and the Open Font Library — are important to Artefatica as a open publishing project. We want to make open books with open tools. More broadly, I find it exciting to think of a set of tools for self-expression and self-publishing that are available for anyone, anywhere.

You can support LGM and keep the conference free by donating via Pledgie.

The theme is open culture. We are going to talk open education, open web, web standards, licensing and the change that occurred on the internet, open publishing, open culture, remixing, video, DJing, and food. Here’s the lineup:

The point? To raise awareness about Creative Commons, especially among content creators — writers, artists, musicians, photographers, you name it. And to lay the foundation for ongoing, semi-annual events. Keep the party going :)

Thanks to our event sponsors:

On Saturday, November 13th (details), Emily Rose Michaud and Owen McSwiney are presenting the Roerich Garden Project at the DIY Citizenship conference in at the University of Toronto. Leslie Reagan Shade is moderating the panel, called Making Space. They’ll also have a spot in the Hack Space. How cool is that?

This was the first time I ever submitted anything to an academic conference (see PDF of call for papers), so I was thrilled that we were selected. Here’s what caught my eye:

A renewed emphasis on participatory forms of digitally-mediated production is transforming our social landscape. ‘Making’ has become the dominant metaphor for a variety of digital and digitally-mediated practices. The web is exploding with independently produced digital ‘content’ such as video diaries, conversations, stories, software, music, video games — all of which are further transformed and morphed by “modders,” “hackers,” artists, and activists… Many of these individuals and collaborators understand their work to be socially interventionist. Through practices of design, development, and exchange they challenge traditional divides between production and consumption and to redress the power differentials built into technologically-mediated societies.

You can download all of the abstracts. Here’s ours. So little, yet so much sweat in here:

The Roerich Garden Project, a collaborative landscape-scale artwork instigated by artist Emily Rose Michaud, was created in 2007 to provoke dialogue about the future of lot #2334609 — known locally as the Maguire Meadow or simply le champ — one of the last undeveloped spaces in Montreal’s Mile End. The project also documents community uses of the meadow and explores concepts of public space, citizen participation, and the open city.

The Roerich symbol was originally used during World War II to protect buildings of historic, scientific, or cultural significance from aerial bombing. The garden in lot #2334609 is a 312-square foot living Roerich symbol made up of plants, rocks, and mulch, and maintained year-round over a period of three years by Sprout Out Loud! — a gardener’s ensemble borne from the project — with the help of neighbors and friends.

The project’s efforts sparked change: Citizens gathered, defined their priorities and dreams, and the city’s $9-million “development” plan is now under closer community scrutiny. A new nonprofit, Les Amis du Champ des Possibles (Friends of the Field of Possibilities), has been created to preserve the field and to raise awareness about the cultural, ecological, and social importance of wild urban spaces.

The Roerich Garden Project and the activities surrounding it are documented online at roerichproject.artefati.ca through a growing collection of more than 40 texts and 500 images, all distributed under a Creative Commons license. A book will soon follow, and subsequent editions will incorporate shifting community stories and perspectives. Visit roerichproject. artefati.ca to explore and learn more.

You can see all of the images we’ve gathered so far on Flickr. And the book is coming along, slowwwwwllly (we all, after all, have dayjobs!). Our tenacity is paying off. The first layouts are really beautiful. I was touched. One of those examples of where people together can create something beyond what we can do alone.

Laurence emailed me a few weeks ago to let me know that Arefatica is featured in the Fall 2009 issue of Maisonneuve. I knew it was going to be published, but had forgotten all about it. It’s a nice piece. Wish I could edit it a bit just to adjust the way I said some stuff and to add what I’ve figured out since Sarah and I spoke. But, well, so be it. Sarah was already a champ — letting me see the piece before it went to print. It starts off like this…

Having spent years working in communications for international development projects, Christine Prefontaine had long suspected that there was more to be gained than lost from sharing ideas, or even from having them stolen. Not only did sharing seem to solve problems more quickly, but it also raised the profile of the idea’s originator. And it wasn’t ideas that ensured success, she reasoned, but the ability to come up with them — something nobody could steal.

Kinda like how it connects my work work with Artefatica, my just-for-love project. Nice to get feedback and attention!

Français

Artefatica is coming along. Sooooo slowly. The draft of the website for our first book —  Terrain Vague, Citizen Engagement & the Open City: The Roerich Garden Project — is up! Check it out, send some feedback, add your story or your vision. We’ve started a Flickr collection to pull together photos for the book, and imagine (le) mile-end has created a group.

If you’d like to contribute to the preservation of the garden as a wild space Emily posts community updates on her blog. And imagine (le) mile-end has been doing lots of great organizing. Here’s their report from their June 2009 meeting. You can find more on the Champ des Possibles (Field of Possibilities) website.

From the introduction:

Lot #2334609 is a terrain vague — owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway, owned by the City of Montreal as of June 2009, used and cherished by the community, the only green space in the Mile End. People feel free in this space. They don’t ask for permission to picnic, grow things, create art, or gather around a campfire. It’s open and wild, unlike most city parks.

To outsiders, it may look like an abandoned field. But, as you will read here, the community has appropriated this space and wants a say in how it will be developed. Development is scheduled for 2009-2010, as part of the city’s $9-million revitalization of the neighborhood.

Emily Rose Michaud, through the Sprout Out Loud! gardener’s collective, created the Roerich Garden project in November 2007. Using this project as a starting point, this book provides a history of the meadow and documents the many ways the community uses and relates to this space. It then connects what’s happening in the Mile End to similar local, national, and international initiatives. It documents what the community wants for this space, as captured through a series of participatory consultations. And it asks questions about how we engage as citizens to imagine and create more open cities.

If you’d like to get (infrequent) updates about this project and the book you can sign up.

——-

Terrain vague, engagement citoyen & ville ouverte: le projet du jardin Roerich

Artefatica est en route. Lentement mais sûrement! Le site web pour notre premier livre est maintenant en ligne: Terrain Vague, Citizen Engagement & the Open City: The Roerich Garden Project. Allez le visiter, ajoutez-y vos impressions, votre histoire, votre vision… Nous avons débuté une collection sur Flickr, afin de mettre toutes ensemble les photos pour le livre. imagine (le) mile-end y a aussi créé un groupe.

Si vous vous sentez appelé à participer à la préservation du jardin en tant qu’espace sauvage, suivez les mises à jour sur le blog d’Émily. imagine (le) mile-end s’occupe aussi de l’organisation: Vous pouvez vous rendre sur leur site où vous trouverez le rapport provenant de la rencontre du 29 juin dernier, ainsi que sur le site du Champ des Possibles.

Tiré de l’introduction:

Le Lot #2334609 est un terrain vague qui appartient à la Ville de Montréal depuis Juin 2009 (il appartenait anciennement au Canadien Pacifique), utilisé et chéri par la communauté du Mile-End puisqu’il est le seul espace vert du quartier. Les gens s’y sentent libres. Ils n’ont pas à demander la permission pour y pic-niquer, y faire pousser des trucs, s’y laisser inspirer pour créer des œuvres d’art ou pour s’y réunir autour d’un feu. C’est un espace ouvert et sauvage, contrairement aux autres parcs montréalais.

Pour les étrangers au champs, ce dernier peut ressembler à un terrain abandonné. Cependant, comme vous le découvrirez ici, la communauté s’est approprié cet espace et exige un droit de parole quant à son futur développement, inclus dans le plan 2009-2010 de la Ville pour la revitalisation du quartier (Budget: 9 millions).

À travers le collectif de jardiniers Le pouvoir aux Pousses, Emily Rose Michaud créa le projet du jardin Roerich en novembre 2007. Utilisant ce projet comme point de départ, ce livre relate l’historique du champs et documente les nombreuses façons avec lesquelles la communauté occupe cet espace et interagit avec cet espace. Il y par la suite connexion avec d’autres initiatives similaires à différentes échelles, qu’elle soit locale, nationale ou même internationale. Ce livre documente les aspirations de la communauté face à au champs, captées à travers une série de consultations participatives. Il pose aussi la question à savoir comment nous nous engageons en tant que citoyens pour imaginer et créer des villes plus ouvertes.

Pour recevoir des mises à jours (rares) sur le projet et sur le livre, vous pouvez vous inscrire ici.

Qu’est-ce un terrain vague? De quel point de vue le regardez-vous? Êtes-vous un promeneur et appréciez-vous un espace peu fréquenté? Êtes-vous urbaniste, artiste, historien, spéculateur foncier? Et si vous êtes naturaliste?

Un terrain vague peut être un rien, un vide, une dent creuse dans le tissu urbain, un champ d’exercice pour votre chien ou un endroit maudit, dangereux à traverser. Vous pouvez aussi le nommer “paysage”, c’est alors une vue idéalisée et statique, une “propriété”, un territoire: ce sont là tous des espaces représentés, humains. On conçoit le terrain vague comme un simple échantillon de topographie, une terre pelée de son velours: le monde végétal. Nous oublions qu’un terrain vague est un espace où se déroulent des processus naturels. La grille orthogonale de nos villes et de nos représentations, en autant de fins tableaux, ne suffisent plus. Si un terrain vague est un paysage, c’est alors un paysage habité par la biodiversité urbaine.

Un paysage est une image intemporelle et désincarnée, découlant d’un regard sélectif, culturel, qui s’ignore souvent. Un paysage habité, lui, est soumis au temps, au vent, au chaos et aux processus de la biodiversité. Ces derniers prolongent l’espace d’un terrain vague en lui donnant sa pleine mesure. Nous concevons le paysage avec les seules dimensions qui nous conviennent: comme un tableau. Le paysage devient ainsi une vue empêchant de voir, une mise hors cadre de la biodiversité.

L’arrivée du mot “biodiversité” n’est pas qu’une simple ré-itération du mot “nature”. La définition même de biodiversité inclut les habitats et leur continuité par les processus écologiques. Le paysage, lui, est demeuré un concept statique de représentation comme autant de “peintures”, fussent-elles vivantes, vertes. Le paysage habité est le lieu de déroulement dans le temps des processus biologiques. Il est immense…

Un terrain vague établi par une démolition récente est un proto-paysage mais il est de fait déjà un paysage habité. Le vent le traverse. Un terrain vague est un champ d’exercice de la biodiversité qui y déverse son trop-plein et s’occupe rapidement de cette opportunité. Le monde des plantes agit tout de suite et investi. Nous serons témoins d’un “verdissement” spontané. Toutefois tout un monde moins “vert”, moins visible, est aussi déjà là: les insectes, les bactéries, les fongus, etc. La biodiversité fait constamment pression sur le milieu urbain. Elle est potentielle. Mais elle demeure inconnue par ses processus lents, discrets ou moins intéressants. En milieu urbain, les espèces animales et végétales suivent des chemins qui nous sont invisibles, circulant et rôdant durant notre manque d’attention.

Nos représentations, constructions, installations et aménagements agissent comme des obturateurs de la réalité biologique. Ces temps d’obturation sont variables… et toujours temporaires. Ce ne sont en fait que des intervalles entre deux épisodes de la biodiversité. Des millions d’années d’évolution adaptive ont prévu la soudaine ouverture d’un espace et sa disponibilité. Toute inattention, même momentanée, de notre part et c’est une fenêtre ouverte aux processus écologiques de colonisation auto-complexifiante. La biodiversité est pré-adaptée à nos “originalités”, elles lui sont totalement prévisibles… C’est que, voyez-vous, nous ne sommes que les derniers arrivés, les petits nouveaux. La nature en a vu bien d’autres.

Notre modèle d’espace vert est encore trop souvent une plantation d’arbres au tronc nu, bien droit, sur une surface partagée fonctionnellement entre une pelouse propre et une minéralisation savamment disposée, accompagnée de quelques “mobiliers”. Avec art nous faisons du vide biologique et nous appelons cela espace vert. Timidement bien sûr nous diversifions un peu les plantations. Mais en terme de biodiversité le premier terrain vague venu offre plus que nos meilleurs architectes-paysagistes!

Dites-moi: est-ce le terrain vague qui est un trou dans le territoire urbain ou l’urbain qui est une tache dans le territoire de la biodiversité?

Un terrain vague est une faille dans nos catégories empressées. C’est qu’il n’appartient pas complètement à notre monde. C’est un memento vita à notre attention, un révélateur du potentiel de la biodiversité. Dans un terrain vague nous sommes ni dans un Jardin d’Eden ni dans un parc aux dimensions parfaitement maîtrisées. En tant que paysage habité, il est l’antithèse de l’idée de création. Nos divins pouvoirs créateurs sont niés. Nous sommes dans un espace vert spontané.

Vers une Réserve de Biodiversité Urbaine (RéBU)

Comment faire place à la biodiversité? Commençons par constater le travail ébauché et rendons un paysage habité encore plus habitable! En un geste de reconnaissance de la résilience de la biodiversité et un geste de réconciliation: l’écologie des rapports humains/biodiversité est en révision. Nous avons une excellente opportunité d’affaire ici-même!

Les friches post-industrielles sont les jachères de la biodiversité urbaine.

Une friche est un espace vert en médiation: entre un abandon ou la cessation d’une activité et un devenir imprécis. Les vestiges de l’utilisation humaine passée deviennent en fait les matériaux de la biodiversité. Un terrain vague laissé à lui-même assez longtemps s’enrichit exponentiellement: de nouvelles espèces de plantes amenant de nouvelles espèces d’insectes amenant de nouvelles espèces d’oiseaux. C’est que la friche est devenu une jachère. Appuyons cette réalité biologique et assurons-nous d’y mettre un maximum de ressources. Faisons des buttes, creusons un étang et mettons des arbustes fruitiers. Préparons la table pour les invités qui ne vont pas tarder. Précisons nos intentions de dialogue et de rencontre avec la biodiversité. Une RéBU est un aménagement en co-production pour une rencontre entre nous et la biodiversité en mouvement.

Le Champ des Possibles porte son nombril qui lui a donné naissance: le Jardin Roerich d’Emily. Il est maintenant un espace de réflexion et d’essai. Le Champ des Possibles est le produit de deux mondes qui se rencontrent en un seul lieu, un paysage habité et partagé.

Aucune terre ne sait quel drapeau flotte au-dessus d’elle ou quelle nation représente ce drapeau. Mettre des drapeaux sur les territoires se fait par commodité, pour qu’on puisse aisément les trouver et déclarer d’où nous venons. Les noms des places, projetés sur les cartes, les coins de rues et les portes des jardins, comme les graffitis, permet à l’histoire de savoir qui est passé par là, mais ils ne sont pas gravés dans la pierre. Lorsqu’ils arrivent, les propriétaires marquent leur territoire non pas en laissant leur odeur sur le pied d’un arbre, mais en changeant le titre du terrain indiqué par ce même arbre. Si vous assemblez chronologiquement une série de cartes d’une région en les déposant une sur l’autre, telle les couches de peintures d’un vieux meuble, vous pouvez saisir les changements d’adresses. Aujourd’hui, il est possible de localiser chaque maison par 4 petites lignes, un numéro sur une route, une ville, une province, un pays; c’est tout ce que ça prend. Sous cette insipide formule, griffonnée sur une enveloppe, se trouve l’histoire de cette parcelle de terre.

Jenkins, P. (2001). An acre of time. New York : Paperback. p. 69.

Après des études de philosophie et d’architecture du paysage, la tête dans les nuages mais les pieds bien ancrés au sol, je me suis donné comme ambitieux projet d’inspirer mes concitoyens à participer à faire de la ville un jardin. Je ne voulais pas dessiner pour eux un monde meilleur, je voulais qu’ils en soient les architectes, les créateurs. J’avais la conviction que la meilleure façon de verdir Montréal n’était pas de planter des arbres, mais de transformer les Montréalais en jardiniers semant le vert sur leur passage.

Pour cela, il fallait les faire rêver, nourrir leurs esprits mais aussi leurs corps, solliciter leurs sens, leurs intelligences. Il fallait leur donner des outils, des techniques, des idées. Abandonnant mon bâton de militant écologiste, j’ai rapidement choisi la carotte pour encourager mes concitoyens à participer à la création de nouveaux espaces verts, comestibles et communautaires. Dans le contexte de l’urbanisation croissante, des crises économiques, écologiques et énergétiques, l’agriculture urbaine était pour moi la carotte ultime et un outil formidable pour rendre la ville plus verte et les communautés plus en santé.

Comme les surfaces au sol étaient très rares et étaient à 80 % minéralisées, restaient les toits, les balcons, l’asphalte et le béton à verdir. Dans le cadre du projet Des jardins sur les toits, que j’ai eu le bonheur de piloter pendant de nombreuses années, nous avons testé la faisabilité d’utiliser les toits et les autres espaces minéralisés pour développer l’agriculture urbaine à Montréal et dans le monde. Sous la forme d’une expérience participative, nous avons exploré comment créer des écosystèmes humains en mobilisant des jardiniers pour s’occuper des jardins, en recyclant des matériaux pour fabriquer des bacs, en captant l’eau de la pluie, en transformant la matière organique en compost et le béton en jardins.

Pour lancer le mouvement et alimenter ces fragiles écosystèmes, il a fallu mettre beaucoup d’énergie à communiquer l’idée et à mobiliser les citoyens. Un message clair accompagné d’actions concrètes socialement utiles et d’expériences sensibles agréables me semblait être un bon mélange pour motiver mes concitoyens à changer leurs comportements et à verdir leur ville. Des conférences, des présentations, des évènements publics, des prix prestigieux, le site www.lesjardins.ca, des guides, un gros dossier de presse, des kiosques, des jardins démonstratifs et le bouche à oreille ont permis à des milliers de personnes de s’approprier l’idée de jardiner sur les toits et la technique nécessaire pour le faire.

Chaque jardin a son histoire à raconter: au jardin du campus McGill, le plus gros de nos jardins démonstratifs, des bénévoles de notre partenaire le Santropol Roulant viennent apprendre à jardiner tout en verdissant un îlot de chaleur appartenant à l’université, pendant que les étudiants en architecture explorent le potentiel de l’agriculture urbaine sur le campus. La récolte est ensuite acheminée à la cuisine de l’organisme de distribution alimentaire, puis livrée à bicyclette à des personnes à mobilité réduite. Les déchets sont compostés sur place puis retournent au jardin et ainsi est bouclée la boucle. À Villeray, les bacs servent à faire des jardins collectifs dans des cours d’écoles à 100% asphaltées. Les enfants y travaillent l’estime de soi et découvrent les plaisirs du jardinage. La récolte est ensuite transformée et dégustée par les enfants et ainsi de suite pour chaque jardin.

Après sept ans d’acharnement, mon rêve de voir les toits se transformer en jardins s’est réalisé. Des tonnes de fruits et légumes sont produites chaque années, des centaines de nouveaux jardiniers alimentent le mouvement, des partenariats produisent de nouveaux résultats, les semences s’échangent, les modèles se multiplient, les jardins sur les toits et les balcons poussent dans tout les quartiers. Les jardins sont bien établis, tous sont autonomes et je peux désormais délaisser le social pour travailler le fond et la forme, peaufiner les modèles, glisser vers l’art pour semer le vert encore plus haut dans l’imaginaire collectif. Ainsi, je vais pouvoir continuer à transformer la ville en un jardin, jardinier par jardinier.

This book is a remembrance of a place that lives in all cities, the world over. It is a place inside of us. It is marginal, sometimes invisible, and its story seldom told. It is a place at risk of disappearing, and this book is dedicated to celebrating its story so it is not forgotten in silence. Thanks to the tireless and inspiring people who continue to show up, roll up their sleeves and do good work: my family, friends, teachers, and especially my collaborators.

It’s the story, the biography of the field beneath my feet … settlers imposed their acres on a land that before they arrived had flowed from sea to sea, joyfully free of measurement….The acre’s residents; plants, trees and animals are familiar miracles but while their story unfolds above ground, there is another running concurrently, in the soil beneath vision…(Jenkins, 1996, p.26).

Initially drawn to the field as a site to work outdoors, take up space, and experiment with sculpture, I found something in the Canadian Pacific Railway lot that was close to freedom. This vacant field was an expansive stretch of overgrown land, open to the sky and accessible to city-dwellers. I went there, and immediately this place clung to my memory like a burr to a woollen sock. Soon after, I created a living sculpture there, and a relationship formed from the making of it. In the centre of the field, just south of a group of big poplars, is where the Roerich Garden rested, from 2007-2010. This project has fed me, shaped my creative process, and altered my perception of the marginal and biodiverse urban landscape. It teaches us all a little something about the marginal bits in ourselves. In 2007, I set out to work beyond the gallery walls and to connect with living matter. Much has emerged since then. Though the Roerich Garden has not been maintained since 2010, the template has been laid and the project has served as a rally-cry to exclaim that this meeting place be kept — as is. Preserving such spaces from the inevitable ever-expanding phenomenon of development is essential to urban existence, our livelihoods and mental health. Urban wilderness has an ecological, cultural and social value that s crucial to the future of cities in this rapidly changing world. Senses return, air clears and decibels drop. We can then begin to hear the stories that emerge from the ground. We can then see what and whom needs our attention.

Jenkins, P. (1996). An acre of time: The enduring value of place. Toronto: Macfarlane, Walter & Ross.

‘Owning’ land is a myth. Ownership of part of the earth’s crust is really no more than leasing, with the option to sell the lease. Expropriation is always possible, by an act of government, or an act of violence.

From An Acre of Time, Phil Jenkins, p.185

The field can be seen as a metaphor for what is now occurring in our economy. It is a symbol of the clash of values between development, nature, and culture. Perhaps the field — as a metaphor for wilderness in our lives — allows us to better understand our own untamed fringes. The field has a life of its own that doesn’t belong to anyone, and it cannot be bought or sold. This wildness belongs to all of us, and is our birthright. Although it is at risk of being removed, dug up, carted away, and built over, its value is priceless to many. The life we seek there is one that is above all, free to exist as it is.

Besides usual locutions like “vacant lot” or “no man’s Land,” the use of the French expression terrain vague (Chateaubriand, 1811) seems to be increasing in the international community. Would it be because the terrain vague, beyond negativity or casual descriptions, evokes more than any other lexical assemblage the paradoxical condition of space and territoriality in contemporary culture? Between nomadism and sedentarity, the terrain vague keeps the question and its potentialities open – concrete virtualities. While the term vague links to flux, indetermination and void, terrain refers rather to the idea of the border and of ground that can be occupied. Can we preserve this unusual coexistence without reducing it to one term or the other ? This is the stake suggested by the figure of terrain vague: to open the territory without dissolving its constructive qualities.

Rather than the normative vacuity associated with hygienist planification, the terrain vague speaks about porosity. Its void constitutes the counter image of the functionalist city, the Achilles heel of its prophylactic and ostentatious phantasms. The pore is both cavity and passage, a place propitious to the development of processes that escape control and contaminate representation by transversal infiltrations. As an indeterminate zone, the terrain vague destabilises the clarity of the urban figure and resists the “spectacular”. In a world more and more mediated and virtualised, it offers the possibility to tame and to experience the raw reality of a new type of impure Wilderness.

The key to stopping the erosion of respect is ritual; I’m certain of it. The rituals of respect for birth, marriage, and death are still around, but the rituals of respect for the land beneath our city feet have faded. North American environmentalism, when it was taking its’ first steps, had no stock of rituals on hand to stoke up respect- so it went to the First Nations, and borrowed theirs (even ones they weren’t using themselves). The fascination with native ceremonies, music, and philosophy was rejuvenating, but in the end it was nostalgia for something that, for the majority of Canadians, who live in cities, was never theirs. A fresh set of rituals, urban rituals for urban acres, is what’s required, to revive the idea of stewardship- we have inherited the city and it’s foundation, we are guardians rather than owners, we are fleeting parts of something more vast and encompassing than we allow. It’s fine to fight for the cute parts, the rural acres and the wilderness, but the ugly metros are also in need of redemption. [...] There is a chance that some day we’ll exhaust the land with our nagging energy and our growing numbers. A revival of respect, and the rituals that go with it, could govern our worst tendencies. The acre, neither knows nor cares if we respect it. If and when we are gone, it will swallow what we force down it’s throat and then fall to the task of repair. It is our benefit to perform the rituals, to use our resourcefulness to understand and maintain the acre’s resources.

From Jenkins, P. (2001). An Acre of Time. New York : Paperback. p. 211.

On pourrait s’étonner de la popularité actuelle de la formule «démocratie participative». Non pas qu’elle soit l’expression d’une modernité politique récente, mais au contraire en raison de son caractère universel quelque peu oublié au cours des dernières décennies. En effet, il semble que les deux termes se soient progressivement éloignés l’un de l’autre, comme un couple en instance de divorce, et que leurs retrouvailles tiennent à présent du miracle. Pourtant, comment imaginer sérieusement qu’une démocratie, toute balisée d’échéances électorales et de sondages divers, puisse s’affranchir d’une participation quotidienne des membres qui la composent?

Pour revenir à l’étymologie, la définition même de la démocratie (du grec dêmos, peuple, et kratos, pouvoir), devrait avoir depuis longtemps aboutie à une interprétation moderne de l’exercice du pouvoir en adéquation avec nos sociétés contemporaines. Il semble pourtant qu’une dérive progressive de notre vision commune de la politique (du grec politikè, science des affaires de la cité), nous ait conduit à délaisser trop longtemps le champ de la citoyenneté au profit de nos seuls intérêts individuels immédiats, et que notre participation à son bon déroulement se soit affaiblie dangereusement. Nous avons lentement et passivement délégué à une toute petite élite professionnalisée le pouvoir décisionnel qui nous revient légitimement.

En se réappropriant progressivement l’espace politique et physique, en se choisissant des représentants plutôt que des chefs, les citoyens font plus que réclamer que leur voix soient entendues par la caste supérieure. Ils affirment la position centrale qu’ils occupent dans l’organigramme du pouvoir. Sans eux, rien de possible, ils ne composent plus un simple corps électoral, mais redeviennent les acteurs privilégiés du bon fonctionnement de l’ensemble de la communauté.

Nos villes sont des structures organiques complexes, régies par de nombreuses lois et règles communes, mais aussi par une multiplicité d’expériences singulières, à l’échelle d’un trottoir, d’une rue, d’un quartier. Ces appréhensions minoritaires échappent bien souvent aux pouvoirs centralisés et sont difficilement quantifiables. Ce sont néanmoins elles, délestées de toute obsession de rentabilité, qui composent l’âme de nos citées et dessinent l’identité de nos quartiers. On aurait tort dès lors de sous-estimer l’apport des actions citoyennes ponctuelles, car c’est ici que se joue une grande partie de l’avenir de nos villes. Les urbanistes, qui ont longtemps considérés le territoire urbain comme un théâtre à aménager en faisant parfois abstraction des acteurs qui l’animent, ne s’y trompent plus et accordent de plus en plus d’importance à ces micro événements participatifs qui façonnent de nouveau nos villes.

A l’heure de la prise de conscience collective des problèmes environnementaux, conséquence d’un développement irresponsable basé sur la productivité et le consumérisme, il serait absurde de se passer de cette expertise citoyenne si riche et diversifiée, la plus apte à émettre des propositions pertinentes quant aux futurs directions à suivre. L’expérience menée dans le Champ des Possibles depuis quelques années est à ce titre révélatrice et emblématique des innovations que peut apporter un processus participatif. En passant de l’étape de la consultation à celle de la conception, les citoyens prouvent qu’ils sont non seulement capables de concevoir un projet novateur pour l’aménagement de l’espace public, mais se revendiquent aussi comme les principaux acteurs politiques de leur quartier. En donnant une forme concrète à des aspirations que certains qualifieraient d’utopiques, ils proposent d’inverser la pyramide décisionnelle, et renouent avec une certaine logique: la sève remonte toujours des racines vers la cime.

Artscape Wychwood Barns enhances the traditional concept of a park as “pleasure ground” by combining heritage preservation with current best practices in green technologies and environmental management. The Artscape Wychwood Barns project embraces environmentally sustainable design by responding imaginatively to the issues of brownfield redevelopment, water and energy conservation, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It is also the first designated heritage site in Canada to seek Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design’s Canada certification.

Through the use of green energy and energy efficient resources, Artscape Wychwood Barns is an environmental quality improvement project that provides significant and positive contributions toward improving the environment in the community, helping to improve air quality, and championing clean water initiatives. Not-for-profit environmental organizations with new homes in the Artscape Wychwood Barns will provide thousands of schoolchildren, adults and area residents with environmental programming, such as naturalization and monitoring projects.

Artscape Wychwood Barns Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design’s Features

Stormwater harvesting:

Underneath the floor in Barn 2 is a 90 cubic metre cistern. This cistern collects rainwater which is captured from the building roof. The water collected is used for flushing the site’s 40 water closets and for park irrigation.

By reusing stored rainwater in combination with low flow fixtures and waterless urinais, the site will reduce the consumption of municipal potable water compared to a typical building of the same size by 67 %. It is estimated that the building will save a total of 7,745.90 litres per day or a yearly volume of 2.8 millions litres.

Potable water use reduction:

By implementing ultra low-flush water closets that work at three litres per flush instead of the conventional six litres per flush, and by using waterless urinais in place of urinais that typically use 3.8 litres per flush, the Artscape Wychwood Barns will substantially reduce the site’s overall water consumption.

Siding:

The siding panels that run along Benson avenue are made of 100% recycled plastic. This polyboard is waterproof, Ultraviolet resistant and contains no asbestos, fibreglass or toxic resins. The 93 sheets used on the Artscape Wychwood Barns diverted 8,556 Ibs of plastic from landfill.

White roof:

The Artscape Wychwood Barns roof system is a single ply, highly reflective, white polyvinyl chloride membrane covering approximately 28,000 square feets. This roofing system helps reduce the heat island effect and the cooling load of the site during the summer months. It is estimated that the white roof system installed on the Artscape Wychwood Barns should reduce the indoor temperature during the summer months by up to three degrees celcius.

Indoor air quality:

Volatile organic compounds can have an adverse effect on the health of the building occupants. The products and installation methods used on the Artscape Wychwood Barns all meet the low-volatile organic compounds levels specified by the Canadian Green Building Council.

Ground source heating and cooling:

The geothermal energy system is located under the park land on the west side of the site. It consists of 48 bore holes that are 120 meters (400 feet) deep, each one containg a water circulating loop of tubing that is in contact with the ground. This system accounts for a substantial reduction in the amount of energy that would have been consumed if the site had used conventional heating and cooling methods.

The system works by utilizing the ground as both a source and sink for energy. During cooling seasons, the heat pump’s compressors work like a fridge to create cooling for the occupants, while dumping heat into the bore holes. In the heating season, the pumps work in reverse and some of this heat is recovered.