Community-based planning and social innovation Let’s meet at the urban courtyard! The role of the community participation in micro-scale urban regeneration in Krakow. Magdalena Miśkowiec1 1Institute of Geography and Spatial Management, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland, magda.miskowiec@doctoral.uj.edu.pl Abstract: According to the recent urban regeneration policy shift, interventions are required at local-scale development. That approach aims at integrated micro- projects promoting spontaneous regeneration and social integration with the local community involvement. In particular, within Urban Regeneration policies public participation is introduced as a tool to reflect public concerns and to guide the urban space transformation. In recent years, studies regarding regeneration were spatially focused on city centers, main public spaces, historical sites, and post- industrial land uses. However, not much attention was paid to the renewal of semi- public spaces reserved particularly for local residents. At the same time, urban courtyard areas become one of the significant sites within the latest Regeneration Programmes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the behaviors and social attitudes towards participatory planning in semi-public spaces regeneration. The research was conducted based on the “Centrum D” urban courtyard case study in the Nowa Huta, the city of Krakow. The study was carried out using in-depth interviews with three groups of stakeholders: 1) local community leaders, 2) municipal officials, and 3) participatory practitioners. The findings are expected to add insights into the discussion on the community participation within micro-scale regeneration inside cities urban setting. Keywords: public participation, urban regeneration, semi-public spaces, urban courtyards Introduction Currently, more and more attention is paid to the community participation within urban regeneration policy (Lawless and Pearson 2012). The communication and participation processes are viewed as a key factors responsible for creating better urban spaces. The participation term is understood as a ‘voluntary process by which people, including the disadvantaged (in income, gender, caste, or education), influence or control the decisions that affect them’ (Saxena, 1998, p. 111). The community engagement in planning may facilitate understanding of the local needs and interests, support the interventions efficiency and provide the empowerment of those who are affected by urban policy (Innes and Boher, 2004, Taylor, 2007). Thus, it is 1443 required to acknowledge the multidimensional complexity of problems affecting local areas to enhance community members quality of life. It corresponds with urban regeneration term defined as a ‘comprehensive and integrated vision and action that leads to the resolution of urban problems and which seeks to bring about a lasting improvement in the economic, physical, social and environmental condition of an area that has been, or is, subject to change’ (Roberts, Sykes, 2000, p.17). The new public management approach regards to public governance promoting more local micro-projects in terms of spontaneous regeneration and neighborhood integration (Elwood and Leitner, 1998, Dargan, 2009). It is due to previous experience with urban regeneration interventions concerns mainly public spaces, cultural heritage sites and postindustrial areas (Domański and Gwosdz 2010, Lorens 2010, Kazimierczak 2014). Although, these regeneration’ interventions contribute to positive benefits, there were focused on more spatial outcomes and broaden group of stakeholders. As a result, there is a gap in studies related to regeneration renewal targeted the improvement of local scale housing conditions. Particularly, it seems significant since the regeneration policies aim problems and concerns of the local community members as a neglected stakeholder. Therefore, the semi-public spaces promoting greenery activities are worth considering as the research areas. There are several studies proved the multi beneficial outcomes of the urban green spaces, such as foster air quality, urban temperatures and climate change (Nowak et al. 2013, Baró et al. 2014). In spite of greenery environmental benefits, there is a great potential in creating green spaces in order to promote spontaneous social life, socializing, rest and restitution (Baur and Tynon, 2010). Particularly, community green spaces facilitate bringing neighbors together in ways that increase social integration and interactions (Gehl, 2011). In this research, urban courtyards redevelopment is recently identified as a significant part of the latest Regeneration Programmes and City programme aiming the greenery and community engagement. Urban courtyards are defined as the spaces between residential buildings and require renewal interventions (Gidlöf-Gunnarsson, Öhrström, 2010). These areas are often used to pass by, park a car or collect garbage. In regard to urban planning assumptions, urban courtyard as a local urban green space should provide environment for outdoor recreation and social integration. However, the question is how to redevelop and create the local environment that collects neighbors together and enhances the development of a strong, resilient and healthy community that also improves safety, builds life-long relationships and is resilient in social changes? It has been proven that place-related thoughts, beliefs and attitudes about our local environment impact the behaviors towards places. Studies have shown that spaces strengthen social bonds and promote the feeling of being attached to the place and community affect residents’ overall well-being (Theodori, 2001). There is a particularly, great potential in fostering place attachment and sense of community in regard to neighborhood regeneration process (Brown et al. 2003). Therefore, the understanding of people’s perceptions and attitudes toward their environment may enrich the planning process. Moreover, the community relationships to place influence whether and how they may participate in local planning efforts (Manzo and Perkins, 2006). However, the stakeholders are not a homogenized subject and have various concerns and interests within participatory planning process. According to studies, communities from disadvantaged areas struggled with poverty, unemployment, crime and social exclusion are less willing to engage (Atkinson, 2003). It is due to experienced low level of self-efficacy and isolation among residents and therefore it is more difficult to promote participatory planning. However, there are studies proven that the positive effects were achieved by regeneration projects where the engagement and partnership between local community and local officials occurred (Bassett et al. 2002, Coaffee and Healey, 2003). Providing participatory mechanisms in disadvantaged areas is viewed as a way to reinforce residents’ confidence and understanding of their contribution (Jones, 2003, Gullino, 2009). Not many studies provided empirical research in order to investigate multidimensional relationships between semi- public spaces and its local communities. In this context, the main aim of this study was to verify the social attitudes towards participatory planning within urban regeneration. Using the case study of the Centrum D urban courtyard, allow to investigate the relationships between different stakeholder’s attitudes towards the following aspects: 1. problematics of the case study area 1444 2. the local community role within participatory process 3. challenges within participatory process The context of Nowa Huta district Nowa Huta was formed in 1949 as a satellite city. In its function, it referred to the reality of socialist realism and the period of industrialisation. The main idea was to create a city where the Lenin Steelworks would be opened. Initially, the city was supposed to have 100,000 inhabitants, but in the subsequent years the assumed value increased more than twice (Komorowski, 2005). It was a place offering a high standard of living and accessibility due to the fact that Lenin Steelworks provided a large amount of social and cultural services for employees and their families. Thus, its inhabitants had free access to medical care, schools, community centres, sports clubs, theatres and cinemas (Domański, 1997). The uniqueness of Nowa Huta results from its preserved historical, urban and architectural heritage. In terms of architectural values and spatial planning, Nowa Huta is one of the most interesting examples of socialist realist urban layout on a European scale. Housing estates blocks were equipped with access to internal semi-public spaces in the form of courtyards. The idea was to provide easy access to green areas for the local communities. Additionally, access to Nowa Huta Meadows surrounding the area makes Nowa Huta one of the districts of Kraków that is often referred to as the Green City (Halicka, 2014). Since the transformation and collapse of the Steelworks, the district has experienced economic and social changes in its functioning. Currently, the district of Nowa Huta is inhabited by 52,332 inhabitants registered as permanent residents, which constitutes approximately 13% of the residents of the city of Kraków (Report on the status of the city from 2017). The problem of losing a permanent job led to an accumulation of problems of unemployment and poverty in the district. What is more, in the consciousness of the inhabitants of Kraków, Nowa Huta received a label of a dangerous district to which no one goes unless necessary. According to research in this regard, the media and the local press had a great influence on the creation of a negative image of the district (Guzik, 2000). However, the statistics contained in the periodical surveys clearly indicate that the number of crimes committed in Nowa Huta is lower in relation to those committed in the centre of Kraków’s district I (Update of the Municipal Regeneration Programme for the city of Kraków, 2017). The regeneration process is seen as a means of changing the image of Nowa Huta. The area of the “old” part of Nowa Huta together with Nowa Huta Meadows with a total area of 399 ha has been designated as one of the regeneration areas in the current Municipal Regeneration Programme for the city of Kraków. The concentration of negative social phenomena, such as unemployment, poverty, population decline and the process of community ageing, was indicated as one of the reasons (Update of the Municipal Regeneration Programme for the city of Krakow, 2017). In order to counteract negative social phenomena, works have been launched on the project called “Spotkajmy się na podwórku” [in English: “Let’s meet in the courtyard”] aimed at revitalising the central spaces of housing estate blocks in the old part of Nowa Huta. The total area covered by the project is inhabited by 16,702 people. The project responds to one of the problems identified by the inhabitants during the public consultation, namely, bad condition of the courtyards. In the opinion of the inhabitants, courtyards are now a no-man’s-land that is neglected and dirty. At the same time, they highlighted the fact of disappearance of relations between neighbours and the lack of spaces where people could interact with each other (Report from public consultations to AMPRK, 2016). Therefore, one of the key directions of the current regeneration programme are activities related to the development of the Nowa Huta courtyards and ensuring social interventions. During the public consultations, residents may identify problems occurring in the space and discuss solutions. Workshops, field walks and open meetings were used as part of the participatory mechanisms. The research took into account the results of a case study of a courtyard located in Centrum D housing estate (Figure.1). 1445 Figure 1 The location of the Centrum D housing estate within the Nowa Huta district inside the city of Kraków Source: http://mpzp24.pl/geoportal/krakow elaborated by the author Methods The general methodology approach of this research is embedded in between the social sciences and human geography. Therefore, the qualitative approach was utilized to capture deeper insight into the behaviors in space and with reference to space from the perspective of the stakeholders’ individual perception (Yang, 2014). Hence, in regard to socio-ethnographic point of view, we carried out selected in-depth interviews (IDI) to identify stakeholders’ attitudes towards participatory planning within urban courtyards regeneration. The findings due to the practitioners and participants perceptions give a multidimensional understanding of the participatory processes. The interviews were performed with three different groups of stakeholders representing local, social and political environment; 1) local community leaders from the urban courtyard area, 2) municipal officials, 3) participatory practitioners. In winter 2019 we conducted 8 interviews in total. We carried out individual interviews with each stakeholder. Local leaders (communities’ members, activists, NGOs, informal groups, local officials) were those who are active and recognizable in the life of local community. Selection of respondents from the municipal officials (Municipal Greenspace Authority in Krakow; Zarząd Zieleni Miejskiej w Krakowie) and participatory practitioners was carried out through judgment sampling. For interviewees’ identification, the mailing lists and snow-balling technique was used, starting with municipal officials. The interviews concerned the following issues: 1. the urban courtyards’ problematics, 2. the participants’ role within public participation, and 3. the challenges and difficulties in public participation. The interviews data was then analyzed to identify common themes among responses and to verify the relationships between groups statements. The qualitative analysis’ outcomes were combined with the survey of sources and field research. We carried out several visit observations during different day time, with lasting approximately 20 min each time. Results Description of the research area Kraków The old part of Nowa Huta Housing estate Centrum D urban courtyard 1446 For the purposes of this research, the case study of the urban courtyard located within the housing estate block in Centrum D in Nowa Huta district has been chosen. The courtyard located in Centrum D is situated on the western side of the Reagan Central Square in the central part of the Old Nowa Huta area. It was founded in the years 1950-1956. The surface of the courtyard is 0,03 km2 and the real estate has a communal status (the City of Krakow is its owner). The field studies within Centrum D courtyard make it possible to explore the complexity of local problems and relationships related to this example of a semi-public space. The western part of the courtyard area within 5-6 blocks is called “ogródek jordanowski”. The founder of these gardens’ idea was a polish doctor Henryk Jordan who believed in physical, mental and social benefits for kids and youth (Smoleński 1961). Since the end of 19th century, these gardens have been providing space particularly for recreation and outdoor activities, being equipped with a playground, basketball court and open-air gym. Throughout the day, open-air playground constitutes a crucial space for kids and older youth to play and spent time with peers. Figure 2. The Centrum D urban courtyard before redevelopment Source: own compilation Problematics of the Centrum D courtyard The insight formulated due to in-depth interviews and field research revealed crucial spatial and social problems that the Centrum D courtyard area struggles with in terms of the following aspects: 1) Greenery 2) Shared space In the interviews, the respondents from Centrum D highlighted not only their current views on the urban courtyard but also how they would ideally see its development in the future. While the answers were diverse, most respondents perceived the area redevelopment as a catalyst for change. The case of greenery was one of 1447 the significant themes regarding the obtained IDI results. Nevertheless, all stakeholders were altogether mentioning the concern regarding the greenery redevelopment. Each group has a different approach to management. As mentioned by the practitioner, there were two opposing points of view during the consultation process. Some residents claimed that cutting trees and mowing lawns is necessary. The reasons for that include allergic reactions and the sense of disorder in the area. The second group of participants wanted more greenery for outside activities and local recreation. On the other hand, the problem of greenery is linked with the existing parking system. The individual interviews emphasised the unresolved territorial dispute over the relations between green areas and parking spots. It was particularly related to the green field area in the eastern part of the Centrum D courtyard. That area is often used by dog owners and elderly people. It is a quiet and well-shaded part of the courtyard with trees and benches where one may rest during a walk. We will certainly put this space in order because now the cars that stand there cause an extraordinary chaos. So we’re working on hardening the surface for those cars. The locals wanted it too. Of course, we are not hardening it as much as they would like, which means we do not want to pave it over thus creating something more like ‘let’s meet in the parking lot’. [municipal offical] During the interviews, most of the local leaders mentioned the problem with safety and noise around the courtyard due to overwhelming role of cars and chaotic system of parking. Cars should be removed from the urban courtyards in Nowa Huta. Thanks to that, those spaces would regain new life. If we start to replace green spaces with parking spots, the number of such spots will never be enough. [local leader] In the area, there are too many cars in comparison with available parking spots. From the interviewed pedestrians’ point of view, it causes the unsafe environment and concerns among parents who let their kids play outside. Apart from that, it contributes to making it difficult for the elder or disabled people to pass due to the fact that the pavements are often occupied by cars. Currently, there is an on-going battle for urban space between the two opposite groups of actors: pedestrians and cyclists versus car owners. The problem is much more complex because the areas of urban courtyards in Nowa Huta have never been redeveloped since their foundation. Their function has remained the same for the last 70 years, regardless of a rapid growth in the number of cars in the urban centres. The aim of the redevelopment was also to create a shared space, in particular for the local community in order to enable interaction and strengthen neighbourhood ties. In addition to the visual and physical benefits, it is expected that there will occur social changes in terms of social capital, attachment to the place and civic involvement. This project was called “Spotkajmy się na podwórku” [” Let’s meet in the courtyard”]. That is why we tried to take these functionalities into account so that the inhabitants could meet each other. When I proposed it and asked: ‘listen, the project is about meeting each other in the courtyard, but we didn’t design any bench’. In response, I heard that those benches would only serve bums who would drink alcohol there and that there is no point in taking it into consideration. The same person who raised the subject did not know that there were also elderly people in that courtyard who had no place to sit. [participatory practitioner] Collectively, those opinions refer to a concern related to the greater number of shared spaces within the area, which may lead to an increase in the number of acts of hooliganism. There were a few interviewees among the local leaders who mentioned the sense of unsafe environment and acts disturbing silence. According to the respondents, it is due to the local group of youth and men drinking alcohol while sitting on the benches in the evenings. As it was suggested, one side of the problem results from the presence of liquor stores that are located nearby and open for 24 hours. On the other hand, there is a lack of street lighting system within the area, which could provide a sense of surveillance. 1448 The role of the local community in the participatory planning process The second part of the interview scenario aimed at verifying the stakeholders’ understanding of the local community role in the participatory planning process. The social consultations involved three meetings with the local community. The first participatory mechanism was the field walk aimed at analysing the issue of courtyards and becoming familiarised with functioning of such spaces as a whole. It was cool that those residents, who had never participated in such a field walk, could walk around the courtyard with such a focus, through those parking spaces, and see that place and discuss it with specialists. We were also keeping in mind the conservation officer all the time. [local leader] During the second meeting, the residents participated in workshops aimed at identifying and highlighting key problems, as well as discussing tangible solutions. The meeting was also attended by a person representing the municipal conservation officer’s office whose task was to take a position on the proposed changes concerning development in accordance with the regulations on restoration. At the third meeting, preliminary concepts for the development of the courtyard were presented. The residents were acquainted with them and could express their comments. From the perspective of a practitioner running the consultation process, the resident acted as an expert in moving around in space. We raised the role of residents to the role of experts. We started with a white sheet of paper with nothing on it. And we said it openly: Ladies and Gentlemen, we are not present in this area, you are its users and experts. Experts who transmit knowledge about what works well in a given courtyard and what does not, and users because they use this courtyard every day. [participatory practitioner] Local leaders themselves saw the role of the resident as a conscious user who, through participation, rediscovers the space of the courtyard and receives new information and knowledge about the existing relationships in that space. For me, this role of the residents was crucial [...]. I have learned a lot. Apart from the fact that there are front yards, the conservation officer’s concern is to preserve as many of these original elements as possible because we have a temptation to change everything. But we are in such a historical context that we must remember that such were the original assumptions. [local leader] This awareness also applies to the rules governing the joint decision-making process. In the opinion of leaders, there are usually two dominant groups of participants in consultations. One is represented by active residents who are aware of the conditions resulting from participation in urban projects. The second group is composed of residents participating somewhat by accident who are not experienced in having public dialogue yet. This meeting was attended by people who have already somehow dealt with social participation in various projects and know a little bit about what can be changed, what can be achieved and what cannot really be changed already at the concept stage, as there are things that are impossible to change. There were also people who probably thought that when one comes and asks what they want, it will be done, but it is also so impossible to achieve. In fact, if anyone has had contact with a social dialogue, they know that this is really a clash and search for a compromise. [local leader] Challenges for the participatory planning process Information and representativeness 1449 The last part of the questions in the interviews concerned the most important thoughts on participatory planning. One of the observed difficulties is related to the organisational conditions, i.e. how the participation process was communicated and, as a result, what level of attendance was achieved. The place and time of the meetings were announced by means of posters hung on the doors of staircases, leaflets, websites and on the Kraków local radio station. The problem emerged at the stage of discussion whether the information about the meetings actually reached the residents. In my opinion, ordering roll-ups for the community centres informing about the time and place of consultations did not work at all. I do not want to even analyse the content of this information and whether it encouraged to come or not. There was not a single article in Głos (local newpaper - Tygodnik Nowohucki) while this part of the residents reads the traditional press. [local leader] Both consultation meetings were attended by about 10 individuals from among the residents of the housing estate. There was a voice on the part of the leaders that the achieved attendance results from individual motivation to participate rather than proper notification. The fact that the attendance at the meetings is like this does not depend only on the Management Board. Information about the meetings was communicated in various forms. The easiest way to get it was via the Internet, but there were also information sheets hanged on the staircases. The fact that someone hasn’t read it or does not care about it is a problem of society and not the good or bad will of the organiser. [local leader] The experience gained in participating in the social dialogue results in the fact that active inhabitants are usually those who are representatives at the meetings. I think that people were also a bit unprepared for such a form of invitation that someone asked them to express their opinions and participate in the meetings. Someone may have come there out of pure curiosity. Those neighbours were encouraged by me so that’s why they appeared. The neighbour who drinks was caught just like that, Iwona came deliberately because it is 9, Zbychu also came deliberately because it is 5 and he was also very interested. These are the people who are rather active and their willingness to act was already noticed before in our activities. Ladies who take care of the front yards were also very interested in what will it look like from the point of view of care for greenery. However, they were rather listening than actively participating. [local leader] Based on the comments given by the interviewees living in that area for more than 20 years, the Centrum D courtyard used to function differently in the past. Neighbours were spending more time outside. There were frequent bottom-up initiatives taking place around that area, such as barbecues, ice rink, art exhibition showing the works created by the local artist Marian Kruczek. One could hear groups of kids playing outside from the early morning till late evening each day. Neighbours knew each other very well and often shared food or equipment they had without any hesitation. It was also connected with the previous communist system that had impact on the lack of goods and resources on the market. Therefore, neighbours had to rely on each other. Nowadays, after 30 years of democracy, our market provides goods that are needed and thus introduces more self-reliance. Getting used to the previous political system partially means that older people in particular are not involved in participatory activities. On the one hand, the interviews show that they still have this habit that decisions were made on the top. Besides, there is a group of ‘quickly to the store, quickly to the church, quickly home’ people. They do not talk to anyone. Sometimes they just stand there and complain about diseases. But when they are asked to come because we want to organise something, they say that they are too busy. There are also those shy people, who hide themselves behind their curtain and do not have enough courage to go out. In the old days, if a manager gave an order, everything was done. Nowadays, there is no one to give an order. [local leader] 1450 On the other hand, there is a group of residents that has already taken too many hopeless actions in terms of involvement. The negative experience of unsolved issues in terms of a dialogue between residents and municipal officials results in people feeling discouragement and lack of self-efficacy. Therefore, this group of residents gives up on any actions requiring involvement right at the beginning. Bottom-up initiatives vs top-down regulations Regardless of organisational challenges, another key difficulty was observed within the decision making- process. It is related to the top-down manner of public management and the need for spontaneous and bottom-up initiatives at the same time. The area of the “old part” of Nowa Huta is inscribed on the List of Kraków monuments. As a result, it is subject to the main historic buildings conservation officer’s management. Therefore, the flexibility of urban design is very limited, as it must always be considered by the historic buildings’ conservation officer. In consequence, the residents’ motions during consultations, such as underground garbage collection, fences and garden for the community, were rejected. At the meetings, there was a person representing the municipal historic buildings conservation officer. It went very well, but that person was attacked quite clearly. Unfortunately, this is an area that is entered in the register of monuments and we cannot accept here parking lots made of openwork panels even if we would like to because despite the fact that it is some kind of permeable surface, it does not fit the place and is not accepted by the conservation officer. So that person said immediately what cannot be introduced for sure and the confrontations were quite serious in this respect. [municipal official] However, there is a noticeable need for more creativity and uniqueness with regard to the redevelopment of the courtyard area based on the local leader’s perspective. For me, the reason for participation was a desire to discuss the possibility of having something unique inside this space and to emphasise our local identity. When I look at my people who participate in our various actions, I think they deserve some cool space. [local leader] From the official’s point of view, the problem with more spontaneous initiatives is related also to the ownership status. The real estate is communal, therefore, the city of Kraków is responsible for spatial management, so any ideas coming from the locals require a top-down permission. According to the urban development policy, all initiatives need to be consistent with the Master Plan and the opinion of the historic buildings conservation officer. However, there are still active residents among the Centrum D community who are willing to carry out collaborative initiatives. In order to create neighbourhood ties and interactions, they organised bottom-up picnic meetings together with Jędruś housing estate club (Klub Osiedlowy Jędruś). Another initiative aimed at removing the graffiti was organised by the residents in the form of a collaborative painting action together with a bottom-up organisation called Scrawl Busters (Pogromcy Bazgrołów). They collected painting equipment and together created a mural with aquarium theme. This mural shows a cat called Włodek (Kotek Włodek), a well- known character from a book for kids. The aim was to create a positive and local identity in order to bring Nowa Huta legacy closer to kids and other residents. Ultimately, the concept plan provides a shared space in the central part of the green area between blocks number 1 and 9. It is meant to function as a part of the space for meetings and social interaction with neighbours. The plan envisages a decorative greenery area and a green belt protecting from the road traffic and reducing the noise level. Taking into account residents’ responses concerning the lack of safety, the concept plan envisages a street lighting system. During the social consultations, participants mentioned the idea of a unique and artistic concept for the Centrum D area to strengthen the local identity. The concept plan involves an artistic installation corresponding to the style of the local artist Marian Kruczek. 1451 Figure 3. The concept plan for the Centrum D urban courtyard redevelopment. Source: Municipal Greenspace Authority in Krakow. Discussion and conclusions The article presents a review of social attitudes towards participation in the regeneration of urban courtyards on the example of the Centrum D housing estate in the Nowa Huta. Among the statements of various stakeholders, it was possible to identify attitudes and behaviours towards the most important problems in the courtyard space, the perception of the role of the resident in the process of participation and the challenges associated with participatory planning. Based on the collected opinions and field research, we can formulate the following conclusions: - first of all, in the face of the problems of the courtyard space located in Centrum D, the discussion on how to maintain and take care of greenery was predominant. There were two opposing views in the statements, where some wanted to increase the greenery area while others were willing to sacrifice greenery for road infrastructure. It turns out that this problem causes a lot of conflicts between residents. As a result, in the concept plan, status quo was maintained, thus the amount of parking spots remains the same. – secondly, the topic of creating a shared space for meetings and recreation for the residents was also discussed. Some residents expressed their opposition and concern about the decrease in security level caused by installing benches that favour acts of hooliganism. This indicates the community’s concern about the appropriation of the city space by individuals or groups of users (Jałowiecki 2007). – lack of experience and familiarity with social dialogue makes the residents not accustomed to participate in the participatory planning process. In order for the participation process to bring tangible results, the residents 1452 should participate in it as partners who understand the need for their own involvement and the need to delegate power (Taylor, 2012). Based on studies, Poles have little experience in active engagement in public participation initiatives. ‘They do not know how to act because they do not take action and they do not take action because they do not know how to do it’ (Czapiński, 2015, p.348). – in the opinion of practitioners, residents during the consultation acted as experts and conscious users of space. However, the difficulty consists in the fact that the creativity of the residents clashed with top-down regulations and authoritarian decisions of the representatives of the authorities, e.g. historic buildings conservation officer. It is a mechanism consistent with the theory of post-socialist cities, where the authorities make decisions without consulting the inhabitants or beyond negotiation. From the perspective of the residents, the officials themselves are seen as an inaccessible elite and not as discussion partners. As a result, such a relationship creates a distance between the two parties and its long-term existence makes it difficult to change the approach to cooperation (Kotus 2006). In such a situation, it is very difficult to maintain the involvement of the residents, i.e. active initiators of activities. On the other hand, covering the old part of Nowa Huta with protection of the conservation office allowed to maintain the unchanged shape of the urban assumptions that make this district unique. – reaching the residents with information on public consultations and the representativeness aspect still remain a challenge. In the opinion of the local leaders, failure to publish information in places usually chosen by the local community, e.g. store or local newspaper, automatically makes it impossible to reach a significant part of the population. Elements related to the date, place and form of information have a significant impact on the number of people participating in the consultations. On the other hand, there is a noticeable lack of interest and a sense of lack of responsibility for the process of social participation. – statements of the local leaders contained a motivation to implement bottom-up initiatives aimed at integration of neighbours. According to Gądecki’s research (2012), in Nowa Huta we first encounter a basic bond between residents of the same block of flats, and then at the level of the community of the entire housing estate functioning within the space of the courtyard. There are four basic elements that influence the sense of community, such as affiliation, interaction, satisfaction of needs and sharing of emotional connection (McMillan, Chavis, 1986). According to the interpretation of other authors, building a sense of community requires attachment to the place, local identity and social interactions (Kim, Kaplan 2004). Designing green spaces together and then contributing to their creation is intended to act as a means to build or strengthen these factors. The result of a collaborative organisation of green spaces, e.g. planting plants, may also be an increase in the sense of ownership and responsibility for the space. In this manner, in the face of acts of vandalism and uninvited users, residents will react and notify the relevant bodies. - in the case of the courtyard located in Centrum D, local leaders go one step further and feel the need to restore the uniqueness of this place by making a reference to the local history (e.g. artist Marian Kruczek, book character Kotek Włodek). Such motivation may result from the desire to emphasise the local identity in relation to the significant character of the Nowa Huta district itself. Artistic and social initiatives based on local history and identity can increase the number of courtyard users. The growing popularity of the place may lead to the phenomenon of touristification, and consequently gradual gentrification (Gotham, 2005). This creates a threat of the green gentrification phenomenon, which occurs when the new green space becomes so popular that it attracts new users and thus new investments and commercial services (Gould, Lewis 2012). Such a phenomenon may lead to an increase in property prices and, consequently, to the expulsion of current residents. At the same time, top-down regeneration activities may accelerate the process leading to the above situation, which may result in a risk of losing the status of “our space” dedicated primarily to the current residents of the Centrum D housing estate. 1453 References Atkinson, R., 2003, Addressing urban social exclusion through community involvement in urban regeneration. Urban renaissance, 101-119. Baró, F., Chaparro, L., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Langemeyer, J., Nowak, D. J., Terradas, 2014, Contribution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: The case of urban forests in Barcelona, Spain. Ambio, 43(4), 466–479. Bassett, K., Griffiths, R., Smith, I., 2002, Testing governance: partnerships, planning and conflict in waterfront regeneration, Urban Studies, 39(10), 1757–1775. Baur, J.W.R., Tynon, J.F., 2010, Small-scale urban nature parks: why should we care? Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32, 195–200. Brown, B., Perkins, D. D., Brown, G., 2003, Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: Individual and block levels of analysis. Journal of environmental psychology, 23(3), 259-271. Coaffee, J., Healey, P., 2003, 'My voice: My place': Tracking transformations in urban governance. Urban studies, 40(10), 1979-1999. Czapiński, J., 2015, Stan społeczeństwa obywatelskiego [Condition of civil society]. In: Diagnoza Społeczna 2015. Warunki i jakość życia Polaków. [Social Diagnosis 2015. Conditions and life quality of Poles], edited by J. Czapiński, T. Panek. (Warszawa: Rada Monitoringu Społecznego), pp. 332-372. Dargan, L., 2009, Participation and local urban regeneration: The case of the new deal for communities (NDC) in the UK. Regional studies, 43(2), 305-317. Domański, B., 1997, Industrial Control over the Socialist Town: Benevolence or Exploitation (London: Praeger). Domański B., Gwosdz K., 2010, Spojrzenie na problemy rewitalizacji miast w Polsce, In: Rewitalizacja miast polskich – diagnoza, edited by Z. Ziobrowski, W. Jarczewski, Vol. 8 (Kraków: Instytut Rozwoju Miast), pp. 45- 54. Elwood, S., Leitner, H., 1998, GIS and community-based planning: Exploring the diversity of neighborhood perspectives and needs. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 25(2), 77-88. Gądecki, J., 2012, I love NH. W stronę gentryfikacji starej części Nowej Huty (Warszawa, Poland: Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN). Gehl, J., 2011, Life between buildings: using public space (Washington: Island press). Gidlöf-Gunnarsson, A., Öhrström, E., 2010, Attractive" quiet" courtyards: a potential modifier of urban residents' responses to road traffic noise? International journal of environmental research and public health, 7(9), 3359-3375. Gotham, K. F., 2005, Tourism gentrification: The case of new Orleans' vieux carre (French Quarter). Urban studies, 42(7), 1099-1121. Gould, K. A., Lewis, T. L., 2012, The environmental injustice of green gentrification: the case of Brooklyn’s Prospect Park. In: The World in Brooklyn: Gentrification, immigration, and ethnic politics in a global city, edited by J. N. DeSena, T. Shortell. (U.K: Lexington books), pp.113-146. Gullino, S., 2009, Urban regeneration and democratization of information access: CitiStat experience in Baltimore. Journal of environmental management, 90(6), 2012-2019. Guzik, R., 2000, Przestępczość w przestrzeni miejskiej Krakowa w wyobrażeniach jego mieszkańców, In: Miasto postsocjalistyczne–organizacja przestrzeni miejskiej i jej przemiany, edited by I. Jażdżewska (Łódź, Poland: Uniwersytet Łódzki, Katedra Geografii Miast i Turyzmu), pp. 201-204. Hulicka, A., 2014, „Miasto ogród”. Analiza możliwości wykorzystania walorów urbanistyczno-krajobrazowych w promocji miasta i budowaniu jego marki na przykładzie wybranych miast polskich. Polityka i Społeczeństwo, 12(2), 112-124. Innes, J. E., Booher, D. E., 2004, Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Planning theory & practice, 5(4), 419-436. Jałowiecki, B., 2007, Gettoizacja polskiej przestrzeni miejskiej (Warszawa, Poland: Academica/Scholar). 1454 Jones, P. S., 2003, Urban regeneration's poisoned chalice: is there an impasse in (community) participation- based policy? Urban Studies, 40(3), 581-601. Kazimierczak, J., 2014, Kształtowanie przestrzeni publicznej miasta w kontekście rewitalizacji terenów poprzemysłowych w Manchesterze, Lyonie i Łodzi. Studia Miejskie, (16), 115-128. Kim, J., Kaplan, R., 2004, Physical and psychological factors in sense of community: New urbanist Kentlands and nearby Orchard Village. Environment and behavior, 36(3), 313-340. Komorowski, W., 2005, Architektura i urbanistyka Nowej Huty 1949‒1959 (Warszawa, Poland: Biblioteka Narodowa). Kotus J., 2006, Changes in the spatial structure of a large Polish city - The case of Poznań. Cities, 23(5): 364– 381. Lawless, P., Pearson, S., 2012, Outcomes from community engagement in urban regeneration: Evidence from England's New Deal for Communities Programme. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(4), 509-527. Lewicka, M., 2005, Ways to make people active: The role of place attachment, cultural capital, and neighborhood ties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(4), 381–395. Lorens, P., 2010, Rewitalizacja miast. Planowanie i realizacja. (Gdańsk, Poland: Politechnika Gdańska). Manzo, L. C., Perkins, D. D., 2006, Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. Journal of planning literature, 20(4), 335-350. McMillan, D. W., Chavis, D. M., 1986, Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of community psychology, 14(1), 6-23. Nowak, D. J., Hirabayashi, S., Bodine, A., Hoehn, R., 2013, Modeled PM2.5 removal by trees in ten U.S. cities and associated health effects. Environmental Pollution, 178, 395–402. Roberts, P., Sykes, H., 2000, Urban Regeneration. A Handbook., (London, U.K.: SAGE). Saxena, N. C., 1998, What is meant by people's participation? Journal of Rural Development, 17(1), 111-113. Smoleński, J., 1961, Budowa i urządzenie ogrodu jordanowskiego. In: Ogród jordanowski, edited by I. Chmieleńska, M. Kossakowski, M. Krawczyń, Z. Wierzbicka. (Warszawa: PZWS), pp. 259-298. Stedman, R. C., 2002, Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environment and behavior, 34(5), 561-581. Taylor, M., 2007, Community participation in the real world: opportunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces, Urban Studies, 44(2), 297–317. Theodori, G. L., 2001, Examining the effects of community satisfaction and attachment on individual well‐being. Rural sociology, 66(4), 618-628. Yang, R. J., 2014, An investigation of stakeholder analysis in urban development projects: Empirical or rationalistic perspectives. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2014): 838–849. Aktualizacja Miejskiego Programu Rewitalizacji Krakowa, Date of access: 25/11/2018. http://www.rpo.malopolska.pl/download/program-regionalny/rewitalizacja/005_Miasto_Krakow.pdf Raport o stanie miasta 2017, Wydział Rozwoju Miasta Urzędu miasta Krakowa, Kraków, 2018, Date of access: 13/03/2019. https://www.bip.krakow.pl/?dok_id=101965 Raport z konsultacji społecznych do AMPRK 2016, Date of access: 03/12/2018. https://www.bip.krakow.pl/_inc/rada/posiedzenia/show_pdfdoc.php?id=86323 1455