“Architecture is a strong tool for activism because of its engagement of ideas through materials. It takes abstract ideas about equity, inclusion, and democracy and translates them into experience through place and materials, producing new spaces that embody change.”
-Nadia M. Anderson, “Public Interest Design as Praxis”
This weekend, the PID group took two important field trips that each added a new layer of complexity to our design process. Friday, our studio visited Green Gate Farms at their other location off east MLK. A meeting with Erin and Skip revealed that they have some ideas about a moveable housing structure that can be used for new farmers. They printed off information pamphlets about the idea to present to us, including a budget and some key points and intentions. They offered us building materials to jump start the project, including a compostable toilet, grey water sink, and trailer bed. The idea is that this 'starter' house is moveable in case of a flood and could be built 'affordably' for people who want to start an urban farm. It was an interesting proposal, but it left me a little perplexed about how this idea fits into our project.
Saturday, we went to Lanier Gardens and interviewed several refugees involved with the MRC. My group interviewed three men, who were all originally from Bhutan. Two of the men had spent 20 years in Nepal in a refugee camp before coming to the United States. They spoke of their pasts and their experiences with farming at home, which were both vastly different than what they have access to in Austin. One man, Nar Tamang, had spent his younger years raising cattle in a somewhat nomadic way. The other man, Dilli Ghorsai, was an agricultural businessman, who sold Guar bean or leaves, as a popular chewing product. Both of the men now use the community garden to grow vegetables for their family. They both expressed the desire for more land, but both lived close to the Lanier plot and liked the accessibility.
After these two meetings with both Green Gate Farms and the Lanier Garden participants, I am left wondering how we meld the ideas of Eric and Skip with the needs and requests of the MRC participants. Is there a way to synthesize these problems/opportunities? Furthermore, how does this project resonate with the Edwin Marty's idea of replicability throughout the City of Austin? I think that Edwin Marty and Erin and Skip use the same language regarding issues like food awareness, expansion of urban agriculture, and access to healthy foods. However, when considering the MRC participants, it is important for us to realize that they are not food activists, maybe they are not looking for change. This is their way of having some small version of the agricultural life that they once had. I wonder what they would think if at the end of this studio, we presented them with a mobile farm-house. I have a feeling they would be confused.
In the Brown and Wyatt article, “Design Thinking for Social Innovation”, the example is given of a water treatment facility in India that was not being used by some locals, despite its apparent accessibility and convenience. It seemed that in planning for the water treatment facility, the designers had considered many aspects of the local residents needs. However, there were a few details that were not carefully thought out, resulting in several locals to continue to get their water from contaminated sources. The woman who needs to carry her water home cannot carry the 5-gallon container on her head or waist. These are issues that perhaps could have been identified through observation and participation with the residents to see how they get their water to their homes. I hope we can consider carefully the answers we received on Saturday about the participant's daily schedule, family life, and transportation issues.
