Public participation and aesthetics in decision-making in Helsinki and Moscow

Abstract

In this thesis, I explore the relationship between participatory practices in urban infrastructure planning and the possible aesthetics of the infrastructural objects that are created as a result. The relation between the two can be traced through the concept of technical artifacts. I take the notion of technical artifacts as it was described in the 20th century by Gilbert Simondon and Langdon Winner. Simondon saw technical artifacts as a manifestation of a technical worldview, and Winner associates technical artifacts with political systems they were developed in. One can consider a technical artifact any tool that was developed by a human, both physical and digital, such as bridges and online maps. The aesthetic value of such artifacts is not inherent but gained according to Simondon.

Participatory and communicative planning exist in different conditions in Helsinki and Moscow, reflecting the democratisation levels of the states’ political systems. To compare the use of traditional face-to-face and online participation methods in both cities I will review the planning context in two countries and evaluate participatory practices of two cases. I have chosen the Raide Jokeri line as a precedent taking place in Helsinki and Chords motorways for Moscow - they are both large-scale ongoing construction processes that go through residential and public spaces, interrupting the established urban environment. The planning context is studied through legislative procedures and a review of existing articles. For the evaluation of participative input, I use Nico Carpentier’s analytical model that was developed for participatory media evaluation but can be reapplied to other participatory processes as well.

Comparing the two cases I aim to find commonalities and differences in value sets of the two cases, providing a link between the resulting physical infrastructural objects and ethics through the democratic participatory tools efficiency. Without being technologically deterministic and assigning a certain aesthetic to objects produced with public participation, I delve into the resulting aesthetic features in two chosen cases and explore them.