Future Fest: a design concept for deliberative engagement in the urban planning process

Format: Papers, RSD6, Topic: Architecture & Planning

Christopher Pearsell-Ross

systems oriented design
deliberative democracy
urban planning

This paper presents the research and analysis process, and results (the Future Fest concept) of a school project in the 2016 Systems Oriented Design course at the Oslo School of Architecture and design, as well as some critical reflections. Taught by Birger Sevaldson and Linda Blaasvær, the course focused on the theme of democracy, and partnered with Tønsberg municipality in Norway.

The research process and design proposal from this course are built on 4 conceptual models: the Three Horizons Model, as presented by Curry and Hodgson; the Pace Layers model, as developed my Stuart Brand; the Ladder of Citizen Participation, created by Sherry R. Arnstein; and a model of deliberative democracy proposed by the author.

The Three Horizons Model, developed by Curry and Hodgson in their paper Seeing in Multiple Horizons: Connecting Futures to Strategy, connects systems and futures studies. It outlines an approach to futures studies built upon outlining 3 separate horizons: the present; the desired future; and an intermediate or transitionary stage. This method allows for divergent possibilities and takes into consideration different speeds of change within a system.

Stuart Brand’s Pace Layers model, developed from architectural practice, is a concept that outlines different layers within a given object of study (be it a building, a company or the whole world), each with different speeds of change. The model allows for analysis of change within a given system across multiple, interrelated time scales.

Arnstein, in her paper A Ladder of Citizen Participation, develops a foundational theory model of participation as an 8-runged ladder, moving from non-participation at the bottom, through tokenism in the middle, up to citizen power at the top. Her model highlights the diverse range of participatory practices and establishes a normative hierarchy for practitioners working in the public realm.

The author also presents a self-generated model of deliberative democracy, breaking down elements of a healthy, functioning democracy into four categories: formal structures, such as legislative assemblies; institutions, such as human rights and a free press; situations, such as high voter turnout, economic stability, and diverse political debate; and principles or ideals, such as consent, equity and self-determination. These four categories can be seen as blocks stacked on top of one another, reaching to the height of a healthy democracy. If the tower is unbalanced, democracy can be seen as unstable. This model helps to locate design projects and interventions within a range of interrelated systems within the broad concept of democracy.

These conceptual models were used to create a research agenda and theoretical framework for problem definition and concept generation, focused on deliberative democracy and participation in the urban planning process. Working with Tønsberg municipality as a context, a week long site visit was conducted, with interviews and meetings with various stakeholders the municipal government, including city planners.

Giga-mapping was then used as a tool to develop an understanding of the complex system of participation in urban planning, and a zip analysis was implemented to identify key areas for further research and potential intervention and innovation. Building on this systemic understanding, a series of semi-structured stakeholder interviews was conducted. These interviews helped to identify 5 key priorities for any design intervention: communication, trust, knowledge, capacity, and accountability/efficiency.

With these key priorities identified as conceptual goals for a design process, ideation and concept generation began. Through sketching and modelling, a series of 34 potential design concepts were developed and then analyzed in a matrix, weighing variables such as systemic impact, synergies, thresholds, the 5 key priorities, and time frames. The Future Fest concept emerged as a clear front-runner, having low thresholds to implementation and high levels of potential systemic impact.

Future Fest is envisioned as a collaborative, open-platform festival bringing together members of the public with cultural, institutional and municipal partners to reconceptualize the culture of participation around the built environment and municipal planning process. By applying the 4 conceptual frameworks as lenses to the learnings from the site visits and interviews, the culture of participation itself was identified as the critical locus for a design intervention. Cities are already hotbeds of activity and engagement – just not necessarily in the formal processes of civic consultation.

By moving the fences, as it were, to include a broader range of participatory activities, led by a broader range of individuals and groups, the Future Fest concept hopes to normalize participation and engagement with the urban planning process. By situating the formal processes of participation (many of which are mandated by law) within a vibrant, diverse and open community context, it is hoped that a stronger culture of participation and engagement can be cultivated, broadening civic engagement, and at the same time diversifying the kinds of activities and inputs that are valued by the public service and political leadership.

Citation Data

Author(s): OCTOBER 2017
Title: Future Fest: a design concept for deliberative engagement in the urban planning process
Published in: Proceedings of Relating Systems Thinking and Design
Article No.:
Symposium Dates:
First published: 12 October 2017
Last update:
Publisher Identification:

Copyright Information

Proceedings of Relating Systems Thinking and Design (ISSN 2371-8404) are published annually by the Systemic Design Association, a non-profit scholarly association leading the research and practice of design for complex systems: 3803 Tønsberg, Norway (922 275 696).


Open Access article published under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License. This permits anyone to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or form according to the licence terms.

Suggested citation format (APA)

Author(s). (20##). Article title. Proceedings of Relating Systems Thinking and Design, RSD##. Article ##.

Publishing with RSD

Proceedings of Relating Systems Thinking and Design are published online and include the contributions for each format.

Papers and presentations are entered into a single-blind peer-review process, meaning reviewers see the authors’ names but not vice versa. Reviewers consider the quality of the proposed contribution and whether it addresses topics of interest or raises relevant issues in systemic design. The review process provides feedback and possible suggestions for modifications.

The Organising Committee reviews and assesses workshops and systems maps & exhibits with input from reviewers and the Programme Committee.

Editor: Cheryl May
Peter Jones
Ben Sweeting

The Scholars Spiral

In 2022, the Systemic Design Association adopted the scholars spiral—a cyclic non-hierarchical approach to advance scholarship—and in 2023, launched Contexts—The Systemic Design Journal. Together, the RSD symposia and Contexts support the vital emergence of supportive opportunities for scholars and practitioners to publish work in the interdisciplinary field of systemic design.

The Systemic Design Association's membership ethos is to co-create the socialization and support for all members to contribute their work, find feedback and collaboration where needed, and pursue their pathways toward research and practice outcomes that naturally build a vital design field for the future.


Verified by MonsterInsights