This chapter examines how momentum for policy innovations emerged through co-evolutionary learning among actors engaged with the urban policy lab. Rather than relying on a single heroicheroic leader, policy innovation cultivators utilised the Lab as a co-creative and facilitative space to plant new ways of making policy and to try practical, co-created solutions. Centring an empathetic policy process, they mobilised partners through shared meanings and boundary-spanning practices. The Food Council became a key vehicle, helping to reframe an urban farm as a Bio-Circular-Green initiative that connected the right to food with waste management, air quality, and city wellbeing. Budget lines and memoranda of understanding facilitated experimentation; however, thin institutional connections constrained durable adoption when political leadership changed. Even so, collaboration widened across municipalities, broadening participation and lowering perceived risks associated with trialtrial and learning. Although the journey faced many disappointments and struggles in a hierarchical society, there were also regular small wins. Most importantly, actors, particularly civil society and laypeoplelaypeople who wish to co-create solutions for a better city, came to see the Lab as a space of possibility within an asymmetrical, hierarchical, elite-dominated, and centrally steered context. This sustains hope and helps keep the ecosystem generative for cultivating policy innovations.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Co-evolution

  • Pobsook Chamchong

摘要

This chapter examines how momentum for policy innovations emerged through co-evolutionary learning among actors engaged with the urban policy lab. Rather than relying on a single heroicheroic leader, policy innovation cultivators utilised the Lab as a co-creative and facilitative space to plant new ways of making policy and to try practical, co-created solutions. Centring an empathetic policy process, they mobilised partners through shared meanings and boundary-spanning practices. The Food Council became a key vehicle, helping to reframe an urban farm as a Bio-Circular-Green initiative that connected the right to food with waste management, air quality, and city wellbeing. Budget lines and memoranda of understanding facilitated experimentation; however, thin institutional connections constrained durable adoption when political leadership changed. Even so, collaboration widened across municipalities, broadening participation and lowering perceived risks associated with trialtrial and learning. Although the journey faced many disappointments and struggles in a hierarchical society, there were also regular small wins. Most importantly, actors, particularly civil society and laypeoplelaypeople who wish to co-create solutions for a better city, came to see the Lab as a space of possibility within an asymmetrical, hierarchical, elite-dominated, and centrally steered context. This sustains hope and helps keep the ecosystem generative for cultivating policy innovations.