Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Hosted by Terrance Ruth, this podcast decodes the language, decisions and hidden areas of local power that often seems illogical to residents. Our goal is to empower people to engage locally and to understand how significant it is to be aware and active at the local level. Once local government is logical, it will become meaningful and provide the benefits that allows for people to live a thriving life.
TANIA: It wasn't just like, oh, we can create
a poster campaign, but it had to be all of these
other things that were around it so that people
could, A, do it in a way that was authentic to
them and B, feel, you know, some sense of ownership.
Yeah. Some people came in and did a little bit,
came to a block party and, you know, we didn't
really see them again, but then there were others
who came to that block party and then were like
transformed and really got involved and we had
to be with all of those things, right? To a lot
of the work was about at a base level, de-stigmatizing
conversation around domestic violence, getting
people involved, not just with the organization,
but just getting them involved in their community.
So they really understood this as a long-term
endeavor, but it's always, I guess, when we talk
about, you know, from the ground up. It's really
boots on the ground. It's not a hierarchy by any
means. It's just who is living that truth every
day. And how can we not just involve them, but
genuinely help them feel ownership?
TERRANCE: Hello, it's Terrence Roof and welcome
to Illogical by Truth, edited by Airfluence. Today
I have Tanya Allen, who is a associate professor
of media arts, design and technology, the director
of graduate programs in media arts, design and
technology. Most important for our conversation
today, Tanya focused on design as a catalyst for
community engagement. Welcome to the show, Tanya.
TANIA: Thank you. Thanks so much.
TERRANCE: So very first question just to start
us off. I love the idea of design as a catalyst
for community engagement. How did your life story
lead you to that idea, that concept? What in the
world of design and community engagement sort
of landed you in that space? Sure.
TANIA: I won't give you the super long answer,
I'll try not. But I mean, my background is actually
not in design. So I have an undergraduate degree
in history. So I think my approach to design,
first of all, is very rooted in the humanities
and social sciences and sort of trying to understand
the world and the human experience. But also,
I'm originally from St. Louis, Missouri. My parents
were both teachers and academics. My father in
particular was a historian of science. But very
much a lot of his work, which I grew up hearing
a lot about, was about the history of science
and eugenics and the social component of science,
so science and society really. And so I think
that that really rooted me in a belief that your
contribution to the world is about social change,
is about equity, that's what you're striving for
anyway. So that's kind of the short of it. St.
Louis also is a very, very segregated city. I
lived in the city. And so I kind of grew up sort
of seeing inequality, seeing civil unrest. When
Michael Brown happened, that was very, I mean,
very, very close to me and close to where I lived
in the city. Fairly close, not super close. So
I mean, so all of that, I think, was always kind
of swirling around. And even when I started going
into design and practicing design, I always wanted
to do it with the agenda of engaging with communities,
engaging with activists and organizations that
are working in communities for community equality
and stuff like that. So I think all of those things
kind of influenced my interest in this type of
work. Before I moved to Raleigh, I was living
in Boston, and I was working with a lot of nonprofits
there, intentionally, wanting to work with nonprofits.
And part of the reason I moved to Raleigh was
to get a graduate degree in graphic design. So
my background is in branding, you know, strategy
work, graphic design, communications, etc. And
I think part of my motivation to do that was really
being confronted with how little I knew about
what I was doing. So I was really winging it and
I don't always think that's bad, right? But I
became increasingly aware that while I was winging
it and I think doing some good work with some
organizations, I wasn't really inspecting what
I was doing to the degree that I wanted to be.
And so I kind of used graduate school as a way
to take a pause from that. And I still work with
many of the organizations that I did, you know,
from Boston. But anyway, so I think that became
really an important moment for me to think more
intentionally about the ways that I wanted to
work with. Community groups and you know now that
I'm teaching to talk to students about how they
engage with community groups, individual community
members, et cetera.
TERRANCE: You know what's fascinating? My... My
brother works in the Starbucks that was birthed
after the Michael Brown incident.
TANIA: Oh, interesting.
TERRANCE: So they created a Starbucks that is
an outward face to the community and they wanted
it to be welcoming to the community, so you can
come in and there's, it doesn't really have the
appearance of any other Starbucks.
TANIA: Right, interesting.
TERRANCE: It's supposed to be a place where the
community can come in and strategize and organize
together. That's awesome. So it's a very unique
space. And so it speaks to the creative tension
that sits in that area, that region. And so it's
helpful to hear that. That's a part of your ingredients.
Yeah, yeah. Because he shares. How much he is
called to do community engagement, even as a barista.
Yeah, yes. Yeah, even as, you know. So our goal
on this podcast is always to help listeners understand
local government and to empower people to engage
locally. That's really our core desire. But we
often do not explain why community engagement
is important. We normally just assume its significance.
Why would you care to leverage design to activate
or engage with community?
TANIA: Community engagement, whether you're an
activist or whether you're a resident, I think
holds a very similar core principle to design,
which is trying to take an existing condition
and transform it into a preferred condition. And
I think that, you know, so I think I come to design
with that and working with communities, whether
it's individuals or activists, sort of with that
same common goal. I think one of the things that
we in design don't do as well, that I think community
engagement, you know, again, individuals, but
especially in the community activist world, and
this isn't universal, but... Is we don't always
interrogate. Who is this preferred condition for?
How do we know this is a preferred condition that
we're trying to take the existing one and turn
it into? You know, who are we engaging in this
process? Are we thinking about it from all points
of view? And with community engagement in general,
writ large, there's so many different players
that are always at the table that you're sort
of confronted with those differences of opinion,
perspective, agenda, et cetera. And so I think
that, you know, a part of that for design too
in design thinking is kind of embracing that,
all of those differences and trying to, and trying
to make sense of it. So I do think that that's
also in the kind of trajectory of design, design
research, design studies, and that's really where
my work is rooted now is sort of in design studies
and design research at NC State, that I think
that that sort of coming together and understanding
and trying to embrace that messiness is not always
something that we've done in design. But I think
we have some strategies for making sense of it
that can be really helpful to community organizers
and engagement, because I think a lot of times
people who are engaging in, you know, community
work, they're doing it from a very personal, passionate
perspective, which is great and is so essential,
but I think also sometimes can sort of, I don't
want to say cloud necessarily, but can impact
the way that you're engaging in the work.
TERRANCE: And I like the word messiness. I've
heard several groups, or at least government entities
or institutions shy away from community because
it's not clean and neat. And I just appreciate
that word messy, and we're not talking about messy
in a negative sense. We're just saying there's
a linear process. As a PhD student and graduate,
there's a way in which I'm trained to think in
a linear way. Community, there's no straight line.
There's a left-right. There's a pause, continue.
Yes. There's no, there's no, so when I'm thinking
of messy, I'm thinking in that way. How are you
defining messy? Because I think what you're talking
about is the place by which it becomes attractive
to people, or it becomes something to people.
TANIA: Or, you know, I mean, I think messiness
in whatever definition is always going to be a
little uncomfortable. And so it's sort of, I think
it's a little bit of a paradigm shift in To your
point, what you were just saying is not seeing
messy as negative, but seeing it as an essential
part of the process and that it's never not going
to be messy because we're moving through time.
Things are always progressing. Things are always
changing. And I'll kind of answer that too, by
saying that what a term that we use, which is,
is not a design, you know, base term is this idea
of wicked problems. I mean, it is sort of a design
based problem, based term. But, and wicked problems
aren't like world hunger, of course, is a wicked
problem. It's very complex. It's very messy, but,
you know, very small problems can also be wicked
problems. And, you know, so some of the definitions
of a wicked problem are that. It's never going
to be fully solved. You know, there's always going
to be some other issue that is created by solving
part or of a wicked problem. And so to kind of
go into it with your eyes open to that, that look,
you know, we're addressing, we want to try to
understand this problem. We know there's going
to be a lot of different perspectives. This is
a problem that I don't know has been sort of emerging
over the last 25, 50 years in various forms, whatever
it is. And, you know, we're going to come to the
table sort of understanding that there is never
going to be any perfect solution to this, but
to honestly and authentically try to address part
of it in the best way that we can and then not
to walk away and sort of clean your hands of it
and say, okay, I'm done, my job is done. So I
think in design, it's also this paradigm shift
from sort of coming in, like fixing the problem
and leaving, to kind of almost looking at a colleague
of mine, use this metaphor, which I love, thinking
of our role as designers. And again, I think community
activists, especially, or community organizations
think of it like this too. Think of us as like
gardeners, like tending and cultivating. And we
have to stay connected. And we have to read what
we've done in the intervention. And know that
it's never going to really be done. And so I think
that's kind of part of the messiness, is that
it's an ongoing process.
TERRANCE: You know, it's amazing to me. For us
to have our eyes wide open, we have to see these
social problems outside the context of. Political
narratives, political campaigns. Because they
have to present a solution. It has to have an
end product. That end product. May or may not
exist in that person's lifetime. And they have
to be honest about how wicked the problem is so
that they're entering to contribute and not entering
to solve so that the expectation around what local
governments can or can't do can also help temper
the expectation of community members entering
that conversation.
TANIA: Well, I think that's a really good... I
mean, and not to go down a political climate hole
by any means, but I do think that as citizens,
the political narrative has conditioned us to
expect these perfect solutions. And if there's
any crack in them, then we can't stand for that.
And so that reframing of expectations that you're
talking about, whether it's from a design perspective
or from a political or governmental perspective,
is so essential. And that's something I think
we can all continue to practice because...
TERRANCE: And you use the word, you use words
like participatory and co-creative process as
a means to produce empowered residents and citizens.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: Most of the everyday listeners out there
probably wouldn't use those terms rarely, if at
all. How should we understand those terms, participatory,
co-creation? How would they empower, create ownership
in residents themselves?
TANIA: Well, I mean, I think when I use the word,
you know, when I talk about participatory, so
I think those are two different things, first
of all, a little bit. So, and I'll kind of talk
about it from a design perspective, because it
might be talked about differently in community
engagement and other stuff. But from a design
perspective, when we talk about participatory,
it's quite literally just asking, you know, potential
users, potential community members, whoever's
going to be interacting with whatever it is that
we're creating, we're asking them to participate
in some aspect of the design process, whether
that's initial information gathering, whether
that's giving feedback directly to a design, so
having community meetings, whether that's, you
know, helping with us with prototyping, whatever
that is. And I think that's slightly different
than co-creative, because participatory is asking
for feedback, but the designer is still kind of
in control of what it is that's being created.
TERRANCE: Really good.
TANIA: But co-creative, at least the way that
I define it and the way I like to talk about it,
is really co-authorship. So it's slightly different
in that I think you're partnering with community
members from the beginning to understand the problem.
You are not the expert. You are looking to community
members as content experts and as experts of a
lived experience. You do not have any pre, or
to the extent that you can't. I mean, you know,
we work with clients and we work with municipalities
who have agendas, so we can't just go in there
and, you know, totally. But we try not to have
predefined ideas or solutions, so to be open-minded
and to really learn from what the community is
telling us and not just get feedback from them
or whatever, and endorsements and stuff like that.
So I think those are like slightly different.
And I really do use the language of like community
expertise a lot, because I think that even when
we engage, when I say we, I'm talking generally
just about the field of design, but I think when
we have engaged, we're using, you know, a lot
of times we can kind of fall into a trap where
we're using community members as, you know, like
a focus group or as a little litmus test, but
not really seeing them as experts of their lived
experience. And I think reframing it a little
bit does help us all be more open.
TERRANCE: I spend a lot of time in community.
I'm normally hearing a request for co-authorship.
I love how you put that. I'm normally hearing
that request, and I normally, and this is just
my own experience, so I'm not casting it broad,
I normally see institutions struggle to see expertise
in community because it's a messy element. They're
used to that nice, clean, somebody that can deliver
a particular outcome or message in the drop of
a dime. And so that messiness still creeps in
in the perception of, and so I think framing would
help. I think we're helping that way as well.
TANIA: Well, and I'll just say also that I think
that's why it's really important too, to identify
community leaders or people who can sort of be
that gateway to the larger, the community at large.
Because I mean, it's virtually impossible. You
can't speak to everybody in the community. But
if you establish those partnerships with representatives,
let's say, or key players, then you automatically
build trust. And you have a strong relationship
to the... So I think that kind of stuff is very
important for design in general, especially working
with communities.
TERRANCE: And now your work emphasized social
change. And not just social change, but from the
ground up. Why would this be important? Why would
anybody ever want to take that generally? What's
the benefits of that approach?
TANIA: Well, I mean, I think in a nutshell, it's
the, you know, coming at it again from a design
perspective, but even from a policy, it's the
community members that are going to be living
with the decisions, right? And I talk a lot with
my students and even with my clients when we're
sort of engaging in this work, or clients or partners.
You know, if you build it, they won't necessarily
come. So especially when we're talking about community
engagement, there has to be a long-term strategy
involved in not just getting people engaged in
the first place, but keeping them engaged. And
one of the best strategies is to have buy-in because
people have contributed to the process and they
feel like it's theirs. They own it. I mean, because
they're the ones who are going to be living with
it. And so I worked for many years with an organization
in Boston, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, and I
still work with them. They're in a different phase
of their work now, but that was really focused
on preventing domestic violence and their whole
strategy was, you know, there's these statistics
that people who are in violent situations, if
they don't have a strong community network around
them, it's very difficult for them to get out
of those violent situations, right? So a lot of
the work was about, at a base level, destigmatizing
conversation around domestic violence, getting
people involved, not just with the organization,
but just getting them involved in their community.
So they really understood this as a long-term
endeavor of changing community dynamics, getting
so many people from the community involved. And
so I'll just give you like an anecdote with a
campaign that we did where, you know, we put together
this task force of like 35 people, all different
ages, you know, genders, ethnicities, who were
already kind of engaged in the community. And
then they were involved in everything from sort
of the messaging to the strategy for like, how
are we gonna, it was a campaign that we were gonna
do. So how do we get other people involved in
this? We had like block parties where people would
just come. They became like involved in, they
were the content for like the photographs that
we created, not just this task force group, but
other members of the community. So they were all
kind of becoming a part of the campaign through
its creation of it. And then they went out and
they like hung up the posters and the little thingies
that we created and you know, whatever. And then
they also, in addition to that, you know, we had
these other things that were like these kitchen
table conversations that were more about, you
know, really getting people to connect with other
people. So my point in like telling that story
is that it wasn't just like, oh, we can create
a poster campaign. But it had to be all of these
other things that were around it so that people
could, A, do it in a way that was authentic to
them. And B, feel, you know, some sense of ownership.
Some people came in and did a little bit, came
to a block party and you know, we didn't really
see them again. But then there were others who
came to that block party and then were like transformed
and really got involved. And we had to be okay
with all of those things, right? But it's always,
I guess, when we talk about, you know, from the
ground up, it's really boots on the ground. It's
not a hierarchy by any means. It's just who is
living that truth every day and how can we not
just involve them but genuinely help them feel
ownership over. And I don't know if that was the
right strategy, but it's kind of part of a process
of really intentionally wanting people to become
a part of all phases of whatever the program is
that you're sort of creating.
TERRANCE: And you know what's sort of some of
my personal experiences in ground up. Is part
of that ground-up journey. Is around. You, the
listener, I was a listener in that moment, listening
to pain. Historical struggle. Not just saying
trust, but like, why is there distrust? And they,
you know, sharing that pain. Sometimes I might
be the end product, or the outcome, or the output
is yelling at me.
TANIA: Yeah, yeah.
TERRANCE: You know, or crying with me, or whatever
that may be. So that's some of that messiness
that you have to almost expect.
TANIA: Right.
TERRANCE: When there's generations of, of disparity
and pain and struggle.
TANIA: Trauma.
TERRANCE: And trauma. And again, this doesn't
eliminate their expert role.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: It just allows you discover that wisdom
is in that space.
TANIA: Well, and I think that like, I don't know
if this is true in the work that you do, but I
think in design, there's this, or there can be,
this assumption of like, oh, I'm bringing this
to you. You should want me to be involved. Look
at how lucky you are that I'm bringing this to
you. Instead of, I value your time, I value your
voice, I value your experience and your knowledge,
and I want to make this an enjoyable experience
for you. So, back to this group that we worked
at, the neighborhood was middle, lower income,
and everything that we did, or that they did,
I shouldn't take credit for this, involved food
and fellowship, because they were like, we want
to feed people. Like, this will take a burden
off of them. It will show us, show that, indicate,
because this is true, that we value their time,
and we want this to be an enjoyable experience,
that we don't expect them. They don't owe us anything.
We owe them, if anything. And so, there was always
that sort of approach to it, which was, we value
you. And I think a lot of times we aren't, I'll
just speak for design, there's an assumption that
by inviting them to the table, that we've somehow
given people this great opportunity. No, it's
not just in design.
TERRANCE: I've actually heard individuals say.
Oh, we brought this and they didn't want it. They
missed out on this. No, no, no, no. Their input
is the goal.
TANIA: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
TERRANCE: You missed out on an opportunity to
really pull from that wisdom.
TANIA: Yes, that's a really good, that's an interesting
way to say that.
TERRANCE: But I... I like that you merge design
thinking with community engagement. I don't see
that often. Usually I see community engagement
as a static moment. A one-time invitation.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: Not a relationship. Right, right. One
second, but I like how you merge those two together.
What does that look like in local communities?
Can you help? I see how these two fields or concepts
that normally people don't marry together, how
do you do that?
TANIA: I mean, there's a lot of different ways
that I guess I have done that. And I think one
of the things, so, you know, it has been through
sort of workshops, for example. But where we kind
of go through the design thinking process. And
I think one of the things that is helpful is it's
actually, it's pretty fun. Like it's fun to do
it. It's a way, it's a social activity. It's a
way for people to get kind of connected to one
another. It's fun to like create things. And especially
when you sort of relieve them, or us all of the
burden of it being perfect, right? I mean, just
that sort of activity of both physical, creative,
social, whatever, just breaks the ice in a way
that I think other things don't. So that's kind
of one very tactical thing. I think also co-producing
things together. So when I'm doing a workshop
or when I'm engaging a group or whatever it is,
I love to have them have to produce something
that we talk about. So it's not just them giving
feedback, it's them putting ideas and thoughts
and images and whatever on paper and then talking
through why they did what they did. And I think
there's kind of, I hate the word empowering, but
I think there is an energizing component to that.
And then you've also got like an artifact and
you've got kind of evidence of what the thinking
is, which can then be used to describe or explain
something in the future, can be pointed back to,
and as evidence of like, this is what we heard
because you're showing us that this is what you
were thinking, and now here's how we've responded
to it, or here's what we think our next step is
going to be, or whatever that is. So I mean, that's
kind of like the more maybe specific way of answering
that question.
TERRANCE: What I hear... Is sort of why we started
this whole podcast for Ella Baker. Her philosophy,
like you already have what you need.
TANIA: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
TERRANCE: Like you're already prepared to do what
you need to do. Right. I'm a facilitator, but
you are the leader. And oftentimes I go in communities
where they don't see themselves as creators. They
don't see themselves as designers. But they live
in a history that have produced amazing creators,
amazing designers, all local. And it's almost
like that history, you just need to be reminded
of that history. So I like when you was like,
that word empower assumed that I'm transferring
something to you. No, you just need to be awoken
to what's already living.
TANIA: And given the space, given the space and
the opportunity to contribute it. Because I think
that's what, it's like, okay, contribute now,
you know? Here's this little window.
TERRANCE: That's so good.
TANIA: And you have to like shove your ideas through
it rather than being given the space to do it.
TERRANCE: And I consider that one of my weak areas
because the messiness that produce a rich meal
in the end. For me, I'm an ingredient guy. They
said only two minutes. I gotta add the rice at
this point. Sometimes you add the rice an hour.
Yeah, yes. Sometimes you have.
TANIA: Not the worst.
TERRANCE: And so for me, I often enter the room
and I go, listen, I was trained for many years
to where I ended with a PhD and it has created
blind spots for me in creating. And I want to
be transparent about that. So I'm going to march
in this linear fashion. I need y'all to move me
left and right. I need you to move me back. I
enter the room stating my weaknesses so that we
become a full room and not just leaning on a social
perception of expertise. But like, listen, you're
helping me fill in blind spots. And so for me,
that was one of my areas. The rice has to be put
in about two minutes. I don't know.
TANIA: Yeah, and I think, I mean, I don't know
if this kind of... This might be a little bit
of a tangent, but I also think in... You know,
so a lot of times in engaging with community members
or, again, groups or whoever, I'm sort of walking
through the design process. But I think what I'm
trying to emphasize is, aside from that sort of
fun part, is the iterative nature of design, which
I think is very aligned with how community engagement
and policy works. It's iterative, and it's not
gonna be solved right away, and there's gonna
need to be a constant evaluation, tweaking, changing,
or whatever, but also adaptable, flexible, and
adaptive thinking, too. And this maybe goes more,
not the community members so much as the policymakers
and the government officials that they might be,
who I understand have some very hard agendas that
they need to fill. So I think from sort of a community
member's standpoint, also saying, OK, this is
part one of this process, part two of this process.
I just have to keep coming back. And so to kind
of set expectations, like what we were talking
about earlier in the conversation about this is
a process, this is iterative, we've got to tweak,
we've got to try some things out, tweak. And so
I do try to kind of bring that in to whatever
work that I'm doing with the community members
as well.
TERRANCE: I want to give you two more questions.
Some of our listeners do not feel engaged. They
don't feel empowered, they don't feel energized
or creative or heard. And this is something that's
both said outwardly and through body language
and silence. Sure. So you sort of hear that saying.
What advice would you give to someone seeking
to find meaningful community participation that
extends beyond just physical involvement in meetings
or going to the city council or the county and
county commission meeting to a person that's being
valued for the generation of ideas, the creation
of ideas. So it's not just... Attendance, but
it's what you produce is important. What advice
do you have for someone that's seeking to move
from this conversation to plug into more meaningful
engagement?
TANIA: I mean, that is, I mean, that's a tough
question. That's a really tough question. And
I'll kind of answer that maybe in two ways. First
of all, I don't think it's the job of the community
member as much as it's the job of the people in
power to try attempt to bring people in. So that's
kind of one thing. And I think but I think what
what in my this is just my opinion but I think
what what advice I would give to community members
or individuals who feel disconnected is to try
to start small and to try and to start with something
that is a meaningful to them and where they can
potentially see change. So whether that's a city
block, whether that's something between you and
your neighbor, whether that's something within
a social circle or network that you already have
established, I think those, you know, not putting
the burden on yourself to jump from no engagement
to like full engagement. It's a process, right?
And it takes, it's, it's baby steps. And I know
again, for me, you know, for me to feel like I
can move forward, I just need to take the first
step. And that can often and often does happen
by engaging with people that you're already connected
to and you know, floating an idea with them of
something that you might want to change in your
immediate community or whatever that is. I mean,
so that's kind of one thing. I will say that,
that there are really great resources out there
also, especially for people who are kind of interested
in design thinking. So IDEO, which I'm sure you
know about is a fairly big like design firm. They
have a whole wing that's open IDEO that has a
lot of tools and tool kits and you know, to kind
of use design thinking in different capacities,
but community engagement being one of them. So
I think that's a really great resource for people
who are again, maybe tapped in, maybe not, but
especially if they want to test out some ideas,
you know, in an informal network, try to do something
in their very immediate community, again, maybe
even in their city block or between a couple neighbors,
whatever that is. I think that's a really good
resource. I also think, you know, if you have
access, if you have a bigger project or agenda
and you're really interested, you know, but maybe
going to the, you know, city government feels
a little daunting, you know, reaching out to people
who are at, in universities, who are doing projects,
or, you know, in colleges of design. I know at
NC State, we are always wanting to do extension
and engagement work and partner with communities
to help them. And so those can be excellent resources
to both, you know, help with an idea that you
have and how do you frame it and how do you put
it, you know, what do you want to do with it,
brainstorm, all that kind of stuff. But also that
have different, you know, sort of connections
to other entities, you know, or institutions or
whatever. So those are kind of my two, I think
sort of pieces of advice.
TERRANCE: The first one I love because... So many
community members carry that burden.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: It's their job.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: To feed their kids, go to work, to somehow
make it to a meeting or make it to it. That weight
is on them. And I love the pivot of, you know,
the weight is on, because in the research world,
it's the researcher. Right.
TANIA: Yeah, totally.
TERRANCE: That has to find representation.
TANIA: Totally, totally, totally.
TERRANCE: It's a job. Right. I mean, that's a
part of your steps.
TANIA: Right.
TERRANCE: But I think local government, that pivot
to where it's on them to have to go and make sure
that they're hearing the right words. Yeah, yeah.
And the second part.
TANIA: And inviting. Yes. Inviting people, not
just like it's open, but I would like to invite
you to the table. Yeah.
TERRANCE: And then we, again, Ella Baker, we brought
it, one of the archivists from Shaw. And she talked
about the room. The hall is still up, but there
was renovations. But there was a small little
basement classroom.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: She started small, changed the whole
United States, but it was a small little base
for her. College students and she started there.
Yeah. And most people would have tried to start
at the provost. Right.
TANIA: No, I think that's absolutely right. I
mean, we feel like in order to make change, we
have this assumption it needs to happen at a certain
level or a certain scale. And that can prevent
us from starting, from taking that step. So I
mean, that's a perfect example of get a couple
people together, have a coffee, talk about what
you might want to do, talk about what the issues
are, you know? But it doesn't have to be separate
from community, you know, social, socialization
or community. And in fact, it shouldn't be, in
my opinion. I mean, that's what makes it fun,
right?
TERRANCE: And I, you know, some individuals are
gonna be hearing you and hearing about IDEO for
the first time and they've never been in that
space. Right. And so they're trying to see where
the welcome mat is for that space. And I'm glad
that you gave some areas in which they have ownership.
TANIA: Yeah.
TERRANCE: Your own little coffee shop, your own
space. I think that's powerful. So last question
outside of asking or sharing how people can reach
you is what best practices from across the country
can you share? Where are communities doing this
well? Yeah. Like where are the sort of, sort of,
highlight in the country or in the world that
they really have a grip on.
TANIA: I mean, I'll kind of give maybe a couple
different examples that are different scales of
things. So here locally, Aaron White, who ran
Community Food Lab, I don't know if you're familiar
with him and his work, but I think he really did
an excellent job of, you know, and he's in the
PhD program now and sort of there's a little bit
of a pause on that, but of really thinking about
design thinking, community engagement and public
policy and government sort of all intertwined
with one another. He worked on projects through
Community Food Lab that were very small to more
systems-based. And I think in that way, working
at these different levels was really powerful
in thinking about the very different ways that
community engagement and community and change
happens. So I think we have a tendency to think
about it like we were just talking about at this
kind of policy level, but it happens at all these
different levels. And in working in this space,
I think what his is a great example of is working
in all of these different levels simultaneously
and kind of understanding that those are all necessary
to larger change and in Community Food Lab, it's
about food and food systems and food access and
stuff like that. Another sort of organization
that is working in New York City that I think
is really interesting is called the Center for
Urban Pedagogy. And that actually brings together
designers and community. I mean, it could be nonprofits,
it could be vendors or whatever to help make policy
more legible and understandable to residents or
to community members. And I think that's a really
interesting initiative because part of what is
I think a barrier to community engagement is not
understanding the policy and the procedures that
are potentially in place fighting against whatever
the changes that you wanna have happen. And so
on a level, and again, they're not trying to make
every policy legible, but they're taking one policy
around, street vending or whatever it is and sort
of understanding how that works. So I think that's
a really good one. And then, I mean, I do think
for as imperfect as it is, I think what the City
Council in Minneapolis did around housing and
the way that they engaged the community, I mean,
exhaustive two year and just 150 meetings or something
like that. Like, I mean, it was an ongoing process
and the mayor himself when they were, so the background
is changing their zoning so there's no single
family houses in Minneapolis. To allow for more
density, to allow for more housing equity and
housing access. Historically zoning has been a
very racist tactic for excluding people of color
from home ownership. And so, and that's all still
in bet. Now it's economic, but that's all still
there. And so to look at that and to take such
a bold move to change their zoning policy, and
I'm not gonna, I'm gonna paraphrase this, not
exactly, but the mayor said, historic injustice
of this magnitude and economic injustice of this
magnitude requires a revolutionary change in the
way we're thinking about this thing. So when we
speak about the perspectives, you need a City
Council who is willing to take the risk to do
something that revolutionary. We'll see how it
all plays out, obviously, there's a lot of other
issues going on, not just in Minneapolis, but
all over the country, but I do think that that
move was really powerful and a real endorsement
of trying to make change not just around the procedures,
but also in some really fundamental policies that
have historically really created generational
trauma have prevented generational wealth building.
I mean, when you were talking about going back
and going back, that's really looking, taking
the long view. And I think that's really inspirational
to me.
TERRANCE: You know, we had a conversation on a
previous episode around, this idea of... Allowing
people to fully understand when decisions are
being made. So once you decode the language to
where it's understandable, there's a timing that
happens around zoning. And most people are activated
when they start to see physical representation
of those decisions. Yeah. What would also be helpful
is like when these decisions are made, so when
you can organize and actually have influence on
the decision on the co-ownership of those decisions.
And I just love the resources that you've given
out. You have articles that you've written. You've
taught at many different workshops and seminars
and conventions. How can people reach you and
your work? I was poking around on your work and
the mapping work that you're doing right now is
actually pretty exciting.
TANIA: Yes, I'm very excited. I am very excited
about that. Yes, thank you. I am on Instagram,
although I am not a big social media poster, I
can assume. I don't post quite so much. I need
to kind of flip that, I think, a little bit. But
at NC State, I have a lab with a colleague, Sarah
Queen, who's an architect, that does use mapping
and visualization as a way to kind of illuminate
and uncover invisible factors contributing specifically
to housing inequity and inequity in the built
environment. That's sort of our focus. We are
working on a new project, which I'm very excited
about, that is looking at housing inequality throughout
the US, but through this region. So Raleigh Triangle,
the region itself. What I'm really excited about
with that project is how it sort of evolved. So
we started off thinking, we really want to hear
from the residents, which we do. But then as we
stepped back, we're like, well, there's a lot
of people working in this space, obviously. There's
activists, there's politicians, there's developers.
And so we really need to start to understand,
as what we were talking about earlier, how each
of these perspectives and agenda are contributing
to where we are now, but also how we got to where
we are now. So we're kind of stepping back and
saying, we really need to understand this landscape
a little bit better. We need to start to, and
it also gives us an opportunity to start to have
conversations with and invite them into the process
with the people who are our boots on the ground
working on this and to form sort of our own. Opinion,
research, whatever we want to call it, based on
those conversations. So I'm excited because it's
sort of gonna be using and testing a lot of the
things that we were talking about today. Building
a network, you know, hopefully, building buy-in,
speaking to people at all different sort of levels,
you know, whatever. So I'm really excited about
that. So that project is going to be encapsulated.
We have an NC State website address, which is
design.ncse.edu slash colab, C-O dash L-A-B. So
if people are interested, and if there's anybody
out there listening to this podcast who is intimately
familiar with this, wants to reach out to be a
part of this project network, would love to hear
from people. And then I'm just on the NC State
website too, so you can shoot me an email, and
I'd love to, you know, talk more to anybody about
this.
TERRANCE: And again, I thank you. Your graphics
on that work is amazing.
TANIA: Oh, thanks.
TERRANCE: So again, this has been an episode of
Illogical by Truth, edited by Air Fluence, and
we thank you again for listening and supporting.
So I'm Terrence Roof, and I'll see you on the
next episode.