Del Barn Raising al Community Empowerment: el legado de Karl Linn y John Turner

CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and John Turner Del Barn Raising al Community Empowerment: el legado de Karl Linn y John Turner PATRICIA FRAILE-GARRIDO Architect Assistant Professor, School of Architecture Tulane University (New Orleans, US) [email protected] ORCID: 0009-0006-5865-7146 INÉS MARTÍN-ROBLES Architect / PhD in Architecture Associate Professor, UVA School of Architecture University of Virginia (Charlottesville, US) [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0001-9160-6064 Recibido/Received: 26-09-2023; Aceptado/Accepted: 15-03-2024 Cómo citar/How to cite: Fraile-Garrido, Patricia & Martín-Robles, Inés (2024): “From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and John Turner”, Ciudades, 27, pp. 1-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24197/ciudades.27.2024.1-21 Artículo de acceso abierto distribuido bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC-BY 4.0). / Open access article under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY 4.0). Abstract: This article examines the lasting impact of architects Karl Linn and John Turner on community development and informal settlements. Grounded in the barn raising tradition, their distinct yet converging paths highlight the power of community participation, collaboration, and self-help in marginalized neighborhoods. Linn's Neighborhood Commons projects and Turner's ideas on self-help housing and user-centered design have influenced participatory practices, challenged institutional norms, and prioritized a process over product approach in today's complex urban landscapes. This exploration underscores the profound impact of their work on neighborhood improvement and inclusive urban environments. Keywords: self-help housing, barn raising, Karl Linn, John F.C. Turner, participatory urbanism. Resumen: Este artículo explora la influencia que han tenido los arquitectos Karl Linn y John Turner en el desarrollo comunitario y los asentamientos informales. Partiendo de la tradición norteamericana del barn raising, o construcción comunitaria de graneros, sus trayectorias ponen de relieve el poder de la participación comunitaria en los barrios marginados. Los proyectos Neighborhood Commons de Linn y las ideas de autoconstrucción de Turner desafiaron las políticas institucionales y han tenido una enorme repercusión en las prácticas urbanísticas colaborativas actuales de mejoramiento barrial y entornos urbanos inclusivos. 2 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 Palabras clave: autoconstrucción, construcción comunitaria, Karl Linn, John F.C. Turner, urbanismo participativo. In the field of architecture, the concept of community development has evolved over the years and is rooted in a rich tapestry of influences. Foremost among these is the tradition of barn-raising in the United States, a testament to the power of collective effort and shared resources in shaping communities. Two notable architects, Karl Linn and John Turner, each drew inspiration from this tradition, albeit in different contexts and with unique approaches. While they never formally acknowledged each other's work, their parallel journeys, driven by a commitment to fostering community, collaboration, self-help and a belief in process over product, converged at MIT in the late 1960s and early 1970s 1 . Their ideas resonated with the nature of informal settlements, and slum upgrading became a central focus for both architects 2 . They believed in the transformative power of community participation and self-help in this context, which went beyond physical improvements to include economic and social processes that could uplift these marginalized communities. This approach was very much in keeping with the spirit of the 1960s, a time when calls for social justice and equality were reverberating across the United States 3 . In line with growing criticism of public housing, urban renewal and modernist visions of urban development, both architects rebelled with a focus on human-centered design, challenging authority and advocating a change in the role of government to a less intrusive one. Drawing on Linn's archive collection at Berkeley, as well as Linn and Turner's publications and bibliography, this paper begins by situating the barnraising practices of rural America as a pioneering model for community development, and speculates how these practices may have been the seeds of both architects' interest in mutual self-help architecture. The article then presents Linn and Turner's ideas in their historical context and their ability to translate their 1 There is no evidence that they exchanged correspondence or mentioned each other in their work, possibly because they were working on different geographical contexts. In 2000, Turner admitted that he was isolated to academic literature and networks outside of what was happening in Peru (Harris, 2003: 261). 2 Slum upgrading refers to improvements in housing and/or basic infrastructure in slum areas (UN-HABITAT, 2014: 16). For Turner, informality meant uncontrolled, unplanned neighborhoods; for Linn, it referred to slum-like neighborhoods in disenfranchised areas of the United States, traditionally occupied by the displaced. 3 In the 1960s, a growing demand for greater participation and representation in society, inspired by movements such as civil rights and women's liberation, led to the institutionalization of a broad participatory agenda through President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs. These initiatives, including the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 and the Model Cities program, mandated greater community involvement in response to the social and economic challenges facing declining urban areas. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 3 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 social consciousness into design action. Finally, the paper considers how they have been evaluated by other scholars, and their influence on architecture to come, seeking to distinguish their different strategies and to identify commonalities between them, while recognizing the profound contributions of each to the modern understanding of the commons and the collaborative and democratic approach to shaping the city. 1. BARN RAISING: THE ORIGINS OF MUTUAL SELF-HELP IN THE UNITED STATES The practice of “barn raising” is a cherished tradition rooted in the history of rural North America in the 18th and 19th centuries. At a time when large and costly barns were essential to farm life but beyond the means of individual families, communities came together in an exemplary display of collective action. The origins of barn-raising can be traced back to medieval England and continental Europe, but evidence points to its association with pre-industrial America, especially in areas where skilled labor was scarce (Ensminger, 1992: 5). To meet this challenge, neighbors banded together to provide the necessary labor. The communal aspect of barn-raising was deeply ingrained, embodying the principles of cooperation and mutual aid that underpinned rural life and that made these communities excellent and self-sufficient settlers in North America (Arthur & Witney, 1972: 215). The process was simple but labor intensive. A group of up to a hundred men worked together to raise the massive wooden frames into place. Work was voluntary –yet mandatory, and unpaid 4 . Meanwhile, women played a crucial role, providing communal meals and support, fostering a festive atmosphere around the laborious event (Stevenson, 1950: 440) (Figure 1). As the 19th century progressed, hired labor gradually replaced the barnraising tradition. However, echoes of this practice persist in contemporary community building projects, as we will see in the following pages. Today, barn raising continues in some Amish and Old Order Mennonite communities, particularly in Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania and parts of Canada 5 . For these communities, participation in barn raising remains mandatory, underscoring the enduring importance of community values and mutual aid. In essence, barn raising exemplifies the collective strength of a community in which each member contributes selflessly, fostering a legacy of togetherness, cooperation and support in the midst of America's westward expansion (Bronner, 2006: 72). 4 The only man to receive a fee for his service was the master carpenter. Also, all community members were expected to attend; failure to do so could lead to censure within the community. 5 See Amish documentary by Burton Buller (Wesner, 2023). 4 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 Figure 1: Process of barn raising and final communal meal at Floradale, Ontario. Source: Arthur & Witney, 1972: 217-222. 2. KARL LINN: PIONEERING COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT Karl Linn (1923-2005) may not be a household name in the field of landscape architecture, but his impact on the discipline and the communities he served is immeasurable. Born in 1923 in a small village in northeastern Germany, Linn's early years were marked by a unique upbringing amidst orchards and a deep connection to the land. It was during this time that the seeds of his later work in landscape architecture and community development were sown. Linn's formative years were profoundly influenced by a fusion of zionism, socialism, and the communal lifestyle of the kibbutzim in Palestine 6 . These experiences instilled in him a strong sense of common purpose, egalitarianism, and a close relationship with the land (Linn, 2007: 9). As he grew older, however, Linn came to reject zionism, viewing it as exclusionary and oppressive (Linn, 2005: 20, 26). This rejection, rooted in his personal experiences of persecution 6 Zionism is the Jewish nationalist movement that emerged in the 19th century, and kibbutzim, originated in Israel, are idealistic communities based on agriculture that combined elements of socialism and zionism. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 5 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 and displacement 7 , set him on a path to explore new avenues for positive change and contributed to his participatory ideologies. Linn's journey took him from the fields of agriculture and horticulture to the bustling streets of New York City in 1948, where he began practicing child psychoanalysis and studying body-oriented therapy. His background in agriculture and horticulture, combined with his evolving social consciousness, eventually drew him to the field of landscape architecture. In 1952, he founded his own design-build firm, and soon after, although his private practice was thriving, he made a pivotal decision to shift his focus from corporate commissions to exploring how landscape architecture could serve a broader social cause (Hirsch, 2014). Linn believed in landscaping as an "ethic" with healing powers, and from then on, he would address the segregation and alienation prevalent in American cities (Linn, 1959). 2.1. Linn’s recurring ideas embodied in the Neighborhood Commons One of the core ideas in Linn's work was to involve community residents in the design and construction of their own open spaces. He recognized that many public facilities failed because they lacked the active participation of neighborhood residents (Linn, 2007: 114). Therefore, when he joined the Department of Landscape Architecture at the University of Pennsylvania in 1959, he developed his concept of "Neighborhood Commons”. “Neighborhood Commons” were parks and playgrounds to be built on vacant lots in distressed neighborhoods, reusing materials and incorporating volunteer labor, with the goal of improving the community through self-help efforts, reaffirming its identity and serving as active poles of resident interaction (Figure 2). Linn's approach was to transform these vacant spaces into "self-help parks", in which he played the role of facilitator rather than traditional designer or expert (Hirsch, 2014). The construction of a neighborhood commons became an opportunity to involve marginalized residents, disenchanted with top-down urban renewal, in the design and construction of their own collective spaces, and to participate in the collective act of productive labor (Figure 3). In Linn's words: “People are alienated from their physical environment if they are unable to leave their personal imprints on their immediate surroundings. Relegating human beings to the role of passive spectators of their environment threatens their mental equilibrium, and robs them of the opportunity to assert their authority, to develop mastery over their places of habitat.” (Linn, 1969: 65). 7 In the 1930s, Nazis forced Linn´s family to leave Germany and seek refuge in Palestine. 6 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 Figure 2: Children helping clearing debris from the Neighborhood Commons’ lot in Philadelphia. Source: Linn, 1972: 76, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Pennsylvania. Figure 3: Urban barn raising. Volunteers working on the commons. Source: Linn, 1990a: 36, Karl Linn Collection, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 7 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 By engaging in mutual aid and voluntary cooperation, citizens experienced a sense of interdependence and fulfillment that Linn compared to the historical practice of barn raising, emphasizing the collaborative effort and how such a communal act created meaningful physical spaces (Hirsch, 2015; Linn, 1990a; Linn, 1990b) 8 . For Linn, the act of building a commons was more important than the physical outcome, with a vision that valued the process over the end product. He believed in "open-ended design", which meant that public spaces were never finished, allowing residents to continually shape and adapt their environment (Linn, 1968). Linn’s idea of the Commons was also deeply entrenched in the principle of using salvaged materials (Linn, 1962) (Figure 4). In addition to the economic and environmental benefits, he saw the use of familiar materials as a way to satisfy the psychological need for "rootedness," to create a sense of connection to the human and physical environment, and to demonstrate that one need not always start from scratch (Linn, 2007: 84-85) 9 . Figure 4: Used recycled marble slabs create this amphitheater. Source: Linn, 1990a: 37, Karl Linn Collection, Environmental Design Archives, University of California, Berkeley. 8 Linn believed in the "moral value of labor" where labor itself was a human need (Spiro, 1963: 11-12). This idea persisted in Linn's theories of community development. 9 This idea of not starting from scratch was very relevant in the context of urban renewal at the time, where massive slum clearance campaigns were bulldozing entire neighborhoods and displacing their residents. 8 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 His “Neighborhood Commons” concept was first introduced in declining areas of Philadelphia 10 , where Linn and his students from Penn met with community members to assess the area's needs and resources, and then presented a final design to residents to build with them and volunteers. The idea later spread to similar neighborhoods in Washington DC, New York, Baltimore, Chicago and other U.S. cities (Hirsch, 2015). But Linn's vision was not without challenges. Many of the commons he helped create faced demolition as part of urban renewal projects. In addition, the use of salvaged materials was sometimes controversial, with some residents feeling discriminated against when they received recycled materials instead of new ones (Linn, 1969). These challenges underscored the complex nature of community engagement and the need for sensitivity to local dynamics. In the mid-1960s, after the failure of building neighborhood commons, Linn began to formulate a more process-oriented model of community engagement that emphasized the self-determination of community members. His idea of the physical commons evolved into a model of "process institutions" that could serve as the basis for ongoing, creative, community-led solutions. These centers -the forerunners of the Community Design Centers (CDCs) that proliferated across the United Statesprovided landscape architecture services to economically disadvantaged African American and Hispanic neighborhoods played a critical role in empowering communities to take charge of their built environment, breaking away from traditional top-down approaches to urban planning (Linn, 1990a; Goodman, 2019). Linn's recurring idea of prioritizing process over outcome resulted in a series of very diverse built objects that were criticized by the architectural establishment. Nevertheless, the idea that architects must empathize with communities on the ground, in their own spaces, has endured. This perspective continues to shape the contemporary Public Interest Design movement and defines how most designers view their role in supporting communities in need (Goodman, 2019). In the late 1960s, Linn joined the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he taught from 1968 to 1972. These years gave him the time to reflect on the experiences and lessons of the neighborhood commons. In 1969, while at MIT, he received a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to convene a forum of grassroots leaders, designers, activists and government officials to discuss the role of urban design in inner-city communities. The result was the Workshop on Open Space report, which provided guidelines for participatory urban open space projects (Lawson, 1969). The report emphasized the importance of issues such as process prioritization, community control, and collaboration in the development and maintenance of 10 The pilot project was the Melon Neighborhood Commons in West Poplar, an area of abandoned buildings in Philadelphia. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 9 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 these spaces. The group also expressed concern about the potential for professional expertise to overshadow community vision. Linn stated that "professionalized environments have contributed to people's alienation" (Karl Linn Collection, 1970), and advocated for a shift in design education to include grassroots leaders and students of color, which continues to challenge the field today (Linn, 1968). 2.2. Conclusions and legacy Linn's contributions to American cities during the transformative 1960s were profound. At a time when few American designers were working at the grassroots level and most landscape architects were focused on suburban development, Linn devoted himself to the country's densely populated metropolitan areas, helping to revitalize an urban public life that had lost community ties and social interaction to modern housing projects (Talen, 2000: 345). His commitment to empowering marginalized citizens through participatory design and construction of their collective spaces, with an emphasis on process and community engagement, continues to shape the practice of landscape architecture and urban design, reminding us that true success lies not only in the physical outcome but in the process of building and organizing community capacity for self-governance and creative production. His legacy can be seen in the community design centers that continue to operate throughout the United States 11 , and serves as a reminder of the potential of participatory design to create more equitable urban environments. Moreover, the dissatisfaction with comprehensive government planning and the ''right to the city'' spirit that informed his practice has contributed greatly to contemporary debates about the commons and the public realm (Talen, 2000: 137). For a variety of reasons, including a recession that has reduced public investment in neighborhood revitalization, there has been a surge of interest in the idea of smallscale, incremental, do-it-yourself (DIY) urban improvement (Finn, 2014: 381). This new type of citizen-led placemaking activity, less reliant on official planning efforts, is gaining traction in an attempt to maintain an urban vibrancy that harkens back to the earliest urban improvement impulses promoted by Linn. 3. JOHN TURNER: THE MEANING OF HOUSING John F. C. Turner (1927-2023) was a British architect and theorist known for his pioneering contributions to the field of informal self-help housing and 11 To name a few: Rural Studio at Auburn University, Yale Building Project at Yale University, Pratt Center for Community Development at the Pratt Institute (one of the first CDCs in the country along with the Architect’s Renewal Committee of Harlem, ARCH), and many others. Many CDCs are affiliated with universities. combining teaching and training for students with a service to the wider community. 16 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 should not be limited to the construction process, but should be included from the earliest stages of decision making and design to ensure better acceptance and results 23 . This led to a shift at some point in their careers from community engagement (in Linn's case) and facilitated self-help ideas (Turner) to promoting process institutions (Linn) and autonomous self-help (Turner), demonstrating their commitment to sustained community self-determination. These methods are particularly relevant at a time when an urgent insistence on participatory democracy has resurfaced. Linn and Turner's experiences influenced the policies and practices of international organizations that are still in place today. Turner's advocacy of the active participation of residents in creating and improving their living conditions has strongly influenced organizations such as the World Bank and UN-Habitat, which support housing programs based on self-help and increasingly recognize the need for community participation, local control, and in-situ upgrading of settlements (Hernández & Allen, 2012: 11). On the other hand, Linn's concept of Neighborhood Commons laid the foundation for Community Development Corporations (CDCs), which have since proliferated across the United States. These organizations have become vital resources that enable cities to embrace more participatory, community-driven urban planning that directly serves people and fosters a sense of grassroots ownership and responsibility. Both architects were critical of institutions. In Linn's case, it was the racial segregation fostered by urban renewal and the rigidity and lack of diversity in universities 24 ; in Turner's, it was the inability of the state to provide the amount of housing needed in rapidly growing cities and the imposition of impractical standards on the urban poor 25 . They argued that professionalized institutions had led to the alienation of people, and advocated a change in the role of the architect as someone who shares his knowledge, a facilitator (Turner, 1985; Hirsch, 2014), as well as the role of the state as a provider that complements the capacities and resources of individuals, promoting ideas of greater freedom and adaptability that have positively informed contemporary practice. Their redefinition of authority and control - who decides - has promoted new policies from a pattern of centrally administered projects to centrally supported and locally self-managed projects 23 These ideas are still present in UN Habitat reports. See: UN-HABITAT, 2014: 17. 24 Linn worked in response to the physical conditions of ghettoized environments and the disruptive effects of urban renewal programs on the urban poor, who were predominantly African American. Thus, many of Linn's commons were built on vacant lots that were tangible reminders of municipal neglect (Hirsch, 2014). 25 Escalating land costs and stringent regulations are forcing low-income people to resort to squatting as their only housing option, especially in rapidly urbanizing cities. This highlights the disconnect between housing standards set by wealthy policymakers and the practical needs of a significant portion of the population who cannot afford these policies. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 17 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 where the design, programming and implementation of local development is primarily in the hands of the local community 26 . In addition, Linn and Turner championed the idea of process over product. Their commitment to flexible and open-ended design has enduring relevance in today's complex urban landscapes, where incremental development is a means to adaptability and resilience (Turner & Wakely, 2013: 5). This is closely related to the idea of sustainability and the efficient use of local resources -both financial and materialwhich are recurring themes in their work. Linn's reuse of discarded materials and Turner's affinity for vernacular architecture reflect a deep respect for a sustainable approach to building that remains a challenge today. Furthermore, their common principles of phased design and civic participation have set the stage for contemporary practices of tactical urbanism and placemaking. Their ideas of self-help and locally controlled projects, coupled with the 21st century challenges of uncertainty, a growing disillusionment with traditional models of governance, economic crises and loss of community identity, have shifted the focus of contemporary urban planners toward more inclusive, participatory, and locally driven decision-making processes (Bishop and Williams, 2012:3). Placemaking, being dynamic and adaptive, allows for the crossing of professional boundaries and power structures. It highlights the significance of experimenting with change and involving local communities in the co-creation of self-managed spaces (Petrescu & Petcou, 2013). Their approaches are not limited to struggling nations, but transcend borders as the erosion of community bonds is a global concern. In a world increasingly dominated by electronic communication, the very concept of "community" needs to be redefined. Although Linn and Turner's ideas remind us that true community involves face-to-face interaction, mutual aid, and trust 27 -same ethos that guided barn-raising practiceswe wonder what community is now, in a world where we work in a city different from the one we live in, with such high rates of tourism and little knowledge of our neighbors. 26 For example, The UK government is proposing what it calls Open-Source Planning. See: Conservative Party, Open Source Planning, Policy Green Paper No.14, retrieved from www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Green%20Papers/planning-green-paper.ashx (Accessed Oct 11, 2023). 27 In Turner's words: "Community is where community happens." 18 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrams, Charles (1964), Housing in the Modern World, London, Faber. Arthur, Eric, & Witney, Dudley (1972), The Barn: A Vanishing Landmark in North America, Toronto, M.F. Feheley Arts. Bishop, Peter & Williams, Lesley (2012), The Temporary City, New York, Routledge. Bronner, Simon J. (2006), Encyclopedia of American Folklife, New York, Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315704807. Cohen, Michael (2015), “John F.C. Turner and Housing as a Verb”, Built Environment (1978- ), vol. 41, nº3, pp. 412-418. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44131925. Ensminger, Robert F. (1992), The Pennsylvania Barn: Its Origins, Evolution, and Distribution in North America, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. Finn, Donovan (2014), "DIY Urbanism: Implications for Cities", Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, vol. 7, nº4, pp. 381398, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.891149. Fitcher, Robert & Turner, John F. C. (1976), Libertad para Construir: El Proceso Habitacional Controlado por el Usuario, México, Siglo XXI. Golda-Pongratz, Kathrin (2021), "John FC Turner (1927-)", in The Architectural Review. Available at: https://www.architectural-review.com/essays/reputations/john-fc-turner1927 (date of reference: 18-04-2023). Goldstein, Barbara (1975), “The Originators, John F. C. Turner talks to Barbara Goldstein”, Architectural Design, vol. XLV, nº8, pp. 524-526. Goodman, Anna (2019), "Karl Linn and the Foundations of Community Design: From Progressive Models to the War on Poverty", Journal of Urban History, vol. 46, nº4, pp. 1-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0096144219836968. Gyger, Helen (2013), The Informal as a Project: Self-Help Housing in Peru, 1954-1986, Ph. D., Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University, New York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7916/D8DJ5NQF Gyger, Helen (2019), Improvised Cities: Architecture, Urbanization & Innovation in Peru, Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvdjrpj7 Harris, Richard (2003), "A Double Irony: The Originality and Influence of John F.C Turner", Habitat International, vol. 27, nº2, pp.245-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S01973975(02)00048-6. From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 19 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 Hernández, Felipe, Kellet, Peter & Allen, Lea K. (2012), Rethinking the Informal City: Critical Perspectives from Latin America, New York, Berghahn Books. Hirsch, Alison B. (2014), "From Open Space to Public Space: Activist Landscape Architects of the 1960s", Landscape Journal, vol. 33, nº2, pp. 173-194. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44132726 Hirsch, Alison B. (2014), "Urban Barnraising: Collective Rituals to Promote Communitas", Landscape Journal, vol. 34, nº2, pp. 113-126. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44132750 Lawson, Simpson F. (1969), Workshop on Urban Open Space, Washington D.C., U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Linn, Karl (1959), "Landscape Architecture as an Ethic" (Man and Nature Course, University of Pennsylvania), 2, Ian McHarg Collection, 109.II.E.2.41, folder: Karl Linn, Psychologist, The Architectural Archive of the University of Pennsylvania. Linn, Karl (1962), "Melon Neighborhood Park", Landscape Architecture Magazine, vol. 52, nº2, pp. 76-78. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44664900 Linn, Karl (1968), "White Solutions won't work in black neighborhoods", Landscape Architecture Magazine, vol. 59, nº1, pp. 23-24. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44671153 Linn, Karl (1969), "Neighborhood Commons", Ekistics, vol. 27, nº158, pp. 65-66. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43614711 Linn, Karl (1970), From Linn's "Neighborhood Commons: Toward a Human Ecology" MIT course description (Box 31, Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Courses 19681972, Karl Linn Collection). Linn, Karl (1990a), "Urban Barnraising: Building Community Through Environmental Restoration", Earth Island Journal, vol. 5, nº2, pp. 34-37. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43882267 Linn, Karl (1990b), "Urban Barnraising: Building Community Through Environment", Race, Poverty & the Environment, vol. 1, nº2, pp. 4-5. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41553941 Linn, Karl (2005), Landscape Architect in Service of Peace, Social Justice, Commons, and Community. An interview with Lisa Rubens, Berkeley, CA: University of California, Regional Oral History Office, Bancroft Library. Linn, Karl (2007), Building Commons and Community, Oakland, New Village Press. 20 Patricia Fraile-Garrido & Inés Martín-Robles CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 McGillivray, David; Guillard, Severin; Graham, Ross & McCaughey, Peter (2023), "Participatory Design Practice, Event(s) and the Activation of Public Space", Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, pp. 1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2023.2214140. Oyón, José L. (2021), "John F. C. Turner y su visión relacional de la vivienda", Ensayo: Revista De Arquitectura, Urbanismo y Territorio, vol. 1, nº2, pp. 57-69. Available at: https://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/ensayo/article/view/23356 Petrescu, Doina and Petcou, Constantin (2013), "Tactics for a Transgressive Practice", Architectural Design, vol. 83, nº6, pp. 58-65, https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1675. Spiro, Melford (1963), Kibbutz: Venture in Utopia, New York, Schocken Books. Stevenson, Fletcher (1950), Pennsylvania agriculture and country life: 1640-1840, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Historical Commission. Available at: https://digital.libraries.psu.edu/digital/collection/life_sci/id/1107 Talen, Emily (2000), "Measuring the Public Realm," Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 17, nº4, pp. 344-360, Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43030552. Turner, John F. C. (1968a), "The Squatter Settlement: An Architecture that Works", Architectural Design, vol. 38, pp. 355-360. Turner, John F. C. (1968b), "Uncontrolled urban settlement: problems and policies", International social development review, nº 1, pp. 107-128. Turner, John F. C. (1977), Vivienda, Todo el Poder para los Usuarios. Hacia la economía en la construcción del entorno, Madrid: Hermann Blume Ediciones. Turner, John F. C. (1985), "The Architect as Enabler", Ekistics, vol. 52, nº 314/315, pp. 538541. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43623894 Turner, John F. C., Wakely, Patrick (2013), Fifty Years of the Community-Led Incremental Development: Paradigm for Urban Housing and Place-Making, not published. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119148784.ch2 Turner, John F. C. (2018), Autoconstrucción: Por una Autonomía del Habitar, Logroño, Pepitas de Calabaza. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2014), “Practical Guide to Designing, Planning and Implementing Citywide Slum Upgrading Programs”, UN Habitat, Nairobi. Available at: https://unhabitat.org/a-practical-guide-to-designing-planning-andexecuting-citywide-slum-upgrading-programmes From Barn Raising to Community Empowerment: the legacy of Karl Linn and… 21 CIUDADES, 27 (2024): pp. 1-21 ISSN-E: 2445-3943 Ward, Peter M. (2012), "Self-Help Housing Ideas and Practice in the Americas". Published in Sanyal, Bishwapriya; Vale, Lawrence & Rosan, Cristina -eds.- (2012), Planning Ideas That Matter: Livability, Territoriality, Governance and Reflective Practice, MIT Press, pp. 283-310. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hhktr Wesner, Erik. (2023), "The Amish Barn Raising", in Amish America: Exploring Amish culture and communities. Available at: https://amishamerica.com/amish-barn-raising/ (date: 0112-2023). Cities Alliance (2021) “Understanding Informality: Towards a Multi-dimensional Analysis of the Concept”, Cities Alliance, Brussels. Available in: https://www.citiesalliance.org/resources/publications/publications/understandinginformality—towards-multi-dimensional-analysis