Toolkit

Context
At a time when trust in national governments has hit new lows worldwide, with public servants under significant stress and service quality steadily declining, both small and large cities are finding interesting ways to deepen their connections with citizens. Not surprisingly, this small revolution is emerging where problems are being addressed.

In proximity, local governments and communities are experimenting with new forms of collaboration, urgently seeking solutions: they are demonstrating that between the state and the market, between state assistance and neoliberalism, it is possible to introduce a third pole: communities. The obsession with efficiency, typical of neoliberalism, is accompanied by relationship building because collaboration with those who were once passive users, the citizens, gives rise to essential projects to address the most urgent urban challenges. This is a stitching work once managed by political parties which connected the "bottom", the networks, and communities of citizens, trying to direct the "top", the political choices.

These new modes, which we define as "civic imagination", are activated thanks to the energy of citizens and voluntary associations. Educational communities, community gardens, energy communities, social cohousing, cultural community hubs: these are concrete and very different examples that share the energy of collective intelligence applied to problem-solving. They have no private purposes but move for the general interest. They are projects born from citizens for citizens and can become a city's policy with tools and methods designed to support communities and bring their creativity.

Collaboration for All or for a Few?
Observing the various projects resulting from community activism, a major problem emerges that those involved in public interest projects are familiar with: in most cases, participation is not accessible to everyone. Minorities are generally excluded, as are young people and economically and socially vulnerable groups. A map emerges where collaboration with citizens thickens in some geographical areas, leaving others empty. This unevenness tends to represent a social geography, with areas with more social resources corresponding to relatively richer ones, while empty areas correspond to poorer and more fragile ones. This inequality, moreover, tends to fuel distrust and create conditions for a resurgence of neglected areas.

This data forms the basis for the approach of collaborative ecology without which there will always be inequality between areas where certain results are achieved because some have the time and ability to get involved, and others do not.

Designing a Collaboration Ecology
Political decision-makers, public officials, or third-sector activists managing public interest projects must embark on a path to recognize the right to different levels of participation, creating a collaboration ecology. The challenge is ethical and political to develop models, also thanks to technological tools, that allow citizens to have their say, with different degrees of intensity ranging from active speaking to involvement through light, informal, and community forms to management. This means expanding the range of participatory methods offered and creating links between them to facilitate the transition from one to another. Realising this rich and dynamic collaboration ecology appears as a tool to give everyone the opportunity to be active and collaborate.

The web is used for constant participatory design, perhaps by determining artificial intelligence to process large amounts of data. But it is essential to accept a structural fragility, typical of experiments, giving concrete space for community management, for a mechanism of recovery of civic energies.

After years of policies that have impoverished our communities, a new mission is needed for those working in the public sector, becoming community enablers. To do this, time is needed to rebuild relationships and power spaces, rethinking forms of governance, trying to build new collective responses and redesigning power asymmetries that have always existed. Collaboration enlivens democracy, through social empowerment as a collective act.

Collaborative Ecology Project Cycle
To pursue collaborative ecology, a change in work method is needed: following what has been learned in the field, initiating collaborative processes of different types, a project cycle with three phases is proposed.

Phase One: Alignment
Normally, design is done according to vertical structures, with hierarchical departments where only managers communicate with each other. Often, the specificities of places are not recognized, those working in proximity are not enabled, processes are not prepared with due attention, and participation is planned only when it is to take place. For this reason, it is necessary to change methods by starting the work behind-the-scenes that addresses bureaucracy and the dynamics of complex organisations. In this phase, it is a matter of:

• studying which areas to work on
• creating a multidisciplinary team with strong collaborative skills
• starting work locally, in contact with communities
• finding the most agile administrative tools
• identifying all listening, participation, and involvement tools
• identifying the time and power necessary for involvement

Phase Two: Alliances
In this phase, it is necessary to map all associations, organisations, and communities operating in the chosen context and then engage them with the utmost care. The goal is to rebuild the fabric of representation with civic realities, even informal ones, that can help involve parents, the elderly, young people, migrants, and, more specifically, citizens, area by area. We must enable existing social capital to find shared solutions that allow us to truly know the needs and highlight proximity issues and create a system in which public actions are allied with social capital. Drawing inspiration from community organising work, we must recognize that we do not work alone, collaboration is necessary.

Phase Three: Activating collaboration
In this phase, the ecology of collaboration emerges strongly to have the ability to distinguish each group of citizens intended to be involved. The collaborative ecosystem consists of various tools that must be continuously updated, allowing information, collaboration, and management: it is not enough to send an email or create a web space where comments and contributions are awaited. The point is: where there are people who may be interested in participating, the time and means necessary to involve them must be found. Without claiming to be exhaustive, we can identify tools to:

Inform: by alternating traditional tools, such as posters and flyers, activating traditional mass media and digital means, such as social media platforms, websites, and chats, we can initiate structured word-of-mouth strategies for the constant dissemination of information to share updates on community projects and initiatives. To address questions, provide details on projects, and guide participation. Web platforms play a fundamental role, influencing both individual and collective behaviour. In line with contemporary forms of civic activism, the web becomes the venue for debate with emotional involvement in the construction of identity, common sense, influencing opinions. Communities are created, contributing to a sense of belonging by providing perspectives.

Create: a series of tools aimed at encouraging more active people to collaborate and establish the foundations of the participatory ecosystem: workshops and meetings for ideation and project creation with organisational vocation. Alongside these, tools need to be devised to allow lighter and more punctual participation for those wishing to engage in tasks for a limited period: for this, it is necessary to arrange informative days, booking modules, periodic update meetings, and even spaces just to gather opinions, with surveys and feedback. The meeting dimension is fundamental, which can also be digital, to facilitate resource sharing and enable collaborative document and resource management to create a sense of community.

Manage: after information and creation, a series of tools facilitate community management of activities: in line with the collaborative phase with tools indicating community membership, from chat registration to even sanctioning participation with a membership fee and card. These are more continuous forms ensuring transparency and accountability with regular updates and responding to community questions. Even in this case, more punctual participation is possible, with activities that need to be organised so that time can be donated in a determined way through targeted invitations, think of neighbourhood or school parties where normally inactive people are present, producing activities as if they were regular volunteers.

Taking a concrete example, such as a community garden, we will have a group of citizens who take care of it diligently and others who may do so more punctually. There are those who coordinate with other community gardens, those who are very passionate, and those who love gardening daily, as well as those willing to manage relations with the local administration. But there are also those who work there a few hours a month, and those who organise the garden party once a year. And then there are those who simply attend it but still feel part of the community that cares for it. They are all driven by a civic, solidarity, and social utility spirit but operate in different ways.

Right to Empathy
Public services need to be rethought and defended, whether they are educational, social, health-related, cultural, etc., but to the traditional vocation of providing services, we add the promotion of proactive dialogue for community development. Public or third-sector officials will thus discover a new role in activating social cohesion. With strong ethical commitment, almost as if they were public activists, day after day and relationship after relationship, they build social capital against isolation. Those who work in proximity, who must be recognized and enabled by recognising spaces of autonomy, self-organisation, and independence from the top: it is a new organisational model, where decisions are made where things happen, with a quality usually overlooked by organisations: empathy. The ability to read the needs, intentions, and desires of those one faces.