ro | en
Argument › No. 18/2026

From Temporary Artistic and Civic Interventions to Sustainable Urbanism. Feroviarilor Park as a Laboratory for Urban Temporalities

https://doi.org/10.54508/Argument.18.06

  • / Center for Housing Research, Paris & Technical University Cluj-Napoca, RO
  • / University of Oradea, Department of Architecture, RO
  • / Tehnical University Cluj-Napoca RO

Abstract

Feroviarilor Park in Cluj-Napoca has been transformed from an abandoned, degraded space on the verge of privatisation, to a public space recovered and rehabilitated following a design competition. Its recent history has thus become a relevant example of resilience in the context of ecological transition.

The stages leading up to the competition and the implementation of the winning project were marked by a series of temporary interventions that influenced urban attitudes and policies. These included civic protests, art installations, participatory interventions, and debates focused on engaging residents as active participants in the co-creation, co-planning, and co-management processes of the park. Based on this case study, the article analyses the impact that temporary artistic and civic practices can have on urban regeneration projects.

The research aims to understand how temporary interventions in public spaces can generate institutional change and directly influence permanent urban regeneration projects in the context of ecological transition.

Methodologically, the article first provides a theoretical analysis of the concepts of grassroots resilience in sustainability transition and its intervention methods (co-design, participatory urbanism), the role of actors and collective imaginaries. This is followed by a qualitative analysis based on semi-structured interviews with individuals involved in the park’s recent history, participatory observation and analysis of temporary intervention examples.

Two of the anticipated results of the research are the identification of useful working and analysis methods for those involved in designing permanent interventions that integrate user requirements, expressed through temporary practices and actions, and an understanding of how conflictual situations generated by divergent and contradictory interests (e.g. public versus private) can influence institutional change.

Keywords

urban regeneration, temporary interventions, ecological transition

Download

References

  1. About the initiative – New European Bauhaus. (2025). European Union. https://new-european-bauhaus.europa.eu/about/about-initiative_en
  2. Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Progress in Human Geography, 24(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913200701540465
  3. Avelino, F. (2021). Theories of Power and Social Change: Power Contestations and Their Implications for Research on Social Change and Innovation. Journal of Political Power, 14(3), 425–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2021.1875307
  4. Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J. M. (2016). Shifting power relations in sustainability transitions: A multi-actor perspective. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(5), 628–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2015.1112259
  5. Baibarac-Duignan, C., & Medeșan, S. (2023). Gluing alternative imaginaries of sustainable urban futures: When commoning and design met in the post-socialist neighbourhood of Mănăștur, Romania. Futures, 153, Article 103233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2023.103233
  6. Béné, C., Wood, R. G., Newsham, A., & Davies, M. (2012). Resilience: New utopia or new tyranny? Reflections about the potentials and limits of the concept of resilience in relation to vulnerability reduction programmes (IDS Working Paper No. 405). Institute of Development Studies.
  7. Bradley, K. (2015). Open-source urbanism: Creating, multiplying and managing urban commons. Footprint, Delft Architecture Theory Journal, 16, 91–107. https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.9.1.901
  8. Castoriadis, C. (1997). The imaginary institution of society (Reprint ed.). Polity Press.
  9. Cote, M., & Nightingale, A. J. (2011). Resilience thinking meets social theory: Situating social change in socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Progress in Human Geography, 36(4), 475–489.
  10. Cretney, R. (2014). Resilience for whom? Emerging critical geographies of socio-ecological resilience. Geography Compass, 8(9), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12154
  11. Ehn, P. (2008). Participation in design things. In Proceedings of the Tenth Participatory Design Conference (PDC 2008). ACM.
  12. Engle, N. L. (2011). Adaptive capacity and its assessment. Global Environmental Change, 21(2), 647–656.
  13. Feola, G., Goodman, M. K., Suzunaga, J., & Soler, J. (2023). Collective memories, place framing and the politics of imaginary futures in sustainability transitions and transformation. Geoforum, 138, Article 103668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2022.103668
  14. Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 253–267.
  15. Galafassi, D., Kagan, S., Milkoreit,M., Heras, M., Bilodeau, c., Juarez Bourke, S., Merrie, A., Guerrero, L., Pétursdóttir, G., Tàbara, J.D. (2018). Raising the temperature: The arts in a warming planet. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 31, 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12
  16. Golańska, D., & Kronenberg, J. (2020). Urban green spaces and the right to the city: (Un)just environmental practices in Łódź, Poland. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 38(4), 668–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12.010
  17. Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. W. (2010). Transitions to sustainable development: New directions in the study of long term transformative change. In D. Loorbach & F. W. Geels (Eds.). Routledge.
  18. Hayward, B. M. (2013). Rethinking resilience: Reflections on the earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, 2010 and 2011. Ecology and Society, 18(4).
  19. Hillgren, P.-A., Seravalli, A., & Emilson, A. (2011). Prototyping and infrastructuring in design for social innovation. CoDesign.
  20. Hillgren, P.-A., Seravalli, A., & Emilson, A. (2016). Counter-hegemonic practices: Dynamic interplay between agonism, commoning and strategic design. Design Issues, 32(3), 89–99.
  21. Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4(5), 390–405.
  22. Hudson, R. (2010). Resilient regions in an uncertain world: Wishful thinking or a practical reality? Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsp026
  23. Irwin, T. (2015). Transition Design: A proposal for a new area of design, study, and research. Design and Culture, 7(2), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2015.1051829
  24. Irwin, T., Tonkinwise, C., & Kossoff, G. (2020). Transition Design: The importance of everyday life and lifestyles as a leverage point for sustainability transitions. Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios de Diseño y Comunicación, 105, 87–99. https://doi.org/10.18682/cdc.vi105.4189
  25. Juri, S., Zurbriggen, C., Bosch Gómez, S., & Ortega Pallanez, M. (2021). Transition Design in Latin America: Enabling collective learning and change. Frontiers in Sociology, 6, Article 725053. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2021.725053
  26. Kristjanson, P. M., Waters-Bayer, A., Johnson, N., Tipilda, A., Njuki, J. M., Baltenweck, I., Grace, D., & MacMillan, D. (2014). Livestock and women’s livelihoods: In A. R. Quisumbing et al. (Eds.), Gender in agriculture and food security: Closing the knowledge gap (pp. 209–233). Springer.
  27. Law, J. (2003). Making a mess with method. In J. Law & J. Urry (Eds.), Theories and methods: New directions in the sociology of knowledge (pp. 1–14). Centre for Science Studies, Lancaster University.
  28. Light, A., Wolf, T. V., & Gangadharan, S. P. (2019). Ethics in participatory design and research with communities. Interactions, 26(6), 26–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3363036
  29. MacKinnon, D., & Derickson, K. D. (2013). From resilience to resourcefulness: A critique of resilience policy and activism. Progress in Human Geography, 37(2), 253–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132512454775
  30. Magis, K. (2010). Community resilience: An indicator of social sustainability. Society & Natural Resources, 23(5), 401–416.
  31. Manzini, E., & Rizzo, F. (2011). Small projects/large changes: Participatory design as an open participated process. CoDesign, 7(3–4), 199–215.
  32. Petrescu, D., Axinte, A., & Medeșan, S. (2026). Design-Supported Urban Commons in Collective Housing Regeneration in Eastern and Western Europe. Architecture and Culture, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/20507828.2026.2632431
  33. Reid, J. (2012). The disastrous and politically debased subject of resilience. Development Dialogue, 58, 67–80.
  34. Reștea, K. (2016). Barca pe valuri plutește ușor. În curând, pe Someș, aproape de Parcul Feroviarilor. Actual de Cluj. https://actualdecluj.ro/barca-pe-valuri-pluteste-usor-in-curand-pe-somes-aproape-de-feroviarilor/
  35. Reștea, K. (2017). FOTO/VIDEO De pus în ramă. Cum își văd vecinii Parcul Feroviarilor-înviat. Actual de Cluj. https://actualdecluj.ro/fotovideo-de-pus-in-rama-cum-isi-vad-vecinii-parcul-feroviarilor-inviat/
  36. Stafford-Smith, M., Griggs, D., Gaffney, O., Ullah, F., Reyers, B., Kanie, N., Stigson, B., Shrivastava, P., Leach, M., & O’Connell, D. (2017). Integration: The key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability Science , 12(6), 911–919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0383-3
  37. Taylor, C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham & London: Duke University Press.
  38. Tobin, G. A. (1999). Sustainability and community resilience: The holy grail of hazards planning? Environmental Hazards, 1(1), 13–25.
  39. Turner, R. H. (1990). Role change. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 87–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.16.080190.000511
  40. Vincze, E., et al. (2019). Șantier în lucru pentru profit: Redezvoltare urbană în Cluj. Zona Ploiești–Someșului–Anton Pann–Abator–Parcul Feroviarilor. Editura Fundației Desire.
  41. Walker, J., & Cooper, M. (2011). Genealogies of resilience: From systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation. Security Dialogue, 42(2), 143–160.
  42. Willaarts, B., Varela-Ortega, C., Blanco-Gutiérrez, I., Henriksen, H. J., Zorrilla-Miras, P., & colaboradores. (2019, March 10–13). Bridging the gap across scales in scenario planning: Co-designing water-energy-land visions and pathways in transboundary basins. Scenario Forum Conference, Denver, CO, United States.
  43. Welsh, M. (2014). Resilience and responsibility: Governing uncertainty in a complex world. The Geographical Journal, 180(1), 15–26.
  44. Wittmayer, J. M., Avelino, F., van Steenbergen, F., & Loorbach, D. (2016). Actor roles in transition: Insights from sociological perspectives. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.10.003