Occupy Goes Global!
Rome
In 2020 OCC! expanded its scope and encouraged students to explore local initiatives in their city, resulting in entries from various locations. Here below you find the entries from Rome
Scroll for more
In 2020 OCC! expanded its scope and encouraged students to explore local initiatives in their city, resulting in entries from various locations. Here below you find the entries from Rome
Scroll for more
Cecilia Cicchetti
Paola Tartabini is one of the promoters of the CER.TOSA project, a grassroots initiative that’s trying to change the lives of many families and activities situated in the Torpignattara neighbourhood in Rome, the capital of Italy, by cutting the cost of the energy bills while reducing the emissions needed to provide the energy. The CER.TOSA is the third energy community in Rome and was born in 2023 on the 14th of September, so it’s still much in the making, but the premises are very promising, and the popular enthusiasm is off the charts.
Title:
The CER.TOSA (Renewable Energy Community) project.
Where is this grassroots initiative implemented?
The CER.TOSA (Renewable Energy Community) project started in the small neighborhood of Villa Certosa, adjacent to Torpignattara and Mandrione, in Rome’s 5th Municipality (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Via+di+Villa+Certosa,+00176+Roma+RM/@41.8805581,12.5336662,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x132f6219278a9fa3:0xc16c1e9bca9afee9!8m2!3d41.8805541!4d12.5362411!16s%2Fg%2F1vntxt5w?hl=it&entry=ttu )
Torpignattara, highlighted in red on the map of Rome. “Rome Zona 6A Torpignattara locator map” by Sannita is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.,
Who are the promoters?
CER.TOSA was born thanks to the joint work of the Certosa Neighborhood Committee and the environmental association A Sud.
Who are the beneficiaries?
The direct beneficiaries will be the residents of the neighborhood and in general, the members of the association that has been set up. In detail, 42 families, a school (the Carlo Pisacane plexus of the Istituto Comprensivo Simonetta Salacone), a commercial activity, the historic bakery of the Marrocchini brothers, and the CDCA – Centro Documentazione Conflitti Ambientali (Environmental Conflict Documentation Centre) – have set up the CER.TOSA as founding members.
How does this initiative engage with climate?
Energy communities are local organizations made up of citizens, businesses and institutions that work together to participate directly in the energy market, not only as consumers, but also as producers. These communities are based on principles of active participation, democratic involvement and solidarity, with the aim of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting the use of renewable energy at local level. Through civic participation, the sharing of renewable resources and the promotion of environmental sustainability, these communities offer a viable and concrete solution to address the challenges of climate change by fostering a just energy transition.
In addition to the energy issue, those who contributed to the creation of the CER.TOSA had also previously dealt with doing a thermal characterization of the Villa Certosa district and hypothesizing possible climate mitigation measures for the district during the summer months, in particular for Via. G. Alessi, Via di Villa Certosa and Via dei Savorgnan, which are directly affected by the neighborhood’s hot spots (Mandrione District warehouses and the former Casilina station area). These are interventions that should be carried out by the institutions, as they have to do with public health, but since they are often absent, the hope is that the CER.TOSA can be a tool to make them happen… somehow!
Photos of buildings in Villa Certosa (images by Cecilia Cicchetti)
What are the main objectives? What are the main values?
CER.TOSA was formed around the political theme of energy sovereignty and the democratization of energy. Its objectives respond to environmental, social and economic challenges.
Environmental: energy communities promote the use of renewable sources, thereby reducing the use of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions. They thus contribute to climate change mitigation and environmental protection by accelerating our country’s decarbonization process.
Social: the development of energy self-production policies, together with energy efficiency policies, represent the best welfare policies for households, able not only to contribute to the reduction of energy expenditure but also to improve the social life of members, thus also mitigating the growing issue of energy poverty.
Economic: energy communities can generate economic benefits for both members and the local area. Members can reduce energy costs through the sharing of resources and access to 20-year incentives on shared energy. In addition, energy communities can foster local employment in the installation and maintenance of facilities.
What is the timeline? Are there already visible effects?
Our CER had a fairly rapid development: the idea was born during a public initiative in the neighborhood on 4 November 2022 organized by A Sud and the Certosa Neighborhood Committee, entitled ‘Climate: global problems, local answers’ (Facebook event here https://fb.me/e/74lsD9DZL). Then, accepting the challenge of participating in a regional call for proposals, we started with stakeholder engagement activities in February 2023.
In May, we were among the grant recipients and had to develop the project very quickly according to the timeline of the call. Thus, on 14 September 2023, the founding members officially signed the by-laws and the memorandum of association of CER.TOSA. Since then we have convened a members’ meeting and organized a public meeting where we invited both Edoardo Zanchini, director of the climate office of the Municipality of Rome, and the local administrators of the fifth municipality to speak. At the meeting it emerged that the fifth municipality is willing to support our CER.TOSA with the installation of photovoltaic panels on the roof of a school. A commitment of which we still have no confirmation to date.
On 23 January 2024, after more than two years of waiting, the implementing decree was published to stimulate the emergence and development of Renewable Energy Communities and to regulate the modalities and timing for the recognition of incentives by the GSE (Gestore dei Servizi Energetici). The next steps will be to convene another meeting with members both to present the decree and to decide together whether and how to initiate popular shareholder activities to purchase the first ERC panels.
Two of the beneficiaries of the CER.TOSA project: the “Carlo Pisacane” elementary school and the Marocchini Brother’s bakery (images by Cecilia Cicchetti)
Who are the actors involved? What is their background?
To date, the stakeholders involved, as mentioned above, are the residents of the neighborhood and the other adjacent neighborhoods within the same primary cabin, some private entities, some businesses and a comprehensive school. But there are many solicitations from future supporters who would like to join CER.TOSA. At this stage we are collecting memberships.
Interviewer: the Torpignattara neighborhood is inhabited by almost 50,000 people, 10% of whom are unemployed and 23% have a migration background. The state apparatuses care neither for the employment of the population nor for its integration, which is instead done at the grassroots level through the work of the neighborhood committees and especially thanks to the initiatives of the Pisacane school.
Which limits does it encounter? Are any shortcomings or critical points visible? What other problematic issues can arise from its implementation?
The strength of the initiative was the strong involvement of local actors, thanks to the peculiar urban conformation of the neighborhood, which resembles a small village. As explained above, it only took a few meetings to attract the curiosity and conviction of the members. This was possible thanks to a community already sensitized by the presence of the neighborhood committee, to both environmental and social issues.
The weak point is the economic issue: not being able to burden the members, it will be necessary to find both financing (crowdfunding, private foundations, some regional calls) and support from the institutions (economic and bureaucratic, for example if one wants to use the roofs of a school or in any case a public roof to install solar panels). In order to keep the attention and enthusiasm that has arisen around this project, there is an urgent need to activate the ERC members in concrete actions as soon as possible; as a participatory project, it could fall apart and be seen as a mere theoretical experiment.
How would it be potentially replicable in other settings?
Many organizations are asking us about how to replicate this virtuous community process. The easy replicability is guaranteed by a model that is now widespread, practiced and shared. It is full of guides on how to set up-start an energy community so there is no lack of theoretical support. What is generally difficult to ‘find on the market’ is the passion of volunteers who are activated by putting their time and skills on the line to coordinate and involve grassroots realities in the area by explaining the project and motivating the group around the potential changes and benefits to be obtained. The rest is all technical work by professionals from the feasibility study to a consultant for drafting the statute.
Is this initiative conducive to broader changes? If yes, which?
The changes that our project will hopefully bring to the area could be (I use the conditional because we are only at the beginning of a journey that is as long as it is challenging):
The headquarters of the Villa Certosa Neighbourhood Committee and one of the initiatives that already take place thanks to their social and democratic work (images by Cecilia Cicchetti)
References:
Tartabani, P. (2024). Interview (C. Cicchetti, interviewer) [personal communication].
Marta Alimelli
The Caffarella Park is a piece of the Roman countryside that has remained unchanged over the centuries and is itself part of the largest park in Rome, the Appia Antica Regional Park. It covers approximately 300 hectares within the perimeter of the Italian capital and contains archaeological monuments of particular historical and cultural significance. Since 1984, the Comitato per il Parco della Caffarella, a voluntary association founded in the same year, has been carrying out intensive work to safeguard the park’s natural, environmental and historical heritage through the contribution of the neighbourhood community and interlocutions with the institutions.
Part of the Caffarella Valley and the Alban Hills in the background, by Marta Alimelli
Private orchards in the Caffarella area, by Marta Alimelli
Where this grassroots initiative is implemented? Who are the promoters?
The regional park of the Appia Antica is located within the current IX municipality of Rome, in the south of the capital; in particular, the Caffarella area is located in the Appio-Latino district, reachable by walking from the Furio Camillo and Colli Albani stops of Rome’s Metro A. The Comitato per il Parco della Caffarella (Committee for the Caffarella Park) was founded in 1984 by some youth from the neighbourhood who lived in the area facing the park, tired of witnessing the degradation in which the area had been deteriorating since the 1960s, at that time used as a garbage dump. Since 1995, the Committee has been registered in the Lazio Region’s register of voluntary organisations, ‘culture’ and ‘environment and nature’ sections. Among the Committee’s founding volunteers is the name of Mario Leigheb, after whom one of the widest avenues through the park is named. At the end of the 1990s, some members of the Committee created the cultural association ‘Humus Onlus’, which still operates in the area today, with the aim of taking over the direct management of the Caffarella valley and assuming the role of an active collaborator of the Appia Antica Regional Park and the Municipality of Rome, through cultural events, educational activities, and cleaning and securing the archaeological areas.
Commemorative Plaque, by Marta Alimmeli
Sign announcing that “the committee has adopted this green aeria
in order to redevelop it” by Marta Alimelli
Who are the beneficiaries?
Those who benefit the most from the Committee’s activities are certainly the neighbourhood community and all the people who live in or frequent the area; but also those who visit Rome from another country, passing through the Valley, have the opportunity to experience the dedication that the Committee puts into safeguarding and preserving the area. Concrete examples of this are the many benches placed in the park’s most frequented spots (especially those adjacent to roads), the dog areas, the play areas and the area equipped for outdoor training. Furthermore, a point of reference for the entire neighbourhood is ‘La Casa del Parco/Casale Vigna Cardinali’, the information and service point run by the Humus association, which, in addition to bicycle hire, cycle repair shop and guided tours, offers a refreshment area and space for organising events and presentations. This makes it very popular within the community because it is free and open to all and sundry; among other things, it is a very pleasant place to study. But in addition to human beings, non-humans can also enjoy the results of the Committee’s efforts, because in the preserved unspoilt nature of the Caffarella they have the opportunity to live and build their own dimension: animals and plants coexist and collaborate in the creation of new relationships, including farms, educational gardens, undisturbed pastures and areas dedicated to the conservation of certain bird species.
Access to the Casa del Parco/Casale Vigna Cardinali, by Marta Alimelli
Ship grazing in the Caffarella and one of the children’s play areas in the park, by Marta Alimelli
How does this initiative engage with climate? Does it tackle mitigation, adaptation, both or other dimensions of climate change?
The initiative strongly resonates with the fight against climate change accelerated by human activities, because since its conception, the Committee for the Park has fought and continues to fight against the pollution of land and water in the Caffarella Valley caused by human activities, giving Rome a green lung in which to find relief from the heat during the summer and to be able to breathe fresh air all year round. For example, it was in the 2010s that the Committee began its work, which is still ongoing, for the purification of the Almone river through petitions addressed to the Mayor of Rome and the President of the Lazio Region. The river, sacred to the ancient Romans, who every 27 March performed the ‘Lavatio Matris Deum’, a purification rite related to the cult of Cybele, was submerged by waste in the second half of the last century. From the moment the Committee for the Park began its work to recover the river, it was discovered that two neighbourhoods of Rome were discharging their sewage into the Almone. After about seven years of battles, including complaints, petitions and solicitations to the Municipality of Rome, the Region, and the Public Prosecutor’s Office, a new sewerage collector was started to stop this water pollution. In the meantime, work to clean the river of solid pollutants began in 2015. These interventions, financed thanks to citizens’ donations, are repeated every few years because, unfortunately, there are people who keep throwing all kinds of waste into the water, which gradually accumulates on the banks of the river. Another action taken against environmental pollution was urging the Municipality of Rome in 2015 to move the car wreckers that were illegally operating within the perimeter of the Appia Antica Regional Park. After a few months, the same were seized by the Judiciary for environmental damage and in 2018 remanded for trial for soil pollution of the Caffarella and the Almone river.
Portions of the Almone river, by Marta Alimelli
What are the main objectives? What are the main values?
The section of the committee’s website dedicated to the history and values of the association states that the association was started with the aim of eliminating degradation, expropriating the area, creating a public park within the larger complex of the Appia Antica Park, and promoting the valuable historical-artistic-naturalistic heritage of the IX Municipality. Today, as for the past twenty years, they continue to pursue these goals of caring for the park, above all thanks to donations from citizens who enable the committee to purchase agricultural equipment, and not only that, for the maintenance of the fields and pathways, to collect and eliminate rubbish, and to make the green and play areas enjoyable. In addition, urging the institutions to monitor the pollution levels of the Almone river and to secure and restore unguarded archaeological areas remains fundamental.
What is the timeline? Are there already visible effects?
As already mentioned, the Committee has been working since 1984 and the effects of its activities are clearly visible, because otherwise today the park would be overrun with waste and scraps produced by illegal activities, just as it was in the 1960s. From the second half of the 1980s until the end of the 1990s, the association was engaged not only in collecting signatures and petitions, but also in an intense activity of publications concerning the crucial natural and historical aspects of Caffarella. An example is the book ‘La Valle della Caffarella – spiccioli di natura’, the first monograph dedicated to the naturalistic and geological aspects of the park, published in collaboration with the WWF and issued in a second revised edition in 1997. Or the text on the historical-archaeological aspects of the Caffarella Valley and the Via Latina, entitled ‘La Valle della Caffarella – la storia ci racconta’, the publication of which was financed through the self-taxation of 50,000 Lire (= 25 euros) each by 249 citizens of the Appio-Latino district. Although the book did not receive any contribution from the institutions, the information it contained was made available to the City of Rome for the drafting of the Caffarella Utilisation Plan by the Environmental Protection Office. On 9 April 2000, the ‘Parco Aperto’ party was organised, with the contribution of the IX Municipality, for the inauguration of the opening to the public of the Caffarella Park, of which 70 hectares had then been cleaned up and made usable. During the first decade of the 2000s, the Committee continued its activities to disseminate the natural archaeological heritage of the Valley, through the publications and the organisation of events. At the same time, the creation of rest areas near the park entrances was carried out, with the placement of numerous benches and the planting of several trees. In addition, the insistent solicitations to the Municipality of Rome that led to the expropriation and consequent acquisition of an additional 40 hectares of land and a number of farmhouses, the most important of which is the Renaissance farmhouse of Vaccareccia, have been fundamental. As already mentioned, in 2010 actions began for the purification of the Almone river, which continue into the present, and those for moving the car wrecks outside the boundaries of the Appia Antica Regional Park. In the ten years that followed, and which are still ongoing, the activities of pressing the institutions and those of maintaining the valley, carried out thanks to the donations of citizens, have continued unabated: dirt roads have been re-surfaced, boundary walls re-established, access gates and buildings restored, and many green areas cleared and tidied up. In short, if it wasn’t for the Caffarella Park Committee, Rome would not have this imposing and solemn piece of unperturbed nature within the city.
Renaissance farmhouse Vaccarenccia, by Marta Alimelli
Who are the actors involved? What is their background?
As will be understood, the actors involved in the Committee’s activities are, first of all, the neighbourhood community, which, thanks to donations and voluntary work, does not fail to give strong support to the association. On the other hand, on an institutional level, the Municipality of Rome and the Lazio Region play a predominant role, to which all the Committee’s requests flow.
Which limits (institutional, physical, social, etc.) does it encounter? Are any shortcomings or critical points visible? What other problematic issues can arise from its implementation?
The Committee mainly faces the limits related to the inactivity on the part of the municipality and cutbacks by the region. Over the years, the Committee has always used its grassroots power to move, often successfully, decisions on the part of the aforementioned institutions. Examples of this are the citizens’ initiative question to the Mayor of Rome in 2011 for the construction of the sewerage collector mentioned above – a project approved by the Mayor only after being urged to do so by the Prefect of Rome, to whom the Committee had sent a complaint for not having received any response from the Mayor to the above-mentioned question – ; the denunciation presented, in 2016, by the Committee and the neighbourhood community to the Prosecutor’s Office of Rome against the degradation of the Almone river; or again, in 2019, the mass sending of e-mails to the Mayor for the resolution of the problems related to the areas expropriated ten years earlier and for the restoration of municipal funds for the maintenance of the Park. It could therefore be said that the greatest criticality concerning the Committee’s activity is its dependence on the behaviour of the institutions, since, despite the strong and heartfelt presence of the community, the management of the Caffarella cannot be carried out independently and without the action of the institutions, which should provide the primary sustenance for the safeguarding of the Park system.
How would it be potentially replicable in other settings?
The power of this bottom-up initiative is, in addition to the restoration and preservation of the Park’s environment, the creation of relationships within the neighbourhood and the awareness of citizens to safeguard their Park, also through the very bonds that are established between humans and non-humans. Whoever crosses the Caffarella feels part of something extremely unusual for a city, as if as soon as they set foot in the Valley they feel welcomed by the genuine energies of the non-human. And this would not be the case if forty years ago a group of young people had not mobilised to reclaim a piece of Rome’s history and nature. So yes, the initiative would be potentially replicable in other settings, since its birth is due to the desire of young citizens to recover and defend a space, of a certain natural and cultural importance, that polluting and moreover illicit human activities were destroying. It would also be replicable because the Committee, despite being made up of a small number of people, has the support of an entire neighbourhood of Rome and this guarantees the initiative strong popular roots.
Is this initiative conducive to broader changes? If yes, which?
The fact that the initiative has led to changes at the community level is unquestionable at this point, both in terms of raising awareness of the preservation of the park’s heritage and in terms of political and economic commitment. But, given the incessant interlocutions with the institutions, the Committee’s actions have also led to changes on an institutional and legislative level: an example of this is the Regional Resolution of March 2019, which establishes the management and preservation of specific portions of the Almone River by the Public Maintenance Service, and no longer the sole responsibility of the Committee.
References :
Assocazzione di volontario Comitato per il Parco della Cafarella.(2018,March 19). Caffarella. https://www.caffarella.it/
Ilaria Tosti
Where is this grassroots initiative implemented?
Retake is a spontaneous citizen’s movement that began in the Trieste neighborhood, now Rome’s second municipality, in Italy.
Who are the promoters?
The experience is originated with Rebecca Jean Spitzmiller, who, tired of the ugliness in her neighborhood, decided to roll up her sleeves since the agencies she had asked for help had not moved to accommodate her requests.
First on her own, then with friends, she decided to create a small association. Now it has settled throughout Italy and is registered with the third sector.
In Rome, there are 86 groups, one in each neighborhood, and each group has one or more administrators.
Who are the beneficiaries?
The beneficiaries of Retake actions are citizens who, not only can experience environments visibly more livable but also can breathe cleaner air.
Square dedicated to the martyrs of freedom slaughtered by the Nazi-fascist oppressor, cleaned up by Centocelle volunteers (December 2023) image by the author.
How does this initiative engage with climate? Does it tackle mitigation, adaptation, both, or other dimensions of climate change?
These citizen groups engage by trying to bring about a change in perspective, by raising awareness of climate change issues, they mitigate the harm that dangerous behaviors of other citizens bring to the environment.
“It may seem that these actions impact little on climate change by dealing with specific areas” says the activist who told me about the project.
What characterizes them is the intention to make people understand the impact they have on the environment around them and beyond.
By upgrading areas or creating specific teaching events for youth and children in schools, they raise social-ecological awareness.
What are the main objectives? What are the main values?
The main objective and value is really to raise awareness, as well as to adopt good practices for the environment, so that a virtuous circle is created in which citizens and institutions work together. With this, they try to get to have the cleanest and most livable cities by trying to share good practices for sustainability.
Volunteers in action cleaning the ground and putting in new plants (December 2023). Image by the author.
What is the timeline?
This initiative was started in 2009 by a small core group of people. The goal of the association is to no longer exist; it will last as long as it is needed.
However, thanks to other parallel projects already in action, such as recycling books, recycling shoe soles, or collecting caps, the end of this project is not yet visible.
Who are the actors involved? What is their background?
There are people of all types and age groups, with all different lives behind them.
So many professionals who are already in the social work field, such as social workers, teachers, nurses, engineers, accountants and lawyers.
“Me being a teacher is the one who raises awareness. Then there is Silvia, who is a seamstress, has golden hands, and is also very knowledgeable about botany. There is Bruno, who comes from engineering studies, and so he helps in the practical side. Luigi, who is a lawyer, helps us write emails to institutions. In short, everyone introduces their expertise.”
In addition, says Sonia, administrator of the Centocelle Retake group, for the past few months there has been a group of Chinese volunteers who are doing a path of integration thanks to the church they belong to. With certificates of participation that Retake can issue them, these volunteers can spend them to the legal authorities to get citizenship.
They also work with groups of young people who have committed misdemeanors and do probation with Retake, using up their community service hours instead of being under house arrest or, worse, in jail, also understanding how to weave deep relationships.
Groups in the neighborhoods of San Paolo, Colle Oppio, and San Lorenzo conduct activities with refugees from some centers. They learn gardening, Italian and how to relate to people in the area where they live.
Many, in doing so, also find jobs.
Square cleaning and bench beautification (December 2023). Image by the author
What limits (institutional, physical, social, etc.) does it encounter? Are any shortcomings or critical points visible? What other problematic issues can arise from its implementation?
The limitation is low willpower in some neighborhoods, lack of volunteers and resignation.
They have constant contact with the city hall, with the green councillor, but since Rome is a very large territory and there are so many problems, no matter how much cooperation there is, they can’t always address them all.
An example reported by the volunteer I interviewed is syringes left by area drug addicts. Here the limits are resignation and difficulty in management. Without help from city hall, it is difficult to get citizens to approach such sensitive situations.
How would it be potentially replicable in other settings?
The association already engages in parallel projects while also building links with other voluntary associations. They work on promoting virtuous practices that open avenues to sustainability in various settings.
One important parallel project that can serve as an example is “Reuse and Recycle Used Sneakers” to show how an object can have a second life.
If in good condition, the shoes will be donated, otherwise the soles will be used as a “second raw material” to build shockproof grounds for playgrounds or athletic tracks.
Is this initiative conducive to broader changes? If yes, which?
With the goal of disappearing, they have entered into covenants of cooperation with the municipality of Rome, in which the association undertakes to find particularly critical areas and redevelop them, expanding to the whole city and then to the whole of Italy. In fact, from a small group of volunteers in a Roman neighborhood, they have grown to create extensive groups throughout Italy.
They try to make synergy with all the actors there are in a city, the municipality, the various subsidiaries such as Ama Roma S.p.A., Atac, and the underground. So far, they have been able to collaborate.
The association starts and the municipality is committed to continue.
“Since 2009 Retake has initiated an ongoing relationship of confrontation and collaboration with all administrations, in the belief that active citizenship and institutions must be mutually supportive in achieving common goals.”
In promoting the values, they have also concretely involved international communities in the area, from the European Commission to the embassies of the United States, Japan, Estonia, Canada, Australia, the Philippines and Romania.
References :
Interview with a volunteer
Retake Roma – Attiva nella cura dei beni comuni! – Sito Ufficiale. (2025, March 10). Retake Roma. https://retake.org/roma/
By Giorgia Grossi
In recent years, there has been increasing talk about the necessity of reconnecting with nature, even in heavily urbanized contexts. This esire is undoubtedly linked to a growing focus on a healthy lifestyle and an increasingly inseparable connection with sustainable development. Therefore, the initiative we have decided to reference in this paper concerns the emergence of urban gardens, with a specific analysis of the Volunteer Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci”.
Before delving into the activities of this association, it seems appropriate to provide a definition of an urban garden to better understand the topic. An urban garden is defined as «a green space owned by the municipality and of variable size, managed for a defined period by individual citizens, often organized into specific associations».
Contrary to what one might think, this type of initiative is rather dated: already during the industrial era, cultivated gardens could be found in urban areas (although with the increase in population and the expansion of cities, this balance was disrupted, and such initiatives became increasingly rare). Specifically, the first urban gardens emerged around the mid-1800s in Germany, while the earliest examples of urban gardens in Italy date back to the years of World War II, thanks to the “War Vegetable Gardens” campaign. However, once this challenging period passed, there was little mention of this type of initiative, at least until our present day.
The association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” is a volunteer organization according to the third sector code and is currently an ODV, which stands for Voluntary Organization. The internal statute’s mission is focused on environmental protection and socialization. This is why they define themselves as community urban gardens: this definition encompasses the idea of creating and enhancing an abandoned place owned by the municipality, making it productive both in terms of food and social interaction.
Figure SEQ Figura \* ARABIC 1: Photo taken by Giorgia Grossi, sign at the entrance to the urban garden
To conduct this research, we reached out to specific individuals who granted us an interview:
Where is this initiative implemented? Who are the promoters?
The initiative takes place in North Rome in the Balduina area, precisely in the Trionfale neighborhood; specifically, we are in the Monte Mario nature reserve, under the jurisdiction of Roma Natura (it is, therefore, a park, reserve, and municipal property, as can be seen in Figure 1).
The initiative has a rather simple origin: in 2014, some citizens frequented the Monte Ciocci Park as public users, and through casual encounters and word of mouth, there emerged a desire to take care of a portion of the public park that was fenced and completely abandoned.
As a result, the citizens decided, in 2014, to establish the association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” (a name derived from the then catalyst Orchidea De Santis, involved in the Monte Ciocci Protection and Surveillance Committee for the mountain and the park, a neighborhood committee that made the opening of Monte Ciocci Park possible in 2013).
Figure SEQ Figura \* ARABIC 2: Screenshot taken from Google Maps, to visually see where this park is located
On February 5, 2014, the Municipality of Rome entrusted the mentioned space to the Association, an initiative that remained partially unauthorized until two years ago (although still within the regulations). Finally, two years ago, the formal authorization for a 6-year + 6-year lease arrived, renewable subject to verification that everything is in compliance with the municipal regulations. Checks are carried out by the Municipality of Rome through the responsible person, Mrs. Paola Marzi, or through the Councilor for Agriculture, Environment, and Waste Cycle of Rome, the current Sabrina Alfonsi). The project approved by the Municipality of Rome aimed at the environmental redevelopment of an area in a state of total abandonment, thanks to the creation of an urban garden. Initially, the garden was something you had to earn, even going against the law. In fact, as Mr. Andrea Messori, the President of EU Projects Manager & Trainer, spokesperson for “Orti In Comune” and the forum for community urban gardens in Rome, tells us, 98% of Rome’s urban gardens originated illegally: they are occupations of degraded and often litter-filled spaces that people decide to reclaim. However, when the Municipality officially initiated the Community Urban Gardens project and assessed the green spaces that were actually free from constraints and usable, they realized there were very few. This was because over the years, citizens had autonomously moved and occupied these spaces before the official project began.
Thus, the Municipality of Rome established the Urban Gardens Office, thanks to the goodwill of Mrs. Paola Marzi, who is currently in charge. This was in response to the emerging citizens’ desire to take care of green spaces. The Municipality of Rome has two levels to regulate this type of activity: on one hand, the Regulation on Urban Gardens and Shared Gardens (with Resolution No. 38 of July 17, 2015), and on the other hand, the Green Regulation (which regulates everything related to the municipality’s greenery, including the management of green areas, concessions, types of plants that can be planted, and extends to urban gardens). These two regulations, dealing with common themes, often intersect. In addition to relying on these regulations, the Volunteer Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” has its own internal regulation, drafted and modified through extraordinary meetings of its members, aligning with the aforementioned regulations.
The Volunteer Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Mario” is a self-sustaining association, and therefore, a fee determined by the Board of Directors (chaired by Mr. Flavio della Porta, President of the Association) must be paid. The Board consists of 5 figures:
How was the creation of the Urban Gardens in this area experienced by the neighborhood?
Initially, it was met with ambivalence, as told by the President of the “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” Association. However, over the years, the Association evolved, becoming more open to the external community and spreading awareness of the potential of that place through various dedicated initiatives. They also worked on making their activities better known to the community. While residents in the area with a direct view of the park initially saw them almost as invaders, over time, they accepted them, realizing that it could only be an added value. This was both in terms of area control and presence, as well as in terms of environmental protection and fire prevention. The President of the Association mentions one of the phrases they often heard from the residents of the area: ‘Rather than leaving the park abandoned… better this way.’ They realized that having a lived-in and well-maintained park in front of their homes was certainly better than having an abandoned park full of waste.
Figure 3 & 4: The photo was taken by Giorgia Grossi inside the urban garden of Monte Ciocci.
Who are the beneficiaries of the initiative?
Typically, the beneficiaries of these initiatives are non-professional cultivators, residents of the neighborhood where the initiative takes place, who are granted the green space for predefined purposes. They usually engage in the production of flowers, fruits, and vegetables, which will then be used to meet the needs of the assignees themselves.
The President of the “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” Association explains that they specifically have 17 members and about twenty volunteers:
Clearly, being a Volunteer Organization (Organizzazione Di Volontariato or ODV), a fee (deliberated by the assembly) must be paid. With the increase in general costs, management costs have also risen, leading to a payment of €150 for the owners of larger plots (60 sqm) and €100 for smaller plots (30 sqm). Additionally, insurance is mandatory for both members and volunteers, covering the membership fee. With the new Internal Regulation, it has been requested that the Municipality allocate a portion of funds to the gardens so that the generated revenue can be used to cover insurance for members, with the remaining amount covering garden costs.
What is strictly prohibited by various regulations (municipal and internal) is the sale of cultivated products. The only opportunity offered to citizens participating in this initiative is, occasionally, to sell a semi-processed product to fund Association activities (an example could be selling small jars of jam or charging an entrance fee for a registered open day event).
Who are the actors involved? What is their background?
The actors involved are the beneficiaries themselves, but do they need to have a specific background? «No», says the President of the Association, continuing to state that «the beauty is precisely that those who come here bring their own experience, knowledge, and desires, creating an exchange with the other actors involved, even at the training level». However, what emerges is the passion that all the actors involved in this initiative have for nature and the environment.
As for the role of the President of the Volunteer Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Mario”, Mr. Flavio della Porta explains that he decided to take a course to become a “gardeniser”. This course, lasting 40 hours, is part of a European project of cultural exchange and enhancement of the combination of two terms, “garden” and “organizer”. This training is defined as a cultural exchange because during these 40 hours, efforts are made to find diversity, challenges, and common ground among the various countries participating in this project. In these 40 hours of training, cultivation aspects are almost marginal; the focus is more on the historical aspects of gardens, organizational-management aspects, budgets, calculations in terms of light and shadow, what to plant and where, etc.
What limits (institutional, physical, social, etc.) does it encounter? Are there visible deficiencies or critical points? What other issues may arise from its implementation?
The President of the Volunteer Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci” describes the predominant limit as the scarcity of available land: there are many requests, but there are only about twenty plots, thus satisfying only a small portion of the demands. This criticality leads to a selective narrowing down, delving into the applicant’s offered commitment during the interview for an allotment, while also facilitating residents of the area or those closest to it. Clearly, assigning a plot to someone who lives on the other side of the city, in a large city like Rome, becomes a critical point, becoming a discriminating factor in the selection.
One of what we can consider as limits is the presence of some gardens that call themselves community gardens but are not at all: these are initiatives promoted by landowners who rent out portions of their land at very high prices (they can reach €500 or €600 per year), allowing cultivation. Practical activities may be the same as true community gardens, but since the owner is a private individual, it becomes a business in every respect. Therefore, it would be more accurate to define them differently because the concept of community (municipal) gardens follows a different line, where there is no ownership since the land belongs to the municipality, and it does not have a commercial purpose.
Figure 5: Map of shared gardens in Rome
As we can see from the map of shared gardens in Rome (figure 5), almost all municipal urban gardens are located in the southeast crescent of the city. Why? Because, understandably, the northern part, including the city center and being the financial district, lacks the necessary space to promote such initiatives. The choice, which has already been experimented with in many cities, to create urban gardens on the roofs of buildings has not yet been implemented.
How could it potentially be replicated in other contexts?
This initiative is not unique to Rome; in fact, there are over 160 urban gardens, demonstrating that it is clearly replicable in other contexts. These urban gardens are connected through a network (an association, in turn, an APS – Social Promotion Association), a very democratic and free electronic platform for the exchange of ideas, opinions, problems, etc. It also serves as a sort of trade union, so much so that on this platform, they contributed to drafting the new regulations for urban gardens. The regulations were supposed to be approved by the City Council last December but were postponed and will be approved shortly. There are urban gardens throughout Italy, each managed differently according to their regulations. What distinguishes the urban gardens of Rome is a strong desire to take care of public green spaces and find a place where they can «return to their roots», as stated by the President of the Association, Mr. Flavio della Porta, adding that this is part of their mission.
It is possible to find urban garden initiatives in other countries as well. Two interesting examples were shared by Mr. Andrea Messori, the EU projects manager & trainer:
How does this initiative positively interact with the environment? How about with the climate? Does it address mitigation, adaptation, both, or other dimensions of climate change?
The presence of urban gardens in highly urbanized and anthropized areas leads to the requalification of the territory, moving towards an increasingly green concept of the city. Through these initiatives, more people spend time outside, in nature (even within an urban context), thus spending less time at home and using less energy.
«The climate change is felt, and we are the first to notice it», says the President of the Association. He explains how, by participating in urban gardens, people become aware of the different timing compared to industrial production, which is naturally slower here due to the absence of chemicals. This also involves indirect food education. Awareness of what we eat and the certainty of its quality are part of the indirect environmental contributions. Being a mere supermarket user, one fills the cart unconsciously when, in reality, it is important for the environment to respect the seasonality of products. Therefore, it would be better to eat less but in a healthier and more sustainable way. In addition, the gardens contribute to the knowledge and dissemination of products that are no longer on the market and, therefore, many users are unfamiliar with. This helps biodiversity because, by frequenting a garden and consuming its products, even occasionally, people find themselves looking for items that are often not found in supermarkets (often these are products eliminated because they are not attractive and productive enough, hence not meeting the demands of the large market). Consequently, individuals need to visit markets or specific bio producers.
Another aspect not to be underestimated is that initiatives related to urban gardens contribute to withdrawing land from cementation (eliminating problems of water absorption by the soil). Unfortunately, it’s not always possible to obtain the concession of those territories with high profit potential. Mr. Flavio della Porta tells us about his attempts to obtain the concession of land adjacent to the garden where a historic Rai (Italian Broadcasting Corporation) antenna stood, which was decommissioned last year. The Association’s request and its President’s intention to occupy that land aimed to satisfy the numerous requests from those who want to participate in the Urban Gardens initiative. However, they did not manage to obtain the concession, which was instead assigned to a construction company that is proceeding with the creation of new residential buildings.
An initiative present in various community urban gardens, including the one examined in this paper, is the presence of a compost bin (a container designed to collect organic waste). The Association, like others, operates in terms of material reuse and recycling of urban waste: green waste is directed into the compost bin to produce compost through various techniques, contributing to reducing landfill disposal and often using recycled materials.
Figure 6: Photo was taken by Giorgia Grossi
The Volunteer Association in question also uses water recycling systems: they have a 5,000-liter tank inside a manhole, and through the use of a pump, the wastewater reaches their garden, using non-potable water for irrigation and thus being at zero environmental impact (also thanks to the lack of electricity and energy within the park).
Are there already visible effects?
Mr. Andrea Messori, the EU Projects Manager & Trainer, spokesperson for “Orti In Comune”, and the forum of community urban gardens in Rome, tells us how in England, the insurance market asks those who apply for health and/or life insurance if they are frequent visitors to urban gardens. If they receive a positive response, they will have a lower rate to pay. This is because they have evidently calculated the positive effects, both in terms of staying healthier and in the fight against isolation (less depression, fewer medications, etc.).
A very important project often present in urban gardens is beehives:
«beehives s. f. [uncertain origin] A box or other structure prepared by humans for the breeding of bees […]»
In many cases, urban gardens construct beehives using natural and local materials, where bees thrive due to the ample biodiversity present.
In a specific case in Rome, recounted by Mr. Andrea Messori, the Prefecture decided to experiment with air quality using insects, reaching an agreement with some urban gardens that already had beehives. By collecting their honey and conducting analyses, it was found that their honey contained more than 17 essences simultaneously, which was considered a rarity. This is because, in other places, bees do not find a variety of plants on which to land, as is the case in urban gardens.
Researchers decided to create true “ecological corridors for insects”: using the network of urban gardens, they sought those with exposed balconies that connected two gardens so that insects could follow the path and join other bee families, giving biodiversity the opportunity to mix, creating a more long-lived and resilient species.
Mr. Andrea Messori, President of EU projects manager & trainer, spokesperson for Orti In Comune and forum of community urban gardens in Rome, states that with the European project they are submitting, Gardeniser Community, a research project involving Roma Tre University with Prof. De Muro, who specializes in social economy, they are addressing the themes we are discussing. They have developed the concept of Impact Indices of community urban gardens (based on the model of the Community-Index by Prof. Stefano Zamagni of the University of Bologna): what they want to do is connect data so that they can evaluate the impact as an internal governance tool (i.e., the system tells me where I have reached based on my goals, adding what to focus on this year). However, regarding environmental impact, it is difficult to make statistics on a macro level: «unfortunately, for the climate footprint, it is enough that for 20 days there is more traffic on Via Cristoforo Colombo than the compensatory activity carried out by the garden is canceled».
A very interesting example, also provided by Mr. Andrea Messori during the interview, concerns the Orti Urbani Garbatella, which originated as an act of disobedience by the citizens of the area. Once the Region’s building was constructed, various debris remained, and the Municipality was willing to give away that area for free to someone who would take care of cleaning it up; a private company wanted to build a supermarket there, and when the citizens, eager to have a park, learned about it, they started cleaning the area. One day, they arrived with 10 trucks of soil donated by friends and poured it over the cement, raising the ground by 40 cm (even today, the Orti Urbani Garbatella cultivate on a 40 cm layer of soil, which is why the trees are very low, as the roots cannot go deep and are blocked).
Following the creation of this urban garden, they decided to create a mound of soil, raising the ground by about a meter and a half: after various surveys, it was noted that after the construction of this mound, pollution in that area was lower (reducing pollution by 30%).
Does this initiative foster broader changes (legislation, institutional agreements, long-term sustainability, or community preparedness, etc.)? If yes, which ones?
Within an urban garden, there are many environmental issues, states the President of the Association “Orchi Urbani Monte Ciocci”. They may not provide a quantifiable and calculable contribution at the environmental level, but they can certainly offer an important contribution in terms of environmental education through initiatives such as educational gardens, events, etc. The “Orchi Urbani” Association, for example, participates in the “Roma cura Roma” project, an initiative dedicated to cleaning sections of the park. These initiatives have multiple positive aspects, ranging from the goal of combating social exclusion to wanting to do something concrete for climate change. In addition, these are important initiatives for preserving areas from degradation, abandonment, and irregularities while allowing citizens to fully experience and reclaim their territory.
These initiatives also aim to create a connection with our agricultural origins by cultivating typical local products and often ancient products that are no longer even found in the market.
What are the main goals? What are the core values?
The goals, as we have seen, aim at both the redevelopment of abandoned green areas and at socialization, environmental and food education, as well as the dissemination of knowledge. As we have seen throughout this paper and as Andrea Messori states, «the urban garden is not only meant to cultivate things but also to cultivate people».
REFERENCES:
https://gardeniser.eu/it , this document was consulted on 19.01.2024.
https://gardeniser.eu/it/profilo-gardeniser , this document was consulted on 19.01.2024.
https://orti-urbani-monte-ciocci.business.site/ , this document was consulted on 08.01.2024.
https://urbact.eu/networks/rurban , this document was consulted on 20.01.2024.
https://www.biorfarm.com/orti-urbani/ , this document was consulted on 08.01.2024.
https://www.centroproxima.it/it , this document was consulted on 19.01.2024.
https://www.comune.roma.it/web/it/sabrina-alfonsi.page , this document was consulted on 10.01.2024.
https://www.comune.roma.it/web/it/scheda-servizi.page?contentId=INF60787&pagina=2 , this document was consulted on 10.01.2024.
https://www.ortidipace.org/mappa-degli-orti-condivisi-di-roma , this document was consulted on 10.01.2024.
https://www.replaynet.eu/it , this document was consulted on 19.01.2024.
https://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/arnia/ , this document was consulted on 19.01.2024.
By Cecilia Pasini
The initiative is the re-appropriation of a former industrial chemical plant that produced viscose, the ex CISA/SNIA Viscosa, in Rome. The abandoned plant has been partly occupied by activists and citizens and re-used, through a re-signification and re-territorialization (Maggioli and Tabusi, 2016) of the former plant in ruins and the creation of a new park, spaces for the community, and an archive of the former workers.
Photo of Lago Bullicante and abandoned ruins of the shopping centre project.
Images by Cecilia Pasini
Where is this grassroots initiative? Who are the promoters? Who are the beneficiaries?
The ex-Snia is located in Rome, the Italian capital city, in the neighbourhood of Pigneto–Prenestino and bordered by via Prenestina and via di Portonaccio. It is now called Parco delle Energie (Energy Park) because it became a public park as a result of the grassroots initiative. The area covers a total of 14 hectares, 6.5 of which are public. In the park stands the Park House and the Quadrato, a skate park where activities, festivals and sports tournaments are organized. The Park House, which in the past was one of the two structures used as a dormitory for factory workers, is a public space managed by the Forum Territoriale Permanente del Parco delle Energie (Permanent Territorial Forum of the Energy Park, from now on “Forum”) in agreement with the City Hall, (AAVV, 2023). The Forum is a civic body built up over the years during the activists’ struggles to protect and manage the area.
The Centro Documentazione Territoriale Maria Baccante – Archivio storico Viscosa (Maria Baccante Territorial Documentation Centre – Historical archive Viscose) is hosted in the Park House and is dedicated to a former worker and partisan in the Italian Resistance. The archive collects documents abandoned by the former Snia Viscosa direction after the closure of the firm. It is managed through an assembly that meets weekly, made by activists and inhabitants of the neighbourhood with a special biographic relationship to the plant, some of them have professional skills in the conservation of archives. The archive has an institutional recognition since 2012, when the Regional Directorate for Cultural and Landscape Heritage of Lazio recognised its value.
Inside the park, there is a natural lake, which leaked from the underground water table during work on the construction of a shopping centre in the early 1990s. The emergence of the lake and the consequent arrival of several people and nonhuman species, especially birds, has been an important turning point in the initiative. In a sense, the initiative is a form of creation of multispecies relationships based on the protection of commons, in which a coalition between human and nonhuman actors is made possible with relevant positive consequences.
Everyone in the neighbourhood and abroad can benefit from the initiative. Thanks to the presence of the park, the community centre and the archive Maria Baccante, the place is visited by relatives of former workers who want to reconstruct their family history as well as researchers, students, industrial history enthusiasts, and even by the curious who want to learn more about the city.
How does this initiative engage with climate? Does it tackle mitigation, adaptation, both, or other dimensions of climate change?
The initiative is against soil exploitation by economic powers, the big firms and the political elites. It tries to defend the area as a common good, preserve the park, and have more places where the community can meet. Activists act to safeguard and increase biodiversity, raise among the inhabitants of the neighbourhood awareness of the importance of green areas, the development of a civic sense, and of awareness of collective goods. The initiative also tries to do something out of the waste and ruins of the deindustrialization process, with a practice that overcomes the sense of loss (Elliott, 2018). It opposes the ruination and waste of a post-industrial area, claiming the need of commoning and creating new forms of relationships (Armiero, 2021). It is also an opposition to the abandonment of the stories of the neighbourhood. The polluting plant (the industrial complex used highly toxic chemicals, such as carbon disulphide, to create rayon or artificial silk) has created a toxic and noxious heritage (Feltrin, Mah, and Brown, 2022) that has condemned the neighbourhood and its inhabitants to become a wasted community, out of sight for the most. The initiative permits to overturning this perspective by developing alternative visions for the community and its territory.
Additionally, the initiative has been made possible thanks to the emergence of human-nonhuman alliances, and the sudden and bulky entry of the urban wilderness in the area, starting with the birth of the Bullicante lake.
What are the main objectives? What are the main values?
The main objectives concern the fight against capitalist power, privatization, resistance to overbuilding and the cementation of natural green areas. The activists want to oppose the new capitalist projects that since the Nineties have aimed to make the area at the service of private interests, asking the municipality for the expropriation of that part of the ex-Snia, which is still privately owned. They consider the park a common good that needs to be owned and used by the community without capitalist exploitation or further privatization. In the words of one of the activists: “We want to be the largest re-naturalised post-industrial settlement in Rome”. The main values concern the protection of urban nature, the importance of creating commons to fight against speculation, and the valorisation of the workers’ stories in an area with a polluted and noxious recent past.
What is the timeline? Are there already visible effects?
The initiative’s history is intertwined with the history of the industrial plant and comes from afar. In 1922 the plant was located by the Società Generale Italiana della Viscosa (Italian General Society of Viscose) and started its activity in 1923. The choice of the location is influenced, among other reasons, by the massive presence of water in the area. In 1944 an Allied bombing raid hit the factory, severely damaging it. Despite this episode, the factory resumed operations after the Second World War, but began a considerable decline that led to the loss of labour, from over 1,600 workers in 1949 to only around 120 in 1953. The decline was accompanied by demonstrations: in 1949 there was a 40-day occupation of the factory asking to improve working conditions and wages. The factory closed in 1954. In 1969 the land became part of the Snia Viscosa estate, and by 1982 it was owned by the Società Immobiliare Snia s.r.l.
In 1990 the builder Antonio Pulcini, through the company Ponente 1978, purchased the warehouses and surrounding area (AAVV, 2023). In 1992, he started the construction of a shopping mall. During the excavation for the underground parking, the excavators eroded the Acqua Bullicante aquifer. The building site filled up with water and attempts to pump it away through the sewer system failed. On the contrary, the sewer burst and the water leaked out flooding the entire area of the nearby Largo Preneste. Then the work finally stopped (Archivio Maria Baccante, 2018). In the following years, the water level stabilised and formed a lake. Its extension is about 10,000 square meters and its depth is about 9 meters, with clean and swimmable waters. On 22 May 1992, a regional decree ordered the cancellation of the building permit for Pulcini’s project.
In 1994 the Rome City Council approved the project to turn part of the Snia Viscosa area into a public green area and started the expropriation procedure. In 1995 the former Snia is listed as an area of archaeological interest. The Snia factory is also preserved as industrial archaeology. The same year activists occupied the former warehouses to guard the park that was to be created. On this occasion, the Occupied Social Centre CSOA ex Snia opens (AAVV, 2023).
In the abandoned offices of the former factory, numerous folders with workers’ and employees’ files, drawings, plans, and blueprints of the technical office, and workers’ medical records were found, collected, and safeguarded. In 2012, the Archival Superintendency of Lazio recognised the cultural interest of the archive (Archivio Maria Baccante, 2018). Now these documents, recognised as heritage, are kept in the Park House in the Centro Documentazione Territoriale Maria Baccante – Archivio storico Viscosa, constituted in 2015.
Photo of The Centro Documentazione Territoriale Maria Baccante. Workers’ documents.
Images by Cecilia Pasini
The park opened in 1997 and other areas were expropriated and made public in 2000. In 2007 the Energy Park Committee was created. This is committed to the protection of the existing park and the realisation of a broader park system. The Park Committee will later become part of the Forum. In 2011 the House of the Park and the Forum were born, the municipal administration, the Municipality of Rome VI, various associations, committees, and citizens of the neighbourhood participated in the meetings. In 2011 the WWF Pigneto Prenestino Committee is born. In 2014 a thousand people participating in a demonstration obtained the opening of the gate of the former factory and reached the lake and the public green area. The Rome City Council approved a motion tabled by an ecologist political group, which partly incorporated the demands made by the Forum for the protection of the lake, the completion of the expropriation, and the opening to the public of the area around the lake. In the same period, the Forum submitted a request for protection of the former Snia industrial complex.
In 2018 the activists presented an appeal to the President of the Lazio Region to establish the Natural Monument of the former Snia Lake and in 2019 they asked to enlarge the Natural Monument area. In 2020 the President of the Region established the “Lago ex Snia- Viscosa” Natural Monument and placed it under environmental protection. One part of the ex-Snia is still owned by the Ponente 1978 company which started a project in 2022 with the official aim of “conservative restoration and partial restructuring” (AAVV, 2023). According to the Forum and to the local WWF, the real aim is to establish in the area a logistics hub. In the same year, the Forum asks again to the local and regional authorities to enlarge the perimeter of the ex Snia – Viscosa Lake Natural Monument.
Which limits (institutional, physical, social, etc.) does it encounter?
The main problem of the initiative seems to be the big dimension of the ex-Snia area that is considered by the municipality and by the privates as a field for private investments and economic exploitation. Nowadays different parts of the area have different statuses and different forms of recognition and protection. Even if the institutions, in particular the Lazio Region, have been active in the protection of the lake, some other decisions seem to stretch out towards interests of privatization. Additionally, the strategy of the promoters of the initiative asking for preservation of the natural and archival heritage has been successful, but at the same time makes the possible future of the initiative strictly connected to the political decisions of the institutional actors.
Are any shortcomings or critical points visible? What other problematic issues can arise from its implementation?
The main problem is about the private interests that threaten the stability of the initiative. The majority of the ex-Snia has been expropriated by the municipality, but a part is still privately owned by the Ponente 1978 company that is trying to establish a new economic activity.
Another threat is the condition of the buildings where the Snia had its production, which has been polluted for so many years that would need an evaluation of the ecological condition from a technical point of view.
How would it be potentially replicable in other settings?
The main strength of the initiative is the capability to build relationships inside and outside the neighbourhood. The initiative has been at the core of various academic papers and the activists are available to spread and communicate the initiative with people interested. Additionally, the aims of the initiatives the activists carried out are close to the neighbourhood needs and identity, in particular the closeness between the history of the plant and the history of families and individuals living in Prenestino.
The special occurrence of the human-nonhuman coalition is something particularly linked to the physical characteristics of the area that are difficult to reproduce in other contexts. Anyway, the idea to re-signify a former industrial area, with the appropriation of space and a memory, is something possible for the majority of the abandoned ruins of the industrial era. It can be made also by valorising and protecting the urban wilderness as well as in the ex-Snia.
Another strength of the initiative concerns the multiform knowledge and the different skills that the activists mobilise, even the more technical and scientific ones (Gissara, 2018). Everybody brings their own capabilities and previous experiences to contribute to the common good.
Is this initiative conducive to broader changes (law, institutional arrangements, long-term sustainability or community preparedness, etc.)?
The initiative has been important in the political decision made by the Region since the Nineties to expropriate the ex-Snia area in order to create a Natural Monument, and for the creation in 2015 of the Centro Documentazione Territoriale Maria Baccante – Archivio storico Viscosa within the Park House. This implies that the initiative has been successful in relating with the political elites, negotiating some positive political outputs, while retaining at the same time its antagonistic and alternative role with respect to institutional politics. The process has been a real long-term initiative that is nowadays incorporated into the political, social and economic life of the neighbourhood, and the assembly is still working, asking for the expropriation of the last privately owned part of the former industrial plant. The initiative is widely recognized within Rome, and more broadly in Italy, as a successful initiative to oppose the privatisation and speculation on the industrial heritage, as well as to defend the preservation of nature and green urban spaces.
References
AA.VV. (2023) Il Lago Bullicante Ex-Snia “Lago per Tuttə – Cemento per Nessunə”. Retrieved from https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/38259072ca4d4b2490fa70a3460abe68 [last accessed 10 July 2023].
Armiero, M. (2021). L’era degli scarti. Cronache dal Wasteocene, la discarica globale. Torino: Einaudi.
Centro Documentazione Territoriale Maria Baccante (2013). La fabbrica. Retrieved from https://www.archivioviscosa.org/la-fabbrica/ [last accessed 10 July 2023].
Centro documentazione territoriale Maria Baccante (2018). L’acqua e la carta: il ritrovamento dell’archivio storico Viscosa. Zapruder, 47, 124-127.
Elliott, R. (2018). The Sociology of Climate Change as a Sociology of Loss. European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes De Sociologie, 59(3), 301-337.
Feltrin L., Mah A. and Brown D. (2022). Noxious deindustrialization: Experiences of precarity and pollution in Scotland’s petrochemical capital. Politics and Space, 40(4), 950-969.
Gissara, M. (2018). Intorno al lago. La riappropriazione popolare dell’area dell’ex Snia Viscosa a Roma. Tracce Urbane. Rivista Italiana Transdisciplinare Di Studi Urbani, 2(4), 218-236.
Maggioli M. and Tabusi M. (2016). Energie sociali e lotta per i luoghi. Il ‘Lago naturale’ nella zona dell’ex CISA/Snia Viscosa a Roma. Rivista Geografica Italiana, 123(3), 365-382.
Thais Palermo Buti
Introduction
Ort9 is an urban garden and public park located in Casal Brunori, a residential neighborhood in the outskirts of Rome. Before being turned into a park, the space was used as a landfill. This text tells the process that the local actors (NGO and neighborhood committee) engaged to recover a neglected urban public space and to give it back to the community.
Parco Ort9: place, characteristics, and actors involved
The initiative is implemented in the residential neighborhood Casal Brunori, in the outskirts of Rome, Italy1. Its institutional promoters are the NGO Vivere In… and the Neighborhood Committee.
The NGO was born in 2006, starting from the initiative of a group of friends who decided to commit themselves to enhance the neighborhood. As reported in a 2018 news story on Repubblica website: “From the cleaning of the green areas to the parties organized to fill the absence of moments of socialization, over the years they have created initiatives to mend the social fabric. In the neighborhood there is a lack of meeting places and while the elderly suffer from the lack of services, families move with their car to other areas of the city, in search of spaces for free time.
Sergio Albani, founding member of the association, had been looking hopefully at one of the large green fields of Casal Brunori, reduced to a landfill, since 2006: among the tall grass there were refrigerators, televisions, even safes abandoned after the thefts. Albani dreamed that instead of decay there were gardens and the Ort9 park is dedicated to him, who disappeared before seeing the idea of him become reality” (De Ghantuz, 2018).
1 The district extends immediately outside the Grande Raccordo Anulare to the south and is between via Pontina and via Cristoforo Colombo. The total inhabitants are 4,361 and the commercial activities around 50.
The process for the creation of the urban gardens and the public park was slow and gradual. Formally, it began with the sending by Vivere In to the Municipality of Rome, in 2005, of a draft of an architectural project, proposing the creation of the gardens in the space then occupied by the landfill. But it was only in 2015 that the Municipality, accepting a proposal sent by the Council of Culture of the 9th district of Rome, agreed to participate in the Sidig-med European project, which made it possible to obtain the necessary funds for the start of the works in the area, 12,000 square meters. Vivere In… NGO was the operational promoter of the project, and this association was entrusted with the management of the Ort9-Sergio Albani Park in February 2017.
Currently, Ort9 is a public park with 107 individual urban garden plots, in addition to shared plots. The park has an automated irrigation system through driplines, shared mechanical and manual tools, as well as public restrooms, barbecues, and indoor or outdoor socializing areas. The park is always open and it is considered a European Best Practice in urban regeneration (Parco Ort9, n.d.).
1 Ort9 Sergio Albani urban garden. www.viverein.org
The role of the citizenship and the local authorities
The creation of the park would not have been possible without the support of the local authorities, specifically the 9th District, which gave Vivere In NGO the concession for the management of the space, also entrusting the Association with the cleaning of the green area surrounding – service for which the NGO gets no compensation.
Other actors involved are the Council of Culture of the 9th District of Rome, the Local Health Agency (ASL), which uses part of the shared lots for the treatment of people with mental illness or former drug addicts, and some public schools in the neighborhood, which use the plots for practical educational workshops. The Council of Culture of the Rome 9th District played a crucial role especially in the launch of the initiative (see point “timeline”).
But the main actors of the whole process are the inhabitants of the neighborhood, who over the years have pursued a common project. As declared by the President of Vivere In, Filippo Cioffi, in an interview to Urlo Web, “these gardens are not the ultimate goal, but the tool to recapture the territory and enhance it. They, even if individually managed, allow people to share a common idea and the use of the spaces allows the neighborhood to be redeveloped”. Cioffi also recalled the disappearance of prostitution phenomena, in addition to the evident arrangement of the area, previously hosting an open-air landfill that the citizens themselves have reclaimed. “To speed up a too slow bureaucracy – continued Cioffi – we ourselves took away the abandoned refrigerators and had the land analyzed, two indispensable factors to be able to start the gardens” (Savelli, 2017).
The timeline and the effects of the initiative
2006 – Vivere In NGO presents a draft proposal for the accommodation of the area to the Municipal
Administration.
2015 – the Council of Culture of the 9th District presents to the Municipality of Rome, in collaboration with Vivere In and with the involvement of the Casal Brunori District Committee, a project of the Constitution of the “ORT9” Committee of the District IX, to “actively promote a network of associations present in the area, coordinated by the Deputy Presidency of the District IX, as a technical-administrative reference point, functional to the realization of future projects of urban social gardens in urban and peri-urban areas of the Municipality of Rome” (STIFINI, 2015).
The goal was to actively collaborate in the “realization of the ORT9 Pilot Urban Garden of the 9th District, as a model of excellence for the city of Rome, developed as part of the international project 4
SIDIG-MED, financed by the European Commission, with the aim of developing a model of good governance of urban and peri-urban agrarian/agricultural areas in the Mediterranean, the promotion of social and intercultural dialogue in and between the 4 urban realities involved: city of Rome (Italy), Barcelona (Spain), Mahdia (Tunisia) and Al – Balgua (Jordan)” (STIFINI, 2015).
The 2015 proposal of the Council of Culture to the Municipality of Rome was, in effect, an invitation to participate in the EU tender which would have allowed, subsequently, to obtain the necessary funds for the start of the works.
2016 – the reclamation of the area begins
2017 – inauguration of the urban garden (individual and shared plots)
2021 – expansion of the garden and creation of other facilities (plots for wheelchair users and people with visual impairments; lighting; barbecue area; squares)
The beneficiaries of the initiative
The beneficiaries of the park is the population of Casal Brunori neighborhood in general, who can access a public park that is always open, and more specifically the 110 families assigned to individual urban gardens (originally 107 families and since 2021, 3 families of wheelchair users). School pupils and people subjected to health treatment who use shared gardens are also direct beneficiaries.
The main objectives and values of the initiative
The aspirations with the creation of the park can be summarized in the sentence expressed by the District Committee in its presentation, and which is based on the creation of value for the whole territory: “to bring an example of ‘being together’, a rediscovered feeling of sharing, a way to regain possession of the territory, an area previously abandoned and returned to people, a rediscovered scent of beauty” (Il parco, 2020).
In concrete terms, the goals, which have been achieved, are to recover about 12km2 of public space that has become an illegal landfill to return it to the community.
Limits of the initiative
According to Filippo Cioffi, President of Vivere In, the institutional limits have arisen from the distrust of the Municipal Administration to formally allocate areas to social urban gardens even if regulated by the Master Plan in its Articles 75 and 85.
The physical limits are linked to the absence of specific funds for recovery, cleaning and executive planning of the community garden system. In the absence of a precise policy, the practice is to occupy the areas and self-finance its use, which creates uneven and non-homogeneous situations, instead of where the ideal situation of programming a governance model, an essential element for the correct management of spaces and the community.
A critical point mentioned by Mr. Cioffi is that the demand for urban gardens is much higher than the supply. Annual waivers between 10/15% fail to meet the continuing demand for assignments, which have exceeded 100% and continue to grow.
How the initiative engages with climate
(does it tackle mitigation, adaptation, both or other dimensions of climate change?)
From all the testimonies I have heard, and also from the interactions I have had with the people responsible for the care of the Park and the projects carried out by Vivere In NGO, I did not seem to glimpse, in the narratives, a connection between the park or only between urban gardens and initiatives to mitigate or adapt to climate change. On the part of public institutions and promoters of the initiative, there is a call for environmental sustainability, urban regeneration and commons.
The main dimensions that emerge in the stories, as positive points and reasons for the success of the initiative (which has won several prizes as a good practice of urban regeneration), are those relating to the sociality that the Park provides, and to the recovery of contact with nature, as well as the aspects of decorum of the urban space, removed from neglect to be usable again by the citizens of the neighborhood. Further positive effects of urban gardens are related to health and education, due to the partnerships with the Local Health Agency and with some schools.
Therefore, the connection between climate change and the Park can only be made in the context of analysis and interpretation, but it does not seem to emerge from the third sector organizations and from the local authorities involved or from the direct beneficiaries. The reason for this deviation, in my opinion, is that climate change is still seen as a distant concept for most people, especially those who live in urban areas not particularly prone to extreme events. Thus the same local authorities and 6
grassroots organizations of the territory do not seem to conceptually include urban regeneration initiatives focused on the creation or recovery of green areas in the spectrum of measures to mitigate climate change.
Possible broader changes thanks to the initiative
As Filippo Cioffi explains, “the experience in the management of the Ort9-Sergio Albani Park and the governance model adopted by the Vivere In NGO was recognized as a European good practice in the panel ‘Resilient urban and peri-urban agriculture’ and is now shared, through the Ru:rban EU projects. The NGO participates of several platforms and projects and is a reference point in the community”.
The governance model could be replicated, but it could be constraint by the limits and characteristics of each local community. For sure many inhabitants of Casal Brunori have changed the way to interact with their territory and among each other. The quality of their lives has improved since they have the park and the urban gardens. So I suppose that even if the main promoter actor, Vivere In NGO, suspended its activities, it would leave a more engaged community. Even if the engagement is directly related to climate change, to retake contact with the own territory through participatory activities, even to reach what could appear like small goals (such as an urban garden), could contribute, in time, to create long-term awareness about climate change and its challenges.
Potential replicability in other settings
Urban gardens are an expanding reality in many large European cities and other continents. It is certainly a facility that can be replicated, as there are many residual spaces in the suburbs that could be converted into self-managed green areas for use by the community, which could host individual or shared garden plots.
However, there is a crucial aspect in the creation and management of urban gardens, which is linked to the ownership of the land. While in Rome most of the urban gardens are located on communal lands, the same does not necessarily occur in other cities, and in other countries.
To stay in European territory, in England, it is normal that groups of people or basic organizations interested in creating an urban garden, must negotiate with private individuals, with whom to stipulate an adequate contract (ie allotment, license, lease) in order to create the garden and be adequately
protected from a legal point of view (Leases, 2020).
Rome is perhaps a city particularly full of abandoned public places which, with the stubbornness of the grassroots communities, a lot of patience and a bit of luck in identifying and maintaining dialogue with the institutional interlocutor, can be recovered and reintroduced for the benefit of community.
The first challenge, in general, is to find the land (which includes the analysis of practical issues related to the slope, the sun, the presence of water, etc.). Then there are the legal aspects of its management. Not to mention the need to analyze all aspects related to the community’s relationship with space. If we are talking about a regulated space (ie not an occupation), it will probably be necessary to set up a legal entity to manage it. The cohesion of the community and its ability to know how to deal with obstacles, to know how to dialogue with local authorities and other stakeholders in the area, is certainly a fundamental question when thinking about the replicability of an urban garden (Da Luz, 2020).
We can find still other differences in urban garden management in a metropolis such as São Paulo, Brazil, a country that presents enormous problems related to land ownership and management, and where family farming and small farmers are relegated to the second category in terms of investment in agriculture and of value perception. One great challenge is to rethink new systems of agricultural production, distribution and consumption, starting from the experiences of urban and peri-urban agriculture that have been taking place for years in the outskirts of the city.
The experience of San Paolo is different from that of Rome, where the growers of urban gardens – normally organized in non-profit associations – are not allowed to sell the crops. Thus, in Rome it remains an activity linked to self-consumption and the urban garden is conceived more like social innovation and urban/environmental regeneration activities rather than a way to overturn production systems.
There are several vulnerable areas in São Paolo where, through urban gardens, a process of recovery of green areas has been triggered, in a process that sees the suburbs at the forefront both in the production of food and in environmental preservation. But in São Paulo there are huge problems with access to land, water and an optimal logistics system for distribution.
An interesting aspect in the experiences of urban agriculture in São Paulo, reported by Fernando de Mello Franco, director of URBEM, is that due to the high cost of land, production must find underused, residual urban spaces. Areas of abandoned oil pipelines and electrical systems, industrial warehouses, empty parking lots, floors of large buildings, re-signify the residues of production and consumption of the city (De Mello, 2020).
In San Paolo as in Rome, the new dynamics bring back the old debate on the dichotomies between nature and culture, which today takes on the contours of the differentiations between countryside and city, between urban and rural, which are increasingly blurred.
Note about consensus: I declare that the President of Vivere IN NGO, Mr. Filippo Cioffi, gave me permission to publish the interview he granted me.
References:
Casal Brunori, gli orti urbani diventano un parco: “I lavori sono già partiti”. (2021, February 16). Roma Today. https://www.romatoday.it/zone/eur/spinaceto/orti-urbani-casal-brunori-parco-ort9- trasformazione.html
Da Luz Ferreira, Jaqueline (Coord.) (2020, November). Mais perto do que se imagina: os desafios da produção de alimentos na metrópole de São Paulo. Instituto Escolhas. São Paulo.
De Ghantuz Cubbe, Marina. (2018, September 05). Viaggio nei quartieri, Casal Brunori: dove c’era una discarica adesso c’è l’orto collettivo. https://roma.repubblica.it/cronaca/2018/09/05/news/dove_c_era_una_discarica_adesso_c_e_l_orto_ collettivo-300883075/
De Mello Franco, Fernando. (2020, November 27). Seminario Desafios Politicas Publicas Agricultura Urbana e Periurbana. Folha de São Paulo, Instituto Escolhas, e URBEM. Evento virtual. https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/seminariosfolha/2020/11/producao-local-e-capaz-de-abastecer-sao- paulo-afirmam-debatedores.shtml
Grilli, F. (2016, July 19). Casal Brunori: in attesa degli orti crescono i rifiuti ingombranti. Roma Today. https://www.romatoday.it/zone/eur/spinaceto/casal-brunori-bonifica-area-verde-orti- urbani.html
Grilli, F. (2018, May 03). Casal Brunori, gli orti solidali conquistano tutti: vinto anche il Best Practice Award 2018. Roma Today. https://www.romatoday.it/zone/eur/orti-urbani-casal-brunori- best-practice-award.html
Il parco ad ORTI di Casal Brunori…un VALORE per tutto il territorio. (2020, February 19). Casal Brunori. https://www.casalbrunori.org/aree-verdi/il-parco-ad-orti-di-casal-brunori-un-valore-per- tutto-il-territorio/
Leases and Licences; Negotiating Land. Community Land. (2020, October). Advisory Service Cymru. GardeniserPro. Green House Social Farms&Gardens.
Orto Inclusivo. (2020, December 8). Vivere In. https://www.viverein.org/sezioni/progetti/orto- inclusivo/
Parco Ort9 – Sergio Albani Casal Brunori. (n.d). Gardeneiser. https://gardeniser.eu/en/urban- garden/parco-ort9-sergio-albani-casal-brunori
PRG – Piano Regolatore Generale – Artt.75. e 85. Nuova Infrastruttura Cartografica (NIC). https://www.comune.roma.it/TERRITORIO/nic-gwt/
Savelli, Serena. (2017, September 21). Gli orti urbani di Casal Brunori diventano realtà. Urlo Web. https://urloweb.com/municipi/municipio-ix/gli-orti-urbani-di-casal-brunori-diventano-realta/
Stifini, Andrea. (2015, September). Progetto Ort9. Consulta della Cultura del Municipio Roma IX EUR. Cultura IX. http://www.cultura9.it/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/ORT9.pdf .