This is a part of the blog post for Placemaking Europe. You can read the full text via this link.
When we started the project, a full-scale war with Russia had been going on for a year. At that time, there was a trend in Ukraine of prioritizing efforts related to the army and critical infrastructure, while other projects were postponed until victory. However, our experience shows that placemaking is highly relevant and worth the effort, even during the war.
The demand for support has gone up, and the means of getting it have gotten worse.
“During the ongoing war, the demand for public spaces has surged as people find themselves increasingly fatigued. We need more support and human connections. Yet, in the communities that have been freed from occupation, even the basics are lacking. The Russian war has destroyed many amenities that were left after the Soviet occupation and the following thirty years of independence,” shares Iurii Granovskyi, facilitator, designer, and urban planner. For Iurii, this is a signal that placemaking has become even more important.
Effective reconstruction of Ukraine requires a united community.
Due to Russian aggression, many communities face destruction. In Makariv, more than 40% of buildings and 60% of infrastructure were destroyed. And effective reconstruction requires a united community. “A community becomes united when its members identify with the locality, comprehend how to collaborate and negotiate effectively. This is crucial because waiting for assistance is not the current need; instead, there’s a call to come together and take initiative,” believes Andriy Batin, designer, and urban planner.
We need to learn to be respectful of the experiences of others.
War is not a monolithic experience. In Ukrainian society, people have different traumatic memories. Some serve in the army, some are in the occupation, some have fled from a burning house, etc. “This happens even at such a close distance as Kyiv-Makariv,” artist Veronika Mol says, “because the people in Makariv were in occupation, but those in Kyiv were not. The “Nashe Place” project and the discussions it initiates help establish a dialogue format where the community can reach a shared understanding, recognize each other’s needs and experiences, and approach others’ perspectives with respect.”
