The second article, as part of the Three Ways of Doing Workshop features a conversation with Mariana Paisana, co-founder of Res Do Chao in Lisbon, Portugal. Res Do Chao was founded by Mariana and Margarida Marques and the organisation specialises in Urbanism, Architecture and Participation. They have developed key projects to enhance public and community spaces through inclusive participatory process while promoting social cohesion and improving trust in institutions. 

Res Do Chao has been effectively partnering with individuals and organisations in pre-existing neighbourhoods, aided by a system that is part of Lisbon’s urban planning methodology namely participatory budgeting. Participatory budgeting allows community members to propose ideas and allocate portions of the municipal budget to projects they deem necessary. For instance, people might propose adding bicycle parking, planting trees, or recreational space and these ideas then are submitted online where other members vote accordingly. According to Mariana, Participatory Budgeting is a great initiative which has its own limitations. The allocated budget is often small and the online platform excludes those who lack digital literacy. Furthermore, the implementation process often lacks participation which leads to poor integration of ideas. 

What intrigued me as a policy student was the quantitative method of evaluation employed by Res Do Chao to decipher correlation and causality. Policies often rely on such methodologies, whether for assessing social impact or evaluating environmental impact. Mariana talks about how this framework comes handy while negotiating their claims with institutions because at the end of the day data and numbers carry significant mileage in decision-making processes. For example, In one of their tactical urbanism projects, they transformed parking spaces into benches and trees in front of a school. They collected data before and after the intervention, measuring indicators such as pollution, road accidents, and level of noise in the surrounding areas. This data not only helped them assess the level of deprivation but also provided them insights into community sentiments about their project. The impact evaluation revealed how people were using the space highlighting its utility and serving as a catalyst for policy interventions. According to Mariana, policies, amongst other aspects, should also be based on quantifiable and measurable data without which conversations around interventions are sometimes superficial. 

"Our methodology usually begins with a participatory analysis phase. We first identify the challenges and opportunities of space and establish the limits set by policies, regulations, or stakeholders—such as green coverage rules, air quality standards, or provisions for different age groups. This framing helps guide the next phase, where we collaborate with the community to explore what’s possible within those boundaries." 

Co-design acknowledges that public spaces are inherently spaces of negotiation. Different users—some wanting activity, others desiring calm—must reconcile their aspirations. That’s why Res Do Chao often structures sessions as group exercises, encouraging dialogue and mutual understanding. The tool aims to make the process as transparent and inclusive as possible while ensuring the outputs are both meaningful and actionable. These tools not only make the process engaging and accessible but also provide clear, objective, and data-driven indicators about community preferences. Whether people prioritize green spaces, visual connections, or quiet zones the input given by them informs the design while addressing diverse needs. 

Public spaces are inherently contested—they come with boundaries, ownership issues, regulations, and limits. It is essential to begin co-design processes  by acknowledging and communicating the limitations whether they are budgetary, regulatory or policy driven. For example if the community proposes removing parking spaces but the municipality isn't willing to do so could lead to frustration and erosion of trust.  When people understand the reasoning behind certain decisions, even when compromises are necessary, they're more likely to trust the process. Setting clear boundaries at the start ensures that the process remains constructive and inclusive.      

Conducting Pilots and Participatory Approaches for Architects

In Portugal, Architects are revolutionising participatory urban planning by actively immersing themselves in the process of policy making. From being involved in citing regulations for corporations to suggesting amendments to legislations, they are paving way for practices to challenge existing hierarchies. On the flip side however, architects in Portugal are highly dependent on municipalities for projects and being critical of institutions might come with a heavy price.  

For Mariana and Res Do Chao, conducting pilot studies has influenced relations and public policies. 

“Architects being able to conduct Pilot Studies really helps bring out the opportunities and challenges which becomes a precursor that can be replicated through interventions.” 

She highlights how there needs to be a shift in terms of dynamics and frameworks where flexibility and participation become key features. Furthermore mutual dialogues and negotiations are aspects of participatory approaches which help in mediating urban planning.    

Stay tuned for our next article on urbz and its user driven evolution where we decipher the influence of design and vision in policy making based on their practice in Dharavi and my experience at urbz.