GfW Zoom-In N° 11 The Zoöp model: when nature gets a voice, it changes urban planning

1.    Why considering all the living entities in urban planning?

We are part of an ecosystem where all creatures play a role. Each of them is dependent upon a biological interaction be it for mutualism, competition or parasitism. At the same time, the disconnection between these relations, has decreased the life-sustaining capacity of the planet and accelerates the climate crisis.  Ecological regeneration is essential to keep the world habitable for all life, human and other-than-human. And for this, non-human lives should not remain external to decision making process.

Image

2. The Zoöp model as an integrator of human and non-human lives in urban solutions

Zoöp – short for zo-operation or cooperation with Zoë (life) - is an organisational model for collaboration between human and non-human lives aiming for symbiosis. A Zoöp can be taking place in a city, a department, an organisation, a piece of land, a project… In GfW, the Zoöp model applies to the whole project.

A Zoöp is committed to following the zoönomic annual cycle which analyses the issues before seeking to address them. As a first step, it creates the baseline with a mapping of the more-than-humans as well as the aspects across which action can be taken to alleviate the pain points (so-called ‘identifying’, ‘sensitising’ and ‘characterising’ phases). As a second step, it designs regenerative interventions which will sensitise about the living world, organise individual actions (“organising”) or act strategically through collaboration and organisational change (so-called ‘focusing’ and ‘intervening’ phases). This cyclical approach is assessed and readjusted each year.

Image

3. A crucial translator and representative of non-human life: the Speaker for the Living

Zoöps appoint an independent Speaker for the Living, a human representative of the interests, independent spokesperson, of the ecosystems in which the organisation participates. This Speaker helps translate these interests into the organisation's decisions, a combination of the role of the Maori guardians in the New-Zealand Rights of Nature implementations (Whanganui River, Mt. Taranaki, te Urewera forest) and that of the board observer that represents the interests of investors as is sometimes done in start-ups.

In practice, the Speaker helps a Zoöp to follow the learning process of the zoönomic annual cycle. In GfW, the nominated Speaker for the Living is Anke Wijnja, an engineer-trained and naturalist from Nature Connection. She was nominated based on her  ecological and organisation knowledge and experience, listening and observing capacity, and her knowledge of the neighbourhood

4. Zoöp as part of Ground for Wellbeing

Concretely, several training sessions and support sessions have been organised by the Zoöp team and the Speaker for the Living for all the project partners of the GfW project: an in-depth introduction to the concept of the Zoöp model and approach, and a Zoönomic Baseline Assessment both in winter 2024/25. These led to the mapping of habitats, financial relationships, giving a visualisation of the current interrelations, stressing the potential points of connection between the elements that the partners might not have seen, before identifying actions.

Image

GfW’s ecological map © Zoop

For the remainder of the project, yearly in-depth workshops with exercises on various ways to improve social-ecological relationships and evaluations of Zoönomic years are planned. In addition, the Speaker for the Living participates in ongoing activities and various meetings with the partners in an organic way throughout the process. There is no one-size-fits-all approach and each Zoöp possesses its own journey. Not knowing what will happen next, some activities will take place organically.

5. Main learnings so far

Zoöp training is crucial and requires changing mindset and acknowledging that whatever will happen in GfW, it will concern the entire living world. And this is why it is key use an integrated approach: in GfW, this is made possible through the collection of data that has been operationalised in parallel by the multiple partners of the project, the health and rhythm analysis for example. It is also completed by a thorough collaboration amongst partners: for example, Muzus writes a newsletter where human and nonhuman stories get combined.

A main risk though might be the time pressure which pushes the partners towards the boundaries of their well-established modes of working, who might miss the opportunity to thoroughly learn from the novel approaches. Working on tight EU timelines and in local administration, this will be a challenge to keep in mind.

Last but least, the baseline assessment and evaluation sessions has been and will be useful not only for the Zoöp approach but also for the overall monitoring and evaluation of the project: through benchmark, yearly evaluation will enable documenting and improving the evolution of the integration of the Zoöp’s approach in GfW.

Image

6. Impacts of the Zoöp model

“The first time I heard about this approach, I thought to myself: what can I do with this new age thing? Then, I realised it made perfect sense. It was common sense. And it is highly valuable.”, Jan Jacob Sikkema, Project Manager of GfW.

Partners are slowly embracing the concepts, and after maybe some first resistance in what could seem to be an exotic approach, they understand the need to change paradigm. That being said it is not easy! And that’s where the active role and diluted presence of the Speaker of the living is key: she can distil her own experience and viewpoint to ensure that all living creatures are taken into consideration at different stages of the process.

A reversed order of envisioning urban planning: traditionally, ecologists come after the work of urban planners, where old school city renewal projects, are based on siloed knowledge practices, heavily built around technical specs. A Zoöp promotes going beyond this towards community engagement, and more integrated social-ecological health effects with nature included as early as possible in planning stage.

Visual and textual understanding of the network of ecological relationships : The mapping of the relationship stresses the  need for collaborative efforts among diverse stakeholders (including local communities, environmental experts, and even the nonhuman inhabitants of our ecosystems), fostering a deep appreciation for the complex interconnections in nature.

“It also makes us, human, useful species in the ecosystem”. Anke Wijnja, GfW Speaker for the Living

Beyond a nature/culture divide: we are all part of the problem; we are all part of the solution. By fostering an integrated, ecological approach, giving space to non-human lives, policymakers and urban planners can move beyond the artificial nature/culture divide which has been prominent since the 19^th century.

7. Upcoming ambitions for GfW’s Zoöp

At the level of the project, the Zoöp will create a more meaningful urban design of Plejadenplein and Meteorenweg. It has become the 10^th Zoöp in the Netherlands, contributing to the Zoöp movement. GfW would be the first complete implementation of the Zoöp model in collaboration with a municipality in the Netherlands (after a first attempt through the New European Bauhaus of the Seas Horizon Europe project.) At the level of the city, it could, in the long-term, become part of municipal portfolio of methods and instruments to achieve ecological policy goals. It would also provide municipalities with an extra tool to design local policies at the crossroads between co-creation with local communities, ecological concerns and policy making.

8. Useful references

You can check these links if you want to know more about the Zoöp movement, and the details about the Zoönomic annual cycle. You can also get into an academic analysis of a first experience with Het Nieuwe Instituut, first step back from a Zoöp transformative experience.