Implementation

There is also a range of different approaches to the implementation of the different practices. Although they were in the minority, interviewees did talk about using formal processes in their practice. For instance, the guerrilla gardening project that included a squat had very stringent processes, starting from a process for becoming a long-term resident to having weekly meetings, and setting up conflict resolution teams and procedures to pre-empt any issues.

Other interviewees from book swap and spot fix initiatives talked about providing certificates or references for volunteers, while one free book shop insisted on stamping each free book in order to legitimise people taking them away. The most common way of formalising their practice was to register as an organisation or to officially affiliate to an existing one. An interviewee from the Equal Streets campaign felt that a registered organisation provided more accountability, especially as their growing activities come under public scrutiny.

One of the spot fix organisers also explained that public authorities did not take them seriously until they were affiliated with a registered organisation. But the most common reason that interviewees gave for constituting themselves formally, was in order to apply for funding. This included both grant applications from the public or the third sector, and private sponsorship. In particular, a number of spot fix projects and the Equal Streets organisers talked about their

185

efforts to raise money from private companies and their need to be a registered organisation in order to access a Corporate Social Responsibility scheme, which stipulates that large companies in India have to contribute 2% of net profits to social or environmental development.

In contrast, the majority of interviewees seemed to prefer flexible arrangements, a lack of formal processes and improvisation. Several interviewees highlighted the importance of flexibility, either in relation to their own commitment or others’

involvement. For instance, buskers explained that they valued the flexibility that came with busking – but was impossible with formal gigs – including to take breaks whenever they wanted, to keep playing or to stop, or to decide not to turn up at all, for instance when the weather is bad. Several interviewees from guerrilla gardening and spot fix projects also highlighted that others could get involved as often or as little as they wanted to. This might mean that organisers do not know in the morning whether anyone is going to turn up for the planned activity, but they felt that since people were giving their time voluntarily they could not be pushed.

Other interviewees emphasised the lack of formal processes or governance, as they did not want to be “paralysed” by committee meetings or form filling.

Rather, they valued their ability to act spontaneously. Buskers gave examples such as spontaneously doing some busking while waiting for a family member, or filling the spot at the Street Performance Festival when others dropped out.

Interviewees from spot fix initiatives recounted how they had walked past a shop selling toilet brushes one day and just decided to start to clean their local station that same day, while one guerrilla gardener emphasised that most of her choices were emerging out of serendipity, for instance, noticing that some beds looked uncared for, while she just got some boxes of bulbs for free.

In addition to spontaneous action, interviewees talked about the importance of improvisation. This included opening up a free book shop, even when many books are still in boxes or on pallets on the floor; or allowing children attending the Equal Streets event to come up with ideas for activities on the spot, such as doing chalk drawings on the road.

186

Interviewees admitted that there were challenges to operating with such flexibility. In particular, they found it difficult to commit others to the project, for instance to rely on others to help water a guerrilla garden. Relying on improvisation also leaves greater potential for mistakes, such as using paint in a spot fix project that later turned out to peel off when exposed to rain or sunshine. Interviewees also talked about the greater level of risk and uncertainty. For instance, an interviewee from a spot fix project felt that their work to clean the surroundings of a station could be lost at any time, since they were not protected by any structure or organisation.

Despite this lack of formal protection, many interviewees received support in different forms through their personal networks. Firstly, interviewees used their personal networks to bounce off ideas. For instance, interviewees mentioned that the idea for an event like Equal Streets came from seeing the work of colleagues in Delhi. Secondly, personal networks provided encouragement and support for the ‘informal’ actors. For example, an interviewee reported having been encouraged by another more experienced guerrilla gardener to have the confidence and start her activity locally. Thirdly, interviewees received direct help with the maintenance and implementation of their practice, including colleagues helping with the distribution of free books on the Underground, family and friends helping to tidy up book swaps, family members helping to water a guerrilla garden, or procuring equipment in the middle of the night, as this quote illustrates:

“On the job that day, 11 o’clock suddenly you realise that those architects are asking for […] chalks to mark […] which colour to put where. And I said, ‘We don’t have chalks’. At 11 o’clock, which shop will be open? None. Then also some of the volunteers, […] he said to me, ‘I know, one of my friends has [a] stationery shop’. He called, got him from […] home, opened the shop, and we got the chalks.” (SF6, interview, 2015)

Finally, the majority of ‘informal’ actors drew on their personal networks for financial and in-kind support. This included the supply of equipment or materials

187

that were required for the practice, such as donated book shelves, books donated by members of the local residents’ association, printing costs covered by an interviewee’s employer, free glass panes for a green house, free seeds from growers, as well as music and sound equipment for a street performance festival being procured because “everyone comes together and helps out and makes it happen”. Interviewees also explained that they drew on their friends and family to get access to specialist services, such as the design of a poster for a book swap, pro-bono legal advice by lawyers specialising in squat eviction cases, landscaping work to flatten an area and then create a garden done at cost price as part of a spot fix project, and design and technical advice by academic colleagues on another spot fix project. Finally, interviewees also received direct funds from family and friends, local acquaintances or former students. Several interviewees also mentioned that they drew on the support of local organisations (such as community or residents’ associations). Often, the

‘informal’ actors were already a member of such organisations and then got the organisation to take on or support their idea. For instance, one book swap organiser who at the time was chair of the community association got the association to pay for the labels to be put on the books.

Drawing on support from informal, personal networks was not without challenges. In particular, several interviewees mentioned the difficulty of aligning others’ ways of working with their own expectations, capacity and principles. For instance, one book swap organiser repeatedly complained that volunteers from a friendly, local free book shop kept filling up the book swap too much, to an extent where she started being worried about the shelves collapsing. Unlike these volunteers, she did not consider it a problem if the book swap was sometimes empty as she thought it might encourage users to put a book back in. She found it difficult to communicate her needs and wishes, as she did not want to offend the very people who helped her out. This is a good example of how, in their practical decisions, ‘informal’ actors have to negotiate various social and discursive regulatory frameworks, and in some cases make a trade-off against their own principles and values.

188