CARE aims to address the emerging debate on urban commons with a specific focus on its impacts on spatial regeneration urban policies. In recent years, European cities are experimenting urban policy tools and procedures enabling citizens not only to make use of disused buildings, but also to produce public interest activities and to take charge of their architectural planning and renovation design. By giving the possibility - and the burden - to civil society promoters to gather resources and competences to transform spaces, those tools challenge the definition of processes, actors and objectives of public works and public urban planning. Some of those tools reinforce partnerships between municipalities and civil society producing directly or indirectly commoning processes, understood as “some mix of individual and private initiative to organise and capture externality effects while putting some aspect of the environment outside of the market” (Havery, 2012). The project is based on two main hypotheses. One postulates that those experimentations represent the lever for eluding austerity urbanism restrictions through the mobilisation of local forces in order to regenerate public properties and produce new forms of public services. The second postulates that those projects produce a form of caring architecture (Tronto, 2020) that changes the processes of architectural and urban design by recycling the existing city and caring for its maintenance. The objectives of the project are 1) to characterise regenerative urban commoning tools within an international perspective, 2) to understand how they modify architectural production and urban development, and 3) to verify if they produce specific kinds of urban commons and spatial care practices. CARE is based on an interdisciplinary approach. The main methodological orientation of the project is the articulation between ethnomethodology and spatial analysis. The research team is composed of international researchers in architecture, urban planning, sociology, geography, law and anthropology. The inquiry is grounded on a comparison between cities in France, Italy and Spain. Those countries seem to be at the forefront of the social and institutional innovation on urban commons and they constitute comparable normative contexts. A first panel of cities (Grenoble, Nantes, Bologna and Madrid) have been selected under two main criteria: the interrelation between existing tools of austerity management and spatial transformation through commoning, and historical implication of citizens in urban transformations. Those cities will be enquired through an ethnography that will collect data on: 1) the profiles of actors involved in the processes and their networks; 2) the emergence of regenerative urban commoning tools in relation to history of the city urban development; 3) the uses of buildings and the governance of projects. This data will be used to create a first analysis grid which will be inserted in an inventory and tested by short immersions in a selection of other case studies in 3 new cities to broaden the spectrum of knowledge. The inventory will be composed of visual data descriptions: maps, project timelines, video clips and photographs. It will contribute to the debate on the co-construction of local public policies and to the critical reflection of urban commons activists. CARE will bring new knowledge to three main scientific fields: 1) urban planning, through the issue of citizens’ participation and collaborative governance of public services; 2) architecture, through the issue of building recycling and maintenance as forms of collective spatial care and of sustainable design; 3) urban studies, through the critical approach to neoliberal development and its alternatives.

Over the past decade, in Europe the rise of populist parties and the growing importance of climate issues on the public agenda have been increasingly well documented in the academic, media and political field. However, they are most often analysed separately. Some recent academic studies have sought to analyse the possible interactions between these two phenomena. Nevertheless, most of this work focuses on populist radical right parties (PRRPs) (Buzogány and Mohamad-Klotzbach 2022), which may be explained by an interest in understanding the drivers of climate scepticism. By contrast, and to provide new insights into the linkages between populist discourse and environmentalism, LeftPopEnv focuses on populist radical left parties (PRLPs). The project is timely as, in Europe, the rise and electoral breakthroughs of the radical left in the years 2010–2020 have been based on populist elements (March 2011), i.e., on a rhetoric (a) opposing the people to the elite, and (b) demanding a ‘radicalisation’ of democracy through the concept of popular sovereignty (Laclau 2005; Mudde 2004). The project applies a mixed-methods research design to the comparative study of five European political parties in four countries: Die Linke (The Left) in Germany; La France insoumise (Unbowed France, LFI) in France; Parti du travail de Belgique (Workers’ Party of Belgium, PTB) in Belgium; Podemos (We Can) then Sumar (Add Up) in Spain. The project will situate the discourses of these organisations within the national contexts in which they evolve (e.g., party competition with green parties, salience of environmental issues, ideology to which the party is attached) to show the similarities and differences of their environmental discourse. The project seeks to examine how the leaders and activists of left-wing populist parties address environmental issues and to analyse the extent to which their environmental discourse is framed in populist terms to understand how it differs from that of green parties. This will allow to question the relevance of the increasingly used concept of ‘environmental populism’ or ‘green populism’. It raises the question of the respective roles of populism as such and its host ideology in framing environmental issues, in link with recent research in the field of populism studies that has specifically called for a better distinction between populism and ‘what it travels with’ (Hunger and Paxton 2021). This comparative analysis, first of its kind, aims to transform our understanding of partisan environmental narratives. LeftPopEnv will provide the basis for a first theoretical framework for understanding the left-wing populism/environmentalism articulation at a time when, in Europe, some parties of the populist left have succeeded in taking power, and others are emerging as major opposition forces in their countries (Kriesi and Pappas 2016). It thus responds to key priorities of Horizon Europe: to investigate the green transition and climate action, with a special focus on populism. The project fits the SH2 Institutions, Governance and Legal Systems.

he challenge of sustainable cities in innovative, integrative and adaptive societies is nowadays driven by reflections and policies promoting users/inhabitants-friendly environments. Among these users, "older people" are increasingly recognized in international discourses and their potential voice is meant to contribute to the participatory governance of “age-friendly cities and communities” (AFCC). The Citizenbench project suggests focusing on the place of older people in the City through an interest for “public benches”. Indeed, those benches can be considered as flagships for presenting local forms of governance that might be organized through perspectives such as AFCC. However, benches are also a support to assess the conditions for older people to going out, walking and being part of public space as full citizens. Assuming the reciprocal Global South/North relation trough an international comparison, the project is based on four diversified case studies of metropolis, two of them being involved in an AFCC model (Manchester, Grenoble), two of the being not involved (Dakar, Chambéry). The originality of this research project concerns not only the exploration of a little known area in social sciences through discipline crossings (sociology, geography, urban planning, and health sciences). It also refers to a large empirically structured “participatory research” mixing qualitative (« Gulliver maps »; « commented walkings »; 80/100 qualitative interviews) and quantitative methodologies (harvest and treatment of geolocalised data; harvest and treatment of mobile gait data through GPS). The analysis of these combined materials will offer us: 1) a better understanding of governance (or absence of) of public space by a diversity of players, at a diversity of levels (from the globalised Word Health Organization through its AFCC methodology, to local and neighboorhood stakeholders) (H1 :political economy of public benches) ; 2) a better understanding of the social construction of power relations, inequalities and social justice in public space, taking i.e. the effects of gender, generation and cultures (H2 : practices and appropriations of public benches). These two perspectives join together for improving our knowledge of experimenting ageing through public space in a time of globalised age-friendly governance.

The project called ReSOTON aims to understand the role of collective regulations in COVID-19 crisis cells coordinated by the hospital on changes in the activity of the healthcare system stakeholders. The 5 actors identified, who had significant changes in their activity, are general doctors, hospital pharmacy, mortuary rooms, nurcing homes and private clinics. The organizational resilience is defined as individual and collective regulations to reorganize work: adaptation in the face of variability, re-elaboration of rules, development of individual and collective know-how, construction of professional sense, preservation of health. The research feasibility is that field data has already been collected: ergonomic observation of 34 CHUGA crisis cells and 34 territorial cells since March 2020, 27 individual interviews with local key actors, 3 REX (pharmacy, mortuary room), 10 observations and interviews of general doctors, 3 months of observation and 20 individual interviews of a nursing home. Data continues to be collected during the 3rd pandemic step. This material will be analyzed in double levels: 1/ the differences between the decisions taken in the crisis cells, perceived as resilient by the actors involved, and the permanent adaptations in the field, experienced as intensification and sometimes injunctions; 2/ the regulations at the local level make it possible to have got rooms of maneuver favoring the action possibilities on work situations for the professionals. Three scientific problems have been identified to report on organizational resilience: 1/ The resilience of the healthcare system depends on the collective ability to adapt, the re-organizations, the coordination between actors and services, and local networking with different institutional actors; 2/ The crisis collective management depends on the link between regulated safety and managed safety and the possible room for maneuver; 3/ The individual and organizational learning phenomena creates and makes the collective organization to support the capacity to adapt The project divided into 4 WPs over 12 months: WP1: Collective activity analysis in crisis cells: study of communications using Actograph software to report on cooperation and collective decisions making; WP2: Individual and collective activity analysis of the actors in crisis management: 50 individual interviews with key actors using the N-Vivo software and feedback (abbreviated to “REX” in French) from the 5 identified target actors (3 collective interviews) which will be the subject of a monograph, story to manage COVID crisis; WP3: Confrontation between the local regulations analysis and the individual activity of the actors to formalize recommendations on the collective organizational resilience conditions. Feedback to local and decision-making actors and scientific seminars will be organized; WP4: Production of scientific knowledge, valorization and deliverables: 2 papers, 1 workshop and 2 national and international congress. The consortium comprises Sandrine Caroly (Professor of ergonomics at the PACTE laboratory) and Vincent Bonneterre (university professor and hospital practitioner and occupational doctor at the CHUGA, TIMCE), who are used to working together and can call on their scientific network for input. A senior phd student recruitment will be to support the data analysis (WP1, WP2) and the disseminate. The project impact is to continue improvement the local health network, hospital organization and the healthcare quality, by producing regulations analysis and individual and collective activity transformations take into account.

Theories, concepts and empirical data can travel between different linguistic and societal spheres. How theories of space enrich ageing and how, in turn, the analyses of the space of ageing can contribute to the questions of general sociology, has been approached from different angles in France and in Germany in the past. The SPAGE project proposes 1) a systematic theoretical comparison of the interplay between age, space, and social exclusion in France and Germany, resulting in a comprehensive theoretical framework. 2) We will then empirically test the framework for potential societal differences and similarities between the two countries, aiming to use their synergy effect in order 3) to create a sustainable research network based on new theoretical approaches and epistemological pathways between Goethe University Frankfurt am Main (through the impulse of the Research Group ‘Doing Transitions’ and the Working Group ‘Interdisciplinary Ageing Research’) and the Université de Grenoble Alpes (through the laboratory of social sciences PACTE where thematic of ageing in public space is developing through ongoing/emerging ANR JCJC projects). Related to the three objectives, the project plan is divided into three work packages. In the first work package, we start a French-German conceptual dialogue aimed at facilitating the exchange of theories, concepts and epistemological pathways used in French and German research on age, space, and social exclusion. On that basis, and facilitated through four “Conceptual workshops” in both countries, we formulate a joint framework. In the second work package, a systematic empirical comparison of the interplay between age, space, and social exclusion in France and Germany leads to a specification of the framework. This second objective is twofold: as a first step, we will compare ongoing research carried out in the respective research groups/countries in both countries (“Data analysis workshops”). Exploiting the potential similarities/differences between the countries, comparative workshops are organized with German and French older participants in the partner’s country to explore how similarities/differences observed in German and French research are experienced (or not) by older adults themselves (“Bridging workshops”). Third, SPAGE wants to challenge the dominant representations of age, such as “age-friendliness”, “active ageing” or “healthy ageing”. By creating a research network on age, space and exclusion through the link between the original research team of both principal investigators, SPAGE would bring forward the multiplicity of age-diversity and age practices (handicapped elderly people/fragile age/age and gender/age and lifespan/ migratory experiences) in the production of space.