Our Espoo 20X0: Dialogue enhances debate and mutual understanding of Espoo’s future  

Our Espoo 20X0 discussions intended to give residents an opportunity to state their views about the future of their living environment. Therefore, it was particularly important to create a safe and fruitful environment for these discussions. The chosen method to promote this objective, used at the discussion events, was Sitra’s Timeout dialogue.  

The Timeout method emphasises constructive dialogue. It comes with a set of ground rules that help achieve equality in discussions. All the participants in instructed small groups can take turns to speak, and the facilitators promote a sincere dialogue.  

Our Espoo 20X0 discussions followed a pre-determined structure. The residents first talked about the positive elements in their neighbourhoods that are worth saving, and then considered aspects that could be improved. As a conclusion, they proposed new things that could be added to their neighbourhoods and selected a discussion topic for a deeper debate together. Additionally, all the discussion groups included experts from the City Planning Department, and a large number of elected officials had also been invited to take part. 

What sort of results were achieved through the use of the dialogue method at the resident discussions? And did the dialogues change the way that the participants think?  

The residents in many of the small groups had similar views regarding the development needs in their areas. In many instances, they began to create inspiring plans for their neighbourhoods together.  

In Tapiola, residents came up with an idea of creating a piazza at the Kulttuuriaukio Square, while in central Espoo, residents discussed the possibility of highlighting Espoon keskus’s role as a gateway to Nuuksio. Furthermore, in Kauklahti, residents agreed unanimously that the district’s village-like atmosphere makes it cosy and community-centred, and were eager to advertise this to the rest of Espoo’s residents as well.  

The discussions were like brainstorming sessions, in which ideas already began to take shape. In other words, a shared understanding of the state of their home districts and the improvement ideas encouraged residents to find viable solutions to the needs of the districts and their residents. 

Some of the most debated themes at the discussion evenings proved to be complicated and sparked a variety of opinions. One such theme was the increasing density of the city’s growth and urban structures. The discussion events led to an interesting debate about how and on who’s terms should the city be built.  

For example, the participants at the discussions held in northern Espoo stated that lower and more spread-out buildings might be more enjoyable for people, but on the other hand they would take more space away from nature than taller constructions. As a result, the residents wondered whether it would be better to construct tall buildings.  

Usually, problems can be resolved in more than one way, and it may be difficult to select the best method. The constructive dialogue made many residents ask which elements ought to have the highest value when building a city. Stating an opinion caused alternative ones to be voiced, and many people began to rethink their views. 

The dialogue also led to situations where the residents had clearly differing opinions about how urban design issues should be resolved.  

For example, at the discussion event encompassing the entire city, the residents disagreed on how forests and other natural areas should be managed and maintained. Some were unhappy that some of Espoo’s forests and natural areas are overgrown and seem poorly managed, while others pointed out that parts of nature must be kept as close to their natural state as possible in order to promote biodiversity.  

A dialogue has no place for arguments, but the end result does not necessarily need to provide a solution to a problem either. All views should be expressed, and the Timeout method accepts the fact that people think differently. The dialogue that involved differences of opinion regarding forests ended up concluding that all types of natural and recreational areas are needed.  

The dialogues carried out at the discussion events indicated that residents have similar concerns and preferences on certain themes, but want to use different methods to resolve the issues. In other words, the outcome of a debate depends on whether a group consists of people with similar or differing views.  

Safety was one of the themes that all the residents who mentioned it wanted to have, but their proposed solutions to promote it were vastly different. One of the discussion groups stated how important it is for all the residents to take part in events and improvements to their neighbourhoods, in order to achieve social inclusivity and safety in the city. Another group was worried about whether the safety and community spirit in their neighbourhood could be endangered due to increased mobility brought on by the metro, causing communities to become fragmented.  

Having a dialogue is not a guarantee that a single discussion group is able to analyse all aspects of a topic, and nor is it required. Instead, the important thing is for all participants to be able to share their views. 

In the best case scenario, a dialogue forms a safe discussion environment where everyone feels that they are being heard and is able to state their opinions. It is important to expand the debate on urban design themes and hear as many views as possible. If the views are similar, ideas can easily be created and developed together. However, views that are dissimilar can help us understand the complexity of topics.  

The expansion of the debate and an increase in understanding are the main things in a dialogue – not reaching unanimous views or solutions to problems. As one of the residents who took part in them said, dialogue and stating different opinions ‘also allow us residents to understand how differently our neighbours might feel about things.

Espoo will prepare a city-wide master plan that will extend all the way to 2060. The work on the master plan will anticipate the City’s development in the coming decades and outline the directions and emphases of the City’s growth at a general level.  

The master plan will be prepared through extensive cooperation and reconciliation of different points of view. We will agree on the goals of the master plan in the autumn and winter. The discussions had during the Our Espoo 20X0 series of events provided important information about residents’ views. The analysis of the discussions and the residents’ views will be used to complement other information when the plan goals are prepared.  

You are welcome to follow the progress of the work and take part in it. Read more about the work on the master plan.