Call for papers - JOELHO - Journal of Architectural Culture #15 - Architectural Design as a Co-Creation Process



Architectural Design as a Co-Creation Process


Guest Editors

Gonçalo Canto Moniz, Luís Miguel Correia, José António Bandeirinha


The processes of producing architecture and cities have always arisen from transformations brought about by the collective, i.e. by society. The city, moreover, is the space in which these changes are engraved in memory, their origins embedded in cultural, social, economic-financial and political aspects, among others. In the 1960s, the intense social and artistic movements that emerged from the political struggles spurred a group of architects to find new ways to perceive the importance of the end-consumers of architecture. Answers were sought to the challenges engendered by the urgent need to house a population which at that time was living in precarious conditions. It was also a moment when society called for new paradigms for education or the use of public space in the city. In response to this context, architects were motivated to explore practices of design that included involving society in the decision-making, especially in certain stages of the process. Architecture moved closer to the people. Giancarlo De Carlo’s pilot projects for Urbino and Terni, the housing programmes proposed by the Service of Local Ambulatory Support (Serviço de Apoio Ambulatório Local – SAAL) or Sherry R. Arnstein’s theoretical framework (“A Ladder of Citizen Participation”), among other contributions, created a legacy that architectural projects of the 1980s and 1990s generally later abandoned.1 This was mainly due to an emerging neoliberal political model, the emergence of the star system within architecture and the limitations of current participatory processes.

Today, political, sociocultural, economic and financial and, in particular, climate crises pervade the five continents to varying degrees. They have reawakened the need to foster greater dialogue between those responsible for organizing the space – architects, urban planners and landscapers – and those who live, study and work in it or are simply visitors. Thus, the invitation to the people to participate in the process of urban regeneration, from the centre to the outskirts, has brought about a growth in global awareness. It is in essence based on the goals for social inclusion discussed in the 1960s and also on the seventeen sustainable development objectives established by the UN. Broadly speaking, it operates on the principle of combating inequalities and guaranteeing an inclusive life for all, particularly from a feminist, intersectional perspective. The present-day practice of architecture is naturally linked to this global debate. As always, the city constitutes the space where society’s intentions for the future are expressed. Social and technical artists, who left their mark on the practice of the 20th century, currently face the challenge of mediating dialogue with different forms of knowledge, with its possible implications of a review of their position towards architectural projects.Not everything, therefore, can be considered complete. On the one hand, it is now more necessary than ever to reflect on these epistemological and evolutionary aims; on the other hand, the city, as an eminently political entity, is undergoing a new crisis, perhaps the most serious of all because it affects its potential for gregariousness as much as it does its sense of identity. It is thus also an ontological crisis.

In keeping with this panorama, the central theme of issue 15 of the journal JOELHO is city architecture of the 20th–21st centuries, with a special focus on the way in which the project is revealed, or not, as a space for collective expression. In other words, there is a need to perceive whether citizen participation in the different stages of the design process has, or may have, more tangible consequences for the way the city is projected and experienced. Researchers, educators and professionals are therefore challenged to submit proposals that can contribute to critical discussion on the creation of the architectural and urban space of recent centuries. We welcome contributions that relate theoretical positioning to practical cases, with graphic and intelligible documentation of them for this very purpose. This perspective may be further complemented by interdisciplinary dialogue. Proposals must be framed within the following topics:

  1. A critical review of processes, projects and works of architectural and urban design that are the result of participatory processes;
  2. Contemporary co-creative practices that include new models and tools for participation and that act upon the city;
  3. Pedagogical or research experiments that apply models and tools of urban design and participatory architecture in a real context.

1 Sherry R. Arnstein, “A Ladder of Citizen Participation,” JAIP, Vol. 35, no. 4 (July 1969): 216–224.



Authors need to register prior to submitting ( If already registered, simply log in and begin the 5-step process.

First stage: potential contributors should submit the full article in English (4,000 to 6,000 words, plus footnotes and captions), an abstract (with no more than 1000 characters, including spaces) and illustrations until January 31st, 2023. These will be subject to a blind peer-review process.

Blind peer-reviews will be reported to the authors until April 1st, 2023.

Second stage: Articles found suitable for publication must take into account the reviewers’ comments. A revised article must be then submitted until May 1st, 2023.

Read more about Call for papers - JOELHO - Journal of Architectural Culture #15 - Architectural Design as a Co-Creation Process

Current Issue

No. 13 (2022): Memory, Memorabilia and the Making
					View No. 13 (2022): Memory, Memorabilia and the Making

In the new time consciousness of modernity, Jürgen Habermas tells us, historical memory gives place to an ahistorical use of the past, which explains the abstract language of avant-garde aesthetics. Suffice to think of authors such as Picasso and Le Corbusier and in the relationships their work establishes with the past. In their collections particulières, memorabilia ranged from vernacular to primitive and classical artefacts, the operative value of which rested in their aesthetic qualities, independently of their place in the continuum of history. The past was a source of raw material, opening new conceptual and morphological paths in the subversive processes of creation. As structuralists would put it, the past provided them with signs to be implicated in new sign structures, constructing new meanings.

Exhausted the impulse of modernity and the post-modernist collage of historical iconography, how do architects use the past in defining new aesthetic paths? In today’s image-based culture, what operative role does memorabilia play in the processes of architectural creation, be it in morphological or in conceptual terms? How does memorabilia, and memory in general, act as a catalyst for artistic thinking?

In a time when architectural design is increasingly subjected to building regulations, restricting its freedom as a creative act, Joelho - Journal of Architectural Culture is particularly interested in the operative role of memory in the creative processes of architectural design.

Published: 2022-03-10
View All Issues