Neighbours' Conviviality without Gatherings. Social Streets in Times of Lockdown


Abstract


The lockdown period imposed by Italian institutions to their citizens from March to May 2020 to contrast the Coronavirus diffusion had a very deep impact on people's sociality and their daily practices. However, informal groups and associations tried to keep them alive with the help of digital communication technologies, used to enhance conviviality and to support and organize forms of mutual help. This article aims to analyse how Social Streets promoted sociality and mutual help among neighbours in time of lockdown, and how Streeters, here defined as people who are at least inscribed at the Facebook group of their Social Street, have profited from the possibility to have at their disposal an online social place where to interact and be informed about the possibility of giving and receiving help. This article draws from data gathered through two online surveys, administered, respectively, during lockdown phase in the second half of April (838 respondents) and in June 2020, after its end (371 respondents). Our results show that, after seven years since their foundation in 2013, Social Streets still play a pivotal role in the neighbourhood. During lockdown, they gave a contribution in keeping neighbours informed about what was going on in the neighbourhood, in sustaining and producing convivial ties, in organizing mutual help services. In the hard time of lockdown, when most of the usual habits and practices were forcefully suspended, Social Streets proved very important in setting a cognitive, emotional, and organizational framework inside which conviviality and collaboration among neighbours could find greater plausibility.

DOI Code: 10.1285/i20356609v14i1p302

Keywords: Conviviality; Lockdown; Mutual Help; Social Streets; Urban Ties

References


Alteri L., Leccardi C. and Raffini L. (2016), “Youth and the reinvention of politics. New Forms of Participation in the Age of Individualization and Presentification”, Partecipazione e Conflitto, 9(3): 717-747.

Andreotti A., Le Galès P., and Moreno-Fuentes F. J. (2015), Globalised minds, roots in the city: Urban upper-middle classes in Europe, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Archer M. (2000), Being Human. The problem of Agency, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Augè M., and Pasqualini C. (2016). “Habiter les Villes-Monde (Non/Virtuels/Nouveaux) Lieux et relations sociales”. Studi di Sociologia, 4: 303–313.

Baldassarri D., and Abascal M. (2020), “Diversity and prosocial behavior”, Science, 369(6508): 1183–1187.

Bichi R., Introini F., and Pasqualini C. (2020), “'Stay at home, stay online'. In Rete durante il lockdown, Istituto Toniolo” (eds.), Giovani ai tempi del coronavirus. Una generazione in lockdown che sogna un futuro diverso. Quaderni Rapporto Giovani, 8: 66-86,

Biorcio R., and Vitale T. (2016), Italia civile. Associazionismo, partecipazione e politica, Roma: Donzelli.

Blokland T. (2017), Community as urban practice: Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Blokland T., and Nast J. (2014), “Belonging in Berlin's mixed neighbourhoods”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38: 1142-1159.

Boyd D. M., and Ellison N. B. (2007), “Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1): 210–230.

Buchanan M. (2002), Nexus. Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks, New York-London: W.W. Norton & Company.

Cartocci R. (2007), Le mappe del tesoro. Atlante del capitale sociale in Italia, Il Mulino: Bologna.

Castells M. (2002), The Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society, Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.

Castrignanò M. and Morelli N. (2019), “Le Social Street come forme di ordinaria azione civica: Prospettive di ricerca”, Studi di Sociologia, 4: 397–412.

Crang M., Crosbie T., and Graham S. (2007), “Technology, time–space, and the remediation of neighbourhood life”, Environment and Planning A, 39(10): 2405–2422.

Favell A. (2001), “Migration, mobility and globaloney: Metaphors and rhetoric in the sociology of globalization”, Global Networks, 1(4): 389–398.

Favell A., and Recchi E. (2011), “Social mobility and spatial mobility”, in Favell A. and Guiraudon V. (eds), Sociology of the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan: 50-75.

Foth M. and Hearn G. (2007), “Networked individualism of urban residents: Discovering the Communicative Ecology in Inner-City Apartment Complexes”, Information, Communication & Society, 10(5): 749-772.

Gibbons J. (2020), “’Placing’ the relation of social media participation to neighborhood community connection”, Journal of Urban Affairs, 42(8): 1262-1277.

Goodspeed R. (2017), “Community and urban places in a digital world”, City and Community, 16(1): 9-15.

Gozzo S. and Sampugnaro R. (2016), “What happens? Changes in European Youth Participation”, Partecipazione e Conflitto, 9(3): 748-776.

Granovetter M. (1973), “The Strength of Weak Ties”, American Journal of Sociology, 78: 1360-80.

Groffman P. M., Cadenasso M. L., Cavender-Bares J., Childers D. L., Grimm N. B., Grove J. M., Hobbie S. E., Hutyra L. R., Jenerette G. D., and McPhearson T. (2017), “Moving towards a new urban systems science”. Ecosystems, 20(1): 38-43.

Hampton. K. (2007), “Neghborhoods in the Network Society. The e-Neighbor Study”, Information, Commmunication & Society, 10(5): 714-748.

Hampton K., and Wellman B. (2003), “Neighboring in Netville: How the Internet supports community and social capital in a wired suburb”, City and Community, 2(4): 277-311.

Iivari N., Sharma S., and Ventä-Olkkonen L. (2020), “Digital transformation of everyday life–How COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care?”, International Journal of Information Management, 55: 102-183.

Inagami S., Cohen D. A., and Finch B. K. (2007), “Non-residential neighborhood exposures suppress neighborhood effects on self-rated health”, Social Science and Medicine, 65(8): 1779-1791.

Introini F. (2007), Comunicazione come partecipazione. Tecnologia, rete e mutamento socio-politico, Milano: Vita e Pensiero.

Introini F. (2017), Un mondo aperto. Itinerari nella sociologia della complessità, Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Introini F., and Pasqualini C. (2017), “Connected Proximity.‘Social Streets’ Between Social Life and New Forms of Activism”, in Antonelli, F. (ed.), NET-ACTIVISM. How digital technologies have been changing individual and collective actions, Roma: Roma Tre Press: 117-125.

Johnson B. J., and Halegoua G. R. (2014), “Potential and challenges for social media in the neighborhood context”, Journal of Urban Technology, 21(4): 51-75.

Johnson B. J., and Halegoua G. R. (2015), “Can social media save a neighborhood organization?”, Planning Practice & Research, 30(3): 248-269.

Kathiravelu L. (2012), “Social networks in Dubai: Informal solidarities in an uncaring state”, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 33(1): 103-119.

Kathiravelu L., and Bunnell T. (2018), “Introduction: Urban friendship networks: Affective negotiations and potentialities of care”, Urban Studies, 55(3): 491-504.

Kleinhans R., Van Ham M., and Evans-Cowley J. (2015), Using social media and mobile technologies to foster engagement and self-organization in participatory urban planning and neighbourhood governance. London-New York: Routledge.

La Cecla F. (2011), Mente locale. Per un'antropologia dell'abitare. Milano: Elèuthera.

Lane J. (2018), The digital street, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Morelli N. (2019), “Creating Urban Sociality in Middle-Class Neighborhoods in Milan and Bologna: A Study on the Social Streets Phenomenon”, City and Community, 18(3): 834-852.

Neal S., Bennett K., Cochrane A., and Mohan G. (2019), “Community and conviviality? Informal social life in multicultural places”, Sociology, 53(1): 69-86.

Ohme J. (2019), “Updating citizenship? The effects of digital media use on citizenship understanding and political participation”, Information, Communication & Society, 22(13): 1903-1928.

Pasqualini C. (2016), “Una nuova cultura della socialità: la sfida delle “social street” a Milano”, Fondazione Ambrosianeum (eds.), Rapporto sulla città. Milano 2016, Milano: FrancoAngeli: 191-206.

Pasqualini C. (2017a), “Il quartiere del Terzo Millennio: le social street a Milano e provincia”, in D. Bidussa e E. Polizzi (eds.), Agenda Milano. Ricerche e pratiche per una città inclusiva, Milano: Fondazione Feltrinelli. 80-90, http:// fondazionefeltrinelli.it/app/uploads/2017/02/Agenda-Milano.pdf

Pasqualini C. (2017b), “Vicini di casa social(i): il fenomeno (made in Italy) delle social street”, Studi di Sociologia, 40: 1-22.

Pasqualini C. (2018a). Vicini e connessi. Rapporto sulle Social Street a Milano. Fondazione Giangiacomo Milano: Feltrinelli.

Pasqualini C. (2018b), “Milano e le sue social street: il “buon vicinato” che rigenera la città”, Fondazione Ambrosianeum (ed.), Rapporto sulla città. Milano 2018, Milano: FrancoAngeli, 227-244.

Pasqualini C. and Introini F. (2020), “Per un buon vicinato: la presenza “attiva” e “ri-generativa” delle social street nei quartieri di Milano”, Milano City School, Costellazione Milano. Contributi di ricerca per un’esplorazione del campo urbano, Milano: Fondazione Feltrinelli: 26-46.

Pirni A. and Raffini L. (2016), “The re-elaboration of the collective sphere. New paths of sociality and groups-formation among the new generations”, Partecipazione e Conflitto, 9(3): 799-823.

Pirni A. and Raffini L. (2019), “Atomizzata o connessa? L'agire politico nella società individualizzata tra de-politicizzazione e ri-politicizzazione”, Cambio, 9(17): 29-39.

Putnam R.D. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Rippon S., Bagnall A.-M., Gamsu M., South J., Trigwell J., Southby K., Warwick-Booth L., Coan S., and Woodward J. (2020), “Towards transformative resilience: Community, neighbourhood and system responses during the COVID-19 pandemic”, Cities and Health, 1–4.

Sampson R. J. (2012), Great American city: Chicago and the enduring neighborhood effect, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Scheepers P., Schmeets H., and Pelzer B. (2013), “Hunkering down as disruption of community cohesion: Municipal-, neighbourhood-and individual-level effects”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 72: 91–106.

Smith E.T. and Smith C.F. (2019), “Investigating the online and offline contexts of day-to-day democracy as participation spaces”, Information, Communication & Society, 22(13): 1853-1870.

Springer S. (2020), “Caring geographies: The COVID-19 interregnum and a return to mutual aid”, Dialogues in Human Geography, 2043820620931277.

Theocharis Y., and Van Deth J. W. (2018), “The continuous expansion of citizen participation: A new taxonomy”. European Political Science Review, 10(1): 139-163.

Tönnies F. (1887), Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft, Lipsia: Verlag di Fues.

Tronca L. (2018), “Le forme di capitale sociale”, in Di Nicola P., Stanzani S., Tronca L., Reti di prossimità e capitale sociale in Italia, Milano: FrancoAngeli: 41-63.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
کاغذ a4
Bookmark and Share


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.