Root Losæter! How today’s connections secure tomorrow’s perspective

Root Losæter identifies gaps in multi-scalar systems and links external circulations with internal processes. These new connections create synergies that firmly anchor the space with its users and its surroundings, both today and in the future.

Losæter is a hub for gathering, exchange and shared learning. The project acts as a catalyst, helping today’s society – which has become increasingly disconnected from nature – to gain an understanding of nature’s seasonal cycles and interdependencies through active participation.

However, this refuge is under threat from both internal and external factors. Nature, society, and the economy are all based on cycles and interconnections. Whenever there are gaps in these networks, they are vulnerable to coming to a standstill. It is therefore important to identify the missing links in the network and to establish and strengthen them through systematic interconnection at the micro, meso and macro levels.

In order to draw the right conclusions and find solutions, we must first understand the past and interpret the present. It is only through this integrated understanding that we can make initial predictions about the future.

Although these predictions may not be 100 per cent accurate, they are crucial and essential for identifying and taking into account relevant influencing factors – such as changes in the environment (changes in population size, age, climate, expectations and ownership, etc.) – at an early stage. This allows us to connect and consider not only the Losæter site, but also the entire surrounding area.

Hello, my name is Merlin and I’d like to take this opportunity to introduce myself briefly. I have a degree in landscape architecture and I chose this career because I realised at an early age the importance of the connections between our built and ‘natural’ environments.

During my studies, I realised that, alongside detailed planning, the bigger picture was always important to me. What factors influence the planning of a local neighbourhood square? How can small interventions bring about large-scale, supra-regional changes? And how can we overcome social, administrative and economic barriers to achieve an inclusive design for people, animals, plants and the climate?

All these questions arose for me during and after I completed my Bachelor’s degree. For this reason, I decided once again to cross my own boundaries, as well as those of my local context, and chose the European Master’s in Landscape Architecture. The programme allows me to adopt new international, interdisciplinary perspectives, break down existing boundaries and think beyond them.

For me systemic thinking, as exemplified by System-Oriented Design, represents a powerful method to gain a holistic understanding of a place and is waiting to be put into practice.

Given that my background is in landscape architecture and I have already had the opportunity to work on various landscape design projects, I decided to take a brief foray outside the realm of pure landscape architecture and adopt a new approach to design projects. System Oriented Design in relation to urban art projects, which are based on a community-centred farming approach, indirectly addresses many questions concerning today’s planning culture.

How do we create space for people in the city? How can we safeguard green stepping stones in an urban context? What must parks and green spaces in the city be able to offer? How do we encourage people to come together? And finally, how can we preserve creativity, spontaneity and ‘chaos’ in the urban landscape? Losæter is an outstanding example of a project that seeks to answer these questions.

The opportunity to engage with such a context and its local activists, to analyse it and to provide ideas is, for me, the greatest motivation for working on this project.

Both in the past and the present, the project has received a great amount of positive feedback and has managed to stabilise at a fairly consistent number of activists and volunteers. Nevertheless, it is striking that certain gaps exist in the system, and it is difficult to consider it as a piece of a puzzle that fits into its surroundings and interacts with them.

In the current situation, meanwhile, Losæter appears as a fragment surrounded by other urban islands, which are also separated from one another and hardly interact with each other. What is interesting here is that each of these islands has a specific character and, viewed as a whole, represents an important and complementary addition to the others. Furthermore, there is a one-sidedness in the flows of economic resources.

The entire area, but particularly the Losæter project, relies on financial support from the Municipality of Oslo and the voluntary work of a group of around 30 people. A lack of diversification prevents the establishment of a strong, stable and resilient network capable of responding flexibly to future events and changes.

In addition to fragmentation on a large scale at the neighbourhood level, there are also gaps within the Losæter system itself. These gaps arise in various contexts and are largely based on the seasonally dependent nature of the area’s farming practices and production capacity. As plant growth comes to a halt due to temperature changes from early autumn to mid-spring, agricultural productivity also grinds to a standstill.

As community dinners constitute the main activity for Losæter’s users, the seasonal barrier becomes apparent here too. Only art events can extend social activity somewhat into autumn; however, as there are no storage facilities on the site, activities such as plant-dyeing workshops can only take place for as long as storage permits without further measures.

Added to this is the fact that, in addition to storage facilities, there is also a lack of space that offers protection from the weather in winter and is heated or insulated to shield against outdoor temperatures. Community gatherings therefore take place in the Bakehus only until mid-October at the latest and then also fall into a winter coma. The question arises as to whether it might not be desirable for people to adapt to the seasons dictated by nature. However, this fact gives rise to further problems.

There is a very high risk that volunteers will not return after the winter break and that the knowledge they have accumulated will disappear along with them. Furthermore, the winter season poses risks to society as a whole, such as social isolation, which the Losæter site can help to counteract by providing weather-protected spaces.

Losæter currently faces certain challenges and these may be further exacerbated in future projections by the sharp rise in the number of residents in the immediate vicinity of the park. The analysis nevertheless identifies a diverse range of leverage points which, through targeted adjustments to the system, can have a significant impact.

These leverage points address the various gaps in the system, regardless of scale, and enable the interconnection of the currently rather separately operating types of connection: ‘Seasonal’, ‘Social’, ‘Spatial’ and ‘Economical’. In doing so, it is essential to view the various ‘islands’ within the existing fabric as a unified whole once again.

Within this unified whole, there are local connections – manifested through social structures and physical links – and overarching, structural connections that aim primarily to extend the network to the city-wide level. These are primarily economic connections that enable diversification of the flow of resources and prevent a one-sided concentration of interests.

Furthermore, it is important not to confine our thinking about Losæter to the existing boundaries, but to seek out spatial and structural opportunities for expansion that will secure the site’s future and anchor it permanently in its location.

It is beneficial to develop solutions at a small scale based on the overarching framework. These solutions are closely linked to existing conditions – whether systemic, structural or infrastructural – and have a particularly significant spatial impact. It is important to offer both direct solutions that can be implemented immediately and long-term or adaptive solutions that can be applied as and when required. It is important to note that the further into the future the proposed solutions extend, the more unpredictable their impact and feasibility become.

Furthermore, the measures should be carried out in keeping with the existing site conditions. This means that building works must be integrated into the historical context and carried out as sustainably and ecologically as possible, where feasible in conjunction with artistic aspirations and with the involvement of the community.

These measures relate specifically to the micro and meso levels. At the macro level, on the other hand, negotiations tend to focus on overarching agreements and synergies that further integrate the project into the urban context. In summary, it can be said that the multifaceted challenges and questions raised by Losæter can only be resolved with multifaceted ideas, in order to protect the refuge, its residents and visitors in the future and to continue to offer them a place for gathering and exchange.