Abstract
The strategies between top down and bottom up approaches in urban renewal cases are dramatically different. Being an outsider, it is apparent that the goals of the two parties align: setting a sustainable ground in terms of both physical and social aspect to protect the future of our habitats. However, because of its wide enough difference in its strategy, we experience cases in which we see the frustration in bottom up implementers such as Skip for the city’s lack of helping hand and top down implementers in city municipalities who are very slow, if at all, in accepting the reality of vacant lots and buried flood plains. What can be the factor that brings two parties together?
This research will look to Camden Garden Centre in North London as an example of successful case study that attempts to reduce this gap. This research will examine how profit-based, education-focused organization can be used as a way to provide economical benefits for the society and lay out its transferable strategies, both educational and organizational methods, that can be implemented in other places, specifically in City of Philadelphia.
Camden Garden Centre is a place found in 1983 by a group called Southern Task Educational Trust. Recently renamed as Camden Garden Centre Charitable Trust, this group of individuals created a business that is owned by a charity rather than individuals. Its goal was to provide vocational training, through the means of gardening and landscaping, to those who were discriminated against in job markets. They have a very specific “training scheme” that attempts to provide these trainees with specific guidance that will enable them to be successful in real life jobs.
This research will also break down the training scheme that Camden Garden Centre has, how it can be replicated and implemented, what are the pros and cons of this training scheme and will attempt to provide any improvement that can be added to this model.