Blog

Care for whom? Reflections on care practices in the city of Berlin

31. January 2025

It should go without saying that a good city for children is a good city for everyone. In the same way, the presence of children playing in the streets is, for many, an indication of a good city to live. However, which childhoods, and which cities are we talking about?

In my doctoral research in Social History of Culture (PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), I am mapping environmental/urban education activities with children. Focusing on practices that place children in a position of autonomy, I try to understand how they can also exercise care practices in relation to the city1. Unlike the more common use of care as a medical term or related to domestic work, I’m interested in care in the sense of a political, citizen and community practice, which has been integrating the ecofeminist debate on thinking about interdependence between species.

As part of this research, I joined the CRC 1265 as a visiting fellow in 2024. The choice of Berlin for the field research was twofold: It is one of Europe’s greenest capitals, and historically incorporates the presence of children in its daily life. This blogpost aims to investigate Brachen, adventure playgrounds, and the question of who takes care of the city in Berlin

The Brachen and care in Berlin

In addition to a large number of parks (2,500 throughout the city2) and the presence of 430,000 catalogued trees, Berlin is also known for the presence of Brachen, which could be translated into English as fallow lands. The translation, however, does not reveal their essence: Partly the result of the destruction caused by wars and the residual spaces of the wall that divided the city until 1989, these urban areas are the result of non-design, of letting things sprout, or leaving them as they are. Far from being unused spaces, Brachen are home to sometimes unknown species, which makes them a rich garden for regeneration and pollination.

What the Brachen indicate is that what may at first seem like carelessness demonstrates another kind of relationship with the urban landscape. In fact, letting plants grow spontaneously is also a German government project to encourage pollination and the proliferation of bees and other insects. These are called Wildblumenwiese (wildflower meadows). Since 2018, the Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung (German Wildlife Foundation) has been running the project “More bees for Berlin – Berlin is blooming!”3 in partnership with the Senate Department for Mobility, Transport, Climate Protection and the Environment. The project also offers lectures, courses and workshops so that citizens can take care of the gardens and even develop their own4.

Fig. 1: Still from production of the documentary Natura Urbana, Berlin (2015). Photo by Matthew Gandy
Fig. 2: Brache in the Chausseestraße, Berlin (2007). Photo by Matthew Gandy
Fig. 3: Wildflower meadow along Hohenzollerndamm, Berlin (2020). Photo by Sandra Jasper

I believe it is possible to draw a parallel between the environmental culture of the Brachen and the culture of adventure playgrounds in Berlin. As in many other cities, the demand for recreational spaces for children arose in the 20th century with the sectorization of functions in modernist architecture and urbanism. The increase in urban population density led to a worsening quality of life and a lack of leisure spaces; children no longer played freely in the streets and houses, but needed spaces set aside for this activity.

Since 2006, the Swiss political scientist and urban planner Gabriela Burkhalter has been researching the history of playgrounds, which she feeds into an online archive5 and a traveling exhibition. According to her, in 1913 Berlin’s first children’s play area was built in Schiller Park, Berlin-Mitte, in the Wedding district. However, it wasn’t until 1967 that the first adventure playground was created, in Märkisches Viertel.

The invention of different types of playgrounds marks a change in the modern idea of children’s leisure. If functionalist architects designed spaces reserved for children’s recreation in a segmented, hierarchical way – determined by a totalizing urban planning –, after the Second World War, changes in modern urbanism repositioned the place of playing in European cities6.

In this sense, adventure playgrounds are one of the many alternatives that have emerged in opposition to the idea that there is only one way to design spaces for children to play. The context of criticism of modernism is also a time when European cities are dealing with the scars of the Second World War aftermath, the rebuilding of cities, rubble, and urban voids. In many capitals, children have found space to play on the idle land left by the bombings. Seeing rubble as an interesting place to play reinforces children’s imaginative capacity and the inefficiency of urban planners’ attempts to control it. The idea that leftover materials, garbage, and waste can contribute more to the development of children’s creativity and autonomy than pre-programmed games and spaces has made this type of playground a benchmark.

Even today, adventure playgrounds are spaces where there are no toys and equipment designed for children’s leisure – such as swings, seesaws, and slides – but rather materials that allow children to build and destroy as they please, with wood, iron, fire, water, mud, tools, scrap metal, tires. In these playgrounds, risk is present and must be managed by the children as part of the game. The role of adults is simply to supervise, maintain and eliminate unnecessary risks (e.g., exposed nails and loose boards). The children’s autonomy in inventing games and taking care of the space and their own safety are part of a pedagogy of child protagonism.

In Berlin, one of the first milestones in the history of adventure playgrounds was the experience of the Spielwagen (toy wagon) collective7. Initially made up of 12 adults from various professional backgrounds, the group occupied streets and squares with a van carrying toys and tools to encourage street play. From 1980 onwards, the idea began to gain momentum with articles in the press and a documentary. It was only in 1990, after the wall fell, that the proposal for a construction playground at Kollwitzplatz was approved and the playground Kolle 37 began to be built on an initial area of 800m².

The Kolle 37 area was later expanded and now covers 4,000 m². It is currently part of the NGO Bund der Jugendfarmen und Aktivspielplätze (BDJA) (Federation of youth farms and active playgrounds). In the afternoon, between 1pm and 6pm, the park functions as an adventure playground. During this period, only children aged between 6 and 16 can use the space.

Fig. 4: Kolle 37. Photo by author
Fig. 5: Kolle 37. Photo by author
Fig. 6: Kolle 37. Photo by author

Unlike a conventional playground or school, the lack of toys and activities and the seemingly dangerous environment are part of a pedagogical proposal that values children’s autonomy. Despite appearing to be a dangerous place for children, these are measures taken in favor of children’s safety and appreciation. At Kolle 37, dealing with risk can be a form of caring for oneself and others.

Who takes care of the city?

In addition to supervised playgrounds, the city of Berlin has many public parks with areas for children to play. Talking to educators and observing the city’s routine, I was able to see that the presence of children on the streets is quite prominent. I often come across school classes on walks around the city, and children playing or walking on their own. This is due to a feature of Berlin education which includes outdoor activities in the routine of children in kindergartens and schools. The outings are to playgrounds and squares near the school, museums, theaters, cinemas, etc. The trips are made on foot, when possible, or by public transport. Thus, part of the activity involves learning how to use diverse modes of transport and traffic rules. In other words, civic education is learned from an early age and incorporates elements of urban education.

Urban education programs have been and continue to be implemented in German schools. In 1999, German architects Nina Nedellykov and Dagmar Tanuschev founded the Architektur und Schule[8] (Architecture and Schools) project within the Berlin Chamber of Architects[9], in which architects partner with schools to develop architecture and urbanism activities. To date, there have been around 250 projects in more than 100 schools in the city with the aim of stimulating children’s perception of the built environment.

How, then, does the role of children in Berlin, whether in the educational and institutional environment or in artistic and cultural practices, intertwine with the global environmental crisis? Among the many environmental education initiatives with children in Berlin’s gardens, I will describe a few here.

Floating University is certainly one of the most central places in the debate about cultural and artistic practices in the context of the Anthropocene. Located in a water retention basin at the former Tempelhof airport, the initiative defines itself as an urban practice and a “naturecultural” learning place where people from different fields come together to collaborate, co-create and work imaginatively for futures10. Among the many activities and working groups into which Floating is divided, one is dedicated to children and teenagers: KidsUni. Since the project began in 2018, part of it has been dedicated to thinking about activities for children. The idea is that children will also be able to explore this place and thus reflect on and research the city, art and space11 through artistic-urban activities.

Fig. 7: Floating University . Photo by author

The many community gardens in Berlin also have various programs aimed at environmental education with children. This is the case with the Prinzessinnengarten collective, located in the new St. Jacobi cemetery in Neukölln. Founded in 2009, the collective was first based at Moritzplatz until 2019, when it moved to the cemetery with an area of 7.5 hectares. On the site there are raised beds, compost bins and a café. The garden and vegetable patch are public and the collective offers workshops and talks on gardening for children and adults. Some of the raised beds are specially designed for children, who are responsible for cultivating them. The collective offers guided gardening activities for children once a week, and some schools in the neighborhood also visit the garden.

In a conversation with a member of the collective about the participation of children in the activities, I asked about the presence of refugee children. Neukölln is a district of Berlin with a higher percentage of migrants than the city average: 48% of the population are migrants or descendants of migrants12, while in the city the rate is 22%13. Her account, which resonates with other interviewees, indicates that migrant or refugee children sometimes do fewer extracurricular activities than non-refugee children. This also means that they have more time available to take part in activities in the garden, for example.

I spoke with Juliana Canedo, a Brazilian architect and professor at the Institute of Architecture at the Technische Universität Berlin who works with refugees in Berlin. She told me that some refugee children have never left the shelter – among many reasons, because their mothers don’t feel safe going out with them14. How can we think about a city that integrates children without thinking about the integration of refugee children? Which city are refugee children entitled to? Which children are living in and contributing to Berlin’s green areas? Does the environmental imaginary of German children include Arab, Turkish, or African imaginaries?

In the district of Neukölln, with a strong presence of immigrants, another community garden project draws attention because it seeks to engage with these groups. Freiraumlabor15 (free space laboratory) is a community initiative with artistic, cultural and environmental activities. Freiraumlabor’s activities are designed so that these people can take ownership of the garden as a community garden. The space welcomes the district’s children, most of whom are immigrants, on a weekly basis and offers art/environmental education activities.

Fig. 8: Freiraumlabor’ community garden. Photo by author
Fig. 9: Freiraumlabor’ community garden. Photo by author

Several other activities in Nerkölln focus on the participation of refugee and immigrant children, giving them a leading role in the ownership of the neighborhood16. As well as being recognized in their childhood, with their cultural differences, they are also an important link in the integration of their families. The wide variation in the understanding of what care is in the context of this Berlin space-time dimension intrigues me. The similarities between the ‘poor care’ of wildflower gardens and children playing in adventure playgrounds in contrast to care disguised as the supposed protection of refugee children cannot be read outside of a colonial perspective17.

Care is not universal, it is not possible to make a normative assessment of what is good care or bad care. This category needs to be put into tension. In the same way that wildflower gardens and Brachen can seem poorly cared for to some, refugee children can seem well cared for in shelters. Collective and shared care can be read as abandonment and precariousness, or as revolutionary and promoting autonomy, depending on the social context. Care can be liberating, germinating, nourishing and sustaining life in many ways, but it can also be controlling, suffocating and deadly. 

Acknowledgements: I am very grateful for the MGK Visiting Fellowship and the Collaborative Research Center Re-Figuration of Spaces for the opportunity to carry out this research in Berlin. I also want to thank Jérôme Fink, from Adventure Playground Kolle 37, Ute Lindenbeck, from Floating University, and Philine Schneider, from Freiraumlabor, for welcoming me into their spaces. Thanks as well to Juliana Canedo and Pedro Moreira for sharing their thoughts and ideas.

Author Biography: Joana Martins is an architect and urbanist from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. She holds a Master’s degree in architecture from Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, where she is currently a PhD candidate in Social History of Culture. Her research interests are urban participation, democracy, care practices, children, and urban/environmental pedagogy. Contact: martinspereirajoana@gmail.com


References

1 de la Bellacasa, M.P.  (2017) Matters of Care: Speculative Ethics in More Than Human Worlds. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.

2 Berlin Senate Department for Urban Mobility, Transport, Climate Action, and the Environment. (n.d.). Public Parks (Green and Recreation Spaces). https://www.berlin.de/sen/uvk/en/nature-and-green/urban-green-space/public-parks/. Accessed 2024.

3 Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung. (n.d.). Wildbienen in Berlin. Projekte in Berlin. https://www.wildbiene.org/projekte-in-berlin. Accessed 2024.

4 Deutsche Wildtier Stiftung. Wildbienen auf der Wildblumenwiese. (n.d.) https://www.wildbiene.org/wildblumenwiese. Accessed 2024.

5 Architektur für Kinder. (n.d.). The Playground Project. https://architekturfuerkinder.ch/. Accessed 2024.

6 Oudenampsen, M. (2011). A cidade como playground. Piseagrama, 3, 52-55.

7 Architektur für Kinder (n.d.). Spielwagen Berlin. https://architekturfuerkinder.ch/spielwagen-berlin-1/. Accessed 2024.

8 Tanuschev, D., Nedelykov, N. K. (2004). Architektur: Die Berliner Architektenkammer geht in die Schule. Architekturberlin, Berlin, 1.

9 Architektenkammer Berlin. (n.d.). Architektur und Schule — eine Initiative der Architektenkammer Berlin. https://www.ak-berlin.de/baukultur/architektur-und-schule.html. Accessed 2024

10 Floating e.V. (n.d.). Floating University Berlin A Natureculture learning site. https://floating-berlin.org/. Accessed 2024.

11 Floating e.V. (n.d.). Kinds Uni. https://floating-berlin.org/programmes/kids-uni/. Accessed 2024

12 Council of Europe Portal. (n.d.). Berlin Neukölln, Germany – Intercultural City. https://www.coe.int/en/web/interculturalcities/berlin-neukolln. Accessed 2024

13 Statista. (2024). Share of foreigners in the total population of Berlin in Germany from 2010 to 2023 https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109981/foreigners-share-population-berlin-germany/#:~:text=Share%20of%20foreigners%20in%20the%20total%20population%20of%20Berlin%20Germany%202009%2D2022&text=In%202022%2C%20around%2022%20percent%20of%20Berlin’s%20population%20were%20foreigners. Accessed 2024

14 Canedo, J., & Elmouelhi, H. (2023). Spatial Integration of Refugees: Towards a Post-Migrant Approach. Urban Planning, 8(4), 313-325. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v8i4.7080

15 https://www.freiraumlabor.net/

16 https://neukoelln-to-go.wixsite.com/info; https://youngarts-nk.de/

17 Ferdinand, M., & Smith, A. P. (2022). Decolonial ecology: thinking from the Caribbean world. Cambridge: Polity Press.