What does participation look like?

"To discover the real needs of the users therefore means exposing and acknowledging their rights to have things and their rights to express themselves; it means provoking a direct participation and measuring oneself with all the subversive consequences that this implies; it means questioning all the traditional value systems which, since they were built on non-participation, must be revised or replaced when participation becomes part of the process, unleashing energies that have not yet been explored." -Giancarlo De Carlo

I have yet to directly see what productive user participation actually looks like. In studio we go on site visits and send out surveys and in the office we consult only with the developer. Why don't we spend more time in school studying psychology and sociology and exert more effort at work on meeting the community and understand their needs?

The real question is how much control do we give up. From whom or what do we reduce the value of in order to raise the value of the user's opinion?

Should architecture look like this?

Or this?

The first image shows an African woman mapping her town. The second image is of a community meeting in Red Hook. Which is more effective? Both have the potential to influence the design process. But the first seems more authentic. Her input is probably more helpful and insightful than that of a community meeting. This woman is actively engaging in mapping in a one-on-one interaction that lets you know that she is being heard, not just listened to.