When the rhythm zones meet: territories and patterns of relationship for better understanding trash

ABSTRACT

This study explores the issue of trash around two high-rise apartment blocks in Amsterdam Zuidoost by focusing on city rhythms. Building upon the notion of “patterns of relationship” by Christopher Alexander, the ethnographic research reveals that rhythms formulate five different groupings, which are conceptualised as “rhythm zones.” In the various ways the rhythm zones correspond to each other around the buildings, trash emerges differently. The study establishes that identifying such zones allows for a better understanding of the social phenomena in the urban environment, creating the potential to improve the design of urban spaces.

KEYWORDS:

• Rhythms
• city
• urban analysis
• architecture
• trash
• patterns

Introduction

This paper aims to contribute to urban studies by approaching trash as a phenomenon that emerges from the rhythms of the urban environment. In the Zuidoost city borough of Amsterdam, household refuse, commercial waste, and litter on the sidewalks, parks, and buildings’ entrances have been an issue of concern for decades Gouweloos et al. (2019). A conventional understanding of trash in public urban areas, shared by city managers and many residents alike, is that of urban decay (Kelling and Quinn Wilson, 1982) and a signal of social disorder (Sampson and Raudenbush 1999). We contest this prevalent understanding as too much rooted in the behavioural perspective on individuals (Volker 2017, Reid and Ellsworth-Krebs, 2019). Instead, we propose a rhythm-based analysis, at the heart of which is a multi-layered characterisation of trash based on the spatio-temporal patterns in the urban environment.

We investigate trash in urban areas as a material legacy that marks the rhythms of dwelling and social interactions in the public space (Perry et al. 2010, Murphy 2017). According to this perspective, the presence and persistence of trash in urban areas cannot only be attributed to patterns of individual behaviour or solemnly to the features of the physical environment (Brian et al. 2021). In addition to the proximity of food consumption and occupied or vacant areas, there is a repetition of activities, their temporality, seasonality, and material artefacts (Yatmo et al. 2013). All of these together articulate the spatio-temporal aspect of trash as rhythmic. Trash is “integral to the beat of the city” (Walker et al. 2022), meaning that the rhythms of the pollutants are always related to the rhythms of city life, such as rush hours, markets and events as well as food preparation, cleaning, childcare, washing of clothes and furniture upgrades.

Recently, scholars have questioned the experiences that emerge from the superposition of rhythms, bringing forth the notion of “territory” by Deleuze and Guattari (1987), which “draws a relational, processual and ‘evental’ perspective” to social phenomena (Brighenti 2010). Outdoor areas such as streets, squares, sidewalks, parks and playgrounds present not only individual rhythms but the coming together and colliding of different rhythms (Crang 2001; Edensor 2010). Rhythms of social life continuously interact, and in the urban space, they can be observed singularly as well as in their interactions (Lefebvre 1996). Following this line of thought, we explore trash as an entity that results from the interactions of rhythmic territories. This way, we expand the understanding of the urban environment from that of being constituted solemnly by singular activity rhythms. Defining trash as such unravels new avenues in urban research regarding how the urban space and dynamics result in complex phenomena.

Our empirical material comes from Kikkenstein and Kleiburg, two residential buildings containing 400 apartments each, in the K-buurt neighbourhood of Amsterdam Zuidoost (Figure 1). They are both fragments of the iconic honeycomb architecture of Bijlmermeer and are identically shaped from a bird-eye view. The K-buurt neighbourhood is a residential neighbourhood with large-scale housing blocks and urban amenities, consisting of shopping centres, sports areas, parks, playgrounds, and a large market square. Urban planning based on separating urban functions and spaces was the main principle of the modernist Bijlmermeer monumental planning (Wassenberg 2013). The two buildings appear to present the most contrasting experiences concerning trash: Kleiburg is known by the cleaning department as a building with very clean surroundings in Amsterdam Zuidoost, while Kikkenstein is known to have very dirty surroundings. Furthermore, Kleiburg is a recently renovated building with all its apartments owned by the residents, while Kikkenstein, a social housing, has not received any upgrades since the 2000s. Such differences influenced the city officials to correlate trash with the economic status and the homeownership of the residents in Kikkenstein and to explore solutions through behavioural nudging. To counter the city officials’ position, we offer a rhythm analysis in the K-buurt to shift the focus to the urban dynamics rather than the residents’ behaviour.

Figure 1. The map of the research area.

To generate methodological insights to identify and map the rhythms and territories that shape the K-buurt and explore how trash occurs, the study deploys the notion of patterns by Christopher Alexander (1977). According to Christopher Alexander, urban life is structured through the interactions of various patterns of space and social activity, and urban design should address how the different patterns correspond with each other (Alexander 1979). The concept of rhythm zones is formulated as spatio-temporal entities developing from integrating social and physical factors around the studied buildings, whose internal dynamics also include trash and cleaning patterns. In this light, the study highlights five “rhythm zones:” domestic, transitionary, inactive, gathering and commercial. The analysis concludes that trash occurs based on the relations of rhythm zones, how they come together, what borders they form, and what dynamics emerge at their coming together. As a result, the study shows how trash, an issue regarded as a behavioural problem, can be formulated as a phenomenon that emerges from the interactive patterns in the urban environment. Because the rhythmic elements that create them and variations that occur through their interplay are made tangible, the concept may be helpful in policy-making and design in the urban domain.

Rhythms, Territories and Patterns of Relationship for Better Understanding Trash. A Theoretical Framework

Scholars have addressed rhythms as a productive way of looking at the complex social processes of city life (Smith and Hetherington 2013). According to Lefebvre, rhythms of activities, nature, mobilities and communal life organise urban spaces (1996). Lefebvre was interested in rhythms to explore how social structures are manifested in space and vice versa to understand how space shapes the social life (Lefebvre 1991). In this light, Lefebvre addresses two critical aspects of rhythms. First is the overall movement they create (Lefebvre and Catherine, 2004, 79), engaging multiple entities into one expressive dynamic through repetition. The second is the aspect of difference; a rhythm is neither exact nor mechanical (Lefebvre 1991). Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987, 313) offers a productive way to think about the repetition and difference of rhythms. As they write in their essay Of the Refrain, territory is defined by the capacity of “‘holding together’ of heterogeneous elements” (Deleuze and Guattari 1987, 323). Rhythmic elements like recurring events, cycles, sounds, colour and spatial attributions “adopt a new practical pace” in a territory (1987, 321), through which the territory gains its expressive quality. Furthermore, territories are not fixed entities (1987, 318). Their internal dynamics are characterised and redefined as they interact with other territories.

Recent studies deal with Lefebvre’s and Deleuze and Guattari’s conceptualisations exploring rhythms as sequences of activities in specific places that can be identified and mapped. Wunderlich (2013) brings forward a conceptual framework for understanding and analysing how urban spaces are organised and experienced “by a sense of order and regularity” and “from being immersed in the regular movements and practices of everyday life.” Within this aim, she speaks of “place-rhythms” of social, spatial or natural character, which are “spatial events” where the individual and collective rituals and patterns intersect (Wunderlich 2013). Regarding how time structures spaces, Mulicek, Mulícek et al. (2015) have explored the notion of “chronotope.” Inspired by Parkes and Thrift (1979), chronotope conceptualises that places have different rhythms, thanks to the shifting duration and frequency of activities happening at a given space (Mulícek, Osman and Seidenglanz 2015). More recently, Chang (2022) introduced the concept of “trajectories” to better understand the processes of temporariness and stabilisation in the urban environment. With this work, Chang allows a new perspective on how the urban surroundings “encompass and express many diverse rhythms” or as “polyrhythmic,” presenting them as “bundles” through the notion of trajectory.

So far, the study of rhythms in the urban environment has focused on making visible the different types of repetitive activities at specific places to reach new conceptualisations in the urban environment (Kärrholm 2009, Brighenti 2010). However, besides their identification, the rhythm study deals with how the different flows and dynamics relate and affect each other (Lefebvre and Catherine, 2004). Through such relations, rhythms present variations and show diversities (Deleuze and Guattari 1987). Although this aspect of rhythms was the core argument of the philosophers who engaged with rhythms (Michon 2016), it has not led to methodological conclusions in urban studies.

To tackle this knowledge gap, this research is founded on Christopher Alexander’s (1977). According to Alexander, patterns are the “ultimate constituents” of buildings and towns (Alexander 1979, 11). They are “identifiable and recurrent entities” that correspond to and complete each other in the environment. In the book A Pattern Language (1977), Alexander introduces 253 patterns in the scale of towns, neighbourhoods, houses and rooms. The patterns are identified based on an inventory of traditions of planning and living in urban contexts worldwide (Dawes and Ostwald 2017). Their explanation includes how they should be structured, their functions, and which patterns they should coincide with for them to function. The following book, “Timeless Way of Building” (1979), further explains the nature of patterns. Every place is characterised by an interplay between “patterns of events” and “geometric patterns in the space” (1979). “Patterns of events” are the activities that can occur in a place, and they are supported by geometric patterns, which are “the structure of the space” (1979, 83), emphasising that spaces are alive and with a character given by the events happening there. Alexander calls their interplay “patterns of relationship.”

Alexander’s concept of patterns expands what the philosophers describe as a rhythmic territory because it reaches a more concrete level in the urban domain for identifying territories and their active relations. Like Deleuze and Guattari, Alexander pays special attention to how the patterns correspond to each other, thanks to which the repeating patterns “manifest themselves unique and slightly different each time that they occur” (1979, 150). Introducing such an urban scheme would bring a continuous urban experience in the cities, emphasising that patterns “work as a system” (1979, 133). Once the patterns correspond to each other in a meaningful way, they become “alive,” “self-maintaining,” and “timeless” (1979). For this reason, Alexander recognises the patterns as possible entities to design with (Toker and Pontikis 2011) based on creating differences in repetitions in the urban environment.

In “Timeless Way of Building” (1979), Alexander introduces that there can be different combinations of “patterns of events” and “geometrical patterns in space” that lead to a “pattern of relationship.” In explaining this, he gives the idea of a sidewalk, which can have a more transport-related use in New York and a social role in Jamaica or India (1979, 72). Similarly, in “A Pattern Language” (1977), he underlines that the work is incomplete, that it is only “one pattern language,” and “there are certainly ways of solving the problem different” (1977, xv). Although Alexander’s claims remain empirical (Bhatt 2010), the two works aim to generate a design method based on considering “no pattern is an isolated entity” (1977 ×iii) and “when you build a thing you cannot merely build that thing in isolation” (1977 ×iii).

In the context of the K-buurt neighbourhood, these conceptualisations are methodologically helpful in three ways. The first is that the study identifies the repetitive spatial arrangements in outdoor spaces and repetitive activities based on “patterns of relationships.” This means documenting where there is a spatial pattern, like a grass field or a sidewalk, intersecting with a repeating social activity, like that of doing sports or leaving the house in the morning. The second way it is useful concerns the descriptions of the types of “patterns of relationship” they form; what are the primary social and spatial rhythms that characterise them, and how they develop throughout the day or the week. The third is based on the interaction of patterns, looking at the border and boundaries between them to understand the variation in the trash. Trash is treated here as a qualitative (type of trash) and quantitative (the amount) indicator of urban dwelling, intensity, and dynamics.

Research approach: identifying, mapping and validating the rhythm zones

The research took place between May and September 2019. The empirical data was gathered based on the case study methodology (Yin 2003), where the question around two identically shaped buildings with diverging histories of trash has been chosen. The shape of the architectural elements allowed us to conduct a comparative analysis of the urban environment, thanks to which the social factors such as people’s activities, urban elements, materials and functions influencing the different trash performances were explored. Because the empirical dilemma was most evident around Kikkenstein and Kleiburg, the other buildings in the K-buurt were not included in the analysis.

The first part of the empirical work focused on the socio-spatial features in the neighbourhood. In the light of Christopher Alexander’s articulation of the urban spaces, observations on the space and the social life in the neighbourhood were carried out by exploring the “geometric patterns in space” and “patterns of events” (1979) in the K-buurt. For the geometric patterns, architectural elements and the significant spaces in the neighbourhood were identified, such as the sidewalks, the playground and the market space. For the social patterns, systematic observations were carried out by choosing two-hour timeframes to document the activities around Kikkenstein and Kleiburg buildings, at the outdoor spaces surrounding them and the main shopping area of the neighbourhood, covering a full timeframe from 7 am until 10 pm.

The second part of the data collection was based on unravelling the cleaning practice in the neighbourhood. For this, the weekly cleaning and trash collection schedules were analysed, and participatory observations were carried out by joining the morning cleaning shifts of the K-buurt and the check-up tours of the cleaners’ team leaders. Furthermore, the digital application that allows the residents to file their complaints about trash, called Meldingen Openbare Ruimte Amsterdam (MORA), translated as Public Space Complains Amsterdam, was accessed. In another exploration, a dashboard was developed to display the different types of MORA reports and their locations (Figure 2).

Figure 2. The density of MORA complaints visualised on a map.

As a result of the data collection, several maps were produced to summarise the empirical findings (Figure 3). Although the fieldwork started from a household scale, because of the repetition of spaces and activities in the area, the mapping ended on a neighbourhood/block scale. The maps indicating the “geometric patterns in space” and “patterns of events” showed similarities. For example, in one case, the pattern of parking space corresponded to the pattern of social activity, and in another, the pattern of a children’s park. On the other hand, there was an equal correlation between patterns of green spaces and patterns of lack of activities. Comparing the patterns of social activities and the trash infrastructure and schedule on a map showed correlations (Figure 4), such as having bulky waste collection units on the sidewalks in front of the two buildings and these places being cleaned less than the sidewalks with shops. Furthermore, it was found that there was a relationship between the spatial features and cleaning types. For example, grass can be cleaned manually with tongs, while sidewalks can be cleaned with machines. On the other hand, the projection of the MORA reports on a map showed that the number of complaints around “clean” Kleiburg was much higher than those around Kikkenstein.

Figure 3. Maps representing the urban patterns of (1) spatial features, (2) social use, (3) cleaning types and (4) cleaning frequency and trash collection types.

Figure 4. Visual explanation of the rhythm zone concept formulation.

Comparing the maps showed that these correlations were repetitive, which led to identifying new “patterns of relationship” (Alexander 1979). Such patterns combining spatial features, cleaning and trash collection types and frequencies were conceptualised as rhythm zones. In total, five rhythm zones were found in the K-buurt neighbourhood. Their mapping showed different combinations of rhythm zones around the two buildings. Therefore, it was suggested that the experiences regarding cleanliness and dirtiness could be not only about how the rhythm zones and their social, spatial, trash, cleaning and MORA patterns were organised but how the rhythm zones interacted with each other.

Once the rhythm zones were identified inductively and projected on a map view, “trash walks” were carried out with the neighbourhood’s cleaning professionals and the residents of the Kikkenstein and Kleiburg buildings to identify them deductively. In total, nine residents and eight cleaning professionals participated. The participants and the researcher followed a predefined route around the two buildings and the public spaces of the K-buurt, passing from one rhythm zone to the other while making stops and responding to questions on spatial features, social use, and trash types.

Thanks to the “trash walks”, it was possible to triangulate the insights gained from the ethnographic work. It was found that the analytically derived classification and the users’ practice-based classification overlap. This gave a solid taxonomy of rhythm zones, constituting the first stage and the first result of the study. Additional observations were conducted in the neighbourhood to explore the central hypothesis suggesting that trash emerges from the interactions between the rhythm zones. The results focus on such interactions, pointing out the physical aspects, social activities, trash and trash collection types, and how the cleaning practice takes place and responds to the different situations regarding trash.

Results of the case study: trash at Kleiburg and Kikkenstein

Figure 5. The rhythm zones on a map view.

As a result, five rhythm zones were identified in the K-buurt: transitionary rhythm zones, domestic rhythm zones, gathering rhythm zones, commercial rhythm zones and (Figure 5). The mapping of the rhythm zones demonstrates similar rhythm zones around Kikkenstein and Kleiburg; domestic rhythm zone on one side and transitionary on the other. However, the rhythm zone combinations are different; a gathering rhythm zone corresponds to the domestic rhythm zone of Kleiburg, while an inactive one faces the same rhythm zone in Kikkenstein. At the same time, Kleiburg’s transitionary rhythm zone meets an inactive rhythm zone while it meets a gathering and an inactive. Therefore, it is suggested that trash emerges through rhythm zone combinations. To explain this phenomenon, this section will present three areas around the two buildings where the evidence of the meeting of the rhythm zones is most apparent.

Experiences at the domestic rhythm zones

Figure 6. Maps displaying the spatial patterns and trash infrastructure in the surroundings of the domestic rhythm zones of both buildings. Photos showing the trash that appear in this area.

Considering the “geometric patterns in space,” both buildings have, on one side, outdoor and indoor circulation spaces, such as sidewalks, driveways, and shared hallways, and, on the other, private balconies and porches. Directly below the private balconies are green areas cleared of bushes or trees, which act as buffer zones between the living spaces of the buildings and the rest. As evidence of the “patterns of events,” one can easily recognise the different furniture on the balconies, cooking smells and children’s voices, creating an intimate sphere. These areas in both buildings are defined as domestic rhythm zones (Figure 6). Although the overall experience they generate is similar, or in other words, they present the same “patterns of relationship,” the geometric and social patterns of the two buildings are not entirely the same. At the ground floor level, Kikkenstein’s plinth hosts the storage spaces, and what faces this side are the closed backside entrances, with no paths leading to them. Because of this, this space does not host frequent users. Kleiburg’s plinth, on the other hand, was converted into ground-floor apartments during the renovations. Consequently, the residents living on the ground floor use the same green space as their gardens, extending their living space.

Figure 7. Photos of the domestic rhythm zones of Kleiburg and Kikkenstein (in order).

The domestic rhythm zone of Kikkenstein faces a larger green space with tall trees and bushes. Spaces like these are referred to in this study as inactive rhythm zones because they do not offer much activity in a daily setting. Besides “patterns of events” like occasional dog walking or people crossing from one side of the building to the other, not much happens here. In Kleiburg, on the other hand, the domestic rhythm zones open toward the neighbourhood’s sports fields, which are used often throughout the day, early in the morning by sports groups and in the afternoon by people who come home from work. These and the other spaces hosting the public facilities of the neighbourhood are conceptualised as gathering rhythm zones. Although their “geometric patterns in space” may vary, these zones are characterised by the communal activities in the neighbourhood (Figure 7).

During the trash walks, the domestic rhythm zones were described as “places that look like they belong to the inhabitants.” A Kleiburg resident described this space in their building as “it is still a public space, but it feels a bit in their private sphere.” Compared to the domestic, the inactive rhythm zones were described as “green and park-like spaces” by the residents. When these correspond with the domestic ones, their thick plants add to the feeling of privacy observed in the previous rhythm zone: “Very nice, I do not need curtains, trees on my balcony!.” Although both these and the domestic rhythm zones consist of green spaces, the residents recognised their difference when they said, “In the previous space, I did not get the forest feeling.” Regarding the lack of activity at the inactive rhythm zones, a Kikkenstein resident said, “Here, they do nothing!” adding, “If it were me, I would plant vegetable gardens here.”

In Kikkenstein, the meeting of the domestic and inactive rhythm zones creates a setting where people seldom spend time. On the other hand, the meeting of the domestic and gathering rhythm zones in Kleiburg makes a much livelier setting, actively used by residents as well as people from all around the neighbourhood. The contrast in experiences around the domestic rhythm zones of the two buildings is also reflected in their trash performances. In Kikkenstein, both the domestic and inactive rhythm zones receive a considerable amount of trash, ranging from old furniture to baby diapers, from empty wine bottles or beer cans to food waste. In contrast, the meeting of domestic and gathering rhythm zones around Kleiburg appears almost spotless, with occasional plastic bags or a few items dropped from the upper balconies. In other words, the patterns of “domestic rhythm zones” and “gathering rhythm zones” establish a successful balance from the cleaning perspective.

The gathering rhythm zones are cleaned daily, while the domestic and inactive ones receive the cleaners’ attention only once a week. When the cleaners arrive at the gathering rhythm zone in front of Kleiburg’s domestic rhythm zone, they also clean the excess trash or the trash that could eventually fly around and arrive at this space. The residents of Kleiburg also clean up the trash from their porches, no matter where it comes from, and when there is excess trash in Area 1, they immediately file a complaint. A MORA report has to be taken care of as soon as possible by the cleaners, meaning that, thanks to these reports, the cleaners visit the area even more often.

The complaints at Kikkenstein focus on the outer C shape of the building, in the section where the inactive rhythm zone is the closest to the elevated road, and the plants are the thickest. However, because it is not an actively used space, the number of complaints is fewer than in Kleiburg. When it comes to this area, the cleaners have to pick up the trash manually with tongs because the grass does not allow any machinery. Their trash bags can become heavy and must be changed more often than at other locations. Even if the residents file complaints, trash will remain from the previous weeks, meaning this area is never completely clean. To cope with this, the cleaning team saves this location for the end of their trip, bypassing the other places quickly to have more time. Since such dirty environments make them look like they are not doing their jobs correctly, the cleaners project negative feelings towards the residents of Kikkenstein.

Experiences at the transitionary rhythm zones

Figure 8. Maps displaying the spatial patterns and trash infrastructure in the surroundings of the transitionary rhythm zones of both buildings. Photos showing the trash that appears in this area.

A very common “geometric pattern of space” in the neighbourhood, the sidewalks running through the buildings, generate the “pattern of events” of daily home and work, home and school traffic, which is especially visible between 8:00–9:00 and 16:00–18:00. In Kikkenstein, the driveway adjacent to the sidewalk, another “geometric pattern” we often observe, is helpful for the residents, especially for the elderly or people with small children, to stop by with their cars in front of the building’s entrances. Kleiburg’s driveway is separated from the sidewalk with a green buffer space, with the car parking distributed alongside. Therefore, a new “geometric pattern” is to be found here. Since the overall experience they present is the building’s outdoor circulation and translocation, these spaces are referred to as transitionary rhythm zones (Figure 8). Similar to the domestic rhythm zones, the architectural language of the two buildings appears different at the plinth level. The “geometric patterns” that construct Kikkenstein’s plinth are the main entrances and the entrances to the storage spaces. Kleiburg’s plinth, on the other hand, has doors to the ground-floor apartments and entrances to the upper floors. As a result, in Kikkenstein, people can be observed standing on the sidewalk and talking to each other. In contrast, the spatial arrangement of Kleiburg creates a limit to the amount of activity that happens here (Figure 9).

Kikkenstein’s transitionary rhythm zone faces the pattern of open space with thick greenery on the upper side, identified as an inactive rhythm zone (Figure 10). This makes it possible for some cars or groups of people to stop by this area in the afternoon to play music and talk to each other, a lively “pattern of events.” At its lower side, the sidewalk faces a parking space that, thanks to the fence surrounding it, many residents use as an outdoor sitting area or, due to its strategic location, as a shortcut to the shopping street. For that reason, the coming together of the event and spatial patterns is classified as a gathering rhythm zone. In contrast to the parking area, Kleiburg’s transitionary rhythm zone is surrounded by green space, mapped as an inactive rhythm zone, with simplified greenery, which was reduced in size during renovations. Consequently, the “pattern of events” on the sidewalk here is more intimate and quieter.

Figure 9. Photos of the transitionary rhythm zones of Kikkenstein and Kleiburg (in order).

The residents described the transitionary rhythm zones as “wide sidewalks,” “purely for translocation.” A Kikkenstein resident added that they are used by “especially people who go from home to the shopping centre.” These zones were recognised as being very similar in the two buildings; however, appearing very different because of the other spaces they faced. A resident describes gathering rhythm zones as “a place where people come together.” Regarding their spatial features, residents from both buildings described them as “too much concrete” and “unattractive spaces.” A Kleiburg resident described the activity at the Kikkenstein parking garage as “a bit of chilling and hanging out,” emphasising that “it is quite busy here.”

The transitionary rhythm zones are equipped with underground trash cans and bulky waste disposal locations for house waste. The buildings’ close surroundings are cleaned once a week on the same day, immediately after their trash pick-up day. On the cleaning day, the team divides into two: one part works with a sweeping machine, with one person driving and the other pushing the waste from the buildings’ corners towards the sidewalks’ centre. The second part of the team picks up the trash at the inactive rhythm zone. The gathering rhythm zones are cleaned almost daily, depending on the amount of trash. As cars are parked, the Kikkenstein parking space is also cleaned manually, allowing the cleaners to expand their area towards Kikkenstein’s sidewalk and remove the excess trash. This does not happen on the upper side of the transitionary rhythm zone, where an inactive rhythm zone is completing it. Because of this, the two extremes of the sidewalk present very different trash performances. However, since the dirtier part is also the part where there are fewer viewpoints from the outside and more people standing, residents and cleaners assume that the activity of “hanging out” creates trash. Such differences show that the pattern of the inactive rhythm zone better completes the pattern of the transitionary rhythm zone.

Figure 10. Photos of the inactive rhythm zones of Kikkenstein and Kleiburg (in order).

The social activity at Kikkenstein’s sidewalk produces small-sized trash, such as drink cans and bottles, and, in the absence of small trash cans at transitionary rhythm zones, these are disposed of in the containers. When small-size litter is disposed of, the containers get blocked, and the residents place their garbage bags next to them. For an outsider, the blocked underground containers or garbage lying outside suggest immediately that the residents tend to dispose of their garbage bags in the wrong place. In Kleiburg, on the other hand, only some small-sized trash can be found, for instance, cigarette butts and tissues. In the large-size trash area, other items than those meant for this space can also be found. When this happens, the residents often file a complaint. For the cleaning department, it is also easier to take care of this because it only involves removing a few items and bags. In the case of Kikkenstein, however, if there are complaints about the containers, extra service is sent to unblock them, but it is not always possible for the cleaning service to send machines to clean the sidewalks.

Experiences at the commercial and gathering rhythm zones

Figure 11. Maps displaying the spatial patterns and trash infrastructure in the surroundings of the gathering and commercial rhythm zones of both buildings. Photos showing the trash that appear in this area.

The centre of the K-buurt, Kraaiennest, is marked by an elevated metro line, under which is an open space where the Tuesday market is held. The market square faces Karspeldreef Street from the south, the main street of the K-buurt that connects the neighbourhood to the rest of Zuidoost. On its sidewalk, Karspeldreef hosts supermarkets, local stores and takeaway restaurants, creating a lively “geometric pattern of space.” The “pattern of events” alters throughout the day. In the early morning, children and their parents walk together from here to school. From 11:00 onwards, the shopping activity begins, and, towards the afternoon, social encounters take place. As their rhythms are highly influenced by the opening times of the shops, these “patterns of relationships” are classified as commercial rhythm zones (Figure 11). The commercial rhythm zones provide places to buy goods and, at the same time, attract large numbers of people. The gathering rhythm zones complement these, offering places to spend time outdoors. The Kraaiennest playground, tennis and basketball fields that face the market square, and the Kikkenstein parking space that faces the backside of Karspeldreef Street, are examples of this.

Like the Kikkenstein parking space, the Kraaiennest playground is a popular spot, visited by parents with children before noon and by kids and teenagers in the afternoon. At the side of the market square, it is demarcated by the same low fence as the Kikkenstein parking space. Because they are close to supermarkets and takeaway shops, both gathering rhythm zones present the “pattern of event” of consuming food. On non-market days, people park their cars on the empty square in the afternoon, play music and sit on the fence. Many visitors to the Kikkenstein parking space also do the same, coming with their cars and sitting inside, listening to music, eating or drinking (Figure 12).

Figure 12. Photos of the gathering rhythm zones, Kikkenstein parking space and Kraaiennest playground (in order).

The coming together of these two “patterns of relationship,” gathering and commercial rhythm zones, produces many types of trash, ranging from leftovers from the market to waste from the stores. The visitors who sit and eat or drink here dispose of their trash in the few bins standing around, but as with the nature of the food consumption activity, many also discard rubbish in the places where they were sitting. These two rhythm zones are equipped with small trash cans. Those around the parking space and in the playground are the simple ones without a lid. The food waste, whether inside the trash bins or on the floor, is a treasure trove for birds and easily blown away by the wind, making these spaces full of litter by the end of the day. Though both rhythm zones are cleaned daily, the trash appears again by the end of the day. Because the parking space is always full of cars, it is hard for the cleaners to pick up all the trash, so this space always looks dirty. When their efforts do not match the cleanliness level in the periodic assessments of the central city government, the cleaners feel disappointed towards the residents who use this space for purposes other than parking.

The market square and the Karspeldreef shopping street are immediately below residential buildings, whose entrances face these areas. In the case of the market square, the large staircase of another building between Kikkenstein and Kleiburg opens towards here. Both commercial rhythm zones face gathering rhythm zones, which makes their intersections very busy. Signifying the residential activity nearby, underground containers are placed at the commercial rhythm zones. One instance of this feature can be seen at the meeting of the Kikkenstein parking space and the back of Karspeldreef Street. The second can be seen at the end side of the market space.

When an underground container is placed where two busy rhythm zones meet, a lot of trash and garbage bags are piled around it. The Tuesday market highly influences the trash at the commercial rhythm zones. The locations of these containers are very convenient for the market vendors and shop owners to get rid of their unwanted trash and for the visitors of these spaces to dispose of their small quantities of trash. Though an additional sanitation service is provided to clean up the square after the market, they do not deal with fixing the blocked containers. Both Karspeldreef Street and the market space receive a high number of MORA complaints. Even though these spaces are cleaned every day, and the containers are fixed as soon as possible, thanks to the reports, this scenario repeats itself every week, contributing to the negative image of the neighbourhood.

Discussion

In defining how rhythms compose the urban spaces around the Kikkenstein and Kleiburg buildings, this study builds upon the notion of patterns by Christopher Alexander (1977). Aiming to create an application to what philosophers such as Lefebvre, and Deleuze and Guattari call “rhythmic territories,” we conceptualise “rhythm zones.” Because certain correspondences of rhythm zones resulted in clean surroundings and others did not, the study proposes that behind different experiences of trash, different rhythm zone combinations can be found.

The study’s first finding concerns the discrete behaviour of the rhythm zones. Here, the results highlight how the “patterns of events” and “geometric patterns in the space” (Alexander 1979) are constituted and repeated in the K-buurt. A further step is taken in defining the rhythm zones by proposing that the cleaning and trash collection patterns also characterise urban spaces (Yli-Kauhaluoma and Timonen 2016), next to the physical characteristics of the urban space and the activities carried out there. It is suggested that the type of cleaning is affected by the “geometric patterns,” which consist of the physical layout of the built and natural environment. In contrast, the trash collection methods and cleaning frequency are affected by “patterns of events” and, therefore, social use. Furthermore, Kleiburg’s plinth has a very different appearance and functionality than Kikkenstein’s. Nevertheless, the temporal development of the activities at the domestic and transitionary rhythm zones remains the same. Therefore, the study argues that despite the different features in the built environment, social activity seems to be a factor of significance through which the experiences at the zones are further defined.

The second finding is on the interaction of the rhythm zones. The results reveal that rhythm zones (re)produce (a)synchronicities, experienced as trash or cleanliness. These (a)synchronicities result in different relational dynamics, or what we call following Alexander, “patterns of relationship” (1979). By showing that differences emerge within these repetitive patterns as they are conjunct, a new perspective is offered to how “repetition and difference” (Lefebvre and Catherine, 2004, 9) happens in the urban environment. The meeting of the domestic and gathering rhythm zones at Kleiburg, and the same rhythm zones with an inactive one in Kikkenstein, appeared to create more frequent social use and cleaning activity around Kleiburg and a decrease in the number of visitors in Kikkenstein. While the domestic and gathering rhythm zones were observed as two patterns that presented less maintenance problems, this was not the case when looking at how the domestic and inactive rhythm zones met. At the transitionary rhythm zones of the two buildings, which in Kleiburg was completed by an inactive one, and in Kikkenstein, a gathering and an inactive rhythm zone, the social activity produced around Kikkenstein appeared to be much more complex than in Kleiburg. Here, the transitionary and the gathering rhythm zones presented a troubling interaction of patterns. Similarly, it was found that busy environments arise from the correspondence of the gathering and commercial rhythm zones, increasing the amount of trash dropped in these areas.

A third finding points to the differences between the cleaners’ practices and regulated and infrastructural aspects of trash. The rhythm zones and the (re)production of their (a)synchronicities are recognised by the cleaners but not by the municipal trash infrastructure. The rhythm zones appear as single entities for the latter, and their relational qualities are not considered. Contrasting this, the cleaning teams work in strong flows of cleaning activity and transition between the zones in an organised way, also transitioning from one trash collection method to another. Based on their perceptions and practices at the rhythm zones, they structure themselves around the trash, where the trash cans to empty and the underground containers to unblock become merely part of their flow. The cleaners, who have lived and worked in Amsterdam Zuidoost for a long time, know the daily life in the neighbourhoods and the trash produced. Considering that they have to make the best use of a limited amount of time to clean the neighbourhood, the cleaners need to be prepared and willing to continuously adjust their energy and time to the amount of trash that they know they will face in an area, and they have predefined ways of doing this. Therefore, practice and not only socio-spatial patterning contribute to the constitution of rhythm zones.

Such differentiation was also visible in the complaints patterns. It was found that the MORA reports on trash were made at rhythm zone intersections with higher usage and cleaning repertoires, such as gathering and domestic. Therefore, the application does not allow extra cleaning services to be provided to disadvantaged areas from this perspective. This also shows that assessing cleanliness in neighbourhoods is far from being “straightforward” (Gill 2017).

Furthermore, the study shows that the social and structural concerns regarding trash are (re)produced. When the reserved time for cleaning is not adequate at the locations where rhythm zones meet asynchronously, the cleaners feel inadequate and angry towards the residents for disposing of their trash incorrectly. As a result, the disorder perceptions (Kelling and Quinn Wilson, 1982) and the cleaners’ and city officials’ negative feelings towards residents emerge. This was evident at the meeting of the domestic and inactive rhythm zones of Kikkenstein. When the relationship between the rhythms and the appearance of trash was not clear, the residents of Kikkenstein were perceived as disorderly, which was a common perspective among the Kleiburg residents, who had been living in the neighbourhood for less than a decade. In this sense, the rhythm aspect of the urban environment also contributes to structural concerns in public service delivery/management, prejudices, or harmonies we overlook.

Finally, mapping the rhythm zones may shift the residents and the policymakers’ perspectives on the generation and management of trash within its social context (Perry, Juhlin and Normark 2010). It makes visible the spatio-temporal entities characterising the urban environment and reveals the dynamics from which they emerge (Dovey and Ristic 2017). Such visual tools may enhance “the interactions between structuring forces and actors of a specific time/space context” and correspondingly also “the specific ways in which problems are framed, and solutions are conceived” (Calderon and Chelleri 2013). In other words, establishing that rhythms manifest themselves as zones in the city and mapping them offers a new perspective on the urban environment and can also be “strategic, constitutive and inventive” (Corner 2011, Hatleskog and Samuel 2021), permitting decision-makers to reflect on new solutions.

Conclusion and further research

In exploring the issue of trash around the Kikkenstein and Kleiburg buildings in Amsterdam Zuidoost, the presented study identified five different groupings of spatio-temporal rhythms around the two buildings. Conceptualised as rhythm zones, these groupings engage patterns of spatial features, activities, cleaning types, frequencies, and infrastructure and continuously interact. Identifying the rhythm zones and focusing on other practices, such as cleaning, and not only space and time, which are commonly used to analyse urban spaces, broadens the theory of rhythms. It allows for a novel bridge between the study of rhythms and trash management in the city. To conclude, drawing a rhythm perspective on trash appears to be complementary to other conceptualisations on the origins of trash, such as urban decay and infrastructure, and deepens the insights into urban dynamics, people’s activities, and social spheres.

Further research on the rhythm zones concept would contribute to formulating design interventions in the urban domain. In doing so, certain aspects could be focused upon. First, design proposals can be made to reorganise the internal dynamics of the rhythm zones. In addition, new rhythms can be introduced into the zones to change their essential characteristics. Finally, consideration can be made of the cleaning activity and infrastructure. Trash infrastructure could be better adapted to the rhythm zones, or the knowledge and efforts of the cleaners can be recognised in practice. Doing so would also offer some apparent value to the role of the people who take care of our urban spaces.

Acknowledgments

First and foremost, we thank the cleaners who allowed us into their practice and shared insights. We thank Yvonne Jacobs, director of the cleaning department of the City of Amsterdam, for her support. We thank Antina Snijder, innovation lead, and local management in the borough of Zuidoost, Abdel Setta and Namuk Cinar.

We thank the residents from the Kleiburg and Kikkenstein buildings, who responded to our call to carry out the Trash Walks. For co-supervising the research and its formulation into writing, we thank Dr Olga Sezneva. For critical feedback, we thank Professor Annemarie Mol and different academic colleagues from the University of Amsterdam.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

This work is one of the three case studies in the Designing Rhythms for Social Resilience research project (1 July 2018– 1 November 2023). It is supported by the National Dutch Scientific Organisation (NWO) as part of the research programme Smart Culture - Big Data/Digital Humanities, grant number 314-99-300.