The speakers of the first part presented very different types of venues and spaces. Most of them were squatted by civil society initiatives and later became legally recognized by inventing specific types of partnerships between civil society and city authorities (that own the property in most cases). As a special case we can see Turkish example where the squatting is done by the capital (private companies) and not civil society.
Presented venues can be seen as places that have quite good level of program autonomy though all of them are struggling to maintain the infrastructures. The question of how to maintain the infrastructures latter developed in an interesting discussion about autonomy which also means that the venues should have financial autonomy. But how to reach the financial autonomy that would also provide means to maintain the building, seems to be the crucial question. Do the venues run by NGOs have the right to public sources or do they have to become commercial in order to survive? How to keep the balance between serving corporate logic and keeping the program independence and consistency?
Listen to the audio
or download it here.