1. A
Defining and identifying the status quo of Rosengård
B
Exploring the driving factors in Rosengård’s reality
C
A time perspective
D
A response to the future: strategy and action
Moving scenarios
Rosengård: days of the future past

2. B + C
Understanding the relationship between D
A the main factors identified in Step 1. Defining a response to the status quo
Identifying the driving Understanding these factors in the and the proposed scenario. Six key
forces and uncertainties light of a timescale. terms are proposed as an answer to what
the future appears to have in mind for
Rosengård.
A
SWOT analysis of Rosengård
An overview

3. A
Strengths and opportunities Weaknesses and threats
Mostly associated with the young human capital of Rosengård. Rosengård is a potentially volatile community when it comes to
its social standing: it is overcrowded, neglected and isolated.
Youngsters can be shaped and educated, and have a good outlook
when it comes to the possibility of learning the Swedish lan- The absence of a sense of ownership is also a problem: most
guage and acquiring a formal education. people only rent their apartments and thus have little attach-
ment to a community they regard as temporary.
Also, there is cheap labour force in the community, which may
supply hands to the projected increase in agriculture due to Finally, since it is populated by a vast majority of migrants,
climate change. it is very susceptible to foreign circumstances, so its social
make-up will continue to be overwhelmingly migrant, and under
the risk of further social isolation.
Rosengård today SWOT

4. B
The driving forces
Climate Economy
Global warming is expected Rosengård is a community
to continue. Its consequenc- with lower scholarity levels
es are location-specific: and high unemployment. With
Swedish winters are already Malmö’s economy continuous-
milder and agricultural pro- ly diversifying, Rosengård
duction and coverage could demands more investment in
benefit from this. both the economic context,
and its educational reality.
However, due to its so-
cial make-up, Rosengård is The creation of micro-busi-
highly vulnerable to foreign nesses based on knowledge
events, so droughts, fam- and technology address both
ine or food-related wars in situations and could be a
warmer latitudes are ex- valid answer to the chal-
pected to translate to more lenges of the future,
newcomers to Scandinavia.
Social Land use
Sweden will continue receiv- Rosengård meant the end of
ing migrants. While Aus- high rise housing blocks in
tralia or Canada welcome Sweden. However, it is ex-
educated migrants Sweden re- pected that public housing
mains accesible to all. How- development will continue
ever, Rosengård may only see elsewhere in Malmö.
a slight population increase
and due to lack of phsyical How will this affect the
space and public services, social landscape of Rosen-
it is not expected to exceed gård? Will its population
24.000 residents. decrease, remain stable or
increase?
Can more migrants mean cheap
labour to the agricultural
future and support to the
Swedish pension system?
Sub-issues tangle with each other trans-category.

5. Time perspective C
1961 1971 1991 2008 2014
5.250 inhabitants 23.112 inhabitants 17.190 inhabitants 21.904 inhabitants 22.224 inhabitants
White people leave Rosengård; population continues to grow
Today, only about 1 in 10 residents of Rosengård is not of foreign extraction.
It is expected that White Flight, which emphasizes segregation of the community, will continue in Rosengård.
The population will continue increasing at a moderate rate, fueled by middle Eastern and African migrants.
The development landscape of Malmö as a whole will continue its diversifying process, switching from industry
to a knowledge-based society.
These situations call for more intense social integration and educational efforts.
Source: Malmö Stad
Climate-related consequences are expected to take a longer time to be felt.

6. D
Ownership / Micro business / bartering
What?
Today, residents don’t own their homes and will move out as soon as
possible. Can they own other aspects of life in Rosengård?
Why?
To enhance the sense of belonging and affection towards the commu-
nity, as well as to involve residents in development iniatives.
How?
Small commercial initiatives provide an alternative. Neighborhood
businesses and public services often a different approach to owner-
ship: to take care of something that is somehow benefitial to the
community. Additionally, it can be a source of income. Micro busi-
nesses need less than 5 employees and the nearly 22.000 people of
Rosengård (11.000 young!) conform a defined market to start.
Bartering provides an additional perspective: it eliminates the
need for money. When you are new in a country, you may not have
cash but you have skills which you can trade for products or ser-
vices. When you combine bartering with creating a sense of owner-
ship, the result is an increase sense of communal ownership. With
a future where agriculture and food-production appear relevant to
Skåne’s landscape, small scale vegetable production, trading and
commercialization appears as an important alternative to address
these issues.
Neighborhood commerce: an alternative approach to ownership.
6 step-response
Part 1

7. D
6 step-response
Part 2
Urban sports /
self expression /
access to education and technology
What?
Life in Rosengård is like living in a diagram where the
functions are disconnected between themselves and from the
rest of the city. Apartment blocks erase all sign of in-
dividuality, and the original architectural programme for
this Million Programme project is very stiff when it comes
to these issues. The point: to take activities that are
popular among young people and make them a spatial prior-
ity.
Why?
Because it is a way to add value to Rosengård’s inhabit-
ants. Many people play football, but nowadays activities
like brake dancing or skateboarding are growing strong
among young people.
How?
By offering young people the chance to be visible and
identifiable in the community, in new ways. Urban sports,
the internet (Facebook, Wikipedia, etc.) or urban art are
potential branding and knowledge generators.
There are over 10.000 young persons in Rosengård, some of
them don’t work or go to school. To give young people some
tools today is to avoid problems tomorrow.
Skateboarding - Grafitti - Murals - Brake dancing - Nintendo Wii
- WiFi park - Parcour - BMX - Rollerblading - Interactive wall

8. One future, two outcomes.
People will continue arriving in Rosengård.
The City of Malmö foresees it, and the cir-
cumstances examined before appear to back
this prediction. How will the community,
the city and the country deal with this
impending future?