Navigating Informality in the formal city: Lessons from De Kaskantine
In a city where everything – even the counterculture – is planned for, how can alternative project organizers carve their own path?
Amsterdam is home to various government-backed initiatives aimed at preserving and promoting the alternative, experimental, and fringe scenes of the city. From the subsidized Broedplaats programs, which provide temporary housing and studio space for artists and creatives, to the government facilitated Vrije Ruimte program, which identifies open space in the city for experimental projects, many aspects of Amsterdam’s counterculture have become woven into the bureaucratic fabric of the city itself.
Often operating on temporary-use leases, these so-called “alternative” urban projects can act as spatial placeholders for future urban development. Some examples of temporary-use projects in Amsterdam include the neighbourhood gardens in Sluisbuurt and the beloved, recently closed broedplaats SUP on Surinameplein.
Government-supported projects like these are vital for fueling urban experimentation and keeping Amsterdam’s creative energy alive and accessible. It’s also important to acknowledge the fact that these initiatives can serve a dual purpose – as slick urban-branding tools designed to boost Amsterdam’s image as a forward-thinking, creative city, with an end goal of attracting foreign investment for future development. The reality, however, is that long-term support for the city’s alternative communities is frequently missing. Government aid can certainly offer short-term relief to subcultural projects, but the municipality often treads a fine line between genuinely supporting these communities and simply exploiting them for the sake of maintaining a certain image of an “alternative” Amsterdam.
The municipality often treads a fine line between genuinely supporting these communities and simply exploiting them for the sake of maintaining a certain image of an “alternative” Amsterdam
In any case, the institutionalization of alternative projects raises several questions around the trade-offs involved in accepting government support. On the one hand, when a project chooses to accept government subsidies, it must adhere to a new set of rules and regulations that govern its location, functions, and duration. Recent research (conducted by AtlasResarch for the municipality of Amsterdam) found that many individuals involved in the broedplaats program view the neighbourhood development and placemaking requirement of the subsidy to be overbearing, especially when lacking proper training on how to effectively run neighbourhood programs. On the other hand, the sky-rocketing prices of real estate and increasingly limited space for not-for-profit development means that collaborating with local governments is one of the only ways to feasibly secure space the city.
This leads us to a bigger question: Is it possible for alterative projects to exist in the city without government support? What is at risk when informal projects choose to remain autonomous rather than becoming part of the system?
De Kaskantine
De Kaskantine is a rare example of a project that has successfully maintained its autonomy in Amsterdam’s ever-changing urban landscape. Founded in 2014 as a not-for-profit, autonomous cooperative, the project began as a small experiment in off-grid, self-sufficient living in the ruins of an old sugar factory in Halfweg. Today, it operates as a community hub for eco-education, focusing on food rescue, the circular economy, and a strong DIY ethos. Now on its fourth temporary location – a former football field in Delflandpleinbuurt – the project is built almost entirely from repurposed materials that are as easy to dismantle as they are to set up (think shipping containers on wheels, car tires turned into planters, and reused windows and timber).
Despite pressure from the municipality, De Kaskantine has flourished outside the confines of municipal subsidies for a decade, refusing institutionalization and maintaining its autonomy. This has been possible thanks to a strong volunteer network and the ability to offset maintenance costs through community programming and donations. Its design as a temporary garden also allows the project to move from place to place, often finding temporary homes in the city’s vacant, fringe spaces until urban development forces another relocation. While this flexibility is key to its survival, it also brings challenges like short-term rental agreements and a lack of long-term financial security.
Yet, much of De Kaskantine’s charm lies in its freedom to explore diverse subject areas without being tied to the rigid criteria of government subsidies. The project engages with a wide range of topics – environmental, cultural, social, and educational – free from the pressure to fit into the predefined boxes of formalized initiatives.
Post-Politics of Sustainability
In addition to a wide network of volunteers and public support, De Kaskantine’s success as an autonomous, alternative project can be attributed to the nature of its work. Although the project touches on various themes, it is primarily rooted in sustainability and environmental education – topics that are increasingly non-contentious. “Sustainability,” once more politically charged as a notion, has over time integrated into mainstream culture, sometimes representing little more than a trendy buzzword or corporate metric. Moreover, De Kaskantine does not pursue an overtly political agenda. Unlike activist movements like Extinction Rebellion, De Kaskantine embodies a form of utopian urbanism, where people deepen their connections with food production, their communities, and the earth. In this way, they lead by example rather than directly aiming to dismantle hegemonic systems or shift power structures within Amsterdam.
This interpretation of sustainability may reflect a broader cultural shift: a view where sustainability efforts focus less on radical change and more on neighborhood beautification, placemaking, and community development. The value De Kaskantine has added to Amsterdam has, in fact, led the city’s sustainability department to unofficially support the project, providing a degree of municipal backing. The desire for the municipality to formalize De Kaskantine may also speak to the way in which these types of “feel- good” sustainability projects can easily become used as political tools.
De Kaskantine offers an interesting perspective on a project that has opted to remain autonomous for the sake of its own off-grid, self-sustaining values and has been able to maintain that way of existing. It’s demonstrated that this way of life is possible here in Amsterdam, or at least possible for projects that can stay in line with broader goals of the city’s community and neighbourhood development visions.