Dự án nghiên cứu

Bài trình bày ngắn gọn về phương pháp nghiên cứu, các hạn chế, tiểu sử, nhóm nghiên cứu, các cộng sự và đối tác


The research is articulated around a simple qualitative case study: Think Playground. Five sites were studied, chosen as to cover the diverse scenarios of localisation, urban environment, socio-economical context and temporality. We applied various methods of data collection to fulfill our main objectives on:



The role played by Think Playgrouds, its strategies, its relationships with its volunteers and with its partners.

6 semi-directed interviews:

  • 2 with Think Playgrounds’ co-founders
  • 4 with Think Playgrounds’ partners

12 directed interviews:

  • 1 with Think Playgrounds’ volunteers
  • 1 with Think Playgrounds’ employee

Participatory research: Participation in the realization of a playground throughout its realization cycle.



Portraits of the users, the reception of the public and the consequences on the neighborhood.

Direct observation : direct observation sessions held on each of the study sites in order to understand the dynamics of use and to know the peaks of affluence.

Short questionnaires of about twenty questions : 

  • 9 in site #1 NGUYỄN CÔNG HOAN with users and nearby residents 
  • 13 in site #2 PLAYSTREET
  • 25 in site #3 YÊN SỜ
  • 40 in site #4 PLAYDAY

Semi-directed interviews : from the questionnaires’ data, we wanted to deepen certain answers which seemed to us incomplete or to be clarified. We conducted interviews of a dozen questions :

  • 10 in site #1 NGUYỄN CÔNG HOAN with users and nearby residents 
  • 9 in site #2 PLAYSTREET
  • 13 in site #3 YÊN SỜ


A definite limit of our global methodology remains the size of the samples. If they cover most of the stakeholders related directly or indirectly to Think Playgrounds’ projects; it remains certain that the methodology does not allow for generalisation about the relations between the organisation, the civil society and the municipal administration or on the future of DIY initiatives in Hanoi and Vietnam. The qualitative approach allows above all to identify recurring themes in individual experiences or similar understandings of the political issues.

About the cultural context, it is important to mention that leading a social research in Hanoi is intrinsically complex. Before even selecting the topic or the method, necessary contacts must be established with renowned public institutions to obtain multiple permits. For most of the interviews, the local students led direct translations. This approach allowed for a more reactive interview, but also implied that some information was lost in translation. On a similar limit, the translation of our surveys was subject to wrong interpretations or linguistic misunderstandings.

The meteorological limits, from dangerously high temperatures to heavy rains, slowed our data collection, since a significant amount happened outside.

The multiple limits of the research echo Savoie- Zajc (2009: 312) conclusions where the semi-directed interview must be understood within its cultural context. Every answer is influenced by the specific situation where it was given.


Berk L. and Myers A. (2013) The Role of Make-Believe Play in the Development of Executive Function. American Journal of Play, 6 (1), 98-110.

Boudreau, J. and al. (2005). Youth-friendly public spaces in Hanoi. Institut national de la recherche scientifique; the Institute of Sociology of the Vietnamese Academy of Social Sciences ; HealthBridge, 170p.

Cerise, E. (2009). Fabrication de la ville de Hanoi entre planification et pratiques habitantes : conception, production et réception des formes bâties. (Thèse de doctorat, Architecture, Paris 8, Paris). 667p.

Costa, A. and al.(2006) Reconsidering the Role of Training in Event Volunteers’ Satisfaction.  Sport Management Review,  9, 165-182.

Drummond, L. (2000).Street Scenes: Practices of Public and Private Space in Urban Vietnam. Urban Studies, 37 (,12). 2377– 2391.

Drummond, L. (2012). Middle Class Landscapes in a Transforming City: Hanoi in the 21st Century. In The Reinvention of Distinction. Nguyen-Marshall, V. and al. (eds.) (1ère édition, vol. 2). Amsterdam : Springer Netherlands. 176p.

Ferreira, R. and al. (2012). Motivations Which Influence Volunteers’ Satisfaction. 10th International Conference of the International Society for Third Sector Research, 24p.

Finn, D. (2014) DIY urbanism: implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability. 7(4) 381-398.

Gray L.M. (1999). Creating Civil Society? The Emergence of NGOs in Vietnam. Development and Change 30 (4), 693–713.

Green, B. and L. Chalip.(2004). Paths to Volunteer Commitment: Lessons from the Sydney Olympic Games. In Volunteering as leisure/leisure as volunteering: An international assessment, Chapitre 3, Wallingford, 49-67.

Harms, E. (2009). Vietnam’s Civilizing Process and the Retreat from the Street: A Turtle’s Eye View From Ho Chi Minh City. City & Society, 21 (2), 182–206. DOI:10.1111/j.1548-744X.2009.01021.x.

Iveson, K. (2013). Cities within the City: Do-It-Yourself Urbanism and the Right to the City. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 37(3) 941-56. DOI:10.1111/1468-2427.12053

Jaupitre, X. and Yong-Hak, S. (2001). Les KTT à Hanoï. In Clément, P. and Lancet N. (dir.), Hanoi, le cycle des métamorphoses. Paris : Éditions Recherches. 352p.

Kellock, P. (2015). « The Case of Play ». Playground Ideas, 28p.

Kurfüst, S. (2011). Redefining Public Space in Hanoi: Places, Practices and Meaning. Dissertation for attaining a doctorate in Southeast Asian Studies – submitted to the Faculty of Arts and Humanities University of Passau. 184p.

Labbé, D. and J.-A. Boudreau (2011). Understanding the causes of urban fragmentation in Hanoi: The case of new urban Areas. International Development Planning Review 33 (3), 273-291.

Lux, J. S. and J. D. Straussman (2004). Searching For Balance : Vietnamese NGOs In A State-Led Civil Society. Public Administration and Development, 24,  173–181.

Nørlund, I. (2007). Civil Society in Vietnam. Social Organisations and Approaches to New Concepts. ASIEN, 105, pp. 68-90.

Nguyen, T. H. (2015). Urban governance in preservation and management of neighborhood parks/playgrounds in inner-city districts of Hanoi. HealthBridge. 65p.

Pagano, C. (2013). DIY Urbanism: Property and Process in Grassroots City Building. Marquette Law Review, 97 (2). 335-89.

Savoie-Zajc, L. (2009). L’entrevue semi-dirigée. In B. Gauthier (Dir.) : Recherche sociale : de la problématique à la collecte de données (5e édition). Québec, Québec : Presses de l’Université du Québec.

Schwenkel, C. (2011). Youth Culture and Fading Memories of War in Hanoi, Vietnam. In Everyday Life in Southeast Asia, eds. Kathleen M. Adams and Kathleen Gillogly. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 127–136.

Think Playgrounds (2017a). Think Playgrounds! Online : http://sanchoi.org/TPG/trang-chu

Think Playgrounds (2017b). In Facebook [Organization’s page]. Online : https://www.facebook.com/pg/thinkplaygrounds/notes/?ref=page_internal

Tran, T. M. T. (2012). Urban Planning, Spatial Injustices and “Right to the City” in Vietnam Under Market Socialism : Case Study of Resettlement Areas for Dislocated People in Urban Renewal Projects in Hanoi. (Mémoire de maîtrise, Institut de Hautes études internationales et du développement, Genève). 88p.

Waibel, M. (2006). The Production of Urban Space in Vietnam’s Metropolis in the course of Transition: Internationalization, Polarization and Newly Emerging Lifestyles in Vietnamese Society. Trialog, 89 (2). 43-8.

Wischermann, J. (2010). Civil Society Action and Governance in Vietnam: Selected Findings from an Empirical Survey. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 29 (2), pp. 3-40.

Wisner, S. P. and al. (2005). The service volunteer – loyalty chain: an exploratory study of charitable not-for-profit service organizations. Journal of Operations Management, 23, 143-161.

Wortham-Galvin, B. D. (2013). An Anthropology of Urbanism: How People Make Places (and What Designers and Planners Might Learn from It). The Participatory Turn in Urbanism. 21-40.


Jules Laurent-Allard

Jules Laurent-Allard

Nghiên cứu viên (Đại học Montreal)


Maxime Boutaghou Courtemanche

Maxime Boutaghou Courtemanche

Nghiên cứu viên (Đại học Montreal)


Gabriel Larue

Gabriel Larue

Nghiên cứu viên (Đại học Montreal)



Nguyen Thi Phuong Anh

Nguyen Thi Phuong Anh

Cộng sự (Đại học Xây dựng)

Vũ Thùy Linh

Vũ Thùy Linh

Cộng sự (Đại học Xây dựng)

Hương Ly

Hương Ly

Cộng sự (Đại học Xây dựng)

Đồng Tuấn Minh

Đồng Tuấn Minh

Cộng sự (Đại học Xây dựng)

Danielle Labbé

Danielle Labbé

Giám sát dự án (Đại học Montreal)



First and foremost, we would like to thank Danielle Labbé, published scholar in urbanisation issues and planning practices in developing countries. Her expertise guided us, the research team, throughout the project: on the private and public appropriations of spaces, on the complexity of the metropolitan governance and, above all, on the unique Vietnamese cultural context.

We also wish to give thanks to the founders of Think Playgrounds and the multiple hard-working volunteers who contribute to their projects. We were greeted with a warm welcome and supported throughout the entirety of our research.

An enormous THANK YOU to Đồng Tuấn Minh, Hương Ly, Vu Thuy Linh and Nguyen Thi Phuong Anh for the precious help on the field, their patient introduction to the Vietnamese culture, the interviews led with professionalism and ever-lasting friendships.

Finally, we wish to thank Duc Nguyễn (http://ducfoto.format.com/) and Valérie Fortin for their stunning photographies used on this website. We also mentioned the talented Daniel Smith (belfastdan.com) who created our logo.

Sơ đồ trang web