‘Clubification’ of urban public spaces? The withdrawal or the re-definition of the role of local government in the management of public spaces

Magalhães, Claudio de; Trigo, Sonia Freire

doi:10.1080/13574809.2017.1336059

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can contribute to a process of clubification of the public realm (cf. de Magalhaes and Freire Trigo, 2017), transforming the structure of public space into one that requires a different agential capacity from residents, one that attracts people who are capable of gardening collectively. A few interviewees strongly felt that because of the public nature of the garden it was not only access to the garden that should be free to non-members, harvesting by passersby should also be welcomed, regardless of membership status.…”

Section: Results From Analysing Dialectical Relationships: Collectivi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing the grounds for emancipation. Explaining commoning as an emancipatory mechanism through dialectical social theory

Bergame

Borgström

Milestad

2022

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there is evidence that commons have the potential to counteract socio-spatial injustices unleashed by neoliberal and capitalist forms of urbanisation, less is known about how commons lead to emancipatory change. Anchored in dialectical social theory, this article explains commoning as a mechanism through which people reproduce/transform their structural context and agency, arguing that the potential for emancipation through commoning lies in the commoners’ ability to induce processes of structural/agential transformation. Empirically grounded in interviews with urban community gardeners in the City of Stockholm, Sweden, we show that collective gardening conceptualised as practice of commoning contributes to structural change in that female volunteer labour collectivises the mandate over municipally managed public space, transforming socio-spatial relations. Yet, garden commoning proves to reproduce structural whiteness and middle-class agency in public space, fails to establish autonomy from waged-labour relations, and is unable to abolish the separation from the sources of reproduction and subsistence.

show abstract

Section: Results From Analysing Dialectical Relationships: Collectivi...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing the grounds for emancipation. Explaining commoning as an emancipatory mechanism through dialectical social theory

Bergame

Borgström

Milestad

2022

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar to HK, the privatization of OSAP reshaped the notion of ‘publicness’ in Europe and other parts of Asia. The commonly recognized binary of ‘private’ and ‘public’ was redefined through the creation of a hybrid landscape (Athanassiou, 2017; De Magalhaes and Trigo, 2017a), which collaboratively formed urban spaces in both the public sphere and arena of capital accumulation (Nachmany and Hananel, 2019). The new form of OSAP required a different kind of public management and policy, in which judiciously designed accountability mechanisms and clear decisions are reached by all key stakeholders (De Magalhaes and Trigo, 2017b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of ‘publicness’ and quality of publicly accessible open space upon user satisfaction

Lai

Wang

2020

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a worldwide trend for planning bodies to allow, require, or encourage developers to provide open spaces in their properties for public enjoyment to complement the open spaces on government lands. The two types of privately owned open space and government-owned open space, both accessible to public, can influence on people’s quality of life. Whether and how the land ownership of open spaces would influence their performance and, in turn, affect user satisfaction has not yet been studied and is worthy of exploration. This paper aims to examine the interactive relationships among three variables: ‘publicness’, quality/performance, and user satisfaction in both types of open space in Hong Kong. A questionnaire survey was administered to users of privately owned open space and government-owned open space and found that satisfaction with government-owned open space was marginally higher than with privately owned open space, with respect to activity facilities, amenities, and the overall utilization. Nevertheless, the differences in satisfaction were mainly the result of open space quality rather than land ownership per se. This study also examines the determinants of satisfaction, open space provision, and management and trends in spatial use. Findings from this study can deepen the understanding of utilizing both government-owned open space and privately owned open space from the user’s perspective, which will help improve the planning, design, and management of open spaces in cities.

show abstract

“…Their expansion undermines the democratic and open character of public spaces and converts them into commercialised spaces, geared up to corporate profiteering. For others, the growth of private investment and expertise represents a welcome addition to the mix of land uses in cities and opens up new spaces to ‘publics’ that were formally off-limits and seen as private property (Carmona, 2013; De Magalhães and Freire-Trigo, 2017). LLEs have found themselves in the forefront of these debates in London.…”

Section: The London Landed Estates (Lles)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The work that place does: The London Landed Estates and a curatorial approach to estate management

Canelas

Raco

2021

European Urban and Regional Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writings on urban development and planning in Europe have been dominated by a combination of technical studies of the real estate sector and more structural political economy approaches on land expropriation and financialisation. In this paper we draw on the example of the London Landed Estates, to critically assess how land-owning real estate companies, that we call city-owners, perform their roles and what models and knowledge sources they draw upon in managing and carefully curating urban spaces and places. Data sources include interviews with estate managers, others involved in, or affected by, their management, and other corporate public information. Our theoretical framing draws on performativity theory that we see as a valuable addition to existing research approaches. We describe and analyse the ways these agencies construct narratives and practices of socially responsible and historically established forms of performance, that they label place stewardship, and the specific mechanisms they use to bring places into existence. Collectively, the discussion calls for an increased focus on how models abstracted from local context and politics can be ‘localised’, in the study of the governance of the built environment. Greater attention also needs to be paid to the work that place does in influencing the strategies, tactics and activities of property owners.

show abstract

‘Clubification’ of urban public spaces? The withdrawal or the re-definition of the role of local government in the management of public spaces

Cited by 17 publications

References 25 publications

Preparing the grounds for emancipation. Explaining commoning as an emancipatory mechanism through dialectical social theory

Preparing the grounds for emancipation. Explaining commoning as an emancipatory mechanism through dialectical social theory

The effects of ‘publicness’ and quality of publicly accessible open space upon user satisfaction

The work that place does: The London Landed Estates and a curatorial approach to estate management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About