Pushing the Urban Frontier: Temporary Uses of Space, City Marketing, and the Creative City Discourse in 2000S Berlin

Abstract

In spite of the amount of urban development that followed the Fall of the Wall, Berlin's urban landscape has remained filled with a large amount of "voids" and disused sites, which have gradually been occupied by various individuals, groups, or entrepreneurs for "temporary" or "interim" uses (such as urban beach bars). This paper analyzes how, and why, such temporary uses of space have been harnessed in recent economic and urban development policies and in the official city marketing discourse in Berlin post-2000, in the context of the discursive and policy shift toward the promotion of Berlin as a "creative city." The gradual process of enlistment of new forms of cultural and social expression by policy-makers and real estate developers for urban development and place marketing purposes has put pressure on the very existence and experimental nature of "temporary uses" and "interim spaces." These have consequently been going through various trajectories of displacement, transformation, commodification, resistance, or disappearance, and in particular cases have become the focus of intense local conflicts.Temporary uses are generally not considered to be part of normal cycles of urban development. If a building or area becomes vacant, it is expected to be re-planned, built over and used as soon as possible. Temporary uses are often associated with crisis, a lack of vision and chaos. But, despite all preconceptions, examples like the vital scene of Berlin's nomadic clubs or temporary events proves that temporary uses can become an extremely successful, inclusive and innovative part of contemporary urban culture. (SUC, 2003, p. 4) After the Fall of the Wall and the reunification of the city in 1989, a period of intensive urban development began in Berlin. Throughout the 1990s large-scale construction sites punctuated the urban landscape of the inner city, in particular around Potsdamer Platz, near the new seat of the Federal Government near the river Spree and in the historical core of the Friedrichstadt. The transformation of the city was promoted to an internal and external audience of Berliners, visitors, and potential investors through high-profile city marketing events and image campaigns, which featured the iconic architecture of flagship urban redevelopment projects to symbolize

Policy learning and sustainable urban transitions: Mobilising Berlin’s cycling renaissance

“…"….in Berlin we are modern, we are not fat, you know?" Berlin has developed a global reputation as a creative hub and cultural capital since reunification and the city has had a reputation as a centre of support for progressive politics in Germany since the 1970's and 1980's (Colomb, 2012;Shaw, 2005). Significantly, Berlin's particularly alternative and hipster image has become increasingly entwined with a form of fashionable bicycle culture (Fick, 2013;The Bike In My Life, 2012;Daily Mail, 2013).…”

Insurgent participation: consensus and contestation in planning the redevelopment of Berlin-Tempelhof airport

“…While initiatives have contributed substantially to the quality of the open space, there has neither been any scope for the projects to effectively shape the planning process, nor does the current park design secure the continuation of their projects. In this sense, participatory strategies can be seen to provide an interim strategy against the loss of property value that has helped to market and 'brand' the site (see also Colomb, 2012b).…”

Obliterating creative capital? Urban governance of creative industries in post-socialist Budapest

“…In policy mobility studies the origins of the creativity idea in the national public policy was traced back to the New Labour's third way politics in the United Kingdom at the end of the 1990s' (Prince 2010b). Although several studies looked at the Anglo-American policy transfer of creativity into different industrial settings of the 'core countries' (Atkinson &Easthope 2009;Colomb 2012;Gibson et al 2012;Peck 2012), less emphasis was put on the peripheral or semi-peripheral dependent economies outside the centres of global capitalism. A probable exception is the case of New Zealand: this country is informative in the sense that it was in the forefront of neoliberal market reforms and the import of fresh policy agendas, although it is located geographically in the periphery (cf.…”