Unused, underused, and misused: an examination of theories on urban void spaces

Hwang, Soe Won; Lee, Seog Jeong

doi:10.1080/17535069.2019.1634140

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other authors, subsequently, highlighted the problem in term of taxation, credit, debts, loans, foreclosures, with particular reference to post-crisis shrinking situations: Basset et al (2006), Immergluck and Smith (2006), Samsa (2008), Schilling (2009), Mallach (2012), Silverman et al (2013), Dewar and Weber (2012), Aiyer et al (2015), Grossmann and Haase (2016), Wang and Immergluck (2019). Recently, some authors have been more focused on local issues of organization and rules trying to cope with the problem: Sampson et al (2017), Gentili and Hoekstra (2018), Pellegrini (2017, 2019), Foster and Newell (2019), Galster (2019), Hwang and Lee (2019), Jeon and Kim (2020). 7 Effectively, certain insights of his work have not been taken into consideration in urban studies (among the few exceptions see Madanipour 1999;Smith 2020a, b).…”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

Franco

2021

Abandonment as a Social Fact

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This introduction is divided into five sections. The first sets the focus: abandonment as a social fact (Sect. 1.1). The second explains the approach: a neoinstitutional perspective on urban issues (Sect. 1.2). The third exposes the research question: what changes once we recognise abandonment as a social fact? (Sect. 1.3). The fourth is devoted to the methodology (Sect. 1.4). The fifth presents the structure of the book (Sect. 1.5). FocusAs is well known, the problem of the abandonment of buildings is much discussed in the literature and public debate. However, the impression is that there is a certain imprecision in this regard, for example in the use of certain terms and concepts-e.g. abandoned, vacant, empty, derelict, deserted, decommissioned buildings-that are not always unequivocal. 1 Some alarming estimates of the phenomena considered here do not distinguish sharply among different cases (which are-for instance in Italy and particularly in urban situations-on totally different magnitudes). Certain debates tend to equate vacant/abandoned buildings with those buildings "at their owners' disposal but not used on a continuous basis" (Agenzia delle Entrate 2017a). In Italy, this category of buildings accounted for over 20% of the properties in 3630 municipalities in 2014. The main issue, however, is that this category is an even broader vague one, employed to accentuate the situation dramatically. It includes either merely empty 1

show abstract

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction

Franco

2021

Abandonment as a Social Fact

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to identify the phenomenon that we intend to address, various terms are used that are not always unequivocal (Hwang & Lee, 2019). It is therefore first necessary to provide certain basic definitions.…”

Section: First Issue: What Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unused private and public buildings: Re-discussing merely empty and truly abandoned situations, with particular reference to the case of Italy and the city of Milan

Moroni

Franco

Bellè

2020

Journal of Urban Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is much debate today over the problem of unused buildings. This debate is often conducted in alarmed and concerned tones. Our idea is that it is indispensable to reconsider the issue with greater critical reflection and some necessary distinctions: in particular, between situations and aspects relating to public buildings and situations and aspects relating to private buildings; and, within the latter category, between totally natural and legitimate situations and truly problematic ones. To this end, we shall focus on definitory issues, quantitative issues, ethical issues and policy issues. We shall do so with particular attention to the Italian situation, which we believe is especially challenging, and to a specific case study, the city of Milan. However, part of what we shall say also applies to other contexts.

show abstract

“…These spaces are exclusive as they are intended for residents, tenants, and employees in building only. Also, it is interesting to note that such management and design features include not only under-planned but also overplanned spaces with superficial quality (Hwang and Lee 2019). Second, the breach of the contract between the government and developer -in other words, failure to provide required public amenities, leads to POPS being underused (Whyte 1988).…”

Section: How To Make Pops Inclusive and Lively?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Whose space is privately owned public space? Exclusion, underuse and the lack of knowledge and awareness

Lee

2020

Urban Research & Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Privately Owned Public Space/s (POPS) is a mechanism to increase provision of public space, particularly in densely built-up urban areas. The empirical work undertaken along the Teheran-ro in Seoul reveals that even well-equipped and highly accessible POPS can be exclusive or underused. This paper argues that the problem of exclusion and underuse of POPS is related to the lack of knowledge of POPS and of awareness that they are public spaces. The more they are known and perceived as public spaces, the more widely and actively they will be used. Hence, the paper adds further recommendations to the existing suggestions.

show abstract

Unused, underused, and misused: an examination of theories on urban void spaces

Cited by 17 publications

References 26 publications

Introduction

Introduction

Unused private and public buildings: Re-discussing merely empty and truly abandoned situations, with particular reference to the case of Italy and the city of Milan

Whose space is privately owned public space? Exclusion, underuse and the lack of knowledge and awareness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About