No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Much of the recent interest in urban design has focused on the creation and management of public spaces of cities. My aim in this paper is to explore the nature and role of public space and its significance for cities today. I look at how the promotion of public space is, on the one hand, a concern for social and functional integration in response to social and spatial segregation of cities and the privatization of public space and, on the other hand, a vehicle of marketing localities and consuming places, all leading to multiple representations and meanings. I argue that it is important that the development of urban public space, as part of a larger, often despatialized public sphere, addresses these tensions and contributes to the emergence of an urbanism which promotes social integration and tolerance.

The temporary use of privately-owned, empty space has been advocated by some as economically sensible and socially progressive, making use of unproductive and empty spaces by providing access to space for those who are otherwise unable to obtain it. The article critically examines this concept, arguing that the temporary use of space should be analysed as part of the urban development process with its temporal and spatial fluctuations and its multivalent outcomes. It investigates the production of empty space and the temporary use of space as a space of opportunity and a flexible method of production. By drawing on the case of Chesterfield House in London, in the context of the British response to the global financial crisis, the temporary use of space is shown to be a moment in a complex process, offering some opportunities, but also revealing the brevity of this moment and the precarity of its users. Beyond the realm of necessity, it may be transformed into a cultural choice, a lubricant of urban development and a medium of social change, signifying a space of opportunity for some and vulnerability for others.