By comparing street skating and park skating, this article examines why skateboarders persist in their use of public space even in the face of extensive regulation and the provision of skate parks. The researcher conducted participant observation and interviews in four sites in New York City: Brooklyn Bridge Plaza, Union Square Park, Riverside Skate Park, and Hudson River Skate Park. A total of 16 semistructured interviews were conducted. Differences between street and park skating are presented by utilizing three dimensions: the social production of public space, the social control imposed on skaters, and the discursive construction of skateboarding. Street skateboarding represents a contesting spatial practice creating a mental, social, and body space, embodying a skater's self-identity and cultural expression. Findings suggest that the governance of public space needs to adapt to the changing needs of multiple users rather than excluding a few without any attempt at accommodating them.

No abstract

People entrapped at different heights of floors or in differently damaged buildings could have a distinct pattern of injury. Our findings may facilitate strategic approaches of patients entrapped in damaged buildings and may contribute to future training for field searches and rescues after earthquakes.

Neoliberal urbanism often draws critiques because it privatizes public space and excludes specific social groups whose interests are not in line with the development goals of local states and corporations. This article, through an exploration of the politics and discourses of urban skateboarding, suggests that this clear distinction, between entrepreneurialism and community–based place making, may fail to explain transformative changes occurring in public space today. Comparing two grassroots activist campaigns at the Brooklyn Banks in New York City (NYC) and West LA Courthouse in the city of Los Angeles (LA), this article explains the ways in which skateboarders leverage specific neoliberal ideologies to claim their right to these two settings. In both cases, skateboarders save spaces through entrepreneurial urban means that bolster neoliberal values while retaining the tactical nature of their activities. Although both activist movements pursue the common values of authenticity, entrepreneurship, and private funding, they employ different discourses to reclaim public space. The NYC skaters frame a security discourse, which ultimately limits their continual access to the Brooklyn Banks. The LA skate community, on the contrary, constructs a spontaneity discourse, characterized by creativity, conviviality, and civil society, successfully transforming the West LA Courthouse into a legalized skate plaza. Our findings suggest that skateboarding communities and their spatial activism are resilient enough to articulate different rationales and successfully fight to transform public spaces into urban commons. However, we argue that ‘the discourses’ matter significantly in the processes and outcomes of activist mobilizations occurring within neoliberalizing public space.