Freedom and control: a state of balance in public space

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to determine how to achieve a balance between freedom and control in public space. It analyses the relationship between freedom and control to identify phenomena and offer users and policymakers instructions for achieving that balance. Public space, including privately owned public space, is important to urban living. People have both the right to use public space and the responsibility to protect it. Both freedom and control should exist in public space in an appropriate combination. It is impossible and inappropriate for us to ask for absolute freedom or endure unreasonable control. Design/methodology/approach – A case study of Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) reveals typical freedom/control relationships. Quantitative descriptions are given based on field observations. Findings – Freedom and control are primary factors affecting the quality of urban life and management of city space. They depend on and conflict with each other. The balance between freedom and control is a balance between diverse spaces. The “freedom space” belonging to both citizens and authorities determines whether freedom and control are balanced. Ethics and strategies constitute control. Only when each authority and user obtains a proper freedom space can freedom and control achieve balance in public space. Research limitations/implications – Freedom and control differ across cities because they are both affected by culture, history and tradition. As each city has its own characteristics, the freedom and control in each open space are distinctive. Balancing freedom and control requires an understanding of a city’s background and the era. While this paper does not attempt to achieve this understanding, further studies could devote more attention to dimensions of time and location. Practical implications – The findings provide recommendations for users, policymakers and construction and management companies that will allow the management of harmonious and high-quality open spaces. Social implications – Freedom and control are two main factors affecting quality of life. The balance between freedom and control may bring a harmony and stable society environment. It would benefit both the authority and the people a lot. Originality/value – This study provides a systematic analysis of freedom and control in public space and makes a valuable contribution to quality urban space policy, design and management.

An analysis of passengers’ ride needs of urban rail transit services: application of quality function deployment

“…Let us take the need of "behaved environment" of the ERL case study as an example. To achieve a balance between freedom and control in public spaces, it is necessary to first identify the behaviour to be ethically controlled by passengers themselves or strategically controlled by the service provider [74]. After identification, the rail company could deploy both kinds of behaviours into respective issues for devising solutions.…”

An Urban Code in Traditional Middle Eastern Contexts: The Edge Environment as a Central Theme for Reading the Social Pattern Language of Historic Sites

“…It assisted researchers to understand the accumulative look of old urban fabric of the city as a process rather than as a product. Its core concept maintains the perfect distribution of the claims and obligations that lie beneath the three rights: ownership, use, and control, among all partners in the built environment (Zhao & Siu, 2014). Therefore, there were different roles based on the role which every party was playing: as an owner, user, controller or manager or both, through the mechanism of responsibility distribution conceptualizing the idea shared responsibility.…”

“…These mutual relations fall mostly within the area of possessive model of responsibility. In addition, the spaces that developed this type of edge were controlled and regulated by two rules initiated by people, bottom-up, on the basis of the core principle of causing no harm: The priority is for the passers-by to use the center of a space, not to the vendors " activities or buildings" encroachments, and they have a right to object to any undesirable act in the passageway (Zhao & Siu, 2014). These two rules evolved into conventions that organized these edges physically, such as right of way, right of height, right to use fore-space, easement right, and the right of neighbors (Hakim, 2017).…”

Percepción del (in)cumplimiento normativo en el subterráneo de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires

“…En este punto lo público se diferencia de lo privado, donde las personas eligen ciertas pautas de interacción y de comunicación con los otros y su medio. En lo público, el espacio está controlado por normas y autoridades que deben evitar que una persona sienta amenazada su libertad o experimente sentimientos negativos (Zhao & Kin Wai, 2014).…”

“…Según Zhao y Kin Wai (2014), las personas que son indisciplinadas o actúan sin respetar las normas de convivencia implícitas generan rechazo en el resto de los pasajeros. Por ejemplo, los pasamanos de los vagones están diseñados para ser utilizados -compartidos-por todos los pasajeros.…”