Vacancy at the edges of the precarious city

The Role of Temporary Use in Urban Regeneration: Ordinary and Extraordinary Approaches in Bristol and Liverpool

“…While there was empirical evidence from interview data in Bristol of temporary development being displaced in this way, even in the less fraught context of Liverpool there was a clear sense of vulnerability among temporary users and concern that they might at some point be uprooted should land and property market conditions improve. In this sense, the findings suggest that because vacant land is a feature intrinsic to the functioning of increasingly deregulated local land markets (Christophers, 2019), temporary users are likely to have a precarious existence (Ferreri and Vasudevan, 2019).…”

Temporary use in England’s core cities: Looking beyond the exceptional

“…Similarly, this study relied on a data set of captured forms of ordinary and extraordinary temporary uses, but there is also the potential to use the applications data set to develop alternative classifications of short-term use based on specific functions (such as urban beaches or community gardens). Finally, further work could extend the focus to identify spatial and temporal associations between different forms of temporary use and sites of new commercial redevelopment or patterns of gentrification in recognition that vacancy, as a feature intrinsic to the functioning of increasingly deregulated local land markets, exposes temporary users to forms of precarity and risk that vary across time and space (Ferreri and Vasudevan, 2019; Martin et al, 2019).…”

“…In a regulatory context, it is possible to conceptualise captured temporary uses as those that comply with existing building and planning regulations or those that are later subject to regulation via enforcement action (Durst and Wegmann, 2017). That enforcement and compliance are spatially uneven and disrupted by the inconsistent practices of regulatory agents and producers and consumers means that captured temporary uses can assume fragmented forms that are differentially realised across time and space (Durst and Wegmann, 2017; Ferreri and Vasudevan, 2019; Madanipour, 2018).…”

The role of the ‘ambiguous home’ in service users’ management of their mental health

“…For vulnerable, precariously-housed populations, including those suffering from mental illness, the home is best approached as a synthesis, a place that is simultaneously open and closed, physical and abstract, felt and imagined (Blunt & Dowling, 2006), protective and repressive (Schroder, 2006;Somerville, 1992). This connects to a larger literature on housing precarity, poverty and houselessness/homelessness amid conditions of pervasive housing crisis (Ferreri & Vasudevan, 2019;Harris, Nowicki & Brickell, 2019;Power, 2019;Veness, 1993). On the positive side, "domestic space offers protection from other peoples' presence, judgments and disorderliness, and allows the self to re-establish its boundaries and coherence" (Segrott & Doel, 2004, p. 604).…”