COLLECTIVISTIC CULTURE AND CIVIC SPACE AS URBAN IDENTITY A THEORY BASED AND HUMAN-CENTRIC TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY FOR FUTIAN CENTRAL DISTRICT, SHENZHEN

Chen Yajuan Jeroen van Ameijde

Introduction

The city centre is a crucial epicentre of an urban agglomeration, drawing in opportunities from across a wide territorial area and containing social, economic, cultural, and institutional functions (Rogerson & Giddings, 2020). Although some people desire to live in suburbs, many prefer a mixed community with central functions that can accommodate work, life, and entertainment activities (Mehta, 2014). As part of the rapid development and densification of cities, urban centres experience challenges such as a lack of public spaces, crowding, traffic congestion, and rising prices for goods and services. These challenges have caused the reputation of the city centre, historically the most representative of the city image, become ambiguous with positive and negative associations. Several urbanists and scholars have discussed the notion of urban identity and the Right to the City. Gehl (2010) has posed that civic space is both the stage of culture and symbol of identity. According to Harvey, the Right to the City is not merely a right of access to what already exists, but a right to change by creating a qualitatively different kind of urban sociality (Harvey, 2003).

Shenzhen is a plan-led polycentric city, and its ‘cluster-belt’ urban structure plays an important role in the city development and economy (Huang & Xie, 2012). However, the commercially driven development of Shenzhen has resulted in a fragmented or scattered urban identity (Tang, 2020). Culture-driven urban and regional strategies have been used since the 1980s in Europe and beyond to unify and strengthen urban identity (Nuccio & Ponzini, 2017), but cultural policies in Shenzhen are often based around the construction of cultural institutions, divorced from the urban design of public spaces or neighbourhoods.

There are some voices in society claiming that public space is no longer needed by civil and political life, but many scholars have demonstrated the relationships between public space and society, and between social life and the sense of belonging in communities (Amin, 2008). Some sociologists have defined the notion of urban culture as the interaction between culture and urban space (Mehta, 2014). Few researchers have explored which kind of spatial qualities could produce specific public activities that affect urban culture and identity. The central aim of this research project is to explore how cultural elements can be integrated with civic space, and how a new urban centre can contribute to improvements in people’s quality of life, their sense of community and identity. This study explores the role of public space as a platform for culture by analysing the concepts and relationships between collectivistic culture, civic space, and urban identity through literature review and field studies. It focuses on the principles of public space design from the perspective of humanization, and the relationships between public cultural life and public space. It uses the central area of Shenzhen as a case study to test how locally specific characteristics and cultural activities could influence the creation of civic space.

The hypothesis of this study is that urban identity depends on public culture and its visibility, which does not only appear in formal cultural institutions and spaces for cultural events, but also in casual activities in civic space. A deep human need exists for associations with significant places. Sustainable development of urban centres can be realized through understanding and catering to the needs of different groups of residents. Diverse activities by different groups make efficient use of urban space and create a diverse urban cultural landscape (Aelbrecht, 2017). A com- bination of fixed and spontaneous activities in public spaces can regulate the use of space and stimulate the generation of cultural activities.

To explore this hypothesis, this paper will present a review of relevant theories and publications around urban culture, space and identity, and analyse the precedent case of London’s South Bank Centre as an example of a concentration of open public spaces which are activated through formalised and informal cultural activities. It then discusses our research of Shenzhen’s Futian Central District as a case study site, exemplary of the current limitations and opportunities around central urban spaces as a platform for collectivistic cultural participation. Based on site analysis and field studies, a series of renewal strategies for the site is presented, to speculate how urban design measures can produce new cultural spaces, increase public participation and the sense of belonging, and help shape a new urban image representative of a collective cultural identity.

URBAN THEORIES OF URBAN CULTURE, SPACE, AND IDENTITY

Although the civic and political functions of public space are hybridised by new communication technologies, consumer venues and other media, public space is still the primary domain to guarantees citizens’ political rights and the embodiment of civic culture and urban life (Amin, 2008). Civic spaces are an extension of the community, as the setting where celebrations are held, where social and economic exchanges take place and cultures mix. Public spaces provide opportunities for humans and nature to interact, contain important spaces for circulation and activities, and lay the foundation for urban identity and city life (Mehta, 2007). Urban identity is an important aspect in achieving social sustainability during the development of cities, for it offers people a sense of belonging, responsibility, and connects with their desires for improved qualities of urban life. A deep human need exists for associations with significant places, and civic space forms a stage to forge these associations (Oktay, 2002). One of the dimensions of ‘culture’ is everyday life (Longhurst et al., 2008) and this materialises through the interactions between people and their environment (Lin & Mele, 2012). With the increasing digitisation of urban life and urban culture, urban public space is becoming more integrated within the private domain (Mao, 2015). Amongst these changes in consumption habits and activity patterns, the role that urban identity plays within people’s individual experiences is also changing.

CULTURE: THE ART OF EVERYDAY LIFE Culture, or Civilization, taken in its wider ethnographic sense, is “a complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, laws, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Tay- lor, 1871). The notion of Culture includes “art and art activities, the learned, primarily symbolic features of a particular way of life and its process of development” (Longhurst & Baldwin, 2008). It can refer to the highest achievements of society; represented in a museum, concert hall and other cultural institutions, and it can also refer to everyday life types of activities and rituals. Research into manifestations of culture in public spaces focuses mainly on activities. As a central concept in anthropology, culture is closely related to the human environment. People’s activities and behaviours in cities constitute social culture, and social culture will affect people’s lives in every corner of the city (Low, 2010). Cultural activities can transport people from the daily mire into a sacred space with a sense of ritual (Zukin, 1995).

IDENTITY: DISTINGUISHING THE CITY FROM OTHERS

Lynch (1964) defined urban identity as the extent to which a person can recognize or recall a place as being distinct from other places. It can be associated with the ‘instinct’ of a city, its culture, art, symbols and way of life, forming an index to its urban characteristics, making the city stand out in the world (Oktay, 2002). Some scholars have defined Culture as the medium that represent urban identity, as culture is a means to store the images and memories of a city, and fill every space in the city with activities (Zukin, 1995).

In this definition, urban culture refers to the close interactions between humans and their environment, through which people change themselves when shaping cities (Harvey, 2003).

The Role Of Civic Space And The Right To The City

The notion of Civic Space has been defined as space accompanied by a set of universally accepted rules that allow people to organize, participate and communicate with each other freely and without hindrance, and in doing so, influence the political and social structures around them. Parks and other urban public spaces that have the potential to be “the stage upon which the drama of communal life unfolds” (Carr et al. 1992, pp. 3). Civic space is also the stage on which the Right to the City is exercised through cultural activities. The right to the city does not only imply free access to the city’s spaces by all members of society, but also the right for all urban citizens to participate in the decision making and co-creation of the future versions of the city (Harvey, 2003).

HUMAN-CENTRIC DESIGN

Well known urbanists such as William H. Whyte, Jane Jacobs, Allan Jacobs and Jan Gehl have since long advocated the need for urban designers to focus on the opportunities for supporting and creating public life, rather than being guided by the technical efficiencies or dogmas around urban design. The intrinsic necessary, optional, and social functions and outdoor activities Mehta (2014) summarized the five dimensions of public space design around the properties of usability, activity, physical environment, and perceptual atmosphere, with the keywords of Inclusiveness, Meaningful Activities, Safety, Comfort, and Pleasurability. Zou (2013) studied the organization and design of the external spaces from a human perspective and provided solutions for the contradiction between urban image and humanized design. An overview of public space design objectivities is given in Table 1.

Table 1. Factors and characteristics of humanized public activity space design. Scholars Factors Characteristics

Mehta (2014) Usability

Inclusiveness: accessible and open, safe

Meaningful activities Physical environment Comfort: comfort and convenience

Activities

Perceptual atmosphere

Carr et al. (1992) Psychology

Pleasurability: changeable, pleasure

Responsive, democratic, and meaningful

Gehl (2006) Activities Necessary, optional, and social functions

Zou (2013) Humanization

Domain sense, place sense, ecological sense, and harmony

Table 1. Factors and characteristics of humanized public activity space design driving forces behind public life are based on human behaviour, motivation, and activity demand (Zou, 2013). According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, physiology and safety are basic needs and can be addressed through features in the physical environment; belonging and love and self-esteem are psychological needs that are achieved through social interaction; and self-realization is a spiritual need and can be achieved through personal development in relation to an individual’s context. When applying Maslow’s concepts to the design of public spaces, this implies that they should provide physical safety, shelter and resting opportunities, provide space and facilities for the social activities of different groups of people, and enable each individual’s ability to modify the space to create a collective culture. This comprehensive and human-centric approach to urban design assumes an alignment between the city’s performance goals and its residents’ life objectives.

The insights summarised in the sections above help us define the key characteristics of cultural urban spaces as platforms for civic participation, embracing the cultural everyday activities ordinary citizens. They inform the criteria through which precedents and case study sites can be analysed, to identify how urban design, public space facilities and activities can help to create inclusive urban cultural centres.

3. Precedent: London's South Bank Centre London's South Bank has been a place of significance for defining identity since the Festival of Britain in 1951, which aimed to strengthen Britain's outlook through introducing the latest technology, science, architecture, and arts in the aftermath of WW2. It has been transformed into an entertainment and commercial district, anchored around the Southbank centre and its artistic venues which attract millions of visitors every year (Figure 1).

Public Space Design

Carr et al. (1992) expressed the ideal that public space is responsive, democratic, and meaningful and Gehl (2006) argued that successful public spaces contain a mixture of necessary, optional, and social functions and outdoor activities. Mehta (2014) summarized the five dimensions of public space design around the properties of usability, activity, physical environment, and perceptual atmosphere, with the keywords of Inclusiveness, Meaningful Activities, Safety, Comfort, and

Pleasurability. Zou (2013) studied the organization and design of the external spaces from a human perspective and provided solutions for the contradiction between urban image and humanized design. An overview of public space design objectivities is given in Table 1.

The insights summarised in the sections above help us define the key characteristics of cultural urban spaces as platforms for civic participation, embracing the cultural everyday activities ordinary citizens. They inform the criteria through which precedents and case study sites can be analysed, to identify how urban design, public space facilities and activities can help to create inclusive urban cultural centres.

PRECEDENT: LONDON’S SOUTH BANK CENTRE

London’s South Bank has been a place of significance for defining identity since the Festival of Britain in 1951, which aimed to strengthen Britain’s outlook through introducing the latest technology, science, architecture, and arts in the aftermath of WW2. It has been transformed into an entertainment and commercial district, anchored around the Southbank centre and its artistic venues which attract millions of visitors every year.

The South Bank is a hub of iconic, state-funded arts and entertainment venues and events, and one of the few places that is equally as popular with Londoners as with tourists. Public perfor- mances and festivals are held here regularly, some jointly organized by community members and non-governmental organizations to express the creativity of the community and provide free performances for local residents. A combination of fixed and spontaneous events activates the main pedestrian routes and stimulate the vitality of public spaces. There are many cultural and art institutions and openair spaces on the South Bank that showcase British cultural life. A book market and food market attract both residents and visitors, while street performers generate spontaneously formed audience circles, inviting passers-by to participate in the cultural life of the area.

The experience and production of space at London’s South Bank is characterised by the term ‘openness’. This openness allows for the generation of social processes, promoting the slowing down and inhabitation of the public space. The openness applies not only to the physical dimension, but to the psychological and regulatory levels, as the spaces are regularly used as ‘play’ and performance areas. A previously underused undercroft space has been a base for skateboarders since decades, and has become representative of the cultural characteristics and sense of belonging of the area, representing the memory of the community. Lefebvre (1991, pp. 286) argues that “space is permeated with social relations; it is not only supported by social relations, but it is also

Types of public space

Location Landuse Ownership Seats Activities Crowd density

Square City Square G4 Public Flower bed seats Sitting, riding, walking, skateboarding, jogging, playing football

—— South Square G1 Public Stone benches Jogging, walking —

Park City Square Park

G1 Public / Walking —

Roof Garden G1+C 1 Private Stone benches Walking —

Leisure Green Space

Around buildings GIC2 Public / Sitting, skateboarding, playing a ball, picturing —

Playground GIC1 Public Stone seats Playing with water ——— Arcade Central Book City G1+C 1 Private Private seats Eating and drinking —

Civic Centre GIC1 Public / Dancing, walking, playing —————

4.3 Public space characteristics and evaluation

Figure 2. Public space and activities of the central axis during the site visit (time: Tue. July 14th, 2020, 7pm-9pm)

Following a series of site visits, qualitative field observations and informal interviews, the following phenomena of the public space layout and activity patterns in the central area can be summarised: producing and produced by social relations”.

• There are no signs or indications in the public spaces or public facilities in the central area. More than 90% of the public spaces of buildings are not equipped with public space signage.

• There is a lack of outdoor public seating in the public spaces. Most of the seating is around flower beds and people sit on the ground. More than 80% of the public spaces of buildings are not equipped with public seating.

Aelbrecht (2017). has analysed the social production of space at the South Bank as a process of playful use of the site. ‘Play’ at South Bank is discussed in a threefold way: as explicit moments of playfulness, as plays on meaning in public space and as playful projections of the self. Part of the qualitative ‘value’ of public space lies in its capacity to facilitate

• There are very few facilities in the public spaces. Besides some seating and greening there is a lack of outdoor facilities to support other activities. Most people just walk around without engaging in activities or resting moments of play; it is from precisely the nonfunctional, ‘open’ status of the public space that its value is derived in this regard. The play function helps to explore the meaning of the individual in the public space, thereby enriching the meaning of the public space.

• There is a low utilization of public open space outside the buildings. For example, the stairs area at the entrance of the Children’s Palace is dark and no one uses the stairs as seating.

• People tend to gather in free and playable spaces, utilising landscape features and gardens as places for children to play. The commercial areas are considered too expensive for ordinary people and lack vitality.

CIVIC SPACE IN SHENZHEN’S FUTIAN CENTRAL DISTRICT

• People tend to use spacious areas to do collectivistic activities like skateboarding and square dancing.

Futian Central District is the second constructed

With reference to our earlier research about the theoretical and pragmatic aspects of good public space design for the establishment of civic space, resident participation and the forming of urban identity, a number of problems and opportunities for improvement can be identified around the studied area: central district in Shenzhen, after the Luohu CBD. It incorporates administration, culture, commerce, and crucial intersections between several main subway lines. The area is home to the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and Futian Station, with new high speed rail connections to Hong Kong and the rest of China. At the end of 2015, 74 new buildings and 7.04 million m2 floor space had been completed for office buildings, accounting for 62% of the total built area (Chen, 2017). The central axis is the “backbone” of the public space and forms a threedimensional axis with a length of 2km in the north-south direction and a width of 250m in the east-west direction. Elevated pedestrian walkways connect the six main buildings (Figure 2).

Public Activities On The Central Axis

The central area houses Shenzhen’s municipal level public offices, so that citizens can access various government services in the same place. The monumental central axis space can hold large-scale urban events, such as the Spring Festival Gala, the National Light show, etc (Figure 3). These government-organised activities do not happen very often and are concentrated into a certain period of the year.

During most other days of the year, spontaneous activities take place on the central axis such as skateboarding and square dancing. During our site observations, the most eye-catching public space activities were people skateboarding in the square in front of the municipal building (Figure 4), and people dancing under the canopy on the platform of the Civic Centre (Figure 5). Most of the skateboarders were students, and most of the dancer were retired women. They come here almost every day because the space is free and generous, and according to some interviewees, activities in the city centre make them feel happier and proud of their city.

Pedestrians are distributed across the entire area, but people gather more in the spacious places for group activities, such as playing, skateboarding, and square dancing. These collective activities form the core component of the cultural landscape of the central area.

Public Space Characteristics And Evaluation

Following a series of site visits, qualitative field observations and informal interviews, the following phenomena of the public space layout and activity patterns in the central area can be summarised: There are no signs or indications in the public spaces or public facilities in the central area. More than 90% of the public spaces of buildings are not equipped with public space signage.

There is a lack of outdoor public seating in the public spaces. Most of the seating is around flower beds and people sit on the ground. More than 80% of the public spaces of buildings are not equipped with public seating There are very few facilities in the public spaces. Besides some seating and greening there is a lack of outdoor facilities to support other activities. Most people just walk around without engaging in activities or resting.

There is a low utilization of public open space outside the buildings. For example, the stairs area at the entrance of the Children’s Palace is dark and no one uses the stairs as seating. People tend to gather in free and playable spaces, utilising landscape features and gardens as places for children to play. The commercial areas are considered too expensive for ordinary people and lack vitality. People tend to use spacious areas to do collectivistic activities like skateboarding and square dancing.

With reference to our earlier research about the theoretical and pragmatic aspects of good public space design for the establishment of civic space, resident participation and the forming of urban identity, a number of problems and opportunities for improvement can be identified around the studied area: Unclear public space management: the space lacks signage and guidelines to divide and navigate the space, and also lacks public space activity facilities and seating. The urban design is monofunctional, and lacks mechanisms for retaining people and generating activities, resulting in low space utilisation.

A lack of support for organising activities. Most activities on the site are scattered and free, and fail to become regular fixtures of the site due a lack of support infrastructure. As a results, the site lacks the mutual stimulation between fixed activities and spontaneous activities as seen at London’s South Bank. Exceptions are formed by the square dancing, which is organised without the need of any facilities, and which form a regular urban activity with strong appreciation. A lack of playability of the public spaces outside the buildings, and a lack of connections between different types of public spaces, result in a sense of isolation and emptiness amongst the featureless and the monotonously designed plazas.

The central area has a high proportion of commercial offices, but the public spaces and facilities are not designed to support the office workers or residents from the surrounding neighbourhoods during their leisure time. This has led to many small and medium enterprises leaving the area for more vibrant, affordable and up and coming neighbourhoods.

Discussion

Chen (2017) has noted that after more than 20 years of rapid urban development, the Futian Central District has become the administrative, business, and transportation hub of Shenzhen. With the emergence of Shenzhen as a hightech, Tier 1 metropolis competing at the world stage, the Futian Central District is the city’s symbolic centre of power, but at the same time, it also reveals some of the contemporary difficulties urban centres have in providing the city with an urban identity representative of collective urban culture. As Shenzhen has evolved rapidly along the linear shoreline of Shenzhen Bay, it now has multiple centres with varying identities and different function mixes. In the relentless pursuit of innovation and expansion, new epicentres of urban development, urban culture and vibrancy have emerged westwards, leaving the previous flagship districts behind in the regional competition for investment and renewal. Similar to London’s South Bank area, which has experienced several rounds of large-scale redesign and reprogramming, the Futian Central District has the potential to become a true multi-faceted urban centre in the hearts of Shenzhen’s citizens.

In line with our findings from the review of relevant urban theories and precedent analysis, combined with the evaluation of field observations during site visits to the case study area, a series of recommendations for the future transformation of the Futian Central District are listed below and illustrated in Figure 6. A culture-driven urban development approach Besides major governmental institutions and company headquarters, the Futian Central District already has several cultural institutions, including galleries, a major library, and museums.

Expanding the relationships between these institutions and collaborating organisations, community initiatives, events and commercial programming can be employed to activate a wider area and its public spaces to form a dynamic cultural district. As outlined in our previous sections, culture should be defined as the combination and interplay between the institutions that represent the highest achievements of the society, and the rituals and activities of everyday urban life that contribute to a sense of identity and belonging for ordinary citizens.

With reference to the South Bank’s ability for the social production of space, linked to the psychological and spiritual human needs as outlined by Maslow, a true urban centre should align its ambitions with the people’s aspirations in their pursuit of a better life. Besides fulfilling basic public space needs in the form of facilities for resting, consumption and shelter from the environment, infrastructure for socialising and collective experiences should be provided, which can lead to individual and community development. Following insights promoted by urbanists such as Jane Jacobs and others, the area could benefit from a more fine-grain mixed-use programmatic distribution. Jacobs referred to the ecological principle of ‘autocatalytic dynamics’; a condition where urban neighbourhoods ‘come alive’ through the self-reinforcing dynamic interactions between many different types of functions, people and activities (Jacobs, 1961). Reducing the proportion of commercial offices and developing buildings and urban spaces with composite and mixed functions, would add vibrancy to the area by attracting varied types of users during all times of the day and week.

According to the human-centric design principles for public space design, the large plaza spaces of the Futian Central District are recommended to be redesigned in relation to the scale of human activities. Inclusion of the principles of openness in relation to urban morphology and management would result in accessible, inclusive, and flexible public spaces that form a platform for formal and informal activities, representing the institutional and local cultural characteristics of the area. Openness towards future changes in lifestyle and social gathering preferences ensures social, cultural, and economic resilience.

As a final point, the insights from the literature on collective identity, meaning and a sense of participation can be synthesized and applied towards the case study site. Relating in particular to the management and activation of public spaces, it is recommended to comprehensively plan yearlong calendars of collective activities such as sports, performing arts, exhibitions and shows, festivals and markets. These regular fixtures as part of the collective experience help build memories and anticipation and create a multi-faceted cultural urban landscape that triggers community-led activities in dialogue with the institutional cultural presences in the area.

Conclusions

By discussing the conceptual and practical interactions between public space, urban culture and urban identity, this paper has explored the particularities of public space as a platform for culture and urban collectivistic activities, capable of representing a strengthening and evolving image of the city and its communities. Our analysis of London’s South Bank Centre has identified the importance of human-centric urban space planning and management, to establish an open system of cultural institutions and spaces for everyday life, establishing a synergy between planned and unplanned social experiences. The place identity and cultural production established at the site contribute to the collective appreciation and significance of this urban centre, and help establish an inclusive image of the city based on the participation of diverse groups of residents and visitors.

Our analysis of the case study site at Futian Central District in Shenzhen responds to the city’s rapid transformation into an urban metropolis of global importance, which is increasingly focusing on liveability and urban renewal. As Shenzhen’s intensive land development has led to the increase of privatised or highly regulated public spaces, it is of vital importance that renewal strategies for existing urban centres protect the notion of the Right to the City, facilitating participation and co-creation opportunities for diverse groups of residents. Our analysis of Futian Central District’s public space users and activity patterns has highlighted how public open spaces are open to appropriation by ordinary citizens, but it has shown how a lack of facilities, urban function mixing and event planning currently limits this potential. The Futian Central District, with its large-scale and underused spaces, shows the unique potential to incorporate additional urban cultural facilities and urban design measures to embrace a broader urban identity, representative of the aspirations and participation of all of Shenzhen’s residents. A more active, inclusive and dynamic engagement of citizens, and their interaction with the new urban environment can help create collective experiences, strengthen the sense of belonging and forge a new image of the city based on the sophistication of its everyday life. In this paper, we have outlined a series of theoretical and practical considerations that promote the implementation of truly public and open public spaces, deploying physical and social infrastructures to enable a wide range of cultural activities. Through a series of measures such as private-public synergies between institutions and the creative and cultural industries, combined with people-oriented public space design, function mixing and event planning strategies, we have shown how cultural mechanisms within public spaces could help establish urban centres with a broad popular appreciation.

Public spaces in the main central areas of large cities have the unique capacity to record collective urban history, culture and progress, through the layering and incremental development of its institutions, buildings and landscapes. Rather than focusing on the reinvention of urban identity through the construction of brand-new symbols in isolated locations, cities can invest in the strategic upgrading of existing centres, introducing new stakeholders and activities in dialogue with the rich existing urban fabric.

References

Aelbrecht, P. S. (2017). The complex regeneration of post-war modernism: London’s Southbank Centre’s Masterplan. Urban Design International, 22(4), 331-348.

Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. City, 12(1), 5-24.

Carr, S., M. Francis, L. G. Rivlin, and A. M. Stone. (1992). Public Space. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, Y.X. (2017). Review Of 30-Year Planning Implementation of Futian CBD in Shenzhen. City Planning Review, 41 (7), 72-78.

Gehl, J. (2006). Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. Trans. Koch, J. 6th ed., Copenhagen, The Danish Architectural Press.

Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for People. Washington, D.C., Island Press.

Harvey, D. (2003). The right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), 939-941.

Huang, L., & Xie, Y. (2012). The plan-led urban form: A case study of Shenzhen. In 48th ISOCARP Congress China Academy of Urban Planning & Design.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities.

Lefebvre, H., & Nicholson-Smith, D. (1991). The production of space (Vol. 142). Blackwell: Oxford.

Lin, J., & Mele, C. (Eds.). (2012). The urban sociology reader. Routledge.

Longhurst, B., & Baldwin, E. (2008). Introducing cultural studies (2nd ed.). Harlow, England; New York: Pearson/Longman.

Low, S. M. (2010). On the plaza: The politics of public space and culture. University of Texas Press.

Lynch, K. (1964). The image of the city (Publications of the Joint Centre for Urban Studies). Cambridge [Mass.]: M.I.T. Press.

Mao, S. H. (2015). Spiritual fingerprint and conceptual core of Shenzhen culture. Practice and Theory of SEZS, (4), 96-101.

Mehta, V. (2007). Lively streets: Determining environmental characteristics to support social behaviour. Journal of planning education and research, 27(2), 165-187.

Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban design, 19(1), 53-88.

Miles, M., Hall, T., & Borden, I. (Eds.).

(2004). The city cultures reader (No. 3). Psychology Press.

Nuccio, M., & Ponzini, D. (2017). What does a cultural district actually do? Critically reappraising 15 years of cultural district policy in Italy. European Urban and Regional Studies, 24(4), 405-424. Oktay, D. (2002). The quest for urban identity in the changing context of the city: Northern Cyprus. Cities, 19(4), 261-271. Rogerson, R. J., & Giddings, B. (2020). The future of the city centre: Urbanisation, transformation and resilience–a tale of two Newcastle cities. Urban Studies, 0042098020936498.

Tang, L. (2020). Shenzhen’s International City Image: “Expert Opinions” From Outside the Region and “Popular Perception“. Journal of Shenzhen University (Humanities & Social Sciences), 37(2), 41-49. Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art and custom (Vol. 2). J. Murray. Zou, B. P. (2013). Research on the Humanistic Design About the Outer Space of Cultural Centre Area (Master’s thesis, South China University of Technology). Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.