DETERMINED TO FAIL
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
DETERMINED TO FAIL The Rise of Neoliberal Determinism
The London School of Architecture, June 2019 3238 Words
This paper began with an observation: a rise in seemingly unpleasant design strategies in the public spaces around our cities. These deterministic ploys aim to exclude the already marginalised members of our society; but studying them reveals a much greater truth about the neoliberal systems that manage our modern western civilisation. The systems have been exploited, and ultimately remove creative control from architects and planners, placing it instead in the hands of those who’s main motivation is the creation of capital. This demand has not only led to the privatisation of democratic public spaces in cities around the western world but, has also contributed to the sterilisation of our streets. So, what can we do in the face of such hostility, and how can the social life of the public realm be preserved for all?
1
Manifesto
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
WHAT (is the issue)? With more than half the world’s populations now living in cities (a figure that is expected to rise to more than two thirds by 2050)1, it stands to reason that architects and town planners must employ a variety of different measures in order to facilitate the populations that reside in these increasingly densified areas. In the most basic terms we are coerced, penned in and directed through the city with a series of barriers, signs and subtly deterministic ploys. Many of these are installed for reasons of safety – railings stop pedestrians from walking into the streets, while sleeping policemen slow cars to a safer speed in residential areas. Alex Andreou noted, “The architecture of our cities is a powerful guide to behaviour, both directly and in its symbolism.”2 While the latter can be clearly seen in our financial districts where money, ambition, and the desire for power created the skyscraper,3 we can find more subtle hints about our society’s priorities by studying the public spaces within our cities.
strategies that appear to target specific behavioural trends, thereby singling out and impacting subgroups at the fringes of society. Defensive design is everywhere once one knows what to look for: protrusions known as pig ears adorn public seating, stopping skateboarders from practicing their sport; concrete spikes are laid beneath sheltered windows making it impossible for someone to sleep there. As Selena Savić puts it, defensive design “aims to exclude already marginalised populations such as youths or the homeless.”5 These designs are subtle since the public realm is often designed in such a way as to appear inviting to all, however for those who are specifically targeted the message is clear: “you are not a member of the public, at least not of the public that is welcome here.”6 The designs are also hostile since they are non-negotiable. “If you have a policeman prohibiting people to sit somewhere, you can still fight with this policeman, or argue with him, you can do things. When you have a bench that has armour, you can’t really as a human do anything about it.”7
Marmot stated that “designers often aspire to do more than simply create buildings that are new, functional and attractive— they promise that a new environment will change behaviours and attitudes.”4 While it is true that design can influence behaviour, the outcomes are not always positive. In the last decade or so there has been a worrying rise in defensive architecture; that is, design
The insidious march of defensive designs has slowly swept through our public places. It is rarely obvious enough to spark outrage, however the unintended consequences can be far reaching: if a slanted bus shelter
2
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Figure 01: Concrete paving outside the LSA designed to deter rough sleepers
3
Manifesto
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
Figure 02 and 03 (top): Benches by Granary Square and an attempt to misuse them Figure 04 (bottom): ‘Pig Ears’ outside Kings Cross designed to deter skateboarders
4
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
bench is designed to stop youths from loitering for extended periods of time, it may also be unusable for an elderly person having a dizzy spell. This raises an interesting morality question about intent: features of a design might lead to certain behaviours being influenced, but if this is not being done deliberately, should it count as ‘Design with Intent’ or not?8 Regardless of the answer, the results are the same. As Andreou observes, “by making our environment more hostile, we become more hostile within it.” 9 As our streets become symbolically safer, they become cold and austere, devoid of character.10
in enabling us to highlight the true intent behind the control of public spaces and has helped to shed light on a key driving force behind the Pops within our cities.
Veryard identified the POSIWID principle (standing for ‘the purpose of a system is what it does’) as a guide for investigation and interpretation of any complex system. “If a complex system produces a given outcome, or if a given outcome emerges from a complex system, then we may assume some purpose linked to this outcome… ...Ignore the official purpose of the system, ignore what the designers and custodians of a system say, and concentrate on its actual behaviour.”13 This idea is useful
recognises that this type of development is not inevitable: “it’s a very Atlanticist model, seen primarily in North America and here, and not so much in Europe, and it involves local government and the private sector working together in such a way that it is really undermining our democratic rights over the city.”16
The issue of defensive architecture is therefore more sinister than accidental or misdirected town planning. By using the POSIWID principle, it can be viewed as an overt design strategy, commissioned, funded and installed with the sole purpose of penalising the poor.14 However, this explanation does not explain the root cause of the issues that lead to this outcome. According to Tosi, this ‘penalisation of poverty’, most prevalent in America, is Defensive design, most prevalent in publicly being internationalised via a network owned public spaces (Pops for short), is of neoliberal policy think tanks “(the ethically problematic since it makes no Manhattan Institute in the US, the Institute attempt to resolve any of the underlying of Economic Affairs in the UK and their issues pertaining to homelessness and equivalents in Sweden, Holland, Belgium, antisocial behaviour. It simply removes Spain, Italy, Germany and France).”15 these already persecuted groups from the As Anna Minton puts it, “the architecture public eye. 11 This ‘vernacular of terror’ of any period, including the production of serves only to remove the offending space, reflects the socioeconomic forces of characters from our sights and minds. 12 that period and in that respect the growth Troubling though this is, defensive design is in pseudo-public spaces is a reflection of simply the façade covering an uglier truth. the neoliberal city.” In contrast to Tosi, she
So what are the mechanisms which allow such trends to continue, and what measures, if any, can we as designers take against defensive design?
5
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
WHAT (is the cause)? Neoliberalism is defined as ‘a modified form of liberalism tending to favour free-market capitalism.’17 At the core of neoliberal ideology lies the belief in a superior understanding of human nature and economics. This apparent advantage would seem to give Neoliberalists the insights needed to use government mechanisms to create a better world for ‘the people’. However, as Gilbert describes the neoliberal ideology, “the only real way to maximise human flourishing is to maximise the profits of capitalists.18
through the use of defensive design. This defensive design is a kind of Neoliberal determinism: instead of architects or town planners having the decisive hand in human behaviour, large corporations driven by economic ambition hold the power. The rise in defensive design “reveals how corporate hygiene has overridden human considerations. It is a symptom of the clash of private and public, of necessity and property.” 20 It seems no coincidence that the increase in Pops, rising house prices, and continued austerity are all happening simultaneously.
This statement presents an issue: if human flourishing can only be achieved through the promotion of capitalism, then it is profit margins and not social considerations which have the defining hand in the design of our cities. As Schumacher put it, “we might presume the land use allocation and thus the programmatic dimensions of the urban and architectural order is to be determined by architecture’s private clients.”19
The potential for this seeming coldness in the public realm is shown starkly in the new Hudson Yards development in Manhattan. As Alexandra Lange explains: “The problem of the design of Hudson Yards… …is that there is no contrast. No weirdness, no wildness, nothing off book. The megaproject was built by an all-star team of designers, but in the end, it’s impossible to tell the difference between the corporate and the artistic.” Even the art, she says, ‘is as hard and shiny as the architecture.’21 She argues that this was the inevitable outcome of allowing a private developer to make an entire neighbourhood – in the world of corporate profitability, there’s no room for weirdness or risk taking.
This desire to play up to the capitalist markets hands over control of previously social and largely unregulated public spaces to large corporations. Once ownership of these areas is secured, the private companies can do as they wish. The presence of ‘undesirables’ (homeless and youths) is seen as bad for business and as a result, they are removed from the public eye
Hudson Yard was designed at a high level to appeal to the masses, and like so many
6
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Figure 05: Lady Justice weeps as profit margins outweigh social consideration in the design of public space
7
Manifesto
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Pops around the world, actively discourages already marginalised members of society from entering. A neoliberalist might suggest that a proportionally insignificant group is not worth designing for, and so long as the general population is happy, then there is no problem. However, it might also be argued that inclusive participatory design can lead to more social public places. Whyte noted this when examining the effects of plazas designed for handicapped use: “If circulation and amenities are planned with them in mind, the place is apt to function more easily for everyone. Drinking fountains that are low enough for wheelchair users are low enough for children. Pedestrian paths that are made
Manifesto
easier for the handicapped by ramps, handrails, and steps for gentle pitch are easier for all.”22 Clearly neoliberal ideology has a strong influence on the way our cities are being built and controlled, but even this can be problematic. Philip Mirowski states that, “Neoliberalism as a world view has sunk its roots deep into everyday life, almost to the point of passing as the ‘ideology of no ideology”23 If true, this presents a worrying problem: since neoliberalism is so allpervasive, the impacts of it can be difficult to spot, and even harder quantitively to attribute to a root cause. It suggests an unknowing compliance from the general population, and an unwillingness to
Figure 06: ‘The Vessel’, Hudson Yard. Photo by Justin Lane/ EPA, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/ commentisfree/2019/mar/15/hudson-yards-new-york-city-private-public-development
8
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
search for any other truth than that which it presents to us: “Just as neoliberalism demands individuals submit to the superior organizational capacities of the market, they must submit to the efficiencies of the autopoietic system, and to their role in contributing positively to this.”24 This leaves little room for those occupying the fringe zones who are not caught up in this unwitting rule-paying.
Manifesto
users come to the site, that’s part of the selling point.”27 Indeed, the development has been a huge success for the majority of the population, attracting a diverse range of people including many families who come to play in the fountains. Matthew Carmona, Architect and tutor at the Bartlett, argues that Pops are as old as London itself. The problem, he says, lies not in their existence, but in the way that they are managed and the autonomy they are afforded after construction: “if we wish to ensure that all public spaces are as “good” and as “public” as we would desire, the planning process is key. We must act early in the development process, before huge developments are given the green light.” 28
When the Guardian interviewed an unidentified homeless man near Granary Square, King’s Cross, he said, “To the ordinary person, there’s no distinction between here, and there,” pointing first at a public pavement by the taxi rank, and then at a privately owned road that leads north towards Granary Square. “To me, the difference is everything, because I’m not the sort of person they want over there.”25
Clearly then, the issue lies not in the existence of such spaces, but in the way that they are managed and the design strategies utilised within. Perhaps Naomi Klein has a point after all. Where we used to have public land where people could relate to one another as non-consumers and as citizens, we now have areas where the only way to socialise is to spend money. Richard Whyte defined “triangulation” as a necessary quality. Triangulation was the mutual act of looking at something—a performer, an artwork, a foundation—that allowed strangers to speak to each other.29 In today’s spaces, those free experiences have largely been replaced by food and drink, and if you cannot afford to sit at the table, you are not welcome.
So the leap from neoliberalism to the control of our cities through defensive design methods becomes clearer. It is important at this point to consider the nature of Pops. While author and activist Naomi Klein agreed with Anna Minton’s view, labelling them a threat to our democracy,26 there are many who feel that privately owned and managed public spaces are not inherently immoral. Julia Finlayson, project director of public realm at Argent, who manages the public realm design at King’s Cross explained the thinking behind the Granary Square redevelopment: “It wouldn’t be successful if access were restricted. Retail and food and beverage operators rely on footfall. Residential and office tenants like to be in a vibrant location; that’s one of the reasons office
9
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
WHY (are we complicit with it)? So far, we have looked at the negative social impacts that this ‘neoliberal determinism’ can cause, and identified the mechanisms that govern and control our public spaces. However, behind many new developments within the city lies an architect or a town planner. So why is it that socially conscious and liberally educated architects and planners take part in socially degrading design practices such as defensive architecture.
One disappointing explanation lies in the fact that architects may simply not be aware that they are contributing to the spread of hostility. Defensive designs will be framed within a brief as pro-social: ‘design against crime, or ‘crime prevention through environmental design’.30 As reasonable as this may sound, it suggests a lack of critical thinking on the part of the architect, a notion most would be keen to disassociate themselves from.
Figure 07: The growing number of Pops in London. Interactive map and more information available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/jul/24/pseudo-public-space-explore-data-what-missing>
10
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
present ourselves as omnipotent, in control, and pulling the strings on any given project, letting the client know what can and can’t be done. The profession is something of a social construct, largely self-defined and self-perpetuating in order to give architects status and the concomitant power. In truth however, the practice of architecture is a more nebulous affair.34
A more realistic factor is economical: “the value we bring to our clients is measurable in many ways, but always looking for social benefits will not pay the bills”31 This is the reality for many architects: pro social designs and ‘forward thinking’ alone cannot and does not make for profitable business. Furthermore, if Schumacher is to be believed, architects have little say in the design considerations of public places to begin with, and therefore even the most progressive thinkers are hindered from the beginning.
The lack of autonomy is perhaps one of the problems that has contributed to the rise of defensive designs and the sterilisation of our social spaces to the benefit of large faceless corporations. Even if autonomy were achievable, defensive designs might still be a part of modern life. In order for any real deviation from the script to occur, architectural industry leaders must pave the way. Unfortunately, this may not happen for some time: as ‘Doric’ puts it, “The top of architecture is occupied mainly by partpsychopathic men who are out to win for themselves.” 35
Even the notion of architects as progressive thinkers is problematic. If we can take issue with the ideologies (hidden as they are) of Neoliberalism, then we should do the same for the architectural profession. “Just as Neoliberalism presents itself as a series of propositions in the pursuit of liberty, architecture presents itself as progressive. This is the truth game of architecture”32 Perhaps, as a profession, we are not as progressive as we like to believe. After all, we operate in a society that is so intertwined with neoliberal capitalism that it would require a major global revolution to dismantle the big corporations.33
So if we as architects lack autonomy, and the few who do have the power to affect change have a tendency to the psychopathic, where does that leave the profession and what does it mean for the social life of our streets?
The impression that architects like to give is one of single-minded brilliance – we like to
11
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
HOW (can we move forward)? 1. Education The first step lies in public awareness and education on the matter of defensive design: artists such as Nils Norman36, and Sarah Ross37 have been doing great work to highlight the ridiculous measures that manufacturers will go to in order to make street furniture uncomfortable. As these matters are brought further to the forefront of the public psyche, the hope is that negative public opinion may lead to positive change in the future.
Clearly, neoliberalism has become deeply intertwined with the creation of new areas within our cities, almost to the point where the two cannot be separated. However, this does not mean that steps cannot be taken to identify negative instances of neoliberal determinism and work towards a more inclusive future.
Figure 08 and 09: Archisuits, Sarah Ross, wearable suits to combat defensive design strategies, available at: https://www.insecurespaces.net/archisuits.html
12
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
2. Policy
3. Ethics
Secondly, a change must be made to planning policy. Ultimately the ownership and management of a public space makes little difference in the day to day life of an average law abiding citizen, so long as basic rights are safeguarded. But long-term management issues are currently not given much consideration. Carmona suggests the adoption of a Charter of Public Space Rights and Responsibilities. “Such a charter would apply to all spaces, both existing and still to be built, that a reasonable person would regard as public, whether privately or publicly owned.”38 The critical point here is to establish a permanent and consistent ruling across any new development which would intervene when planning permission was given, and would promote and preserve basic human rights as dictaed by UK law.
Thirdly comes the responsibility of the architect to uphold pro-social design practices. This is the crux of the matter: architecture and design will inevitably change behaviours. Ethically, therefore, it is incumbent on us to consider the impact of design decisions and try to achieve a ‘good’ outcome (by whatever standards are applicable). John Rawl and the veil of ignorance offer a useful tool to architects and designers moving forward, eg ‘the golden rule’: “the creators of a persuasive technology should never seek to persuade a person or persons of something they themselves would not consent to be persuaded to do.”39 The current system has no room for empathy, so we must make room. As a profession we have a moral duty, as outlined in the RIBA code of conduct, to “promote stronger communities and improve equality, diversity and inclusion in the built environment.”40 This is a quality that appears to have been lost in the design of many of our public spaces, and this is the change that must occur in order for the social life of our cities to survive.
13
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
References 1 United Nations, ‘68% of the world population projected to live in urban areas by 2050, says UN’, United Nations (16 May 2018) Available at: <https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-ofworld-urbanization-prospects.html> [Accessed February 2019] 2 Alex Androu, ‘Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty’, The Guardian (18 February 2015) Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/18/defensive-architecturekeeps-poverty-undeen-and-makes-us-more-hostile> [Accessed: February 2019] 3 Atanas Slavov, The “Thaw” in Bulgarian Literature (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), pg. 124. 4 Alexi Marmot, (2002) ‘Architectural determinism. Does design change behaviour?’ British Journal of General Practice, 52 (476), p. 252–253 5 BBC, ‘Secret City Design Tricks Manipulate Your Behaviour’, BBC (02 December 2013) Available at: <http:// www.bbc.com/future/story/20131202-dirty-tricks-of-city-design> [accessed March 2019] 6 Alex Androu, ‘Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty’ 7 BBC, ‘Secret City Design Tricks Manipulate Your Behaviour’, 8 Daniel Lockton, (2012), `Posiwid and Determinism in Design for Behaviour Change’, working paper, available at <http://danlockton.co.uk> [accessed May 2019] 9 Alex Androu, ‘Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty’ 10 June M. Campbell writes here on the subject of homelessness: “The streets represent a reality that cannot be hidden. Here, enactments take place involving us all, as we are drawn into witnessing not only society’s inadequacies in dealing with homelessness, but also it’s ambivalence and downright hostility to homeless people.” The sterilisation of our streets appears to go far beyond aesthetics... ‘Psychoanalytic Thinking on the Unhoused Mind’, Chapter 4: Homelessness and containment (Oxon: Routledge 2019) pg.57 11 The homeless are 17 times more likely to be the victims of violent crime than the general population. Dawn Foster, ‘Crisis report reveals shocking dangers of being homeless’, The Guardian (23 December 2016)Source available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/dec/23/homeless-crisis-report-attack-violencesleeping-rough> [accessed March 2019] 12 Nils Norman, ‘Archives’, Dismal Garden, available at: <http://www.dismalgarden.com/archives/defensive_ architecture> [accessed January 2019] 13 Richard Veryard, (2003-12). ‘Exploring the purpose of things: Approach’, available at <http://posiwid.blogspot.co.uk/p/approach.html> [Accessed March 2019] 14 “It takes real work to create a lousy place. Ledges have to be made high and bulky; railings put in; surfaces canted. Money can be saved by not doing such things, and the open space is more likely to be an amenable one.” William Hollingsworth H Whyte and The Conservation Foundation, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, page 29. 15 Antonio Tosi, ‘Homelessness and the control of public space, Think Piece for the European Observatory on Homelessnes’s, ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030-3106 online, 200, available at: <https://www.feantsaresearch.org/download/ ejh_vol1_thinkpiece32065047816907975993.pdf> [accessed April 2019] 16 Chris Michael, ‘Revealed: the insidious creep of pseudo-public space in London’, The Guardian (24 July 2017) available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/jul/24/revealed-pseudo-public-space-pops-london-investigationmap> [accessed May2019] 17 Google Dictionary, [accessed May 2019] 18 Jeremy Gilbert, ‘Neoliberalism’ and ‘Capitalism’ – what’s the difference?’, Jeremy Gilbert Writing (14 July 2015), available at: <https://jeremygilbertwriting.wordpress.com/2015/07/14/neoliberalism-and-capitalism-whats-the-difference/> [Accessed March 2019]
14
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
References 19 Patrick Schumacher, ‘Free Market Urbanism – Urbanism beyond Planning’, in Masterplanning the Adaptive City – Computational Urbanism in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Tom Verebes (Abingdon, Oxford and New York: Routledge, 2013) p. 120. 20 Alex Androu, ‘Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty’, The Guardian (18 February 2015) Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/18/defensive-architecturekeeps-poverty-undeen-and-makes-us-more-hostile> [Accessed: February 2019] 21 Alexandra Lange, ‘At Hudson Yards, the future isn’t now’, Curbed New York (15 March 2019) available at: <https://ny.curbed.com/2019/3/15/18256293/hudson-yards-nyc-buildings-vessel-architecture> [accessed April 2019] 22 William Hollingsworth H Whyte and The Conservation Foundation, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, 4th edn (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1980), p. 33. 23 Philip Mirowski, Never let a serious crisis go to waste: how neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown, pg 28 24 Douglas Spencer, The Architecture of Neoliberalism, page 118 25 Chris Michael, ‘Revealed: the insidious creep of pseudo-public space in London’ 26 Naomi Klein, speaking in ‘No Logo Documentary HD Channel Official’, available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZpnZ6s6NWM&t=1273s> 27 Clare Dowdy, ‘Privately owned public space: does it matter who owns it?’, RICS (25 February 2019) available at: <https://www.rics.org/uk/news-insight/future-of-surveying/intelligent-cities/privately-owned-public-space-does-itmatter-who-owns-it> [accessed April 2019] 28 Mathew Carmona, ‘Privatised public spaces can breathe new life into cities’, The Conversation (18 December 2013) available at: <http://theconversation.com/privatised-public-spaces-can-breathe-new-life-into-cities-20976> [accessed March 2019] 29 Whyte quoted in: A Lange, “At Hudson Yards, the future isn’t now”, Curbed New York (15 March 2019) available at: <https://ny.curbed.com/2019/3/15/18256293/hudson-yards-nyc-buildings-vessel-architecture> [accessed April 2019] 30 Dan Lockton, interview with Selena Savic, Unpleasant Design, 2013, pg 159 31 ‘Doric’, A Gendered Profession, Chapter 4 ‘Why Men Leave Architecture’, p. 49 32 Douglas Spencer, The Architecture of Neoliberalism, page 4 33 Timothy Morton, Being Ecological, pg. 17 34 Jeremy Till, Architecture Depends, pg. 18 35 ‘Doric’, p. 49 36 Nils Norman, ‘Archives’, Dismal Garden, available at: <http://www.dismalgarden.com/archives/defensive_ architecture> [accessed January 2019]. 37 Sarah Ross, ‘Archi Suits’, Insecure Spaces’ (2015) available at: <https://www.insecurespaces.net/archisuits. html> [accessed February 2019] 38 Clare Dowdy, ‘Privately owned public space: does it matter who owns it?’39 Berdichevsky, D. & Neuenschwander, E. (1999). ‘Toward an Ethics of Persuasive Technology’. Communications of the ACM 42, pg. 52 40 RIBA, ‘RIBA: Code of Professional Conduct, (1 May 2019) available at: < https://www.architecture.com/-/ media/gathercontent/work-with-us/additional-documents/code-of-professional-conduct--may-2019pdf.pdf> [accessed May 2019]
15
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
Bibliography Androu, A. ‘Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty’, The Guardian (18 February 2015) Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/18/defensive-architecture-keeps-povertyundeen-and-makes-us-more-hostile> [Accessed: February 2019] BBC, ‘Secret City Design Tricks Manipulate Your Behaviour’, BBC (02 December 2013) Available at: <http://www.bbc. com/future/story/20131202-dirty-tricks-of-city-design> [accessed March 2019] Berdichevsky, D. & Neuenschwander, E. (1999). ‘Toward an Ethics of Persuasive Technology’. Communications of the ACM 42, pg. 52 Campbell, J.M. ‘Psychoanalytic Thinking on the Unhoused Mind’, Chapter 4: Homelessness and containment, 1st edn (Oxon: Routledge 2019) pg.57 Carmona, M. ‘Privatised public spaces can breathe new life into cities’, The Conversation (18 December 2013) available at: <http://theconversation.com/privatised-public-spaces-can-breathe-new-life-into-cities-20976> [accessed March 2019] Dowdy, C. ‘Privately owned public space: does it matter who owns it?’, RICS (25 February 2019) available at: <https:// www.rics.org/uk/news-insight/future-of-surveying/intelligent-cities/privately-owned-public-space-does-it-matter-whoowns-it> [accessed April 2019] ‘Doric’, A Gendered Profession, Chapter 4 ‘Why Men Leave Architecture’, p. 49 Foster, D. ‘Crisis report reveals shocking dangers of being homeless’, The Guardian (23 December 2016)Source available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/dec/23/homeless-crisis-report-attack-violence-sleepingrough> [accessed March 2019] Gilbert, J. ‘Neoliberalism’ and ‘Capitalism’ – what’s the difference?’, Jeremy Gilbert Writing (14 July 2015), available at: <https://jeremygilbertwriting.wordpress.com/2015/07/14/neoliberalism-and-capitalism-whats-the-difference/> [Accessed March 2019] Klein, N. speaking in ‘No Logo Documentary HD Channel Official’, available at: <https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=6ZpnZ6s6NWM&t=1273s> Klein, N. ‘No Logo’, (10th anniversary ed.). Fourth Estate. ISBN 978-0-00-734077-4. Lange, A. ‘At Hudson Yards, the future isn’t now’, Curbed New York (15 March 2019) available at: <https://ny.curbed. com/2019/3/15/18256293/hudson-yards-nyc-buildings-vessel-architecture> [accessed April 2019] Lockton, D. interview with Selena Savic, Unpleasant Design, 2013, pg 159 Lockton, D. (2012), `Posiwid and Determinism in Design for Behaviour Change’, working paper, available at <http://danlockton.co.uk> [accessed May 2019]
16
Ivo Pery
Critical Practice
Manifesto
Bibliography Marmot, A. (2002) ‘Architectural determinism. Does design change behaviour?’ British Journal of General Practice, 52 (476), p. 252–253 Michael, C. ‘Revealed: the insidious creep of pseudo-public space in London’, The Guardian (24 July 2017) available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/jul/24/revealed-pseudo-public-space-pops-london-investigation-map> [accessed May2019] Mirowski, P. Never let a serious crisis go to waste: how neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown, pg 28 Morton, T. Being Ecological, pg. 17 Norman, N. ‘Archives’, Dismal Garden, available at: <http://www.dismalgarden.com/archives/defensive_architecture> [accessed January 2019] RIBA, ‘RIBA: Code of Professional Conduct, (1 May 2019) available at: < https://www.architecture.com/-/media/ gathercontent/work-with-us/additional-documents/code-of-professional-conduct--may-2019pdf.pdf> [accessed May 2019] Ross, S. ‘Archi Suits’, Insecure Spaces’ (2015) available at: <https://www.insecurespaces.net/archisuits.html> [accessed February 2019] Schumacher, P. ‘Free Market Urbanism – Urbanism beyond Planning’, in Masterplanning the Adaptive City – Computational Urbanism in the Twenty-First Century, ed. Tom Verebes (Abingdon, Oxford and New York: Routledge, 2013) p. 120. Spencer, D. The Architecture of Neoliberalism, page 49, 118 Slavov, A. The “Thaw” in Bulgarian Literature (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), pg. 124. Till, J. Architecture Depends, pg. 18 Tosi, A. ‘Homelessness and the control of public space, Think Piece for the European Observatory on Homelessnes’s, ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030-3106 online, 200, available at: <https://www.feantsaresearch.org/download/ejh_vol1_ thinkpiece32065047816907975993.pdf> [accessed April 2019] United Nations, ‘68% of the world population projected to live in urban areas by 2050, says UN’, United Nations (16 May 2018) Available at: <https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanizationprospects.html> [Accessed February 2019] Veryard, R. (2003-12). ‘Exploring the purpose of things: Approach’, available at <http://posiwid.blogspot.co.uk/p/approach.html> [Accessed March 2019] Whyte, W. H. H. ‘The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces’, 4th edn (Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation, 1980).
17