The transition from socialism to capitalism

“(Social) space is a (social) product”

(Lefebvre, 1974)

Public space is highly dependent on the society or social formation within which it is located (Castells, 1977). Consequently, shifts from one socioeconomic system to another strongly influence the creation and further transformation of public spaces that are already in use. A number of scholars (Zukin, 1995), (Harvey, 1990), (Soja, 1989) have addressed the consequences of the shift to a neo-liberal economy, or hyper-capitalism (Piven, 2007), for urban space from the Western or Eurocentric perspective. In the West, the shift to a neoliberal economy resulted in a change in the methods of production in urban areas. Large scale industries have been replaced with small-scale production, characterised by clean and advanced technology. For economic reasons, heavy industry was moved to Third World countries, leaving behind vacant lots in strategic positions within the urban fabric. Production sites have been transformed into consumption sites: shopping malls, entertainment parks or high-density housing (such as Docklands in London, or HafenCity in Hamburg). Lefebvre critically assessed the measurement and control of space as a specific expression of the capitalist method of production, which results in abstract and fragmented spaces, highly developed exploitation, and carefully monitored passivity (Lefebvre, 2003). In the Western world, the shift to neo-liberalism coincided with a transition from the modernist to postmodernist conception of space. This change was visible in the city’s architectural styles, functional distribution, and scale. To summarise the complex subject of postmodern urbanism: large-scale modernist master planning was substituted with small-scale,

fragmented urban developments, and deindustrialisation was followed by aesthetic incoherence, commercialisation and the proliferation of exclusive, private interests (Dear, 2000), (Ellin, 1996).

The transition of socio-economic and political systems was far more complex in Central-East European countries, where it occurred in several layers: cultural, economic, institutional, political and social. The market oriented economy brought extreme privatisation and appropriation processes, and resulted in new forms of economic exclusion and social segregation. In most post-socialist countries, public space was poorly protected by city authorities from the dominant private/corporate interests that emerged from the transition. Inherent civic expectations of the state’s responsibilities rather than personal initiatives led to an almost complete decline of the public realm. According to Zhelnina, everyone’s space became no-one’s space (Zhelnina, 2013). Following Banerjee’s theory that socialist urban form is the archetype of modernity (Banerjee, 2004), and pursuing Hirt’s argument that post-socialist cities provide vivid examples of the rupture between the modern and the postmodern (Hirt, 2008), we can conclude that post-socialist cities exhibit all the effects of the modern/postmodern transition, further amplified by the socialist/post-socialist shift. Most Central and East-European countries, however, managed to overcome these transitional difficulties by the early 2000s, and enter the post-transitional stage of development.

Sarajevo, along with other urban areas in former Yugoslavia to some extent, deviate from the typical socialist-post-socialist transitional model. As mentioned previously, Yugoslavia wasn’t a typical Eastern Bloc country. After the Tito-Stalin split and Tito’s further disloyalty to the USSR in 1948, Yugoslavia was considered a buffer between the Eastern and Western Blocs (Zagora & Samic, 2014). The reforms that followed led to a further opening to the West, which resulted in an economic system with both capitalist and socialist characteristics. As elaborated

in Chapter II, this condition of geo-political in-betweenness has been a characteristic of the region from antiquity: on the threshold of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires, of Christianity and Islam, of the Ottomans and the Habsburgs, and of socialism and capitalism. The resulting phenomenon is often referred to as a kaleidoscopic culture (Kulic, 2018) – a blend of cultures, ethnicities, religions, and traditions, brought together under the slogan of “brotherhood and unity”. Consequently, all the manifestations of vernacular and ethnic/traditional architecture were replaced by neutral modernist architecture, or Yugoslav architecture – a specific combination of socialist realism and international style (Štraus, 1991). This architecture was not derived from a specific cultural heritage; on the contrary, it expressed universal, international values promoting Yugoslavia as an open country, distinct from other communist countries. These peculiarities were reflected in its urban planning and development. Modernist city planning was fully embraced to accommodate the influx of the rural population into urban areas. The cities reflected both socialist and CIAM42 urban planning principles: the rigid segregation of functional zones; the predominance of production over consumption; the monumental scale of public projects; the planning of urban spaces not constrained by the land market; functionalism and uniformity as the proper aesthetic medium of progress and equality (Scott, 1998); and formal geometric simplicity and standardisation. “The public spaces, created at that time, were reflecting the socialist ideals of dominance of production over consumption; the dominance of the collective over the private and the individual; and the dominance of order and discipline over diversity and marginality (Banerjee, 2004).

The transition from socialist to capitalist systems in Bosnia was anything but gradual; first it was blocked by the tragic conflict and its consequences in the 1990s, and then it was suppressed and prolonged until the early

Figure 44. Morii Canal in Reghin before and after the urban transformation.

2000s due to the resulting political and economic instability. As elaborated in Chapter I, despite the rise of city commerce and services, foreign investments and tourism, and spatial politics and planning methods, 24 years after the war Sarajevo is drifting in transitional limbo. The city’s public spaces still mirror an aversion to and neglect of common values. This has led to fragmentation, through the dominance of private interests over public ones, transiency in terms of function and management, and an overall social, cultural and environmental imbalance. Examples of successful urban transformations of the socialist public space are rare, and hard to find.

Conversely, other former socialist countries with a more fortunate recent history are bursting with successful transformations. The urban transformation of the Moirii Canal in the city of Reghin, Romania illustrates the socio-economic transition from socialist to contemporary eras, and its consequences for a specific public space (Table 5).

Similarly to Sarajevo and many other post-socialist cities, 1990s Reghin had a discernible aversion to public spaces, and a dominance of private vehicles over pedestrian areas. This was clearly visible along the banks of the Morii Canal, a channel of the Mures River, which belonged to the town council. But public ownership does not produce public space by default. First, the channel was blocked by massive concrete walls as flood protection. Later, the council granted temporary construction permits for private garages, kiosks and storage units along both riverbanks, covering an area of 6000 m2. Consequently, the water became invisible to passersby, and the neighbourhood was denied any recreational and communal

spaces.

In 2010, a group of local architects began an initiative to restore the waterfront, and remove the physical obstacles between the water and the neighbourhood. At this point it is useful to follow the course of implementation and decision-making in light of its collaborative approach to urban planning and bottom-up initiatives. The architects acted as a proactive intermediary agent between the local community and the town council. The initiative was first presented to local residents and businesses through a series of postcards that illustrated Morii Canal after its transformation into a community space. This presentation of the idea made people aware of the possibilities the area offered them in terms of environmental and social wellbeing. Driven by an expression of community interest, the municipal actors expanded the idea, and the city invested over half a million euros into the transformation of the riverfront area (Figure 44). The temporary buildings were demolished,

Figure 45. Morii Canal in Reghin after the urban transformation.

re-establishing visual contact with the water. Two pedestrian walkways connected with foot bridges were introduced along the riverbanks, along with urban furniture, a children’s playground and sport and recreation areas (Figure 45). Instead of passively waiting for institutional actors to take responsibility for public spaces, as is the case in many post-socialist countries, in this example private and public layers were equally involved in the transformational process.

The individual initiative acted as a catalyst to raise the awareness of both the local community and city authorities of the potential of the neglected river. The lessons learnt from the Morii Canal case study (Table 5) would be valuable in an analysis of neglected modernist intra-block communal

spaces in Sarajevo, such as those in the neighbourhoods of Grbavica, Hrasno, Cengic Vila and Otoka, as well as in Alipasino Polje and Dobrinja.

Table 5. Analysis of the socio-spatial attributes of the Morii canal site prior and post transformation. Source: Authors

ATTRIBUTES SOCIALIST CONTEXT POST-SOCIALIST CONTEXT

1. TYPOLOGY TRANSPORTATION UNDEFINED COMMUNAL GREEN

2. SCALE MEDIUM MEDIUM

3. ENCLOSURE ENCLOSED OPEN

4. URBAN ACTIVITY PASSIVE ACTIVE

5. ACCESSIBILITY CONDITIONALLY ACCESSIBLE ACCESSIBLE

6. URBAN ATMOSPHERE INTROVERTED EXTROVERTED