CUT - Contemporary Urban Theory 2014 - Umbrella Urbanism by Contemporary Urban Theory

CUT Contemporary Urban Theory 2014

Preface

This is the second issue of the student magazine CUT. The essays are the result of the course named Contemporary Urban Theory, given within the master program Sustainable Urban Planning and Design at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm. This year we have explored three different themes within urban theory: Spatial justice, Utopian urbanism and Responses to decline in cities. Within each theme of choice the students have read a book and were given the assignment to apply and discuss the book in relation to other literature and a specific urban phenomenon or situation. This magazine is a compilation of the students’ essays, representing diverse perspectives and experiences reflecting the students’ backgrounds in different academic disciplines and from different cities of the world. Hence, the conversations in the course have been dynamic and heterogeneous, reflecting a wide scope of perspectives within the field of urban theory. As teachers we have encouraged the students to explore different styles of writing – ranging from the more academic tone to the personal and experimental – with an emphasis on popular scientific writing. The students have found images to accompany their essays or made their own illustrations. We are proud to present this collection of essays, however, would like to emphasize that the opinions expressed in the essays are the authors’ own. An editorial board, consisting of five students, has been responsible for compiling the essays, making the cover illustrations and the overall theme of the magazine. We hope that this magazine will give you a glimpse of what is, and will be, at stake for urban planners and designers in the coming decades. Karin Bradley, Anna Hult, Ryan Locke and Nazem Tahvilzadeh Teachers and researchers at the Division of Urban and Regional Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, 29 December 2014

Umbrella Urbanism

Most often an umbrella is a source of protection from the elements, but it could also serve as protection from another person or group. However, how an umbrella is used or understood will always be contextual and embedded within ones own reality. Some may never see an umbrella for more than what its designed purpose was in the first place, but others may see it increasingly as a symbol of injustice and power, or alternatively as a symbol of safety and inclusion. This past year protesters in Hong Kong took the umbrella as their symbol to protest growing injustices and inequities within their society. Here the umbrella was not only used as a tool for protection from pepper spray and the heat, but it also came to become a symbol of solidarity and a unification of ideologies. In a sense this group all came to fit under one umbrella, united and protected against forces that were aiming to instill unwanted democratic reforms. Cities also share in similar threats and constraints that at times require a collective provision of protection against forces that can often be beyond their own control. Forces may take the umbrella into unwanted directions. Similarly, the city is affected by invisible forces that shape the social life and urban form. Negative spirals of inequalities and economic decline may blow the umbrella along dark paths that few wish to take. And so new ideas of what the city should be like quickly emerge and continue the process of change and conflict. With this perspective in mind, we also take the umbrella as an appropriate symbol to represent the need for new ways of collective protection from forces beyond our own control. Cities need a broader social understanding as to why and how our cities react and deal with contemporary social and economic impacts on our societies. This magazine investigates, discusses and criticizes contemporary cities and urban design. The articles try to depart from the established ways in which cities are run, cutting out of the system as we know it today. The magazine is divided in three themes; spatial justice, responses to decline in cities and utopian urbanism. Cinthia Stecchini, Emilie Larsen, Gardiner Hanson, Jiamin Zheng and Xiaohui Wang: The studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; editorial board. Master Students at the Urban Planning and Design Program, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, 7 January 2015

HUMAN & DREAM - UMBRELLA ON THE WAY

Content

Spatial Justice The less fortunate pushed to the edge, unfortunately unable to fit under one umbrella

Response to Decline Fighting against forces pushing the umbrella into unwanted directions

Utopian Urbanism If the umbrella does not fit – try to find a new one

Revolution Will Come They Said, it Will Be Fun They Said… Democracy and its Future in a Neoliberal World Hanna Zetterlund

Producing and Reproducing Urban Inequalities in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside Gardiner Hanson

Guerrilla Urbanism Towards Spatial (in)Justice And now what? Christina Larsson

Park(ing) in Husby Space for Adaptability, Flexibility and Informality Xiaohui Wang

Publicness of Public Space The role of Guerrilla Urbanism in Achieving Publicness Onno de Vries

Remaking Urbanism A Response Strategy for Shrinking Cities Lili Schäfer

Performing on City Stage Shenzhen Fringe as Insurgent Public Space Jiamin Zheng

Self-provision in Diverse Urban Contexts Recognize the Powers of Informality Julia Diringer 7

Life Among Garbage Spatial (in)Justice in Jardim Gramacho Cínthia Stecchini

A Few Strings Attached Control, Public Spaces and Young Women Matilda Karlström 15

Urban Shrinkage in Europe An Analysis of the Policy Stance of the European Union Regarding Urban Shrinkage Josef Gustafsson

Matchmaking Markets in Chinese Public Parks Rick Hoogduyn 65

A (Public) Space to Call Your Own Homelessness and Panhandling in the Contemporary City Johanna Thuresson

Out with the Modern, in with the Authentic James Thoem 69

Can Segregation Be Good? Emilie Larsen 23

Capitalism Didn’t Kill Architecture Nuno Azevedo 73

Spacial Justice The less fortunate pushed to the edge, unfortunately unable to fit under one umbrella

Revolution Will Come They Said, it Will Be Fun They Said... Democracy and its Future in a Neoliberal World Hanna Zetterlund By analyzing the current neoliberal hegemony through the work of Mark Purcell and the eyes of a depressed political activist, this essay discusses the different paths of democracy and the possible future for our economic system. The essay shifts between the academic analysis of different political theories and the private thoughts of an activist who tries to understand where the western economic system is going in the aftermath of the latest economic crises. Using the ideas of Purcell and political theorist Chantal Mouffe the author discusses both radical pluralism as a future direction for our democratic system, and citizen salary as its method of practical implementation. The main aim is to find a democratic way to overthrow the neoliberal hegemony.

Hanna Zetterlund is a human geographer and urban planner. She is currently doing her last year at the international master program at KTH in Stockholm. Questions like spatial justice, politics and the future society engage and interest her, which is reflected in her work.

To see another future Urban design and planning professor Mark Purcell is not an author of small words or narrow visions. “Remember this, we be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them. Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.” (Purcell, 2008 p.1) This is how he preludes his book Recapturing Democracy- neo-liberalization and the struggle for alternative futures, with a quote by Arundhati Roy who spoke at the World Social Forum in 2003. Purcell believes that there is a way to resist the ongoing project to neo-liberalize cities by pursuing a counter project of democratization, and his book is the physical manifestation of that. It is not presenting a clear model, or a list of principles, but rather a set of democratic attitudes that could be interpreted as an emotional stance towards the world and society we live in. What is a political depressed activist supposed to make of all this in the 21th century? How does one even become and activist and survive in a society where the right-wing has tricked the citizens that “There is no alternative” in a Thatcher like manner, and even the left-wing is afraid of presenting another future than the neoliberal. Where and how do you engage, when all you see are participatory projects which only purpose is to have capital make people legitimize exploitation of themselves and their urban environment? “Thank you big boss, I’m so grateful for the opportunity to choose the color of the benches that will be located inside the new mall” You know, there used to be a park there… Purcell’s (2008) main point is that the rhetoric from the cold war; capitalism and democracy versus communism and tyranny, has paved the wave for today’s neo-liberalistic outsourcing of our democratic rights. In order to remain competitive on the global market democratic institutions are seen as obstacles for capital, cities cannot afford to lose out on a good investment just because of some individuals. To change from government to governance, and let private, NGO’s and other actors take over public institutions has increased economic efficiency but decreased transparency and the democratic power of the people. “Seen as a whole, the agenda of neoliberalization is to reduce state spending that does not benefit capital in order to free up revenue for spending that does. More specifically, capital needs the state to pay for things it cannot or does not want to provide for itself” (Purcell, 2008 p.18). Instead of schools that teach children to be critical citizens, we breed a disposal workforce and consumers. Instead of public transport to increase the freedom and mobility of the people, we build for the mobility of capital and labor. Instead of having fair wages and affordable housing we have tax payers finance a social welfare so that capital can keep its high prices. The polarization between the rich and the poor increases step by step every year even if the world is richer than ever, in terms of accumulated wealth. This causes tension in the system, but instead of taking responsibility we make the state

GO OUT AND CHANGE THE WORLD!

HERE I AM READING A BOOK ABOUT IT Hanna Zetterlund through www.imgflip.com/memegenerator. Original image of Aaron Mcgruder, the TV-series The Boondocks, BOONDOCKS © 2005 Adelaide Productions, Inc. All rights reserved (2014).

take care of the undesirable consequences of neo-liberalism, polarization, poverty and crime. What is democracy? They say we should be thankful for living in a democracy, that we have the power to vote for change every 4th year. Why isn’t it changing then? Why is every expression of anger with the current system outside the voting booth counted as a “threat to democracy”? What is the definition of democracy; Rule by the people for the people? But how do we define “Rule”, “by”, “people” and “for”? There are as many different opinions on the actual definition as there are people on earth, and even if we could agree on a definition, would that bring forth the best type of society? Democracy as we know it is called liberal democracy, and its identity is strongly connected to the neoliberal economy. The connection is so strong that they are often thought of as the same thing (Purcell, 2008), thus, excluding all other forms of democracy and economic systems as either impossible or oppressive. Many of the other forms of democracy do not cooperate as easily with the neoliberal principles, and so the connection between neo-liberalism and liberal democracy is a tactic that has lead to a neo-liberal hegemony that for a long time been seen as indestructible. But nothing lasts forever and a shift in the discourse has been identified. Words like “collaborative”, “communicative” and “participation” are becoming more and more common to hear, not only from planners and researchers but also from capital interests. The aim seem to be to climb higher and higher on Arnstein’s ladder of participation (Arnstein, 1969), and to reach the part which has not only a symbolic value but actually gives citizens power over the process. Participatory democracts, which believes in local and direct democracy, sees the partaking in the public sphere and the striving for common good as the ultimate form of self-realization and has traditionally been oppositional to neoliberal practices (Purcell, 2008). Officially, public participation is a big part of the planning process and often emphasized in many projects, however there is a substantial difference between the rhetoric and the practice (Henecke and Khan, 2002). Because of the growing awareness and an increasing demand for more public participation during the last decade (Khakee. 2006), it is mostly agreed among planners today that public participation is something we would benefit from. Since participation is time consuming, and often only engaging very few, other ways of legitimizing different projects has been developed by the ones

demanding efficiency (Healey, 2009). Deliberate democracy is also focusing on the common good, but through logic and argumentation instead of participation, is easier to combine with neo-liberalism and is used to legitimize the system by giving citizens arguments equal weight to the landowners and private interests (Purcell, 2008). For many, the participatory processes, and the deliberate democracy are ways to democratize our political processes, and for participatory democrats participation is one of the cornerstones of democracy (Hou, 2010). Political theorist Chantal Mouffe is more cynical in her interpretation of the recent interest for participation and a more democratic process. The capitalist economy is adaptive, and should not be underestimated. “I think that this is a really interesting approach that chimes with my view of hegemonic struggle. It allows us to see this transformation as a hegemonic move by capital in order to neutralize demands that call its domination into question, using them to reestablish its hegemony. The aim is to create in people the feeling that their demands have been satisfied. But, in fact, it is a satisfaction that makes them dependent on capital.” (Miessen, 2010 p.134). She does not believe in the Marxist idea of capitalism as a part of linear process that sooner or later will lead to its own downfall. Another one who would probably be critical as well is Lefebvre who emphasize the “right to be different” when talking about spatial justice (Dikec, 2001). The treatment of people unwilling or unable to participate, or people who stand outside the current hegemony of aiming for the ‘common good’ is unanswered in both deliberate and participatory democracy. There is also a risk for both participatory and deliberative democracy to be used by the capital to legitimize the system, instead of changing it. The political left has often dreamt about revolution as a way to change society. Revolutionary democracy does not trust neoliberalism at all and cannot be ‘hijacked’, since it is based on a critic of the capitalistic system. According to its practices the only thing that could change the capitalistic hegemony is for people to reclaim their power since: “The only truly democratic politicaleconomic system is one in which the producers of wealth control it and the source of all power holds it” (Purcell, 2008 p.61). The revolutionary democrats as well as the participatory do not believe in political representation, instead the ideal form is direct democracy. It may seem naïve but as Harvey (1993) points out, there will always be a debate about the definition of social justice, but the aim should be a society that eliminates the different forms of oppression, and he sees no justice in capitalism. Instead he sees the possibility of imagining different futures and utopias as a method to overthrow the tacit economic hegemony that the

Revolution Will Come They Said, it Will Be Fun They Said…

Banksy, anonymous graffiti artist, the text has been added afterwards by unknown. www.pinterest.com/banksybrilliancy Original painting found at http://banksy.co.uk/in.asp. (unknown date)

neoliberal agenda has had for the last decades (Harvey, 2000). Or as expressed by Engels and Marx (2009); the proletarian has nothing to lose but his chains.

generation will live as we do. There is no perfect democracy, but radical pluralism opens up for the democratic process to be ever changing according to the needs of the marginalized.

So revolution it is. If it is impossible to change the current hegemony within the system since capitalism is so adaptive, let’s join forces and overthrow it! Would it not be nice if the answer was so simple? So many nights have been spent sleepless wondering about revolution as the answer to change. So many discussions with people who firmly believe it to be the answer, why is it that is does not seem to be enough? Maybe because of what happens after the actual revolution. Marxists tend to only acknowledge the struggle between labor and capital, and when that conflict is out of the picture how will then a society without oppression be organized? Sooner or later the question about the collective versus the individual will be raised; it is naïve to think that all power struggles are gone just because the economic struggle is won.

Pluralistic practices Radical Pluralism, isn’t it just another post structural critic that will never be anything else than a method of critic towards the current hegemony? I bet it could criticize itself to death as well… I mean, what I am looking for is not another way to identify flaws with a theory or a practice, I already know there is no perfect democracy, no utopia to strive towards. I am looking for an actual answer to where, how and into what I should put my time and engagement. I want to fully believe in what I engage in for once, instead of just becoming cynical and passive when reality disappoints me.

Within neoliberal practices, all struggles are antagonistic, because all of them bear the risk of elimination. But if the risk of elimination could be obstructed then the struggle could take an agonistic approach instead, not being between enemies, but rather between equals with different view but with respect for one another (Miessen, 2010). Power is something that exists in relation to others and is chronically unequal, and it is as impossible to avoid power struggles as it is to change human nature. The idea on a “common good” is hegemonic of its own, telling us that such a concept exists that would benefit all of us without exclusion. Radical Pluralism is the form of democracy that accepts and affirms agonistic conflicts instead of trying to solve them or reach consensus. A healthy questioning and challenge of the current hegemony and a constant effort to lift those who are marginalized through transparent processes would encourage resistance to neo-liberalism (Purcell, 2008). Conflicting interests should not be eliminated, but instead mobilized to pursue agonistic struggle. The ground pillars are Liberty and Equity for all, borrowing from all former ideas of democracy, but not defining the actual meaning of Liberty and Equity. Everything is debatable, so it does not even try to find a definition that would fit everyone, or as Mouffe puts it: “This is how I envisage the agonistic struggle: a struggle between different consensusconsensus on the principles, disagreement about their interpretation.” (Miessen, 2010 p.109). Every consensus builds on the exclusion of other ideas; every project to “involve all” is oppressing the ones who do not wish to participate and all that is planned assumes that the unborn

There are some assumptions that are made by both Purcell and Mouffe when they discuss Radical Pluralism (2008; Miessen, 2010). The idea that a conflict can be agonistic, instead of antagonistic builds on the premises that there is no risk for elimination. Since elimination does not need to signify death or extinction it can be interpreted as a reduced possibility to fulfill ones basic needs. Purcell describes it as “Commitment to total radical equalization, though not total equality” (2008, p.39) or that radical pluralism “demands instead a substantial equality whereby all people are materially politically and culturally equivalent in a way that makes political equality truly possible (2008 p.85). Mouffe can be interpreted as of a similar idea when she describes radical pluralism as being about a conflict between “friendly enemies”, thus assuming a relationship of respect and some form of shared bases (Miessen, 2010 p.109). The same type of idea has been expressed throughout the history but from different political views: “Some liberal democrats are inclined, with Mill, to argue that political equality requires some measure of social, educational, and economic equality as well. But such positions begin to call into question one´s commitment to liberalism, and thus one´s label as a liberal democrat” (Purcell, 2008 p.44), and it is pretty obvious that the Marxists theorists are of the same opinion but from a different approach, since their idea is for the value surplus of production to be divided equal among people. The idea and concept that all they touch upon can be translated to the idea of a citizen salary, or basic income as it is also called. With a basic income, that assures ones survival, the fear of elimination would disappear and so facilitate the shift from an antagonistic struggle to an agonistic. It would also ensures the freedom of the individual to try and accomplish whatever they 5

desire without hindering structures, which is so important for the liberal democrat, a view they share with radical pluralism. Through citizen salary the possibility to participate in other activities than paid labor would increase, thus creating a possibility for those who value participatory democracy to engage in what they want; and the deliberate democratic could rejoice since the citizen salary would be benefitting the logical ‘common good’. The skeptics would be the revolutionary democrats, arguing that the citizen’s salary is a ‘middle way’ which is not revolutionary enough and that the state is given too much power, and of course some cynical radical pluralists that would define it as new hegemony to overcome. There are practical problems with an ideology which is based on the constant conflict between different opinions. Mouffe talks about a term called “Critical consensus” (Miessen, 2010) which leaves the window open for agreements that are not without conflicts but used to help everyday decision making. Citizen salary can be counted as such an agreement if implemented, since it is something that a theoretical majority could agree upon to some extent, but the conflict about who it will involve or the amount distributed will always be present. This is also why extraparlamentarian movements such as ”Occupy” are promoted within radical pluralism, challenging the hegemonic structure of parlamentarism. Movements consisting of different actors with different aims and opinions, but that can walk the same path for a while, as in the struggle to resist neo-liberalization (Purcell, 2008). It is not about total consensus since they are not changing their beliefs to adapt to the other organizations, but they are able to meet around certain issues and work together for some time, while still remaining different and with no intention to merge. Citizen salary, could it really the way to change our current economic and democratic structure? Or will the adaptive capitalism use this to survive as is has done before? Citizen salary seems to be the only answer to the decreasing role of human labor in production due to technical achievements and higher efficiency. But is it really the answer to increase democracy? And how would this affect the planning practices? Would this increase transparency and democracy on a planning scale? Neo-liberalism has always been a spatial project, since the mobility of capital is its foundation. Therefore changing the hegemony should also have spatial project perspective. This book does not have the answer I’m looking for; there is no way to conclude in this format if radical pluralism is the right thing to engage in, or if citizen salary is necessary for it to work. Especially since the practical problems with the theory isn’t fully answered. But it is impossible to relate to Purcell and his ideas without getting affected by his optimism, since he is so full of hope for the future. I wonder though, how would his book have turned out if it had been written after the crises. How would he have dealt with the increasing polarization, the state saving private banks with the tax payers’ money and the increasing xenophobia in the western world? Would he have reflected on the fact that when the faith in neo-liberalism decreases it leaves a political emptiness that needs to be filled, and that it is not axiomatic that the emptiness will be filled with a longing for more democratic processes. That requires hard work….

Answer or not, I think I found what to work and fight for, and hopefully this means the end of my political depression; to work hard so that this political vacuum that the crises has created gets filled with a new found belief in the potential of democracy. Not Revolution as much as Evolution, no utopia but rather a place of constant agonistic struggle to improve the living conditions of all different groups and individuals that we call human.

References Arnstein, R. S (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners vol:35 issue:4 p.216-224 Dikec, M. (2001) “Justice and the spatial imagination”, Environment and Planning A 2001, volume33, pages 1785-1805. Engels, F. & Marx, K (2009) Det kommunistiska manifested. 2nd edition. Nixon. Harvey, D. (1993) “Social Justice, Postmodernism and the City”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16, 588-601. Harvey, D. (2000). Excerpt from the chapter “The spaces of utopia” in Spaces of hope. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 156-181. Healey, P (2009) In search of the “strategic” in spatial strategy making. Planning theory & practice.vol:10 issue:4 pages:439-457. Henecke, B & Khan, J (2002) Medborgardeltagande i den fysiska planeringen: en demokratiteoretisk analys av lagstiftning, retorik och praktik. Lund: Lunds university: Meta-tryck. Hou, J (2010) (Not) your everyday public space. Insurgent public space- Guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities. Routledge: London Khakee, A (2006) Medborgardeltagande i samhällsplaneringen.In; Blucher, G& Graninger, G Eds:Planering med nya förutsättningar – ny lagstiftning, nya värderingar. Linköping: Linköping University, p.11-24 Markus Miessen (2010) The nightmare of participation (Crossbench Praxis as a Mode of Criticality). Sternberg Press. Berlin Purcell, M. H. (2008) Recapturing democracy: Neoliberalization and the struggle for alternative urban futures. New York: Routledge.

Revolution Will Come They Said, it Will Be Fun They Said…

Self-provision in Diverse Urban Contexts Recognize the Powers of Informality Julia Diringer

In any social, economic or other context it is conceivable that people experience a lack of certain needs or dissatisfaction with their living environment. At times and as a reaction to this, actions that are based on one’s own initiative occur. These informal structures are characterised by an absence of a formal or legal background as well as bottom-up processes. According to urban planning these informal activities are booming. But how and why do they evolve in particular? What are the reasons for informal processes and what is special about them? And finally how can traditional urban planning connect to that? By means of several examples answers to these questions should be found, compared and discussed.

Julia Diringer studies urban and regional planning at the Technische Universität Berlin (Germany) in the second year of her master’s degree. Currently she attends an exchange program at the Royal Institute of Technology (Sweden). A major focus within her studies belongs to participatory and bottom-up processes in urban development.

Introduction Informality can be found in various urban contexts – selfprovision of housing in forms of informal settlements, self-aid due to security problems or self-made so called do-it-yourself urbanism. Even though backgrounds, reasons and outcomes can (or rather should) not be compared in all datails, certain similarities still exist and give an interesting insight into informal structures and how to deal with them in terms of planning. This topic is of special interest, because there is much to learn from the way people organize themselves and how new structures within cities evolve without any governmental influence. Urban informality opens a wide field of activities and structures (Tonkiss 2013: 102). Therefore this article focuses on people who provide goods or services for themselves, when they experience a lack of these. The growing significance of informality in current urban processes creates a necessity for a closer look. Connecting to an urban planning perspective and also knowing that informality is a growing part of urbanization contains a need for taking informal activities into stronger consideration and rethink the way how it is integrated. As Dovey (2011: 351) states “all cities embody a mix of informality – formality and urbanity requires informality” and therefore informality is part of the way a city is shaped, designed and structured (Dovey 2011: 352). Current urban development processes both in growing and shrinking cities have led to a diverse range of informal activities that is taken on by the population. Informality had turned from matters of subsistence urbanism to one of the major drivers of contemporary urbanism (Tonkiss 2013: 93). On the one hand, in consequence of globalization and urbanization more and more people tend to live in cities. This development is mainly located in developing countries. There, an increasing demand for housing, especially for low- and mid-income household, takes places. This need is difficult to fulfil as governmental institutions are not able to provide as much housing as requested, thus informal housing started to grow. As a consequence these urbanization processes happen without any governmental influence (Tonkiss 2013: 93). But informality is not only related to the growing urbanization of the poor and the changes in developing countries and cities (Tonkiss 2013: 97). Other informal structures can be found in any urban structure where people experience a lack of public support and a need for own initiative to provide themselves with any kind of public service that is subjectively missing. Overall these informal or rather self-provision activities are connected to a withdrawing state, globalization processes and stronger market powers (Kudva 2009: 1614). In connection to that public services disappear (Tonkiss 2013: 106). The named tendencies have led to discrimination or disregard of certain groups in society. Conversely they started self-help actions that can be seen as a response to the economic abandonment (Tonkiss 2013: 104). However within these informal activities local potentials can be strengthened and they might enhance economic activity, social interaction and security in areas that have undergone abandonment and dereliction by the state (Tonkiss 2013: 105, 111). 7

One form of self-provisioned housing Photo by Julia Diringer

Tonkiss describes in her publication Cities by design (2013) that these informal activities are characterised by their inventiveness, tactics, resourcefulness, unruly sociability and intensity of activity. Moreover they can be seen as provisional and within that are trying to find spatial opportunities in unlikely and unofficial sites. Informal structures appear to have a certain kind of impermanence, but even though they often last longer than expected. Next to this, informality is sometimes regarded as a non-concept, but it should be clear that even an absence of formality does not indicate the absence of organization in total. Any informal activity is based on social networks in which people get organized, work together as well as get access to resources and use them. Only the mobilization of people allows these actions to get started. It offers the possibility that people actually get work, build homes, borrow money, receive safety and acquire goods (Tonkiss 2013: 93, 97, 105 ff). Ways in which informal structures work and how social forms and orders arise will be shown on the basis of several examples later on. When assessing the backgrounds and actions of informal urban developments inappropriate ‘romantic’ images might occur. Therefore a careful look at numerous related problems and challenges is necessary. At first the absence of rights (e. g. property rights) creates large insecurity to whomever is living or working within informal structures (Tonkiss 2013: 104). As mentioned above informal networks do not work without a certain order, but as these are not regulated by any law they are also fairly fragile and might end in “capture, compulsion, intimidation and stand-over tactics” (Tonkiss 2013: 106). Apart from organizational difficulties, informal structures should be carefully discussed when it comes to questions regarding the “right of the city”. Roy (2005: 155) names that informality is a “tricky dilemma of spatial justice”. It occurs often in poorer or deprived parts of a city and excludes or pushes people to the edges of the city. Moreover informal structures have an influence on the surrounding settlements and the overall shape of the city. 8

This might manifest in “the deepening of urban segregation and creation of a thickened ring of poverty at the urban periphery” (Kudva 2009: 1615). Various backgrounds for urban informality Regarding informal urban activities Tonkiss (2013: 102 ff) mentions the example of informal settlements in Cairo and therefore describes informality in the background of a growing city. Increased urbanization in Cairo started to take place in the 1950s. Back then new informal settlements arose on agricultural and rural land at the edges of Cairo. Those developments happened unregulated and uncontrolled (UN Habitat 2003). Today these areas often suffer from poverty and provide only simple forms of housing as well as a poor access to public services and infrastructures (Soliman 2010: 123 f). The self-provisioning aspect of economic activities in those informal settlements can be emphasized, due to lending money (e. g. forms of microcredits), trading und producing goods (Tonkiss 2013: 104). Next to this particular form of informality others can be found all over the world and in various urban contexts. Hence self-provisioning activities in Detroit give an impression about how informality evolves in a shrinking city. Moreover urban structures in Berlin visualize how different forms of informality occur and thus rise awareness about the existing diversity and specific backgrounds that are related to informality. Overall the description of informal processes in these different cities and urban contexts provides a wide understanding of the term “informality”. Informal Berlin Currently Berlin is one of the most vibrant capitals in Europe. Affordable housing and lots of vacant property resulted in a population growth since the early 1990s. Even though parts of the economy and cultural institutions benefited from that, immense structural changes have taken place in the past few years. International investments, modernization and increasing prices influenced social and structural changes in certain central

Self-provision in Diverse Urban Contexts

(Informal) networks – complex and interlinked structures Photo by Julia Diringer

districts which are today characterized by gentrification and segregation (Häußermann and Kapphan 2000: 237 ff). As a reaction to this several activities have been taken on by the public society.

people, migrant worker and refugees was formed and started to live there (Tagesspiegel 2014). They built houses, organized a swop-market and collected donations and by doing this provided themselves with their daily needs.

Tonkiss described that “one part of the idiom of informality […] has translated more widely into current approaches to urbanism is the emphasis on temporary uses of space, urban improvisations that occupy and activate spaces of disuse and desertion.“ (2013: 107). One example for temporary use in Berlin is the development of the RAW (Reichsbahnausbesserungswerk) area. This area is located in the east of Berlin, in the former GDR. Close to the main east-west train line the East German State Railway repair works was situated, after the fall of the wall, the plot was not needed anymore. The empty buildings and the layout of the area soon attracted club owners, as well as local social, cultural or sport associations. These actors formed an active network. Together they created a well-known and popular area, where people from the district and further are spending time (Friedrichshainer Chronik 2008). Even though this example points in the direction of do-it-yourself urbanism, the way the involved people interact is particularly interesting. Within their flexible network they are able to form close, but if necessary, also loose connections, and by doing this they are able to react quickly to disturbances or changes.

The two Berlin examples have highly contradicting backgrounds. One is connected to the conversion of an abandoned area to a cultural facility whereas within the other one people actually provide themselves with housing. Nevertheless both are organized within complex network structures and offer space for people that design and build their living environment on their own.

Nevertheless one should be aware of the fact that there is a difference between self-provision that is undertaken by people living in informal settlements and other people creating urban life on their own (Tonkiss 2013: 108). However Berlin made it to the headlines, when in 2012 kind of an inner city informal settlement evolved. In Berlins district Kreuzberg one of the last brownfield sites, in the Cuvrystraße, had been occupied at first by a group of locals that gathered there for protesting against the luxury development of surrounding areas. Shortly after that other people moved to the site and a diverse group of homeless

Informal Detroit Since the economic transformation in the 1960s Detroit had undergone an immense decline. The car industry had been the economic engine for the whole region for decades, but the close down of several big companies resulted in deterioration on the job market and thus a migration of the population to stronger and promising regions. As a consequence the number of the cities inhabitants decreased. Vacant houses and plots became a problem for the local society, as drug dealing and other criminal activities started to take place there. The first example in Detroit aims to the worsened safety and structural conditions in certain neighbourhoods. However the cities government was not able or rather provided insufficient support to deal with those issues, which lead to actions on one’s own initiative of the local population. Therefore residents in areas where many houses were vacant invented several tools to prevent their neighbourhoods from further criminal activities – e. g. pretending to use vacant buildings or putting up warning signs to create the effect that other people are watching the site (Kinder 2014: 7, 9f.). This problematic is connected to neoliberal tendencies, where privatization takes place, collective, welfare institutions rollback and in consequence inequality regarding the 9

distribution of public services grows (Kinder 2014: 2f.). However these structures form the basis for an urban society that started to self-provide necessary actions (Kinder 2014: 4). In addition to the self-provision of safety in certain neighbourhoods in Detroit the second example deals with urban farming. Shrinking processes opened up space in form of vacant plots and abandoned properties for a diverse range of agricultural activities all over the city (Heckler 2012: 219 ff). The involved actors or rather farmers seek to work with the local food supply, sustainable agriculture and moreover by doing so try to enhance the local economy. Pointing out the economic effects there is an intention to provide an alternative to the industrialized food system and also create economic opportunities in the neighbourhood (Food Field). Some urban farming activities in Detroit are connected under the umbrella organization Community Supported Agriculture. This association connects six farms in the metropolitan area of the city, which all grow vegetables and fruit organically for the local market (Drees). Next to the possible economic improvements and local food supplies, vacant plots receive a new purpose within the agricultural conversion.

micro-systems; provide collective infrastructure”. Such support could be undertaken by governmental or non-governmental organisations (Tonkiss 2013: 112). In the beginning it was pointed out that informality is one if the main drivers of today’s urban development. Governments could even profit from these structures, because some of them work and provide the dwellers of a certain area with needed goods or services, but they are only lacking official permission (Tonkiss 2013: 105). Planning is facing changes and challenges in the future, it is possible inevitable to work with, instead of against, informality. Therefore the major challenge is probably how urban planning can actually deal with informality. As written before there are various informal activities, but for now there is a contradiction of urban planning and the messy reality of informal activities (Kudva 2009: 1625). In the past urban planning ideas have often been repeated and replicated (Roy 2005: 147), but new tools could be invented and applied towards a more informal approach. In the end urban planning activities could integrate informal structures to a higher extend, but also need to deal with questions regarding insecurity, responsibility and support of existing informal structures more closely.

Both examples in Detroit are benefited to the local community. It became clear that especially the network within in the local neighbourhood that tries to provide safety is seriously fragile and even though they act on their own initiative, they still rely on the goodwill of the municipality. This municipal support is also necessary regarding the urban farms as they also rely on a certain level of permission to use the vacant plots for farming. Moreover a lack of personal and financial resources as well as a lot of responsibility for the projects without any formal support makes some activities difficult. Similarities and differences The examples open a wide range of ways in which society provides itself with services, fills gaps in the cities structure and somehow protests against current development trends. However it is crucial to separate these examples from each other. Their backgrounds differ in several ways, but still similarities can be found. Therefore one could name the networks that exist in between the involved actors. Moreover all examples are related to larger economic changes, neoliberal tendencies change the relation to economic powers in the different cities. This is either connected to the absence of the state or on the other hand to excessive regulations of space by the government (Tonkiss 2013: 108). Informal activities are also connected to a certain level of insecurity. None of the above mentioned examples has any formal legitimacy or contractual security and could thus been stopped any day. Looking at these different structures and processes it becomes visible that “informal urbanism is perhaps the clearest example of city-making as an ordinary practice” (Tonkiss 2013: 91). Hence it is logical to attach greater importance to these processes. What could urban planning learn from it? Informality, or in particular self-provisioning activities, have an “emergent effect of millions of small-scale designs” (Tonkiss 2013: 98). They should be taken carefully into consideration when applying urban planning instruments. Moreover planners could take a closer look on how these structures work and instead of formalising everything, figure out how existing and working informal structures could be supported or secured. Therefore Tonkiss (2013: 98) suggests “some latitude in the regulations and licensing of businesses and trade; guarantee a certain amount of security for those living in informality; support 10

Self-provision in Diverse Urban Contexts

References Dovey, K. (2011): Uprooting critical urbanism, in: City, vol. 15, no. 3-4, p. 347-354. Drees, L.: City Commons, online: http:// citycommonscsa.com/about/ last access 9.12.2014. Häußermann, H.; Kapphan, A. (2000): Berlin: von der geteilten zur gespaltenen Stadt? Sozialräumlicher Wandel seit 1990, Opladen. Food Field: Mission Statement, online: http:// www.foodfielddetroit.com/who-we-are last access 9.12.2014. Friedrichshainer Chronik (2008): Die große Initiative – Aufbruch und Abbruch am RAW-Gelände, online: http://www.friedrichshainer-chronik.de/Die-grosseInitiative-Aufbruch-und.html last access 28.11.2014. Heckler, S. A. (2012): A Right to Farm in the City – Providing a Legal Framework for Legitimizing Urban Farming in American Cities, in: Valparaiso University Law Review, vol. 47, no. 1, p. 217-266. Kudva, N. (2009): The everyday and the episodic: the spatial and political impacts of urban informality, in: Environment and Planning A, vol. 41, p. 1614-1628. Kinder, K. (2014): Guerilla-style Defensive Architecture in Detroit: A self-provisioned Security Strategy in a Neoliberal Space of Disinvestment, in: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, p. 1-17. Roy, A. (2005): Urban Informality, in: Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 71, no. 2, p. 147-158. Tonkiss, F. (2013): Cities by Design – The Social Life of Urban, Cambridge. Soliman, A. M. (2010): Rethinking urban informality and the planning process in Egypt, in: International Development Planning Review, vol. 32, no. 2. Tagesspiegel (2014): Berlin Favela, online: http:// www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/bezirke/kreuzberg-blog/ kreuz-und-quer/cuvrybrache-in-kreuzberg-berlinsfavela/9631642.html last access 28.11.2014. UN Habitat (2003): Understanding Slums: Case studies for the Global Report 2003 – Cairo, Egypt, online: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_ Report/cities/cairo.htm, last access 26.11.2014.

Life Among Garbage Spatial (in)Justice in Jardim Gramacho Cínthia Stecchini

The history of the Metropolitan Landfill of Jardim Gramacho shows many controversies and is characterized by huge inequality and negligence of both space and its inhabitants. It was the largest landfill in Latin America and was shut in 2012. After the shutdown, the situation did not improve but, instead, seems to be getting worse. Through Soja’s (2010) notion of spatial justice, the landfill, its history and its present situation are described. The lack of public policies from the involved authorities and the difficulties to organize dwellers appear as obstacles that must be overcome in order to struggle for better conditions.

In a globalized world, consumerism is strongly stimulated. Needs are created each day as products lose their utility or are substituted by new ones, as a part of the planned obsolescence. What happens to those old products is not always taken into consideration: once they lose their function to the owner, they should vanish, disappear. Though there is a growing awareness of the unsustainable effects of these habits, in Brazil only 3% of household waste is recycled. For more than 30 years, 80% of the household waste of the city of Rio de Janeiro and from its metropolitan region ended up in Jardim Gramacho, a landfill situated in the city of Duque de Caxias. It was the biggest landfill in Latin America and yet it was treated by authorities as garbage itself: ignored, invisible. With neither regulation nor control, for years it destroyed the surrounding environment and attracted a population of low income inhabitants that would make of the garbage their source of survival. The landfill is now closed, but its damages live on. This essay will analyze the Metropolitan Landfill of Jardim Gramacho through a spatial justice perspective. First, some theoretical implications will be presented in order to guide the analysis of the space in focus. Then, the city where it is located will be briefly described and the landfill’s history will be presented in more details, as well as its main actors, the garbage pickers who work and live in the landfill. Last, a picture of the present situation will be given and some thoughts of possible interventions in seeking spatial justice. Spatial Justice Inequalities become more evident as a consequence of a globalized and neoliberal world, where most of its population lives now in cities. In the struggle for better conditions, the concept of justice is gaining strength as a mobilizing force, uniting different aspects: social, economic, environmental. In Seeking Spatial Justice, Soja (2010) amplifies the notion of justice adding spatiality to it, acknowledging the geography as one of its crucial components. Justice, on the other hand, has a consequential geography which cannot be defined only as an outcome of social and political processes, but also as a force that affects these processes, in a social-spatial dialectic:

Cínthia Stecchini studies Architecture and Urbanism in Centro Universitário Moura Lacerda (Brazil) and has a bachelor degree in Psychology by the University of São Paulo (Brazil). Through the Science without Borders scholarship program, she is now studying at the Royal Institute of Technology.

“ [T]here exists a mutually influential and formative relation between the social and the spatial dimensions of human life, each shaping the other in similar ways. In this notion of a socio-spatial dialectic, as I called it some time ago, the spatiality of whatever subject you are looking at is viewed as shaping social relations and societal development just as much as social processes configure and give meaning to the human geographies or spatialities in which we live.” (Soja, 2010, p.3-4)

Justice is considered beyond the boundaries of law, encompassing principles of fairness and democracy. Young’s 11

A girl sits in the garbage that still remains and occupies most of the area. Photo by Laurence Guenon, Jardim Gramacho (2013)

definition of justice (Soja, 2010) in terms of the five faces of oppression – exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism and violence – calls the attention to issues that must be confronted in order to create better cities and environments. Spatial injustice can be seen in any example of unequal individual or collective advantage and opportunity, which, in turn, will always be attached to a location in space in some degree. Soja’s notion of spatial justice implies increasing justice and decreasing injustice, and the struggle for that should aim not only at a more equal and fair distribution of urban resources and opportunities, but mainly at obtaining power over the processes that produce these unequal spaces.

shut, consequences of the uncontrolled use of the soil were still evident, such as irregularities and contamination, compromising the territory for further occupation (Xerez, 2013a). After this experience, authorities did not want a landfill in the city of Rio de Janeiro anymore and the destination of household waste changed according to the cities and its surroundings’ growth until the 1970’s. By this time, the neighborhood of Jardim Gramacho, in the city of Duque de Caxias, was scarcely inhabited – predominantly by low income population – and had recently been assigned for the construction of social housing. The neighborhood was chosen to host a new landfill as it was equidistant from the cities involved and there was enough public land available.

Geographically uneven development is present in every part of the globe and contributes to create and maintain social and spatial injustices. According to Soja (2010), recognizing spatial (in) justice should be the first step for seeking spatial justice, and that requires a deep examination of the uneven geographies in order to determine which forms of injustice demand greatest attention. The process underlying these geographies occurs in different scales that go beyond the city boundaries, being regional, national or global as well. These are produced by human activities and, as such, to intervene on these geographies making them more just is not only possible but also a responsibility. Through seeking spatial justice, there is the possibility to expand theory and practice and to promote more democracy and social activism.

According to Junior (2013), the siting was imposed by the military government. Though there are no official records on this matter, Duque de Caxias was considered a strategic area for the national security as its main industries were considered communist places (Xerez, 2013a). In a dictatorship, there was no choice for the city other than receiving the landfill no other municipality was willing to take. The land was given away by the Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária (INCRA) and had an area of more than two million square meters of mangrove near the Guanabara Bay and with two rivers on its edge. Xerez (2013a) demonstrates that the siting was wrong and unconstitutional, as mangrove areas are considered areas of permanent protection by the Brazilian Forest Code and the waste discharge near rivers is prohibited.

Duque de Caxias The city of Duque de Caxias is part of the Metropolitan Region of Rio de Janeiro (RMRJ), which concentrates 19 cities and about 75% of the population of the state of Rio de Janeiro (approximately 10.8 million of inhabitants). The city has the second largest gross domestic product (GDP) of the state and is the third largest in population. In 1927, the construction of the Washington Luiz highway enabled the installation of important industries for the country and the city experienced a rapid economic and demographic growth. Nevertheless, this was not followed by the supply of basic infrastructure and income inequalities and segregation are high and continue to rise due to a lack of efficient public policies. History of Jardim Gramacho Political reconfiguration, environmental issues and social problems occurred and were transformed during the history of the Metropolitan Landfill of Jardim Gramacho, making it controversial (Xerez, 2013a). From the 1920’s to the 1940’s the household waste of the city of Rio de Janeiro was taken to a landfill in the Sapucaia Island. Ten years after this landfill was 12

Since its official opening, in December 1975, the landfill attracted catadores (garbage pickers). Some commercial establishments related to recycling were opened and the pickers settled in the neighborhood, building their houses in precarious ways. As it was initially a residential area, there was a common hope that it would offer better conditions later on. The opposite was observed: the landfill started to receive other sorts of noxious waste, such as industrial and medical; and environmental problems soon became evident, attracting rodents, birds, and insects (Xerez, 2013a). The municipalities involved in the garbage disposal offered no support in the maintenance of the dump and this situation was carried until the 1990’s, when environmental issues received international attention. With the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) taking place in Rio de Janeiro, in 1992, the Public Prosecutor’s Office forced the city to adopt environmentally friendly measures for the treatment and disposal of the waste. The solution found by the involved cities was to privatize the recovery and administration of the landfill.

Life Among Garbage: Spatial (in)Justice in Jardim Gramacho

A street in Jardim Gramacho, precarious housing and living conditions. Photo by Laurence Guenon, Jardim Gramacho (2013)

In 1996, the company Queiroz Galvão was nominated through public bidding and started to work in order to recover the mangrove area and treat the disposal. The company stopped operating the landfill in 2001 and another company, EBEC, assumed temporarily the work in progress and was later on succeeded by another company, Nova Gramacho, which managed the landfill until its shutdown in 2012. The shutdown of the landfill had been planned for 2014, in accordance with the requirements of the National Plan for Solid Waste. As Rio de Janeiro would host the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012, political and environmental compromises were assumed and the shutdown was anticipated for that year, being officially executed a few days before the conference. The waste is now taken to a new landfill in Seropédia, which meets environmental requirements and does not allow pickers in its area (Nascimento, 2012). Garbage pickers The work of a picker is attractive to many people, especially those who were expelled from the formal labor market. It is profitable activity and has no requirements in terms of previous education or experience (Xelez, 2013a). Nevertheless, the total income generated from the picking and recycling process is not distributed equally, the pickers receive only an insignificant amount of it (Bastos, 2008). Though it has been classified as Catadores de materiais recicláveis (picker of recyclable material) by the Brazilian Ministry of Work, it is not a regulated profession and the work is only possible through informality, with no guarantees provided by law, which compromises their citizenship. Furthermore, the picker carries a bad stigma and has usually poor socioeconomic condition (Bastos, 2008). Their relationship with their work oscillates between self-valorization and selfdisqualification. In Jardim Gramacho, an important contribution for the quality of work of the pickers was the creation of the first cooperative of the landfill, the Cooperativa de Catadores de Materiais Recicláveis Jardim Gramacho (COOPERGRAMACHO), in 1996, which provided them with some organization. It aimed to instruct the pickers on the importance of cooperative formation, in an attempt to humanize the activity and provide them information about the legal and commercial processes involved in their work. In addition to it, a social assistant was hired to instruct garbage pickers on their job and on the use of protective equipment. They were also separated by wearing vests of different colors into three groups: those who were linked to the cooperative, those who worked for warehouses and those who were linked to neither of these.

From 1996 to 2004, the number of workers duplicated: from 960 pickers to 1700 (Xerez, 2013a). Apart from the improved work conditions, this growth was also possible because of the growing amount of waste the landfill received. On the other hand, receiving more waste was only possible because of the work of the pickers (Xerez, 2013a). Another factor that attracted more workers was the pickers themselves, as they would bring family and friends to the landfill (Bastos, 2008). By the time the landfill was still active, the difficulty in organizing the garbage pickers was already visible. According to Bastos (2008), the different groups that worked and lived in Jardim Gramacho had different perspectives. Most of the pickers considered themselves as autonomous workers despising, in this sense, possible coalitions and collective gains. Through an illusion of being free from patronal impositions, they ignored that they became even more subjected to exploitation. Besides the cooperative, an association was founded, the Associação de Catadores de Jardim Gramacho (ACAMJG). However, when interviewed, only a few recognized any of these organizations as their representative and most did not know what their role in Jardim Gramacho was (Bastos, 2008). In 2005, the Instituto Brasileiro de Análises Sociais e Econômicas (IBASE) together with other 26 local institutions founded the Fórum Comunitário de Jardim Gramacho (community forum). The purpose of the forum was to promote sustainable local development and acts through four workgroups, focused on Education, Health, Community Life, and Work and Income. Since 2007 the forum has its own headquarter in the community and both COOPERGRAMACHO and ACAMJG are members. Jardim Gramacho today The shutdown of the landfill was necessary because of its environmental risks; but its anticipation represented a rupture in the planning process of its recovery, both environmentally and socially. According to Junior (2013) 1.3 million square meters of mangrove were destroyed and the landscape can no longer fulfill its environmental function. Nearly 1900 pickers were left with no profitable activities. It was agreed that they would be compensated, receiving R$14.000,00 (€ 4.400,00) each. This amount is, nevertheless, not enough to cover basic needs for a long time and most of them have already spent it. The absence of institutional support, financial and technical resources and the lack of public policies of the involved cities that was observed during the landfills functioning (Xerez, 2013a) were aggravated by its shutdown.

Tons of waste still remain in the area, which now receives the disposal of clandestine garbage companies, some of them related to drug traffic (Viegas, 2014). Many of the pickers remain in the area and still work as such, but most of them had to find other occupations outside Jardim Gramacho in order to guarantee minimum survival. Living conditions are precarious as there are many unpaved streets and most of the dwellers live in the same houses they built, with no access to basic infrastructure such as water or electricity (TETO, 2013). Even though Jardim Gramacho is still ignored by authorities, it has gained public attention through documentaries, such as Wasteland (Walker, 2009) and Estamira (Prado, 2005). Some university research has been taking place in the community, focusing mainly on the environmental impacts of the landfill and on the vulnerable condition of its population. Xerez (2013a) analyzed the impacts of the landfills’ shutdown in the life of the pickers and produced a documentary, Mãe Rampa (Xerez, 2013b), with the intention of making the issue more visible and call for action, as well as encouraging the pickers to raise their voices and engage in a struggle for better conditions. TETO, a non-governmental organization (NGO) is also working in the community since May 2013. The NGO focuses on community development and has built more than 40 transitional houses in the area, which are built by volunteers and a family of dwellers. While doing so, the NGO aims to help the community to identify leaderships and start associations. Data is being collected in order to generate socioeconomic reports that will help to diagnose the community and establish goals and plans for action. A first report was published in 2013 demonstrating the extreme vulnerable socioeconomic situation of the dwellers as well as their living conditions (TETO, 2013). What next? At the end of the production/consumption chain there is waste, that has to go somewhere without incommoding previous users. Jardim Gramacho appears almost as metaphor of this: a place of exclusion, precariousness, where low income population cohabits with garbage, deprived from basic infrastructure and services, and for whom rights are constantly and continuously denied. All five faces of oppression are clearly recognizable in the landfill area. Soja (2010) defends that the spatiality of (in)justice must be observed and analyzed in order to generate strategic tools for action. Political and social forces must be spatialised as there are no a-spatial relations, and by doing so it becomes possible to gather different interests in a struggle for more just conditions. Nevertheless, spatial justice is mainly a theoretical concept

References Bastos, V. P. (2008). Catador: Profissão. Um estudo do processo de construção identitária do catador de lixo ao profissional catador. Jardim Gramacho, de 1996 aos dias atuais. [Master thesis in Social Servisse]. Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro.

and Soja leaves unclear which tools are there to link theory and practice. Yet, looking through the history and present situation of Jardim Gramacho and its dwellers it is possible to observe the role of geography, both as a process and as an outcome, in creating and maintaining injustice, and some guidelines for future interventions can be envisioned. Socio-economic inequalities in Jardim Gramacho are reinforced by inefficient public policies, deeply affecting its geography and being equally influenced by it. The landfill was sited in an area of low value, where social housing was built, and became the destination – the only choice – of many other poor populations. Prolonged uncontrolled use and exploitation of the soil resulted in a damaged environment, which represents a risk for its surroundings and for the dwellers. This reality seems, nonetheless, to be invisible to the authorities. Policies are produced in a unilateral way, not considering the population: either through force, during the dictatorship, or through privatization, which follows a neoliberal logic and transfers the responsibility from the government to private companies. Measures are only taken when international attention is focused on the issue. Nevertheless, these measures are either superficial or inappropriate, neglecting real needs and conditions. Dwellers have no voice in political decisions, and this might be strengthened by their lack of sense of solidarity – a characteristic and consequence of their working conditions. Yet, the garbage pickers’ movement is growing in Brazil (Bastos, 2008), having achieved some benefits for the working class. Though neither leaderships nor associations are recognized by the dwellers, some work has been done together with the community’s forum in order to involve the population and struggle for better conditions. It is important, though, that this work is continuous and involves more actors. Education could be an important element of transformation, both in a sense of qualifying the pickers for the job as well as providing information and promoting dialogue about their condition and rights, which are not only denied externally but sometimes even ignored by themselves. The growing interest of universities for the landfill area helps to deepen the knowledge of its situation and can guide practice in different and yet overlapping fields – such as environmental and social. People who live in different places do not have the same opportunities. Jardim Gramacho does not appear only as the place where inequalities and exclusion is sited, it is where citizenship is (not) carried out. Its precarious situation claims for urgent action and analyzing it through a spatial justice perspective can help envision possible interventions and gather different interests in a struggle for better conditions.

Prado, M. (Director). (2005). Estamira. [Motion Picture]. Brasil. Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking Spatial Justice. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Harvey, D. (1993). Social Justice, Postmodernism and the City. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16, 588-601.

TETO (2013). Relatório Enquetes Jardim Gramacho 2013. Retrieved from http://www.techo.org/paises/ brasil/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/relatorio_ JDG_2013-140318.pdf

Junior, A. C. S. O. (2013). A paisagem da Baixada Fluminense: uma análise na perspectiva geoecológica. Revista Brasileira de Geografia Física, 6(2), 195-210.

Viegas, N. (2014, June 21). Polícia, enfim, fecha lixão controlado pelo tráfico. O Dia. Retrieved from http:// odia.ig.com.br/noticia/rio-de-janeiro/2014-06-21/ policia-enfim-fecha-lixao-controlado-pelo-trafico.html

Nascimento, J. O. (2012). Avaliação dos impactos sociais e ambientais com o fechamento do Aterro Metropolitano de Jardim Gramacho. III Simpósio de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia Urbana.

Walker, L. (Director). (2009). Lixo Extraordinário (Wasteland). [Motion Picture]. USA.

Xerez, A. (2013a). Mãe Rampa: os impactos do encerramento do Aterro Metropolitano de Jardim Gramacho nos catadores de materiais recicláveis. [Master thesis in Visual Anthropology], Universidade Federal Fluminense, Rio de Janeiro. Xerez, A. (Director). (2013b). Mãe Rampa. [Motion Picture]. Brasil.

Life Among Garbage: Spatial (In)Justice in Jardim Gramacho

A Few Strings Attached Control, Public Spaces and Young Women

Matilda Karlström is a student at the department of Sustainable Urban Planning at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), she is from Stockholm and has an interest in feminism and the power relationships in urban planning, particularly in public spaces and participation processes.

Matilda Karlström

How we use or avoid, behave and are treated in public spaces can greatly affect how we move in the city, who we meet, what spaces we define by our presence, and perhaps also our absence. Fear and exclusion are important factors affecting this, and are related to oppression and control. Many interests in society promote greater control, sometimes surveillance, or simply restrictions on behaviour in public spaces, in order to promote safety and other private interests. When examining a recent case from Rosengård, Malmö focusing on young women, and relating to primarily Don Mitchell’s The Right to the City - Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space as well as work by Rachel Pain, I came to relate the central issues of this article to the notion of control.

Women participating in a gymnastics show in Stockholm, 1944. Studio Gullers, www.stockholmskallan.se (1944).

Introduction This essay will be centred on a case; the recently finished project in Rosengård, Malmö, called Rosens röda matta – stadsplanering på tjejers villkor, roughly translatable to “The rose’s red carpet – urban planning on the terms of girls”, a project about creating an activity space, and doing it with a focus on girls and young women gender equality. The project consisted largely on involving young women in the planning processes and different participatory methods. However, this article will focus mainly how it relates to public space and its central issues of power relations, justice and exclusion. It will also apply the theories provided by Don Mitchell in his work on the right to the city and the fight for public space. Public space - fear and control Public space is one of the central matters when dealing with spatial justice, besides that of issues related more strongly to property ownership and the economic system. Here fear and control are important factors that affect behaviour and use of public spaces. While literature concerning gender issues and urban space often is focused on social constructs and behaviour that may work in exclusionary ways, Don Mitchell (2003) is very focused on laws, local regulations limiting homeless people, a perspective both interesting and current today. However, Mitchell deals with fear in relation to public space in a way that mostly focuses on how perhaps more privileged people experience fear in public space as a force that works towards the further exclusion of homeless people from the city. Mitchell contemptuously criticises the notion of striving for a free movement through the city and its public space, a movement lacking in friction and fear. Unfortunately he almost completely disregards how this strive might just as well be one driven from a unprivileged position as a part of claiming a right to the city. Rachel Pain (2001) on the other hand has a comparably refreshing and comprehensive view on fear: as mainly an exclusionary factor. One form of exclusion would be being constructed as a threat, and is to some extent what creates the impossible situation for homeless people that Mitchell describes. Young people tend to loiter, hanging out, have no particular place to go, and because there are so many places that are off limits; they are either too old or too young for most of them, or simply not trusted enough to go there; they have to make the most of public spaces (Pain, 2001). My own teenage years were with endless walking and talking; unless I wanted to leave the neighbourhood I grew up in and waste time with friends in malls and downtown. Often teenagers may be considered a nuisance, even a threat, and sometimes suspicious enough to call the police. Pain also points out, in line with Mitchell, that while one may be feared and seen as a threat, one might at the same time be fearful, and at far greater risk of being victimized. Other forms of exclusion from public space are perhaps more related 15

The location of the activity space Rosens röda matta marked by the black dot. News Øresund - Lönegård&Co., https://www.flickr.com/photos/newsoresund/9612776145/in/photostream/ (2013)

to women; fear through being victim of a crime, through subcriminal acts such as threats or sexual harassment, or cautionary behaviour from fearing these are all affecting how women take on or avoid public spaces (Pain, 2001). Unfortunately Mitchell lacks in many cases this more diverse view of oppression and its manifestation in space. As mentioned, he shares his focus on class and private property ownership with many other scholars in his view on spatial justice and the right to the city. There is nothing extraordinary about this, and still I have a difficult time forgiving him for reducing fear related to public space as something predominately oppressing others than the people being fearful. What Mitchell then neglects are other forms of exclusion related to fear and oppression, being fearful. Women, ethnic minorities, elderly people, young people are excluded from his analysis (Mitchell, 2003; Pain, 2001), as well as transwomen and other people part of the LGBT community. The resistance or friction he thoroughly describes as the reaction of person of an amount privilege, could just as well have described the resistance that excludes people through harassment, violence, threats, or just the fear of it. Sports and public space Mitchell’s primary case revolves around People’s Park at the University of California, Berkley campus in the 1960s to 1990s. The story begins at a time when the Free Speech Movement is growing, and the University deciding to buy a piece of property in the middle of South Campus, where more progressive students often gather and in general is an area perceived by the University as place of counterculture, of demonstrations, degrees of autonomy and political activity. It is then claimed that the University needs more facilities, and that there was a ‘“desperate need”’ for a soccer field, thus needing to tear down some houses on the property. Another reason for the purchase, admitted later on, was to try to “assist in eliminating the “counter culture” that had begun to grow up around, and define, the university” (Mitchell, 2003, p. 106). Later on growing into vast protests, an over night action was made to create a People’s Park in the area. It was created by students as well as by other people in Berkeley, and at first became a very used and also

defended. In 1969 the space was again threatened, then by the construction of student housing on South Campus, which lead to vast riots across town. Eventually the first planned soccer field was built on portion of the area, but the student housing was stopped and the University gave up for that time around. During the 1970s People’s Park grew from a place of politics and student engagement into a place where homeless people could find a safer place to sleep, and successively became a place most people avoided. But the story did not end there, for in the late 1980s the University decided volleyball courts, security lighting, public restrooms and pathways should be built in a large, central and grassy area in People’s Park. Again the planning of some form of sports ground was connected to a wish to control the space and push aside an unwanted activity, and this time around it too sparked riots and protests in Berkley, California. Rosens röda matta – “urban planning on the terms of girls” Being a teenager is never easy, and as I will get back to, you don’t always know where to go, what to do. Sometimes, what is offered is too unsafe, or your parents wont let you. Sometimes you have to go all the way across town to find a place. This will be a description of the project Rosens röda matta (RRM), from Rosengård, Malmö, as well as the methods used in it. The neighbourhood Rosengård was built as a part of the modernist housing project the Million Homes Program in the 1960s and 1970s. The project, finished a little over a year ago, was based in the neighbourhood Rosengård in Malmö, and is more specifically called Rosens röda matta – stadsplanering på tjejers villkor, calling itself “urban planning on the terms of girls”. It was about creating an activity space, and doing it with a focus on girls and young women, and gender equality. The project consisted largely of involving teenage girls and young women in the planning processes and different participatory methods, and thus finding alternative ways of creating activity spaces, and making sure public spaces in the neighbourhood are used by girls to a greater extent.

A Few Strings Attached

The project continued with the use of workshops, mixed with group interviews with girls. Many connections were according to Björnson (2014) made through visiting all the schools with pupils aged 10 to 15 years in Rosengård. Workshops were also made with other girls across Malmö. Around this time, it became apparent that girls wanted places for physical activity, but desired more cultural forms of it, such as music, dancing or stages for making shows. Later on, during one summer, 13 girls of the age 16 to 19 were employed by the municipality to work together with planners and landscape architects during four weeks one summer. Within the frame of workshops they worked with the physical aspects, and later on spatial strategies, and organizing an event that was supposed to take place in the space, which at that time was more or less an empty plot. Later on detail plans were made, and during projecting and construction other girls were organised to arrange similar events. In order to further be able to organise events, a group called EIM (Engagerad i Malmö) was founded by the girls employed during the project (Björnson, 2014). The first plans for what now is the activity space Rosens röda matta started in 2009, and is connected to a larger project started in 2010 focusing on connecting Malmö city through a passage going in an east-west direction, from Rosengård in the east, to Västra Hamnen in the west (Claesson, 2014; Grundström & Listerborn, 2014). Relating to the city-wide project, a number of projects are part of a redevelopment of central Rosengård and have been on going parallel to Rosens röda matta, all in places along the street where east end of the passage I located in Rosengård (Grundström & Listerborn, 2014). A new square Örtagårdstorget, as well as a form of small business development called bokaler now called Bennets Bazaar have been developed along the passage. Small-scale urban gardening has also been started together with a women’s cooperative and business association called Yalla Trappan, which is also based near Bennets Bazaar (Björnson, 2014; Grundström & Listerborn, 2014; Claesson, 2014).

making shows, which came to direct the end result of the project. Later on, during one summer, 13 girls of the age 16 to 19 were employed by the municipality to work together with planners and landscape architects during four weeks one summer. Within the frame of workshops they worked with the physical aspects, and later on spatial strategies, and organizing an event that was supposed to take place in the space, which at that time was more or less an empty plot. When detail plans were being made, as well as during projecting and construction, other girls were organised to arrange similar events. In order to further be able to organise events, a group called EIM (Engagerad i Malmö) was founded by the girls employed during the project (Björnson, 2014). The conscious excluding aspect of the project has been explained as necessary, and not as radical as it might seem: “When Rosens röda matta made the stance to ‘exclude some in order to include others’ it can be seen as radical. At the same time there is always an on-going biased excluding and including with in urban planning that is taken for granted, and therefore seldom confronted. Partnerships with chosen parts of the business sector is one example of that.” (Claesson, 2014p. 108, authors’ translation). It is also pointed out by Claesson (2014) that the framework; the place and size – a specific old parking lot, the use – a public place for physical activity, and even parts of the design – something that should fit in with other parallel projects in Rosengård, were already predefined. Even the placing, overlooked by surrounding, tall residential buildings is argued by Ragnhild Claesson to run the risk of reproducing gender issues in space: “ How girls are meant to be seen and take place touched in this case patriarchal notions about women as objects whose bodies can be exposed, observed and controlled from an elevated view (from foot paths and high-rise buildings).” (Claesson, 2014, p. 108, authors’ translation)

Rosens röda matta (RRM) was run by Malmö stad between 2009 and 2013. Originally the project was meant to plan an “activity space” in Rosengård, a place that would probably have included facilities for multi-sporting, skateboarding and climbing. However, the initial work done lead the municipality to focus on gender equality and particularly girls and young women: very few of those who use facilities for spontaneous sporting in Sweden are girls (only 2 out of 10), and among young people in Rosengård the ‘favourite spots’ of boys and girls were very different. For girls, these spots were mostly located either in more neutral places on the other side of town, or in the homes of best friends, while boys would choose public or semi-public places in Rosengård. In addition the local youth centre struggled with only 10%-20% of young people going there being girls (Björnson, 2014).

Relating to these risks of the project there is an additional interesting aspect of this project; that it seemed to have sparked political engagement and interest in the girls who worked with the planning of RRM. Some of them were later on included in and employed by the organisation called Tjejer i Förening (TiF), a part of the adult liberal education association ABF in Malmö. TiF has begun organising some of their activities as events at Rosens röda matta, and also works together with previously mentioned Yalla Trappan (Arbsjö & Larsson, 2014; Tjejer i Förening, 2014; ABF, 2014). Planners in this project hoped that by involving the young women in this way, their and other girls’ and women’s engagement in the place would compensate for what a physical structure could not create on its own (Björnson, 2014).

Controlling me, controlling you Mitchell’s foremost critique of how public spaces are treated, especially in an American context, is mainly about how interests concerning safety, attracting investment and the likes are used to promote increased control of public space. Besides this, I argue that the routinely use and development of sports facilities (volley ball courts, soccer fields, and perhaps also activity spaces) 17

in and as public spaces is a way of exercising control of public space. Through how they are used, and by whom, there is a risk of reproducing an already skewed use of public space between, for instance, young men and women. This strong programming of public space is in itself possibly a threat towards other less censored or controlled uses of public space, (without necessarily claiming that all sports activities are controlled and censored). The University of California’s actions when meeting with political activism and “counterculture”, as well as homelessness this invariably seemed to be their go to procedure in trying to neutralize the space of South Campus. Rachel Pain points out that especially teenagers and young people, when constructed as a threat, are perceived as being out of control. No adult or parent around to make sure, and control them. Or as Mitchell says, the homeless person is somehow beyond control, and yet controlled by an immense amount of laws and restrictions on their behaviour in public space, because they have no home of which they are the masters. Women on the third hand are also being perceived as controllable; sexual harassment and violence, and the fear of it can have an immense impact. To draw a quick example, experience by many, including myself: the effectiveness of “I have a boyfriend” is often beyond anything remotely more truthful; in other cases there is no boyfriend and me belonging to him for anyone to respect. I can go on for ages, but I wont. I want to talk about Rosengård now. The project Rosens röda matta does have many positive aspects, but it too is a very controlled project. As pointed out by Claesson (2014), the framework; the place and size – a specific old parking lot, the use – a public place for physical activity, and even parts of the design – something that should fit in with other parallel projects in Rosengård, were already predefined. Even the placing, overlooked by surrounding, tall residential buildings is argued by Ragnhild Claesson to run the risk of reproducing gender issues in space: “How girls are meant to be seen and take place touched in this case patriarchal notions about women as objects whose bodies can be exposed, observed and controlled from an elevated view (from foot paths and high-rise buildings)” (Claesson, 2014, p. 108, authors’ translation).Besides the physical structure of the project, its physical end product, it also produced a structure of

References Arbsjö, K., & Larsson, E. (2014, 06 9). “I en stad som hotas av en rasistisk rörelse måste vi visa motsatsen”. Sydsvenskan . Björnson, M. (2014). Rosens röda matta. Stadsplanering på tjejers villkor . In C. Listerborn, K. Grundström, R. Claesson, T. Delshammar, M. Johansson, & P. Parker, Strategier för att hela en delad stad: Samordnad stadsutveckling i Malmö (pp. 73-80). Malmö: Malmö University Publications in Urban Studies. Claesson, R. (2014). Berätta staden tillsammans. Planering som en plats för lärande, lyssnande och konflikt. In C. Listerborn, K. Grundström, R. Claesson, T. Delshammar, M. Johansson, & P. Parker, Strategier för att hela en delad stad: Samordnad stadsutveckling i Malmö (pp. 99-110). Malmö: Malmö University Publications in Urban Studies. Grundström, K., & Listerborn, C. (2014). Var dag på stråket. Observationer från Västra Hamnen och Rosengård. In C. Listerborn, K. Grundström, R. Claesson, T. Delshammar, M. Johansson, & P. Parker, Strategier för att hela en delad stad: Samordnad stadsutveckling i Malmö (pp. 29-40). Malmö: Malmö University Publications in Urban Studies. 18

organizing events in the space. The physical structure welcomed this through stages, and playing music from your phone and so, while the group the girls founded (EIM) was assigned to control the organization of events. Ways to apply for funding from the municipality were secured, to make sure that the project generated something beyond a physical space. But one could also argue, in relation to Claesson, that the space is very controlled in the sense that it guides the type of activities organized in Rosens röda matta, and thus limits what it could be used for. Speakers connected to the stage in RRM can be controlled from a mobile phone, but only during certain hours (Malmö Stad). Today, girls are controlling the space. TiF (Tjejer i Förening) is regularly organizing more or less political events in the place, they are also taking up “space” in media (Arbsjö & Larsson, 2014). But the project RRM itself did not provide control or influence over any other spaces in Rosengård or Malmö. Reaching a more gender equal and just access and use of public space will not be achieved through the course of one project running over the course of a few years. However Rosens röda matta is no ordinary projects, it questions ideals about public spaces for physical activity and sports, as well as participatory planning processes and the overall assumption of planning for all. Planning for all is a beautiful assumption, about a society in which structural issues either are small or distonected enough from spatial matters. Sadly this is not the world we are living in. Was this physical control in terms of location and design a necessary evil for the girls to “be able” gain control of it? Is it even control or is it something else? The control and programming of the space Rosens röda matta could possibly act in an exclusionary way, and here lies the sweet and sour of this story. It might exclude the activities, and those who currently or often contribute to the overall exclusion of girls and women in public space. But, it might also hinder further and less controlled use of public space by girls. It might enable the existence of organizations like TiF, but it could not be a place to gather around like the People’s Park. It lies somewhere in between the plans for soccer and volley ball, and this other free but not unproblematic space. Hopefully, it will sooner or later burst at the seams and promote further involvement of girls and young women.

Johansson, M., & Parker, P. (2014). Utvecklign och Förvaltning i Samverkan Längs med Rosengårdsstråket: Ett samtal med Lena Eriksson och Moa Björnson, Malmö stad . In C. Listerborn, K. Grundström, R. Claesson, T. Delshammar, M. Johansson, & P. Parker, Strategier för att hela en delad stad: Samordnad stadsutveckling i Malmö (pp. 81-91). Malmö: Malmö University Publications in Urban Studies . Rosens Röda Matta [Motion Picture]. Available at: http://video.malmo.se/?bctid=2938325670001 McDowell, L. (1983). Towards an understanding of the gender division of urban space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space , 1, 59-72. Mitchell, D. (2003). The Right to the City - Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York: The Guilford Press. Pain, R. (2001). Gender, Race, Age and Fear in the City. Urban Studies, 38, 899–913. Tjejer i Förening. (2014, 10 20). Tjejer i Förening. Retrieved 10 26, 2014 from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tjejeri.forening A Few Strings Attached

Images Image 1: Studio Gullers (1944). Flaten: Gymnos har uppvisning vid Flatenspelen 4 juli 1943. Retrieved from stockholmskallan.se Image 2: News Øresund - Lönegård&Co., (2013). Proposal for a new railroad to Malmö Airport (red line). Retrieved 12 10 2014 from: https://www. flickr.com/photos/newsoresund/9612776145/in/ photostream/

A (Public) Space to Call Your Own Homelessness and Panhandling in the Contemporary City Johanna Thuresson

Public spaces are an important part of what constitutes a city and has been studied in a range of different topics and continues to raise debates. One of who have studied the concept of public space is Don Mitchell (2003) in his intriguing book “The right to the city – social justice and the fight for public space”. Mitchell provides insights in the topic of public space and discusses, among other things, the connection between public space and homelessness in an US context. This relation is also the subject of this article. This is linked to the notion of the public. Homeless are being excluded from public space both figuratively and literally in the US and are also not seen as part of the public. Mitchell argues that homelessness must be placed in a larger context linked to poverty and an obtrusive lack of housing. I discuss Mitchells book to see how well his findings can be translated to a Swedish context. There has been a debate over these issues in Sweden during a couple of years and my findings implicates that the issues Mitchell discusses can be found in Sweden albeit not to the same extent.

Johanna Thuresson has a bachelor degree in urban and regional planning from Stockholm University and is currently studying the master programme at the same institution. Her main interest lies in how people use space, cultural heritage and spatial justice.

Introduction Oh no, not another text about public space! Well, sorry but it must mean something that so many have engaged in this topic. Public space has been studied in a range of different topics and through different lenses and continues to raise questions and debates. Public spaces are an important part of what constitutes a city and something many of us take for granted. In recent decades new forms of public spaces have emerged, such as Internet and malls that many see as a public space. Parallel to this development, we have also seen a widespread privatization of the more traditional public spaces (Thörn 2006). As many scholars have recognized this poses a number of challenges for the contemporary city in which some will be discussed in this article in the context of Sweden. One challenge linked to public space is the issue of homelessness. This text will address both homelessness and panhandling as they often are interlinked. These issues have been up for debate in recent years in Sweden and are connected to both social justice and public space. This text will primarily depart from Don Mitchells (2003) important and intriguing book “The right to the city – social justice and the fight for public space” and his notions on the issues of public space and homelessness. Mitchell provides insights in the topic of public space and gives a number of examples from the US throughout the book. In this text I will discuss Mitchells book to see how well his findings can be translated to a Swedish context and what implications it gives for the urban environment and future. The text will start by discussing the concept of public space followed by a discussion regarding homelessness and panhandling, which then will be related to a Swedish context. The paper will end on a reflection over the implications for the contemporary city and its future regarding the findings. What is public space? The concept of public space may seem obvious for most people living their lives in the city. Public space is the streets, parks and squares existing as a natural part of the urban landscape. Mitchell (2003:131) states that public space “is the space of the public”. Simple enough you might think. But if you look at the concept at a deeper level it is evident that the term is not unambiguous. Mitchell argues that public space is not something given; it is something you have to fight for. As examples he gives the labour movement and the women’s right movement that has taken place in public space without asking for permission and sometimes even by breaking the law. Furthermore, Thörn (2006) argues that public space usually is seen as a space for commerce, pleasure and as a political arena. Thus, within this concept lie divergences that can lead to conflict. This dialectic of public space is very important because it shows that the meaning of what public space is may change and it is not a thing we can take for granted (Thörn 2006). According to Mitchell (2003) there is a tendency in today’s society towards the view that public spaces should be frictionless 19

An outstretched hand Wikicommons: Proimos (2009)

and safe - a space that is controlled. In this context, Mitchell discusses if the notion of public space have come to an end in contemporary cities. He claims that there is an idea that no “distractions” should exist - for those who consume. More spaces in the city become semi-public, like malls, and are in fact focused on consumption and spectacle (Thörn 2006). In these spaces there are no room for “undesirable” elements such as homelessness and panhandling (Mitchell 2003). In line with this Mitchell questions some of the new public spaces (such as Internet) and argues for the necessity of a material public space. Although Mitchell’s book is more than ten years old and a lot has happened in the digital world, I would still argue that the same is true today. Even if we have spaces on the Internet to express our opinions there seem to be a need to manifest this in material space. Examples of this during the last years are the Arabic spring, Occupy Wall Street-movement and the antiracist demonstrations in Sweden. All of these movements have occurred in public spaces and also caused some conflicts. Thus, it is apparent that public spaces are still important in today’s society. But it is not only important for movements but also for people who use the public spaces on a more regular basis. An important question to ask is who has a right to use these common spaces? In the beginning of this section I wrote that Mitchell defined public space as the space of the public. But who is the public? Mitchell argues that it is only in public space that the homeless can “represent themselves as a legitimated part of the “the public”.” (Mitchell 2003:129). The connection between public space, the public and homelessness will be discussed below. Homelessness and panhandling Homelessness and panhandling is today part of the urban life both in the US and in Sweden and as mentioned above the public space plays a significant role. Both homelessness and panhandling have a spatial dimension, which is important to highlight. One of the things I reacted to when I moved to Stockholm five years ago was how I often saw people without a home and whose only recourse was to ask for money from fellow citizens on the street. For me, who grew up in a small rural town, it felt chocking and very unpleasant to be confronted with this reality. Today, the number of panhandlers has increased and it is virtually impossible to walk the streets of Stockholm today and not face any homeless people in the public spaces. Tim Cresswell (2004) means that the homeless could be seen as “people without a place” in the city. Thus, it challenges our conception of both a citizen and what the public space is. In other words, they are not seen as real citizens, they do not “belong” because they 20

lack a place to call their own. The homeless are rarely counted as part of the public even though they almost always live in the public space of the city. Instead the homeless are seen as nuisance according to Mitchell (2003). In his book, Mitchell (2003) gives several examples of how the homeless are being excluded from public space both figuratively and literally in the US. He gives examples of laws that for example make it illegal to sleep in public places and policies such as a ban for panhandling after dark. All of these strategies are set out to regulate behaviour and public space, which Mitchell calls the annihilation of space by law. Mitchells argues these laws are designed to eliminate the homeless and not homelessness. He argues that the annihilation of space ultimately means the annihilation of people because these laws are forcing people to break the law just by trying to live. He connects this to the new urban regime, which lies in line with the neoliberal economy that has had, and continues to have, a lot of impact on society in different ways. Mitchell highlights the relation between the economic order of the world and the fact that many people live in poverty and argues that the capitalistic system in fact needs an amount of poor despite the fact that many try to regulate space in which the homeless live. Mitchell argues that regulating is in that sense ideological: you regulate the people because you do not want to regulate the economy (Mitchell 2003). Another effect of the neoliberal principle is the focus on the individual responsibility. The situation of the homeless and the on-going panhandle is blamed on the individual and is not seen as a structural problem of our society (Mitchell 2003). In recent decades there have also been, in line with the current economic-political system, more focus on the city as a landscape or as a theatre as Thörn (2006) puts it. It means that the image of a city becomes increasingly important. As part of this cities want to get rid of the homeless because they do not fit into the picture cities try to sell. Within this view there is also a notion about a “pacified public” which requires frictionless spaces which was discussed earlier in this article. Mitchell (2003) gives many examples throughout the book on strategies from cities to regulate space and the people within. A representative example from the US is Santa Ana. During the 1990’s the local government put forward an anti-camping ordinance, which made it illegal to store belongings on public property and sleep under a blanket in the city centre. The sentence for breaking the ordinance was six months in jail. These kinds of laws are designed to affect the homeless by regulating their access to the public spaces (Mitchell 2003).

A (Public) Space to Call Your Own

A homeless man on the streets of Boston Wikicommons: Woitunski (2008)

I think it is important to emphasize that Mitchell writes in an American context. The spatial injustice is by far greater in America than in a Sweden as well as the question of racial discrimination. Many of the laws and ordinances passed in the US are quite far reaching, for example the anti-camping ordinance. But is it possible to see some similar strategies of exclusion in a Swedish context? This will be discussed in the next section. In a Swedish context In recent years we have in Sweden heard similar arguments to those Mitchell highlights from the US: not recognizing the panhandlers like “real” homeless, which in Sweden also is connected to nationality. Many, but not all, of the panhandlers in Sweden are from another European country. The EU-migrants have increased in recent years as an effect of the on-going economical crisis in the world. Mitchell remarks that foreigners are not considered part of the public (Mitchell 2003:132). This is something you can see in the Swedish debate as well where the EU-immigrants are not seen as part of the Swedish society. But the fact is that as part of the European union we have agreed on a free flow of capital, commodities, services and – people. Any member of the European union has a right to move freely between member states and stay in another EU-country for three months without registration (Utrikesdepartementet 2014). However, they are not allowed to use the country’s social welfare services even though there are no legal obstacles stopping municipalities from providing shelter to the EU-migrants. Even though many of the EU-migrants have homes in the country they come from they become homeless here in Sweden. An important thing to remember is that it is poverty that is the underlying force of why many of the EU-migrants want to come to Sweden. As mentioned, there has been a debate over these issues in Sweden during a couple of years and I will highlight a few examples. In an article from the Sweden Democrats representative Kent Ekeroth (2011), he argues for a ban on begging, because it “destroys the cityscape.” In the article Ekeroth also mentions that many of the panhandlers are foreign and should be deported from Sweden. The Sweden Democrats are a xenophobic party why it is not surprising that they advocate a ban on panhandlers in their policy proposals. During the election for the European parliament and the national parliament in 2014 the party also had posters broadcasted in public transport, on buses and on platforms where the message was: ban “organized begging”. This may seem a bit provocative (which probably was the plan) seeing that these places for advertise is exactly the same places were many panhandlers reside.

Some of the right-wing parties have, however, also started to talk about a ban on panhandling. Cecilia Magnusson, a representative from Moderaterna (the conservative party of Sweden) in the parliament has written a debate article arguing for a ban on street begging. In the article she writes “Many people feel provoked and feel bad when they see fellow man begging outside the shop.” (Magnusson 2014, my translation). Even though a ban on all panhandling is not the party’s official standpoint, the issue of “organized panhandling” have been raised in the party’s national assembly meeting and caused much debate. However, there is no evidence that the panhandlers are part of a larger organized crime scheme (Poohl et al. 2014). Instead, I argue that these descriptions are used to diminish the panhandlers and not recognising them as part of the public. As shown, this is a common strategy when it comes to exclude people figuratively (Mitchell 2003). Furthermore, earlier this year the police evicted homeless people from their temporary settlements around Stockholm. An argument from the city was that it was for the homeless own best: No one should have to live like this. (Sveriges radio 2014). Well, however insightful this statement may be, the problem is that the city does not offer any alternative. Shelters, especially for the EU-migrants, are too few and the only place that remains is the public spaces of the city. The argument of “their own good” has also been put forward in the American context (see Mitchell 2013:212). Another example of more explicit efforts to exclude certain unwanted “elements” in the city is from the municipality of Sala where the local politicians announced a local ban on begging in public spaces in the town of Sala. It was, however, repealed later by the provincial government (Länsstyrelsen) because it was considered breaking the Public Order Act (Länsstyrelsen i Västmanland 2011). There have also been several reports on how informal settlements have been vandalised around Stockholm (Olofsson 2014). Thus, it is apparent that the issues that Mitchell (2003) discusses in his book concerning the US can be found in Sweden as well. For example, both Magnusson (2014) and Ekeroth (2011) refer to the “ordinary” citizen and her/his uncomfortable feelings regarding panhandling and the impact on the city’s “image”. As shown, you can find different kinds of exclusion, both literally and figuratively, in the Swedish context although not to the same extent as in the US. Mitchell (2003) argues, in which I concur, that homelessness must be placed in a larger context linked to poverty and an obtrusive lack of housing. Thus, homelessness and panhandling should not be seen as problem of the individual but of the society as a whole. Mitchell attributes this notion of 21

the individual to the neoliberal way of approaching society and its citizens discussed in the section above. Spaces for people who have no home We cannot ignore the fact that many of our fellow citizens (Swedish and European) are living in the streets. It is important to acknowledge that this have a spatial dimension. I argue that the homeless and panhandlers should be allowed access to the public spaces and not risk being criminalized because of poverty and exposure. Therefore I find the development in Sweden, with eviction and the raised voices for a panhandling ban, worrisome. However, as Mitchell (2003) wisely points out, the question of rights should not be whether you should be able to sleep, urinate or beg in public spaces but by recognising your right as a citizen to be entitled to a roof over your head and basic human needs. Peter Marcuse also argues for the right to the city as a moral principle of justice: “The homeless person in Los Angeles has not won the right to the city when he is allowed to sleep on a park bench in the centre of the city” (Marcuse 2012:35). Thus, Marcuse argues for a more visionary meaning of spatial justice and proposes that the right to the city should contain both the right to consume urban life, but also the right to produce and influence the city.

as a normal element in the city – then we really have a serious problem. The aim should be to give the opportunity for all to have a place to call home and at the same time recognising the right to the city for everyone.

When a city’s image become more and more important as a way to attract investment and provide a “safe” place for consumption then it is not surprising that voices are raised to exclude those “elements” who do not fit in according to this image. But I would argue that a city is not always safe and clean; it lies within the concept of a city that it is diverse and challenging just as Mitchell (2003) shows that public spaces are filled with necessary dissent. I think there is a risk that by trying to make our cities into something they are not we exclude the most important part of a city: the human being. Homelessness and panhandling are undisputable part of the contemporary city. These issues are not easy to solve and may cause feelings of despair. But to let mine or any other person with a roof over her/his head, personal feelings of uneasiness get control over who has access to the public place, which is something Ekeroth (2011) and Magnusson (2014) advocates for - it is for me absurd. Obviously there is no simple solution to the problem but I think we need to recognize the homeless as part of the public and try to eliminate homelessness and not the homeless. A first step would be to recognize the structural problems and not to blame the situation on the individual and the “organized” panhandling. Even though you may feel a bit depressed after reading Mitchell’s book and conclude that similar development seems to occur in Sweden you may also find some hope. One of Mitchell’s main thesis is that public space can change and it is not something you should take for granted. This means that it is possible to make a difference. This is why the issue of public space always will be important to discuss. In this text I have only touched on some of the issues regarding public space and the connection to homelessness and panhandling. It is vital that the discussion and questioning continues. Who are the public spaces for? Who are the public? What kind of city do we want and is everyone welcome? The day we do not feel uncomfortable walking pass a homeless person but see it 22

A (Public) Space to Call Your Own

References Cresswell, Tim (2004) Place – a short introduction. Oxford: Blackwell publishing Ekeroth, Kent (2011, 22 April) Förbjud tiggeri i hela landet. Svenska dagbladet. Retrieved from http:// www.svd.se 2014-11-24 Poohl, Daniel, Quensel, Anna-Sofia & Vergara, Daniel (2014, 19 maj) Så ljuger SD om tiggarna. Expo idag. Retrieved from http://expo.se 2014-12-05 Länsstyrelsen i Västmanland (2011) Förbud mot tiggeri inte förenligt med ordningslagen. Beslut 201104-26 Dnr 213-1208-11. Retrieved from http://www. lanstyrelsen.se/vastmanland 2014-11-24 Magnusson, Cecilia (2014, 13 August) Förbjud gatutiggeriet för att minska risken för fattigdom. Dagens nyheter. Retrieved from http://www.dn.se 2014-11-24 Marcuse, Peter (2012) “Whose right to what city”, in Brenner, N., Marcuse, P. & Mayer, M. (eds.) Cities for people, not for profit: Critical urban theory and the right to the city. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Mitchell, D. (2003) The right to the city – social justice and the fight for public space. New York: The Guildford Press Olofsson, Veronica (2014, 15 juli) Flera tältläger utsatta för vandalisering i Stockholm. ETC. Retrieved from http://www.etc.se 2014-12-05 Sveriges radio (2014, Mars 13). Vems ansvar är tältlägren? Sveriges radio P3. Retrieved from http:// www.sverigesradio.se 2014-11-24 Thörn, Catharina (2006): Kampen om staden och offentlighetens omvandling. In: Ove Sernhede & Thomas Johansson, red., Storstadens omvandlingar: postindustrialism, globalisering och migration. Göteborg: Daidalos. Utrikesdepartementet (2014) Fri rörlighet för personer. 2014-07-02 Retrieved from http://regeringen.se 201412-05

Can Segregation Be Good? Emilie Larsen

In Cities by Design, Fran Tonkiss describes the different social dimensions of inequality in cities resulting from spatial design. Segregation and informality are two subjects brought up, which are quite deeply and thoroughly portrayed. Very briefly, she mentions that segregation can be considered as a good thing – which I think is an interesting and rather provocative claim that I want to discuss more. In the following article I therefore examine it further in the context of spatial and social aspects of urbanism, partly by using Botkyrka in south Stockholm as an example. I conclude the discussion with a claim that the positive aspect of segregation is less important than the negative, due to the individuals affected by it.

Emilie Larsen is a student of civil engineering at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, at the division of Urban and Regional Studies. She has interest in comprehensive and strategic planning, especially in addressing social matters such as equality and sustainable development.

The accepted truths I will circle around two concepts that have to do with urban design – segregation and diversity. Segregation is a big problem in cities of today as it affects the social relations in a negative way, or at least many claim (see for example Tonkiss, 2013). The physical structure that segregation takes, often means division of people in different residential areas but can also be other spatial separations with exclusion of some groups in certain areas. These can derive from differences in ethnicity, class and culture. When using the word ‘segregation’ from now on, it refers to repression of minority groups combined with spatial (and/or social) separations between groups in the city. Further, the highly established view within the planning profession and much of the academia in the field consider diversity as an ideal for the city in favour to achieve economic growth and social sustainability. Though, some writers question these two accepted ‘truths’ that segregation is bad and diversity is good: Is that really the case in all situations? The answer is quite obviously ‘no’ as all urban forms are unique, but the following article will discuss it further. The good segregation “As with inequality itself, segregation is a long-standing – and very widespread – urban phenomenon; and like inequality, it is not simply or necessarily a bad thing.” states Fran Tonkiss (2013, p. 73). I stopped reading the page. What? What does she mean? How can segregation possibly not be a bad thing? She is referring to Peach’s (1996) claim that it actually enhances difference and diversity in the city. How curious. When reading further I learn: In American cities there are actually examples of cities with severe separation between black and white that also are cities with high diversity. I turned to Peach’s original article to find out more. And yes, it is put exactly like that. Segregation means diversity. He states: “Segregation, is in fact, one of the key methods of accommodating difference” in urban contexts (p. 379). I am still not convinced but accept his next claim that there is a difference between voluntarily and forced segregation. People from minority groups that choose to live together with other minorities, separated from the majority group, have done so freely. This is to be compared with people not having the opportunity to choose, but rather is forced to live and dwell in specific areas of the city. Okay, got it. Then it follows that another way of viewing the scale of segregation is to look at levels of concentration. Minority groups may live in more or less separated areas. Peach differentiates them as the ‘ethnic village’, where the minority is mixing up with ‘the rest’ to some degree, vs. the ‘ghetto’ where areas are totally represented by the minority, often under bad socio-economic conditions. Here I think that the first can be seen in the positive light of diversity, as there are different kinds of people living together, while the latter is generally within planning considered as negative. But I question if the ethnic village is segregated in that case. Though, in the ghetto, the high concentrations of similar thinking and lifestyle-living people mean not exchanging social life with the majority group outside. Peach says that consequently the culture in such closed areas are less 23

affected by the city and that a minority group isolated within the city’s border remains its culture, value and language easier. With that, the cultural differences between the minority and the overrepresented rest in the city are preserved. “ Urban concentration allows the groups to pass the threshold size at which ethnic shops and religious institutions can be maintained and the proximity to members of the groups that allows the language and norms of the groups to be maintained.” (Peach, 1996, p. 386)

In the same manner, according to him, spatial segregation strengthens social networks within the area as it is excluded from the rest of the city. The concentration can so have a protective aspect, where the group becomes a safe unit against the outer world. Newcomers may choose these areas for living where they feel belonging. Thus, what he describes is more or less voluntarily segregation. Nevertheless, I think this is problematized by the fact that there often are different degrees of systematic discrimination and separation by purpose of the elite whereby distinction among the two is difficult to conclude. Regardless voluntarily or not, I like to visualize the concentrations spatially like isolated homogeneous islands in the city. If the many concentrations of different cultures are spread out in the city, I guess the homogeneous islands put together creates heterogeneity. Like the raisins in a cookie makes it a raisin cookie. Even gated communities within the city’s boarder, which is most often looked at with judging eyes by planners as the elite segregate themselves, may be good for achieving diversity (Tonkiss, 2013). This is due to the fact that the elite and minority still live next to each other in the city. Hence, there is some exchange between them and they share the city, they are not totally separated; the gate is a ‘semi-open border’ (p. 88). The argument is based on the point that the alternative is worse, being that the elite and minority would live totally separated and far away from one another. The good diversity Okay, so now we have seen some examples of why segregation, quite unexpected, can lead to something good. The holistic view that different spots of culture concentrations within the city lead us into the concept of diversity. Firstly, I like to address what Tonkiss say about the opposite side of diversity, which is for example monotenure. It is certainly not valid in all cases, but the worst examples of monotenure in residential areas experience high levels of crime, unemployment and family problems. In addition, bad health, low education levels and poor housing are related to the phenomenon (ibid.). Consequently it is supported that this is not wished for. Diversity can be described as mix of uses and groups of people in the built environment (Talen, 2006). It is normally considered to be socially good in terms of greater opportunities in life (education, work etc.), creativity as result of innovation spill-overs, tolerance towards others in society and the mix is minimizing distance between functions which has positive environmental effects (Talen, 2006). Moreover, it creates neutral public places and shared spaces (ibid.). In addition it can generate social 24

inclusion and improvements of housing and urban environments (Tonkiss, 2013). To summarize, it is wanted for urban sustainability, which is an argument we so often have seen within planning and urban design over the last years. Talen (2006) describes that planning policies for diversity in America have shown positive results when mixing people from different backgrounds into the same residential area. These are active strategies of moving people to counteract spatial segregation. Also in Great Britain there are similar urban policies like ‘mixed communities’ that sought to change the characteristics of poor areas (Tonkiss, 2013). This has been done by not only moving people, but also through building new affordable housing in wealthier residential areas, renewals of properties in poor areas, mixing tenures and subsidises from the government (ibid.). But from an urban design aspect, it is hard to plan for diversity. There are issues of what to mix, difficulties with implementation as well as maintenance of the diversity. Talen though suggest that what planners can do is to create opportunities for diversity with design by different kinds of uses in the same area – mixing various housing with services and planning for people to exchange experiences in public spaces. This is all in line with Young’s ‘ideal desegregation’ of ‘livingtogether-indifference’ (in Tonkiss, 2013, p. 79) that promote that diversity is achieved when different people live closely. The good informality Another aspect of diversity is informality. Or rather, perhaps, does informality produce diversity..? To start with; informality occurs in the margins of society, outside the rules and formality made by the elite. Tonkiss claims that there is a contradiction in informality taking place in practice; it comes both from below and above. I.e. it affects and derives from both the very poorest and most excluded in the world, as well as the societal elite. The elite possesses the power of controlling much of the world politics and societal system, planning not to forget. But the elite society also consists of informality such as social networks, informal relations and business agreements “under the table” etc. Tonkiss exemplifies the contradictions with the difference between rich people gating communities and privatizing what were earlier public spaces such as streets and parks, with the urban poor occupying land such as in slums or trailer parks – the difference being that the latter is illegal while the elite sets the rules. But somehow, the withdrawal of state and informality creates potential, selfsufficiency and alternative urban design (Tonkiss, 2013). It produces alternative ways and possibilities for urban life. It produces and makes the city under the surface (ibid.). Informality can in these ways appear good. The other side of it Then I ask myself, good and bad for whom? I cannot be blind to the negative consequences from spatial and social segregation. Listen to this: “…economic segregation is both spatial expressions of, and the spatial stimulus for, dissociation and dis-identification across physical and socio-economic distance” (Massey & Fischer, 2003, in Tonkiss, 2013, p. 79). Then there are the other types of segregation such as ethnic, residential, cultural and religious. It all leads to hostility, distrust and suspicion between the repressed minority and majority (Atkinson in Tonkiss, 2013, p. 79). It directly means social exclusion and

Can Segregation Be Good?

Islands of Difference Illustration by Emilie Larsen (2014)

marginalization of the minority (ibid.). Not to forget the individuals living as excluded from the city, with less opportunities and always considered as the stranger in the city. This is what Peach described as involuntarily segregated. Additionally, it is not only the (non)choice of the segregated minority that influents, but also to what degree the majority choose to isolate themselves (Tonkiss, 2013). So some say that segregation can mean diversity. But how does that work in planning practice I wonder? Planned diversity, where policies have moved people to mix up minorities into residential areas dominated by another majority group, is not a guarantee for well working diversity. Despite Young’s promotion of the ‘ideal desegregation’ with ‘living-together-in-difference’, it does not necessarily mean interaction (Talen, 2006). In fact, nonspatial aspects of separation of a more social nature can be present in spatially diverse areas (ibid.). The usage of the word ‘diversity’ is so well used in a positive context in urban strategies, that we might forget to reflect on it, even less question it. Can diversity be bad? Well, there are some things I want to put forward here. Talen refers to Skerry when pointing out that diversity actually can lead to conflicts. There is the risk of creating tensions when different groups live next to each other. The argument so suggest that diversity not necessarily is good in all situations. Moreover, Tonkiss declare that there is little or lacking experiences of how to plan for diversity in practice: “ In truth, the elements of designing for diversity are fairly well known - the larger problem is how to support or maintain a diversity of users in such spaces, given that a ‘diversity premium’ on varied and vital parts of the city so often leads to processes of incubation and colonization by more privileged socio-economic groups.” (p. 86).

Planning for diversity also bares the risk of gentrification (Tonkiss, 2013). Mixing housing and making poor districts “nicer” make it more attractive and processes of rich pushing out the poor may start, or majority pushing out the minority. There is also the risk of planning an area with successful spatial diversity, but remaining social divisions as described earlier. No, segregation does certainly not only bring good.

Segregation in practice To put this in perspective, I will now present an example of segregation. Botkyrka is a municipality located south of Stockholm, constructed of several suburbs to the capital. It covers a relatively large geographical area, with urban districts closest to Stockholm, and rural characteristics further out in the very south. The urban area is in turn divided in north and south, with some greenery areas in between. The appearances of the two areas are very dissimilar; the north dominated by multistoreys apartment housing from the million housing program and the south by villas. I will not go deep into the causes of why, but it is a fact that the districts are totally separated. There is segregation in Botkyrka (Rojas Lundgren, 2010; Hårsman, 2006), mainly residential but also ethnic, socioeconomic and cultural. In the south live practically only high-income native Swedes, while the north is a concentration of lower-incomers and immigrants, or people with immigrated parents, from several origins. The north has so become a cluster of many minority groups. Hårsman’s study (2006) of spatial segregation in the Stockholm region showed that ethnic minorities often cluster in areas with other ethnic minorities. This is the case in Botkyrka, and the level of segregation has reached high. People are excluded and separated in both directions, north from south and south from north1. There is also distrust between the citizens. The ‘rich’ has separated themselves in the south, even trying to break out from the municipality to create one of their own. (The rich south lost the vote however as the entire municipality participated in the voting and the north wanted it to be unified.) Connecting this to diversity I notice a few things relating to the previously presented theoretical thoughts. The concentration of multi cultures in the north indicates that the diversity in those areas is high, while the south dominated by only one ethnic majority has much lower levels of diversity. The study by Hårsman supports this, and also showed that native Swedes rarely visited places with high ethnic mix. This implies that the cultures of the minorities are preserved, in accordance with Peach’s theory. I also perceive it in the area as I hear other languages than Swedish spoken around me, international shops with groceries from all over the world and simply another cultural air than in the south. Despite that the north has lower levels of income, education and is represented by approximately a hundred different cultures 25

Observers Illustration by Emilie Larsen (2014)

(Botkyrka, 2014), here, in fact, perhaps the excluded are the ones that have the most diverse society! There are also signs of informality in this part of the municipality (Eldestrand & Berggren, 2011). In this case the diversity and informality may be seen as a good thing. The municipality seems to think so, as they use diversity for city branding and in development strategies where the variety of culture is highlighted.

as the individuals are way more important than looking at the greater good in those specific situations. Surely, holistic views are important for urban planning; I am certainly the first to agree on that. But in the case of segregation I think that individuals must be put in first hand, personal wellbeing and equal rights to the city is of bigger importance.

However, informal economies and networks can in many cases mean that you are excluded from formal societal systems such as institutions and formal market, which affect the poorest worst (Tonkiss, 2013). In north Botkyrka there is a large group that stands beside the job market and subsidy systems (Eldestrand & Berggren, 2011). 15 % of people able to work are like a black spot for the officers in the municipality. On the papers, the 15 % does not work, study or get subsidies. But they have an everyday life there in some way that is out of the officer’s knowledge. Now the municipality made an investigation about this a few years ago and found results worth raising eyebrows. As a direct consequence of bad access to relations and personal contacts with people on the job market, poor language skills, low level of education and lack of working experiences they were totally excluded from the job market (ibid.). Clearly, this illustrates the downsides of informality. Conclusion I understand the arguments for why segregation can be seen in the light of diversity when considering the city as a greater entity of several different groups. But no, I do not buy it. To be excluded both socially and spatially cannot be good for the weak and powerless minority groups. It may be so that the city benefits from some sort, or level, of segregation as it makes it diverse. However, I think the argument sets aside the oppressed and excluded people living with segregation. The voluntarily self-segregated rich (or other group in possession of power) may however not be affected in the same negative way as the weak. To them, segregation might even be good, as they can choose when to experience other cultures and diversity outside of their closed community. But for the excluded oppressed, such as the ethnic minority or people living in areas dominated by low socio-economic values, it is a different story. I think the humanistic view and understanding of power relations simply have to be considered when talking about this phenomenon, 26

Can Segregation Be Good?

References 1. Olsson, L. ‘Presentation KTHstud’. Presentation of Botkyrka municipality in course Project Sustainable Urban Planning – Strategies for Urban and Regional Development, KTH. Botkyrka kommunhus, Tumba: September 12, 2014 Botkyrka (2014) ‘Om Botkyrka’, www.botkyrka.se (accessed 2014-11-27) Eldestrand, A. & Berggren, S. (2011) ‘Från osynliga till synliga’, Botkyrka kommun, report by Employment and Adult Education Department Hårsman, B. (2006) ‘Ethnic Diversity and Spatial Segregation in the Stockholm Region’, Urban Studies, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 1341–1364 Peach, C. (1996) ‘Good segregation, bad segregation’, Planning Perspectives, vol. 11, pp. 379-398 Talen, E. (2006) ‘Design That Enables Diversity: The Complications of a Planning Ideal’, Journal of Planning Literature, vol. 20, pp. 233-249 Tonkiss, F. (2013) ‘Cities by Design: The Social Life of Urban Form’. Cambridge: Polity Press

Response to Decline Fighting against forces pushing the umbrella into unwanted directions

Producing and Reproducing Urban Inequalities in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside Gardiner Hanson

In the book Cities By Design: The Social Life of Urban Form, Fran Tonkiss seeks to describe many of the formal, informal, visible and hidden processes that combine to shape how cities are developed, livedin and structured by its inhabitants. The book is a stark reminder of how these processes seemingly continue to produce and reproduce a wide variety of gross injustices and inequities for many urban dwellers. With this perspective in mind, I turn to the highly impoverished neighbourhood of the Downtown Eastside in Vancouver, Canada, to explore how Tonkiss’s understanding of the city and its processes have produced and continue to reproduce one of the most isolated, segregated and impoverished communities in Canada. These same processes have also seemingly laid the framework for an incoming wave of gentrification into the neighbourhood, thereby also making this one of the most threatened neighbourhoods in Canada.

Gardiner Hanson is an Canadian urban planning student currently working towards the completion of his M.Sc. degree in Urban Planning from the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden. His academic and professional focus and interests have largely related to matters related to environmental planning, economic development, and sustainable community development.

Introduction Vancouver, Canada somehow keeps popping up on these lists of one of the most livable cities in the world. I tend to believe local Vancouverites generally tend to love and share this particular accolade, as do the local media, who often rarely miss an opportunity to remind its readership. Take these same Vancouverites outside of the city and they can probably go on for days about all the amazing qualities of the city and how one should definitely make a visit there one day. I am largely a part of this camp as well. I love the city for the most part. It can definitely be all that it sometimes claims to be and more, but never am I naive to the fact that this city has created a very unjust and unlivable situation for many residents of a particular neighbourhood. This particular neighbourhood is the Downtown Eastside. On any given day and at any given time, rampant poverty and peril can be witnessed across much of the Downtown Eastside. At the same time and if one looks carefully between the lines, one can also witness the strong sense of community here. The Downtown Eastside (DTES) of Vancouver is often referred to as Canada’s poorest neighbourhood. In fact it is. It is also a highly segregated community. This segregation is largely framed around the reality that a majority (approximately 63%) of the residents in the DTES live below the poverty line, but also face a disproportionate amount of impacts related to unemployment, homelessness, crime, fear, violence, drug use, mental and physical health issues, and sub-standard living conditions (City of Vancouver, 2012). The inequalities that are found within this neighbourhood are of course produced and reproduced by a variety of different means, which is the focus of this essay. To analyze these different means, Fran Tonkiss’s book, Cities by Design: The Social Life of Urban Form, and specifically her chapter on “Unequal Cities, Segregated Spaces” will be used to analyze the conditions for how the DTES initially became to be and how it also continues to be an area which is endemically impoverished, isolated and segregated within the city of Vancouver. Historical Perspectives As Vancouver grew rapidly around the turn of the 20th century, the local and provincial economies were largely tied to the resource industries found throughout the rest of the province. Workers who were employed within these industries, mostly men, would often head elsewhere in the province for work, often for extended periods at a time, but would periodically return to Vancouver to spend some of their wages. Upon returning, many of the resource workers would find lodging in and around the DTES due to its high density of hotels, boarding houses and bars (Newnham, 2005). This dynamic created a rough and tumble image of the neighbourhood from the beginning, but regardless, it was 29

Looking west along Hastings St. from the old core of the city towards the newer central business district in the background Photo: Briadoublene. Accessed via https://www.flickr.com/photos/briadoublene/15365005134/ Shared under Creative Commons agreement. Image by: Lehmann, J. | The Globe & Mail, 2014)

nonetheless the heart of the city. Up until the 1950’s, the DTES was in fact the central business district of the city also. Beyond the hotels, rooming houses and bars, there was also a multitude of department stores, banks, the main library and the wide variety of other services one would find in a typical downtown commercial area. Although alcohol and substance abuse has long had a history in the neighbourhood (Russwurm, 2008), it wasn’t until the years following the Great Depression that the fortunes of the neighbourhood began to take a markedly pronounced turn when an era of disinvestment was introduced.

Urban Inequalities Urban inequalities, particularly income and consumption inequalities, are always ‘produced and reproduced’ through a variety of different means (Tonkiss, 2013: 69). Inequalities are produced through the spatial structuring of employment and urban land markets as well as through the distributional impact of urban investment and their related distributional priorities. Inequalities are reproduced through the ways that socioeconomic differences become ingrained in place (Tonkiss, 2013: 61).

By the 1960’s, Vancouver’s central business district began to shift to the west of the DTES, as did many of the department stores and other commercial service providers. What was left were the old hotels, rooming houses, bars and of course the increasingly low-income residents (McMartin, 2014). In the 1980’s the Province of B.C. deinstitutionalized many psychiatric treatment centres across the province, with the result being that many former patients, took residence within the DTES in order to access the affordable rental housing stock. As many residents suffered from mental health issues and poor prospects for employment, alcohol and substance abuse problems began to take a sharp hold in the neighbourhood (Strathcona BIA, 2012). In the 1980’s, a wave of crack-cocaine and heroin use further exacerbated the issues felt in the neighbourhood as many residents soon found refuge in the highly addictive and potent narcotics. By the 1990’s, crime, drug use, homelessness, prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases were so rampantly present, that the neighbourhood had seemed to cross a point of no return (ibid. 2012).

The production of urban inequalities in the DTES can largely be traced back to exactly what Tonkiss highlights as root causes, the spatial restructuring of employment and urban land markets and the distributional impacts of urban investment. The first prolific change to the urban land market in Vancouver coincided with the introduction of the initial streetcar system at the turn of the 20th century. This rapidly brought about an expansion of the urban area and allowed financially able residents to more freely move to areas further away from the historical core of the city (McMartin, 2014). This spurred a process of socio-economic and ethnocultural ‘sorting’ where residents were able to spatially diversify where they chose to live based on economic and ethnic status. This process of ‘sorting’ also permeated into the commercial real estate sector. In the 1960’s, market and political forces augmented downtown urban investment in Vancouver by focusing on promoting new urban development directly to the west of the DTES. Politicians and business leaders had long been aware of the social and economic problems that existed in the DTES and sought new ways to generate economic investment in the city. With the goal to modernize and to capitalize on demand for new office space, a new financial district for commercial office space was planned and built. This represented an explicit process of commercial and economic segregation from the rapidly deteriorating historical core of the DTES. As investment migrated west, so in turn did many of the existing businesses of the DTES and almost all of the urban infrastructural projects (such as transit infrastructure, new commercial and residential development, institutional centres etc.).

Today, the DTES still faces a number of challenges related to the perils of addiction and impoverishment, but a new wave of gentrification is also slowly creeping in and disrupting the traditional make-up of the community. How this process of gentrification will benefit or further harm the community and its members is still unclear. What is clear is that there has been a long drawn out process of direct and indirect consequences that have impacted this community like no other in the city and subsequently created an area where urban inequalities are strikingly present.

What largely remained were the ramshackle buildings and the downtrodden residents of the DTES. The hollowing out of the

Producing and Reproducing Urban Inequalities in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside

Protests have become common place in recent years to protest the social living conditions in the DTES. Photo: Film Collins. Accessed via https://www.flickr.com/photos/nofutureface/4361793980/in/set-72157623444713756. Shared under Creative Commons agreement

economic status of this neighbourhood is critically important to highlight, because what remained were commercial and residential spaces that were no longer in high demand, which subsequently drove down market prices for these spaces. As the overall economy restructured, formerly transient resource workers became more stable in their housing and subsequent demand for the hotels and rooming houses dissipated. Due to the reduced demand for temporary lodging, many of the former hotels and boarding housings were converted to single residential occupancy (SRO) housing units, which are essentially one-room apartments with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities. This created a dynamic where low-income individuals (who often lived on fixed incomes from social welfare payments), were able to secure permanent housing within these buildings. The SRO’s made it possible for lower income earners to become established as the dominant group that resided in the area, largely due to the fact that it was likely all that they could afford. This of course furthered the stigmatization of the area as an area for the urban poor and further reinforced a cycle of urban disinvestment. There wasn’t a total lack of disinvestment in the community though. As the neighbourhood became ever increasingly impoverished and began facing the multitude of mental, health and addiction challenges, this prompted social service providers to establish and centralize their services in the area. Although well intentioned, the centralization of these social service providers, further segregated and concentrated the most economically and mentally challenged into one single area of the city. Segregation Segregation would most often likely be explained as a purely negative condition within urban environments. In reality there are mostly often negative consequences that are featured within urban segregation, but not always. As Tonkiss explains (2013:74), segregation can also promote ‘diversity and difference’ within urban environments and allow for varied ethnic or socioeconomically communities to rationally group themselves due to “cultural preference, economic opportunity and social solidarity”. Members of any given social group within a city can exploit this, whether such groups are distinguished by socio-economic class, or along lines of ethnic or cultural identity. Segregation therefore

also permits cities to support various population groups, which are highly differentiated by class terms (ibid, 2013:75). The key issue for evaluating segregation for Tonkiss (2013:73), is by determining to what degree is segregation “coercive, constrained or compulsory, as opposed to more or less ‘freely’ chosen”. Tonkiss (2013:77) highlights the fact that segregation can also impact different socio-economic groups in different ways. Areas where investment is lacking and where poorer groups have taken root, often act as areas where access and housing options are more readily available and could therefore potentially be seen as a positive. As Vancouver has become increasingly expensive as a city to live in, the DTES represents one of the only areas, if not the only area of the city, where there are is an abundance of housing that is within financial access to people who are subsistent on social welfare programs. Due to this phenomenon, the DTES also acts as one of the only neighbourhoods where access to entry is attainable for people on very limited budgets. Whether or not a direct intention, this phenomenon is undoubtedly a considerable ‘coercive’ tool. In this sense, segregation becomes almost ‘compulsory’ as there are no other neighbourhoods for these disadvantaged residents to financially move to, which therefore becomes an overtly negative consequence for these residents. Alternatively, the segregation of these residents may be seen as a positive by more able and affluent residents as the negative externalities associated with this neighbourhood are clustered into one area of the city and thereby not negatively impacting other neighbourhoods. Subsequently this could ensure that the overall region is perceived as more ‘livable’ from a psychological perspective as the associated consequences are out of sight and out of mind (Tonkiss, 2013:76). One of the conditions that could often be perceived as out of sight and out of mind for most residents are what Tonkiss terms, ‘socio-spatial anchors’. Generally, socio- spatial anchors can be understood through the provision and access to “information networks and job openings; social solidarity and mutual aid; opportunities for enterprise as well as for consumption;... political mobilization and community organization” (Tonkiss, 2013:74). Although these anchors are highly contextual , they are not always explicitly visible to the unsuspecting eye. The video 31

documentary, Through a Blue Lens (Mannix & Kovanic, 1999), documents quite well how different members of the community often engage in accessing information networks, and sharing in social solidarity, mutual aid and consumption. Although many of these components often relate to engaging in the illegal drug trade or prostitution, they nonetheless act as social anchors for members of this community. That said, It is more likely that the entrapment of addiction and accessible housing act more as ‘anchors’ for local residents than the ‘socio-spatial anchors’ for which Tonkiss describes. The wide array of social service providers that are centralized in the neighbourhood also act in a sense as social anchors within the community and help in defining the makeup of how people interact within the community. Soup-kitchens, homeless shelters, detox facilities, safe-injection sites and other forms of social service provisions can act as spaces where members of the community can access services and interact with others. It is quite obvious why social service providers would choose to cluster in such an environment as they undoubtedly seek to provide accessible services to those that most generally need and demand them. The question though is how ‘freely’ residents and these service providers in the area have chosen to become members of this given community, or if the impacts of addiction and lack of economic ability have ‘constrained’ and ‘coerced’ these residents and services to locate here? The answer is largely two-fold. Of course most social service and subsidized housing providers have most likely freely chosen to locate here due to the pressing needs, but likely not always. In recent years, the City has been aggressively arguing for the need to decentralize such services in order to spread the ‘burden’ across the entire city. Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, the desire to decentralize services has faced enormous community opposition in almost every neighbourhood other than the DTES. This opposition creates a vicious cycle where in the face of neighbourhood opposition elsewhere, the only remaining option is to increasingly provide new and expanded services within the DTES. This further exacerbates the reproduction of a segregated community, one in which if you are a low-income individual or someone who battles mental or substance abuse issues, the only place in the city where you can access services to help you are within this neighbourhood. Desegregation or gentrification? The process initiated by the City to decentralize services and spread the ‘burden’ across the city is largely a strategy and tool towards the promotion of an increasingly desegregated urban area. Others see it as a way of permitting the process of gentrification into the DTES. Here, the expectation is that higher income earners will increasingly move into the neighbourhood (often for a myriad of reasons), but by doing so, often by displacing the existing residents by driving land and rent costs higher. This process can subsequently drastically change the 32

social dynamics of a neighbourhood and can often create conflicting demands for services (Kohn, 2013). Tonkiss highlights that there is a duality involved in many gentrification processes. Firstly it is a process where ‘re-sorting’ affluent residents can exploit their own spatial capital to freely choose areas with locational benefits (i.e. the inner-city), but also choose to access different forms of consumption (schools, restaurants, parks etc.) due to their mobility and economic affordances. Many disadvantaged residents do not have the means to access the same opportunities of consumption and mobility, so when gentrification processes are taking place, “many who are unable to travel find themselves trapped in an area with limited resources and potentially a declining quality of life” (Foord, 2010: 60; cited in Tonkiss, 2013: 82). This is problematic in another sense towards these ‘re-sorting’ processes of urban areas. Although these different socioeconomic groups may not always compete for the same housing, they undoubtedly compete over the varied places of consumption (Tonkiss, 2013:82). As more and more affluent residents increasingly inhabit such an disadvantaged area, so do their demands for increased housing and consumption choices, which consequentially continue to drive prices higher and thereby continue to promote new forms of investment by external actors, the possible displacement of existing residents and conflicts between users groups. This process has been particularly problematic within the DTES, particularly within the last 5-10 years. Market forces have created the demand for new market-rate housing in the area. The main concern of course is how these market forces may come to displace existing residents. Recently a string of ‘reno-victions’ at local SRO’s have started to begin to pop-up, where landlords use the excuse that ‘required renovations are necessary’, only to complete the renovations and subsequently ask for much more in rent after the fact. Of course the previous tenant who was most likely on social welfare cannot afford this. Figures are not readily available to discuss how significant this phenomenon may or not be, but as local resident, Rick Spencer shared with a local media outlet, “All of sudden, everybody has started to disappear” (The Straight, 2014). Local building manager, Fred Lincoln, further confirms this by noting how a former SRO building across the street from his own recently evicted everybody, renovated the premises and subsequently raised the rent from $375/month to $1,000/month (ibid, 2014). With situations like this continually occurring, it will only be a matter of time before the entire neighbourhood changes. These market forces also cause disruption to the local commercial sector as increasing demand for new ‘boutique’ businesses have begun to appear in order to cater to new residents. These new businesses may or may not displace existing businesses, but regardless, they do in fact cater to a clientele that is largely not the traditional resident base and

Producing and Reproducing Urban Inequalities in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside

therefore largely inaccessible to existing residents. In fact since 2005, commercial storefront vacancy rates have fallen from a high of roughly 34% to a remarkably low rate of roughly 12% (City of Vancouver, 2012). The question then remains as to how these processes will remake the city? No one obviously knows, but if market forces and gentrifiers are continually allowed to permeate this neighbourhood, undoubtedly gentrification will continue to gain steam. Most likely over time the neighbourhood will likely begin to resemble an extremely ‘diverse’ area made up of low to highincome residents. Higher earning individuals will continue to drive demand to move closer to the inner city and will likely largely succeed to some degree. Low-income earners will have a defined social housing building stock to access, but nowhere near as much as before. The will require more policies and actions to be developed to protect the existing residents and services from being forced from this area. In order to protect the make-up of the neighbourhood, the City and the Province have for their part purchased a number of SRO hotels and provided city-owned land in the past decade to ensure a supply of affordable housing options, but residents constantly fear it will not be enough to allow them to continue to live in the one and only neighbourhood that would originally have them. I guess in this sense the next time you hear about Vancouver being one of the most livable cities in the world, keep in mind it’s all a matter of who you ask.

References City of Vancouver. (2012). Downtown eastside (DTES) local area profile. Retrieved from http://vancouver.ca/ files/cov/profile-dtes-local-area-2012.pdf Kohn, M. (2013). What is wrong with gentrification? Urban Research & Practice, 6 (3), 297-310. DOI:10.10 80/17535069.2013.846006 Lupick, T. (2014, April 9). Downtown eastside residents fear dispersal due to local area plan. The Straight. Retrieved from http://www.straight.com/ news/622151/downtown-eastside-residents-feardispersal-due-local-area-plan Mannix, V. A. (Director), & Kovanic, G. D. (Producer). (1999). Through a blue lens [Motion picture]. Canada: National Film Board of Canada. Retrieved from https://www.nfb.ca/film/through_a_blue_lens/ McMartin, P. (2014, July 2). Vancouver’s downtown eastside is a ghetto made by outsiders. The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved from http://www.vancouversun.com/life/ Pete+McMartin+Vancouver+Downtown+ Eastside+ghetto+made+outsiders+with+video/ 9983272/story.html Newnham, J. (2005). An overview of Vancouver’s downtown eastside for UBC learning exchange trek program participants. UBC Learning Exchange. Retrieved from UBC Leaning Exchange website: http://www.learningexchange.ubc.ca/files/2010/11/ overviewdtes2016.pdf Russwurm, L. (2008, July 13). ‘The dope craze that’s terrorizing Vancouver’. The Tyee. Retrieved from http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/08/13/DTESHistory/ Strathcona Business Improvement Association (2012). Vancouver’s downtown eastside: a community in need of balance. Retreived from http:// strathconabia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ DTES-A-Community-in- Need-of-Balance.pdf Tonkiss, F. (2013). Cities by design: The social life of urban form. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Photos Lehmann, J (photographer). (2014, April 23). Robertson calls five per cent rise in Vancouver homeless ‘frustrating’ [image file]. The Globe & Mail. Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail. com/news/british-columbia/robertson-calls-fiveper-cent-rise-in-vancouver-homeless-frustrating/ article18129120/ Redekop, A. (2013, March 2). Protesters such as DTES resident Bud Osborn chant and make speeches as the protest outside Pidgin restaurant in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside [image file]. The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved from http://www. vancouversun.com/news/story.html?id=8040381

DOWN

6 7

8 10

9 12

17 19

27 28

31 32 34

33 36

44 47

37 42

43 46

ACROSS 1. This can be face-to-face, over the phone, via e-mail, or in other ways 6. Not near 7. Creative outlet 8. Abig, furry, cow-like animal 10. A synonym for finished 12. The thickenling agent in Jell-O 16. Give the meaning of a word 18. The abbreviation for silver 19. Another word for lady 20. Past tense of sell 22. ____, sweet ____ 23. Edlble flesh 25. A lipid that is liquid at room temperature 26. Follows do, re, ____ 28. English, Spanish, Arabic, French, e.g. 30. A long story

31. Credit to 32. A sound you might make while thinking 34. Clothing worn by a female ballerina 36. ____, crackle, pop 37. Synonym for applaud 40. An ethnic group from Southeast Asia 41. Synonym for attempt 43. Abr. for Los Angeles 44. A snake or feathery scarf 48. The robot from the Plxar movie of the same name 50. The biggest satellite orbiting Earth 51. ____ Wayne or Kim 52. ____ and Order

1. Feline 2. The state at the north-east corner of the United States 3. Opposite of voting yea 4. A shorter name for Coca-Cola 5. The time of day when the sun appears highest in the sky 6. The opposite of bondage 9. The amount of time since your birth 10. A 10-cent coin 11. ____ , two, three, four ... 13. Far from first 14. â&#x20AC;&#x153;A long time __, in a galaxy far, far wayâ&#x20AC;? 15. Solitary person 17. A related group 21. __ and behold 23. Significance 24. Past tense of eat 27. Inheritance 29. Asubstance you chew 31. Aflying mammal 32. Homo Sapiens 33. Likely 35. This can be on the stern of a rose 36. Anotoriously slow, shelled animal 38. Not fail 39 To stuff 42. Sit! Stay! ____ over! 44. What a ghost says to scare someone 45. This animal is used as a messenger in the Harry Potter series 46. You do this with a reedle and thread 48. Havenothing to ____ with

5 3 4

5 3

8 8 3

8 9 1 7 4 3 1 5 4 7 6 9

1 9 5

8 4 9

1 4 8 2 7 4 6 8

2 5

4 3 3 9

3 2

8 9 1 6 7 5 2 5 4 7 1 2 3 9 8 4 5

5 9 2

3 7 5 3 1 8

1 8 2

1 2 7 2 3 8 5 4 4 5 7 6 1 7 7 6 8

2 4

1 6 8

3 5 6 3

3 7 7

3 7

1 5 3 4

3 2

1 8 6

7 5

9 3 9 5 2 7 8 3 2 5 3 6 7 5

8 4

1 9

1 5

9 7

6 1 4 2 4

7 2

4 3 6

1 6 9

7 4 1 9

2 5 8

The right to the city cannot be considered a simple visiting right or a return to the traditional city. It can only be formulated as the right to urban life, in a transformed and renewed form. ------ Lefebvre, 1993 The city has long been a subject for utopian longings and hopes for a better future; it has also been the focus of social fears, despairs and dystopian imaginings. ------ Pinder, 2002

A neoliberal rhetoric of government austerity and market-based provisioning has taken its place. As a result, residents in dozens of large cities live without many basic services, and they do so with little chance of successfully rallying government support for reform through invocations of social justice. ------ Kinder, 2014

The right to difference is complementary to the right of the city. ------ Dikec, 2001

The evolution of regions and urban agglomerations is thus seen as following development cycles that include periods of rapid growth followed by periods of slower growth and decline. ------ Martinez-Fernandez, 2012

Flows, networks, and cycles of production–consumption will form between the collective facilities and the neighborhood, closing chains of need and supply as locally as possible. ------ Petcou, 2011

It is The right to the city, not rights to the city. ------ Marcuse, 2011 All the great urban planners, engineers, and architects of the twentieth century set about their tasks by combining an intense imaginary of some alternative world (both physical and social) with a practical concern for engineering and re-engineering urban and regional spaces according to radically new designs. ------ Harvey, 2000

Conceptualizing spatial justice in terms of a view of space as process, and perhaps in terms of radical notions of justice, stands as an exacting challenge and, not unlikely, as the single occasion there might be for requiring and constructing a concept of spatial justice. ------ Pirie, 1983

The network society perspective allows a scalar view of urban decline both ’zoomed in’ from global to local and ‘zoomed out’ from local to global. ------ Martinez-Fernandez, 2012 But the right to the city is a unitary right, a single tight that makes claim to a city in which all of the separate and individual rights so often cited in charters and agendas and platforms are implanted. ------ Marcuse, 2011 One of the key challenges, then, lies in how to reconceptualise the concept of utopia and in particular the functions of utopian urbanism, so that they draw inspiration form such movements and critical actions, rather than neglecting them through the claims of ‘endings’. ------ Pinder, 2002

Such is the radical nature of this challenge to extant systems of social and economic order, which Florida equates to the transition from feudalism to factory capitalism, that the rules of the game have forever changed. ------ Peck, 2005

To explain the discrepancies, one has Social justice requires not the to take into account, on the one hand, a certain time lag in analysing the melting away of differences, but structural development of settlements and, on the other hand, a normative institutions that promote reprobias toward optimism among the city’s planners, which also played an duction of and respect for group important role. ------ Wiechmann, 2012 difference without oppression. ------ Harvey, 1992 R-Urban is thus not about “sustainable development” A view of the city region is complicated by the fact that revitalization lies in the hands of many different agencies, which are often acting in an uncoordinated way, among them planning departments and redevelopment agencies. ------ Wiechmann, 2012 Open-source urbanism gives them the chance not merely to serve for a limited period as gap-fillers that bridge bad times, but also to be taken seriously as cooperation partners and catalysts for use and process-oriented urban development. ------ Misselwitz, 2007

but about societal change and political and cultural reinvention, addressing issues of social inequality, power, and cultural difference. ------ Petcou, 2011 It is crucially important to be clear that it is not everyone’s right to the city with which we are concerned but that there is in fact a conflict among tights that needs to be faced and resolved, rather than wished away. ------ Marcuse, 2011

The notion of spatial (in)justice sets the parameters by which the right to the city may be assessed, violations of which are resisted through a right to difference. ------ Dikec, 2001

Increased public subsidies for the arts, street-level spectacles, and improved urban façades, with expected ‘returns’ in the form of gentrification and tourist income, run the self-evident risk that such faux-funky attractions might lapse into their own kind of ‘generica’. ------ Peck, 2005

‘ City air makes one free.’ It was once said. ------ Harvey, 2000 The allocation of goods in a society should be governed by the ‘difference principle’, whereby policies should only improve the situation of those better off when ‘doing so is to the advantage of those less fortunate. ------ Rawls, 1971 Utopia is an artificially created island which functions as an isolated

The frequent resort to such driving metaphors in The Rise of the Creative Class not only sends strong signals about who is in the driving seat and the direction of the traffic, at a more implicit level it also suggests causality. ------ Peck, 2005

coherently organized, and largely closed-space economy (thought closely monitored relations with the outside world are posited). ------ Harvey, 2000

Park(ing) in Husby Space for Adaptability, Flexibility and Informality Xiaohui Wang

Public space is places for everyday life and public matters. The decline, erosion and privatization of public space have become urgent issues for urban public life. There are a large number of practices and projects around the world aiming to create and reshape vibrant public space. Among these, informal activities create new use and forms of public space and add adaptation into decayed and abandoned space. Take Husby as an example, this essay aims to find possible methods and tools to improve spatial adaptability and physical flexibility from the perspective of design process. Husby is an over-planned and over-programmed housing area in Million Homes Program. Inspired by the Eco-box project in Paris, this essay tries out to design experiments to transform parking space in Husby into new adaptive and flexible public space. It will offer just basic tools for local inhabitants to build their public space, manage their space and enjoy their space. The new public space is a place for diverse users, various activities and selfmanagement.

Xiaohui Wang is a master student in Sustainable Urban Planning and Design at KTH in Sweden. She holds a bachelor degree in urban planning and design from Nanjing University in China. She is interested in researches on public space, urban social life, urban form and human behavior, landscape urbanism. 38

Introduction: Public life + Informal urbanism Public space, such as squares, markets, parks and streets, contributes to vibrant urban life in contemporary cities. They are the places for everyday life. Researches on public life are attracting more and more attention around the world. Rios (2010) states that public space is a domain, realm or sphere that includes globalization, capitalism, privatization, consumption, cultural identity and environmental behaviors. The use of, access to and control of public space has become more complex issues that involve diverse actors and stakeholders from politicians, urban planners to citizens. Hou (2010) points out that a predominant theme in the recent literature on public space is the decline and erosion of public space and public life, which could be partly explained by increasing personal interest and declined civic engagements in the public matters. Besides, another phenomenon is the growing privatization of public space as a common pattern and experience, where plenty public spaces have been transformed into themed malls, festival markets (Hou, 2010). Among practices and projects from diverse urbanism, informal urbanism is the clearest example of city-making as an ordinary practice (Tonkiss, 2013). On an everyday level, informal activities create new use and forms of public space and these personal and collective uses bring both private and public benefits (Hou, 2010). Connected with urban informality, everyday urbanism emphasizes on temporary processes more than urban form, and on the use value in the experience, perception and meaning of public space (Rios, 2010). According to Rios (2010), adaptive space is a material expression of everyday urbanism, namely, “[…] unclaimed environments that are appropriated for economic and social uses”. Vacant houses, street, parking lots are examples of such adaptive spaces, which are regarded as decayed and abandoned space. Husby: Over-planned community + Adaptive possibilities Husby, in the Rinkeby-Kista district of northern Stockholm, is a suburban housing community with a large population of immigrants. It takes 20 minutes to Stockholm City with the blue metro line. Today, almost 80% of the inhabitants have first or second generation foreign background (Stockholm Stad, 2008). The May Riot in 2013 brings Husby into the public realm and hot political discussion in Sweden.

A typical Million Homes Program area. Due to rapid urbanization and huge housing storage, the Swedish parliament implemented a Million Homes Program (miljonprogrammet) in 1965 aiming to complete a million new houses in ten years (Hall & Vidén, 2005). As part of this program, Husby community was planned in the 1960s and completed in the mid-1970s. According to Statistik om Stockholm, the population in Husby is 11,944 by 31 December in 2013. At a glance at Husby, it is a large-scale and intensively developed community with monotonously physical environment, such as uniform apartment blocks, repeated building units and homogenous courtyards. As a stranger or a newcomer in Husby,

it is hard to navigate himself/herself and to identify different parts of Husby. This year, the Stockholm municipality has made a new budget for renovations in Million Homes Program area like Husby, which are in urgent demand of both physical renewal and solutions for social problems.

Strong identity of local community. According to a report written by a group of researchers and scholars from the University of Stockholm (SVD OPINION, 2014), Husby residents attempt to influence politicians and other decision makers to implement changes in their own living area all the time. There is a strong sense of community, belonging and a belief “This is our home”, which might be shaped by the history of shrinking welfare and exclusion experiences from the surrounding communities. The interviewees in the report (SVD OPINION, 2014) see themselves as part of Sweden and demand equal rights to a good urban life, to work and housing, to access to public services, to consumption and to be treated as the same as the other citizens. Over-Planned Housing Community. Tonkiss (2013) describes organic patterns of settlements as flexible, responding to the environmental conditions and limits, and organized around the movement patterns. Obviously, Husby, which is lack of adaptive space, is a typical over-planned district in Stockholm,. It sits on a slight hill, with several pedestrian streets linking the squares, interspersed fountains and small park areas. Beneath these walkways are the cross roads where inhabitants can drive their cars through the neighborhood and park their cars. They could go directly to their houses without entering other area of the neighborhoods. In terms of land use, Husby is mainly planned for simple functions, like housing, parking and schools. There are few other functions, like commerce, business and recreation. Almost each space is clearly delineated as a function zone with few free space and adaptive space. The whole community is divided into several isolated blocks by the road system and vast parks, while the only connections between blocks are the narrow pedestrian bridges. Inactive urban public life. Husby is surrounded by a large number of parks and green area, but not so many inhabitants access to the green area during their leisure time. Husby centrum has two small squares, supermarkets, several restaurants and stores, a library, fountains and chairs. When it is sunny during lunch time, a large number of people will show up in these small squares, chatting, meeting and interacting with others. It seems that Husby Centrum squares are in active use, but other problems still exist in Husby’s public space. In a previous citizen dialogue meeting, Husby inhabitants were asked to express their impression of Husby. Each of them put a red point where they felt bad and a green point where they saw good things. The result was quite out of expectation. The densest area of red point is in Husby Centrum. The interviewees, especially women stated that when entering the square near the metro station, they always had a feeling of being watched by the people in the square. This

contributed to their fear of the public space in Husby Centrum. Besides, a lot of teenagers show up in Husby Centrum. This is a group of problematic kids, who make a lot of noises and do some bad things. The conclusion seems to be that Husby needs more public space. So how about the center of each isolated block community? Not surprisingly, parking houses locate in the block centers. This space is more reasonable to become a public space for interaction and social life, since Husby is a heavily car-dependent area. However, in our investigation of one parking house near Husby Centrum, the roof parking space is quite empty during the day, while half of the cars are abandoned. Some cars have been left in this parking space for such a long time that the tires or windows are already broken. The informal urbanism of the public space identifies their adaptive qualities and capacity to support diverse uses and physically flexibility, and allows for extension, conversion and adaptation of the space (Tonkiss, 2013). Husby produces plenty of disused and inactive space, as well as opportunities for adaptive appropriation. One frequent approach is the temporary use of disused or deserted spaces, which helps to find out more spatial opportunities for commerce, for art, for production and for social life in these unlikely and unofficial sites. Reference: Eco-box + Collaborative practice Atelier d’Architecture Autogérée (aaa), --- the Studio for SelfManaged Architecture, is a multi-disciplinary and loose non-profit organization founded by architects, Constantin Petcou and Doina Petrescu, in Paris in 2001. Their projects are researches and experiments in progressive and temporary reuses of misused or leftover urban space that is slowly taken advantage of and managed by local inhabitants (Marrow, 2007; Spatial Agency, n.d.). Eco-box is several self-managed projects initiated by aaa in the neighborhood of La Chapelle in northern Paris in 2001. The project is an ongoing process aiming to figure out flexibility and adaptability of spatial usage, preserve urban biodiversity and promote a combination of diverse life-styles and living practices (urbantactics, n.d.). Eco-box is intended as a collective platform for creativity, for community events, and for local residents’ engagement in “micro-politics” through cultivation and other activities (Carrot City, n.d.).

Mobile devices. At the beginning of this process, a temporary garden, called Eco-box, was built with recycled shipping pallets. These wooden pallets shaped the base of the garden and a series of walkways (Carrot city, n.d.; Morrow, 2007). Voids left between the pallets could be filled with sold and used as small allotment gardens. The modular and mobile nature of these gardens makes them very easy to be transferred to other sites, which minimally disrupt the continuity of community activities, as well as allows for graduate expansion and upgrades by its users (Carrot city, n.d.). Later some students and designers also produced a number of mobile furniture, including mobile kitchen for cooking, mobile stations for media education and workshops, 39

Tools and activities to create adaptive space in Husby. Illustration by the author

which are highly easy for the movement between different locations. (Spatial Agency, n.d.)

A collaborative platform for multiple actors. This is a collaborative project carried out with sociologists, researchers, architects, urban designers, urban planners, artists, students and institutional partners such as universities, associations, NGOs and space users. This communal space is the result of collective involvement and demonstrates that personal obtainment is the biggest motivation for inhabitants to engage in a project (Morrow, 2007). Besides, this project also interacts with numerous other local entities includes schools, artists, cultural centers and other gardens. Adaptive to diverse activities and uses. Over the five years (20012006), Eco-box became a common space for cultural events, social interaction and economic activities. For example, a mobile market is organized by local resident association monthly, while Stalker/Osservatorio Nomade held workshops to collaborate with the community in their project. The garden is open on weekends for special events, such as concerts, dances, film screenings, workshops and shared meals. Adaptive Husby: Experiments + Programs As our analysis above, parking space in Husby could be transformed into new public space in the isolated blocks. In this way, instead of Husby Centrum, inhabitants are able to build their social life and enjoy active interaction with their neighbors in the block communities. The temporary use projects would be useful references to transform the parking space in Husby. Inspired by the Eco-box projects, this project aims to transform the existing unused parking space into a self-managed public space through basic tools and diverse programs.

Experiment 1: Eco-box for self-managed public space The idea of eco-box here is to reuse the parking house roof as a 40

new public space. In our case, there are three basic tools in the Eco-box to transform this space: wooden panels, green boxes and adaptive pavilions. We encourage local residents to use recycled materials to construct these tools. The size of the wooden panel is 1m * 1m and 0.2m high. Similar to aaaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Eco-box project, these wooden panels could be used to create walkways and recreation space. This project would also utilize these panels to build temporary stages for concert, film screen and exhibitions when necessary. Local residents could use these simple tools to create their space and identify a feeling of spatial belonging. The green box is intended to grow plants for urban farming, because the roof is made of concrete and without existing earth. In Husby, these green boxes can be easy combined into different sizes to build allotment gardens according to usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; demands. The adaptive pavilion is consisted with glass and wood. Due to the cold weather in Stockholm, there are few people in the public space during winter. In winter, the adaptive pavilion serves as the greenhouse for inside plants and warming huts for inhabitants. These green plants in the pavilions will attract inhabitants to come out and continue their activities and social life outside. In the summer, the pavilion surrounded by small allotment gardens is a good place for relaxing, meeting and recreation. These three basic tools are highly mobile, which provide more opportunities for temporary use test of space and bring more potential appropriation of the parking house roofs here in Husby. In this way, both the panels and green boxes are very easy to rearrange and highly transferable. If one parking transformation is successful, it is very convenient to copy that experience.

Experiment 2: Eco-box for youth learning Husby lacks appropriate space for young people to spend their free time. The diverse playing facilities in the courtyards are just

Park(ing) in Husby

Reference Carrot City, n.d. Eco-box, [Internet]. Available at: http://www.ryerson.ca/carrotcity/board_pages/ community/ecobox.html Hall, T., & Vidén, S., 2005. The Million Homes Programme: a review of the great Swedish planning project. Planning Perspectives, 20(3), pp. 301-328. Hou, J., ed. 2010. Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities. Oxon: Routledge. “Områdesfakta Husby stadsdel”. Stockholms stads utrednings- och statistikkontor AB. Rios, M., 2010. Claiming Latino space – Cultural insurgency in the public realm. In: Hou, J., ed. 2010. Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities. Oxon: Routledge, ch.8. Self-managed network created by Eco-box Source: http://basekamp.com/sites/default/files/event/aaa11.png

Ruth Morrow, 2007. ECObox. Mobile devices and urban tactics, [Internet]. Available at: http://www. domusweb.it/en/architecture/2007/11/14/ecoboxmobile-devices-and-urban-tactics.html Spatial Agency, n.d. Atelier d’architecture autogérée, [Internet]. Available at: http://www.spatialagency.net/ database/why/political/aaa SVD OPINION, 2014. Punktinsatser räcker inte för förorterna, [Internet]. Available at: http://www.svd. se/opinion/brannpunkt/punktinsatser-racker-inte-forfororterna_3549760.svd Tonkiss, F., 2013. Cities by design: the social life of urban form. John Wiley & Sons. Urbantactics, n.d. Eco-Urban Network / Eco-box, [Internet]. Available at: http://www.urbantactics.org/ projects/ecobox/ecobox.html

heaven for kids. The allotment garden created by Eco-box could be a good place for young people to learn agricultural knowledge and spend a happy time with each other. This project aims to use Eco-box to create a learning center for local teenagers. A possible transforming parking space is the one near the Husby centrum and Husby Café. The café roof could be changed into a roof garden through Eco-box. Glass walls and glass roof will be added to build a greenhouse above the café roof top. This roof garden café project will collaborate with university researchers and offer workshops for youth education. Teenagers can work as volunteers here and get discount when drinking café.

Experiment 3: Collective programs in process Husby has several local associations and organizations that have strong interest in local engagement. There is a large allotment garden in Husby where the annual Farm Festival is hosted. In the academic area, there is an increasing research interest in Husby for the Million House Program, social problems and local identity. In 2012, an artist launched a Light Festival in Husby in winter to welcome the dark night in Stockholm. There are so many different actors and strengths interested in the Husby area, which will bring a lot of benefits to our collaborative programs for parking transformation. On the local level, several events will be organized monthly, like the mobile kitchen for food sharing, mobile market for local food trade, and open weekend night for concert or film screen. Besides, this project aims to organize workshops with other artists, researchers, university students for the teenagers in Husby, among which the youth learning program is an attempt. Rethinking + conclusion: a balance between planned and unplanned The reason behind aaa’s successful projects is that they act as curators while simultaneously others still can find space to take care of and continue the project as they want. An over-planned and over-programmed district clearly demarcates public and

private zones, highly secures lines of ownership and access, tightly prescribes different functions and conforming behaviors and limits the room for spatial adaptation (Tonkiss, 2013). The past zoning planning tries to identify every space, which is impossible in the current complex society. Planning for informality is now a down-top approach to deal with the problems resulted from the existing planning system. A good city planning will allow informal activities and practices at various time (Tonkiss, 2013). As we could see from possible experiments in Husby, flexibility and adaptability are now important and urgent issues in urban planning and design. In several informal modes of settlements, one characteristic is their adaptive qualities, which support different uses and physical flexibility (Tonkiss, 2013). At the small scale, as Eco-box in Husby, it is easy to test and try again and again to find out the best solution. However, at a large scale, like the city level or regional level, it still needs more efforts. Citizen initiatives could be good examples for urban planners and designers. Participatory planning or collective planning is another approach to reach the flexible planning. In this essay, the Husby project tries to avoid again this over-planned and over programmed problem. It offers just basic tools for local inhabitants to build their public space, manage their space and enjoy their space. They can decide the chosen space, use the tools to occupy the space and manage the space in a way they want. However, Tonkiss (2013) points out that such ambiguity of environments in one sense allows diverse uses and adaptation, but at the same time it makes space physically permeable and legally vulnerable. In the Husby’s case, this project will firstly make a proposal to the municipality to get permission and then try to get more local inhabitants and associations engaged in.

Remaking Urbanism A Response Strategy for Shrinking Cities Lili Schäfer

Shrinkage has become a global phenomenon. And all the cities are shrinking for a variety of different reasons. Cities are shrinking due to deindustrialization, while cities in the United States, for example Detroit, suffering from the economic and social consequences of suburbanization processes. In Germany by contrast, demographic population changes shrink the cities. This article gives a brief overview of current topics in shrinkage and should show up approaches of new urbanization thoughts. Can shrinkage also be understood as a chance and open up more room for adjustment for residents and space pioneers in the urban development? International examples try to formulate answers for a possible response strategy for shrinking cities and identify recommendations.

Mind the Gap! Since the emergence of the modern city and the development of the concept of the European city, growth played a central role in urban development. Economic changes and demographic developments initiated a declining process in many international cities, thus they lost their economic importance. In addition to growth shrinkage is considered today as the predominant urban development paradigm, although many industrialized countries are already faced with negative regional transformation processes (cf. bpb, 2014). Everyday, the population is growing by 190,000 city residents. According to forecasts for 2030, 4.9 billion people will live in cities. But not all cities benefit from this population boom. There are shrinking cities across the world in many countries; however, they are lost in the global competition between the cities (cf. Project office Shrinking Cities, 2014). In Germany, for example, the economic structural change of the 1970s and the demographic population changes have led to massive job losses and consequently regional migrations. In comparison, the demise of large industries cause of the poor labour market and economic situation have led to significant population movements for example in the United States. In the US, it is above all the cities in the former industrial region of the United States (Rust Belt). The consequences of these changes are shrinking cities, which constitute today, in addition to the urban growth, another planning paradigm and which will continue to play an important role for urban planning in the future (cf. bpb, 2014). Therefore, two contradictory trends in urban development have emerged increasingly over the time: Cities in countries such as Asia and South America continue to grow while cities in the United States or for example Germany constantly decline (cf. Oswalt, 2005: 10). While other cities are growing beyond its borders, some cities are shrinking in recent years, partly by half of its inhabitants. In the city development, a growing gap between urban shrinkage and growth is forming steadily. Both extremes are dominant and current themes in urban development planning. Cities will continue to shrink, while others continue to grow.

Lili Schäfer is a student of Urbanand Regional Planning at the Technical University Berlin and currently an exchange student of the master’s program Civil Engineering at the KTH – Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm in Sweden. The master study in Berlin is focused on urban research. Her interests lay in sustainable planning and urban development. 42

Shrinkage as a Potential? Current urban developments show that shrinkage and growth processes run in parallel. Shrinkage at one place means growth at another. But this phenomenon is not only seen on a macro level in the global city comparisons. This coexistence of both trends is also taking place on a micro level, such as the shrinking of many downtown cores and the concurrent growth of the suburban areas. In Detroit (USA), for example, during the last 50 years, the city has lost more than one million inhabitants while the suburban region has grown steadily. The city still declines and it is an extreme example of the negative transformation processes in the American Rust Belt (cf. ebd.: 14).

Various social and demographic phenomena have influenced that cities are shrinking in their inner city and the suburban area continued to spread over the city boundaries. The results are decay cities with residual fragments of empty buildings, squares and streets, which gradually continue to dilapidate. Moreover, not only the physical space changes. Along with the structural changes, polarizations of different social strata are formed in the region as well as in the inner city (cf. ebd.: 12). Hence, it means that: “ Polarization is taking place spatially as well as socially: not everyone profits from growth, and societies are increasingly being divided into winners and losers.”

these transformation processes and to prepare cities long-term for the urban and socio-structural changes. New strategies do not mean to fill existing empty urban spaces with new buildings or urban figures. It is not about unusual architecture and modern design in the city, which would only serve as a closed facade in the abandoned city. “ […] Shrinkage may reveal or uncover other methods of development rarely considered by urbandesign strategies. This may point to an alternative urban public space that does not necessarily need to be filled in with buildings.” (Wilkins, 2010: 169)

(ebd.: 12)

The educated, higher-income family households move into houses with garden in the suburban areas of the cities, while in the city the people who are uneducated or too poor to migrate, left behind (cf. bpb, 2014). Detroit (USA) is a good example of this phenomenon. The city has struggled in recent years with extreme emigrations in the downtown area. The results are ruined streets and areas, which are uninhabited and empty. Especially for the people who stayed, these problems are a challenge in their daily life. Infrastructures are removed and therefore can be used only in parts. Many residents are surrounded by abandoned buildings, gardens and streets. The building space has major impacts on the life in the city, because “social processes manifest themselves in the spatial constellation of the city” (Oswalt, 2005: 13). The challenge in many cities today is to create a social cohesion in the fragmented city structure. In many concerned cities, shrinkage is not necessarily negative and may also represent potential. Especially these cities can be the starting point for cultural and social innovations, for example, through music, art and design. “ […] Shrinkage will not always be experienced as a negative trend in the long run. It will lead- as growth did- to fundamental transformations that will bring about new guiding principles, models of action, and practices, ultimately resulting in a new orientation for society.”

There is an alternative to deal with the emptiness. Everyday urbanism can be an alternative, which purports to be a way to live more confident in the city especially for the residents themselves who still remain in the cities. Brent D. Ryan argues in his book “Design after Decline – How America Rebuilds Shrinking Cities”, that the everyday urbanism approach is more about an individual change of life on a small- scale. Furthermore, he argues that these small- scale strategies are not irrelevant but they don’t make any contribution to solve the problems caused by the largescale abandonment of the city (cf. Ryan, 2012: 187). But instead, the approach describes a strategy, which can be understood as the way to create the urban space how the residents would use it optimally. It is more about a bottom- up strategy on a small and individual- scale, which can contribute to long- term improvement of the resident’s life. Referring to Ryan’s argument, the everyday urbanism suggests maybe not the problems of the whole city but it can be a contribution to rethink the urban life in a shrinking city. In this context it is about the question: Who owns the city and who uses the space? Today, only half of the population as 50 years ago lives in Detroit (USA). These strong population losses have led to the emptiness of countless homes, businesses and entire streets (cf. Wilkins, 2010: 169). The dominant everyday image of the city is an open fragmented landscape of abandoned and partially detached buildings. This transformation of the urban structure has required a new perspective in relation to the city as a catalyst for social and cultural life.

(ebd.: 12f)

New dynamic everyday cultures can be created by the urban problem areas, which can build on the potentials and weaknesses of the locations and contribute to the formation of new urban identities (cf. Project office Shrinking Cities, 2014). A term for this new understanding of urbanism in dealing with shrinkage describes the everyday urbanism. Everyday Urbanism or the Response Strategy for Shrinking Cities Cities will not stop shrinking and suddenly grow again. Rather, the issue of shrinkage will be an increasingly expectant topic in urban planning. It should therefore be to find strategies to design

This rethinking in terms of the function of the city as a space for communication and participation leads more and more to a change in the urban development of Detroit (USA). Regardless of traditional formal urban development strategies, these empty spaces have become venues for experimental informal city development through the initiatives undertaken by residents. These everyday activities of the residents in the city of Detroit (USA), for example, urban gardening or temporary art installations, are part of the dynamic process through changing a new urban thinking (cf. ebd.: 171). People, who stayed in the city and who use and revive the city everyday at the same time, create the spaces. In part, unused lost landscapes have become neighbourhoods. Streets and crossings were recorded by spatial 43

Everyday urbanism as a way to design the decline Image by: Lili Schäfer ©

The density of emptiness: a fragmented landscape with abandoned buildings and untapped space Image by: Lili Schäfer ©

installations and thus have become more secure. Numerous examples form a productive response to the dense emptiness of Detroit (USA).

abandoned one-family houses in neighbourhoods that are used for the creative projects. The result is a former private individual space that has been transformed into collective common objects (cf. Wilkins, 2010: 173f). Another example in relation to the creative use of Detroit ‘s emptiness is the Heidelberg Project in the Heidelberg Street- a street in one of the third poorest zip codes in the United States. Initiated by the artist Tyree Guyton, the project’s objective is about to design the decline of the neighbourhood together with the inhabitants in a creative and committed way and to counteract against the deterioration of the area. The project intervenes precisely at the point when normal development strategies are no longer effective (cf. ebd.: 172f).

“The residue itself- the gap, the vacant parcel, the abandoned building- has become the space of social, cultural, and environmental actions, interactions, and reactions by Detroit residents.” (ebd.: 171)

The Pioneer City Many people are moving away from the shrinking cities. Urban fragments and partially disconnected neighbourhoods remain in the city. Not all people assess this situation as something negative. For some, this situation also opens up new perspectives to shape the lives more creative and sustainable. Artists, designers, architects, enterprise: many of them see something positive in the declining process and at the same the opportunity to come to the cities and to make neighbourhoods more liveable through their creative Know-how and motivation. Philipp Oswalt introduced these people in his work as space pioneers. They can help the local people to think about alternative lifestyles and to support the residents in collaborative processes to implement their own ideas (cf. Oswalt, 2006: 373). The pioneer city approach means in this content that shrinking cities can be understood as a catalyst for something new in the society and that they can facilitate new urban forms of participation in urban planning processes (cf. Oswalt, 2005: 378). An example of the space pioneers is the Detroit Collaborative Design Center (DCDC) in Detroit (USA). This is a non-profit organization at the University of Mercy School of Architecture. The approach of the architects and designers is “to creating sustainable spaces and communities through quality design and the collaborative process.” (University of Detroit (USA) Mercy, 2014). They work collaborative in interdisciplinary teams of residents, students, and local politicians and profit from the corresponding Know-how of the employees of the DCDC. The aim is to think about sustainable and liveable future visions for the city and the adjacent neighbourhood. The focus is on community participation in connection with the appropriate expertise in design and architecture (cf. ebd.). The Firebreak HayHouse is a sample project, which was initiated by the DCDC. It belongs to a series of guerrilla activities in Detroit (USA) trying to formulate strategies for reuse of empty buildings and space to reveal hidden potentials of public spaces and make them usable for the residents. In most cases, there are 44

Shrinking cities are a worldwide phenomenon. The pioneer city approach also finds application in numerous other international cities. An example is the city Dessau in eastern Germany, which has struggled since the political change in 1989 with strong shrinkage processes. The consequences of the emigration are, in addition to empty residential complexes, also large empty monostructural complexes, such as the former Brauhaus Dessau, which was closed due to low demand early 90s. In the late 1990s, the Brauhaus Dessau e.V. was founded to preserve and reuse this architecturally valuable industrial monument. The association has 30 members. The Chairman is the architect Thomas Busch. They have developed together the old brewery into a cultural and innovative centre for independent business owners, catering and artist (cf. Brauhaus Verein Dessau, 2013). Also this example shows that the input given by creative space pioneers can decisive to find a new use for the abandoned “industrial giant” and announced the location beyond the borders of the town. Consequently, the pioneer city approach can also contribute to placemaking (cf. Oswalt, 2006: 373). Space pioneers play an important role in the heterogeneity of the city use. People, who leave the shrinking cities, mostly leave homogeneous urban environment cause many usages are no longer in demand and the city loses functions such as communication or exchange. In these specific circumstances, the space pioneers have a major responsibility. They are due to their competences initiators for new ideas and lifestyles (cf. ebd.: 377). Moreover, “[...] they illustrate the power of design as a community organizing tool that can alter and shape a person’s surroundings.” (Wilkins, 2010: 181) Learning by Doing In many shrinking cities the demolition of redundant buildings was for a long time a common way to deal with the issue of shrinkage and integrate it in the planning process. Examples like

Remaking Urbanism

Detroit (USA) have shown in the past that precisely the strategy does not lead to success. In the first decade of the 2000s in Detroit (USA), the demolition of many buildings was a popular strategy to solve the problem of decline and was for a long time the only alternative. The result is a fragmented city that has lost a lot of social cohesion. The planning strategy in the early 2000s put more emphasis on the demolition and ignored as it were the rising social problems. Many people have migrated, but there were still numerous people who stayed: isolated, unemployed and poor (cf. Ryan, 2012: 179, 185). The demolition has removed unnecessarily structures, however, it does not improve the quality of life of the residents. In the years 1970 and 2000, there were just as many poor people as before, just less buildings and fewer people. This confirms that in the post-war age, the use of shrinkage was understood more as a physical problem and the social consequences were ignored (cf. ebd: 185). The demolition of many buildings created public space that has not been sufficiently reflected in the open space planning. This newly established space, the landscape of empty spaces between the remaining buildings, provides for many residents of the city an opportunity to improve their life. “Blotting” is the name for a common method in Detroit (USA). Empty, public space, formerly private land will be taken, bought or borrowed from neighbouring entrepreneurial residents. Thus they expand their property by the gradual appropriation of surplus space (cf. ebd.: 186). Whole neighbourhoods are linked by this method to form a connected structure. This approach gives rise to the question: Whom does the city belong to and who remakes the city, especially in a city like Detroit (USA), which is politically situated weak and financially poor. “Blotting” is a small-scale approach, which is not comparable with a visionary master plan. It rather describes the transformation of the city by dedicated house owners who do not want to lose their homes and improve their quality of life (cf. Armborst et al., 2006: 9).

References Brauhaus Verein Dessau e.V. (2013): “Erhalten und Bewahren”, “Über uns” and “Nutzungskonzepte”. 2014-11-28. url: http://www. brauhausdessau.de, http://www.brauhausdessau.de/über-uns/ and http://www.brauhausdessau.de/nutzungskonzepte/. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung / Dr. Glock B. (2007): Schrumpfende Städte. 2014-11-28. url: http://www.bpb. de/gesellschaft/staedte/stadt-und-gesellschaft/64405/ einfuehrung?p=all. Design Center- “Mission” and “Collaboration”. 2014-11-28. url: http:// www.dcdc-udm.org/about/ and http://www.dcdcudm. org/about/ collaboration/. Everyday Urbanism (2009): Introduction. 2014-11-28. url: http:// www.everydayurbanism.com. Interboro Partners / Armborst. T, D´Oca D. and Theodore G. (2006): Improve your lot!. 2014-11-28. url: http://www.interboropartners.net/ wpcontent/ uploads/2008/09/071022_interboro_improve_your_lot. pdf. Oswalt, Philipp (2006): Shrinking Cities – Volume 2 Interventions. Hatje Cantz Verlag. Oswalt, Philipp (2005): Shrinking Cities – Volume 1 International Research. Hatje Cantz Verlag. Projektbüro Schrumpfende Städte / Oswalt P. (2014): Shrinking cities: „Globaler Kontext“ und „Kultur des Schrumpfens“. 2014-1128. url: http://www.shrinkingcities.com/globaler_kontext.0.html and http://www.shrinkingcities.com/kultur_schrumpfen.0.html. Ryan, D. Brent (2012): Design after Decline – How America Rebuilds Shrinking Cities. University of Pennsylvania Press. The Heidelberg Project (2014): Heidelberg Project: Mission + Vision. 2014-11-28. url: http://www.heidelberg.org/who_we_are/. University of Detroit (USA) Mercy (2014): Detroit (USA) Collaborative Wilkins, Gretchen (2010): Distributed Urbanism: Cities after Google Earth. Routledge.

The fragmentary neighbourhoods, abandoned buildings and open roads: the emptiness in the cities became the object in the declining process and the space of social actions, interactions and reactions by residents and external space pioneers (cf. Wilkins, 2010: 171). It opens the residents and space pioneers new ways to shape their own futures and strengthens the importance of democratic participation in urban planning processes. Shrinkage is a global problem, which can also lead to cultural innovation for many cities and can help at the same time to implement new action models in sustainable urban planning processes.

Urban Shrinkage in Europe An Analysis of the Policy Stance of the European Union Regarding Urban Shrinkage Josef Gustafsson

This paper will discuss how urban shrinkage is tackled in a European Union context. Through using two documents that are well known and strategic in this field the policy stance of the EU is represented. These two documents are then contrasted and analyzed in relations to one of the most well known books on the contemporary state of cities, Triumph of the City by Edwards Glaeser. His book emphasize very much the strengths and positive aspects of cities, which makes for an interesting comparison in relations to the EU documents, since studying urban shrinkage is describing a state that tends to have negative connotations. Through having literature on each end of the spectra, this paper is given a range of stances and opinions to touch upon. The comparison of the literature goes to show that there is an increased acceptance of cities in decline. Although the conventional growth paradigm still holds it own, at least when looking to the top tier of policy writing. The measures aimed at alleviating the circumstances differ. In the few instances when Glaeser touches upon decline it is done through a rather generic and traditional approach. In contrast the newer documents from the EU that advocate a locally focused approach involving the citizens, all in all a much more progressive outlook.

Josef Gustafsson a student at the Royal Institute of Technology and studying a Master program called Sustainable Planning and Design with a focus on Regional and Urban Planning. Holding a bachelor’s degree in Political Science with a focus on European Politics, his passion is studying the regional politics of the EU and how it plays out across Europe. 46

Introduction Cities are usually identified as the creative hubs of humanity, inextricably linked to development; it is here that progress takes place. In his book Triumph of the City, Glaeser (2012) firmly states that cities are the epitome of humanities strengths, through cities we interact and learn which is the key to human civilizations progress. Although, the state of cities is not always that grand, it does include episodes of decline something that we as a society or policy writers rarely discuss, but need to. Even though Glaeser (2012) tends to focuses on the positive aspects of cities he does include a section where the more non-dynamic aspects of cities are discussed. In line with Glaeser’s discussion, I would argue that the general sentiment towards urban shrinkage decline is a rather limited one; it is discussed but only in a limited extent and context. When finally touched upon one instantly thinks, and talks, about Detroit. The city has become synonymous with the concept of urban decline; in just decades it has lost over one million people and a substantial part of its business life (Glaeser, 2012). However, this development does occur much closer to us, it is something happening all across Europe. Former industrial cities such as Glasgow, Rotterdam, Bremen and Vilnius, just to mention a few, are all much smaller than they were at their industrial peak (Glaeser, 2012). One good quote to describe the current state in which Europe is in is this one: “we are dealing with islands of growth in a sea of shrinkage” (quoted in Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neill, 2013, page 10). So, how is this development being discussed and framed within a European context? Although not being a formal competence of the EU, a lot of policies are now being written about what could best be describe as an urban agenda. This paper will focus on how EU is framing and combating urban decline, this will be done through studying two policy papers Cities of Tomorrow (2011) and Urbact From Crisis to Choice: Re-imagining the future in Shrinking Cities (2013). These two documents complement each other; the former is a broader document that touches upon a variety of challenges and opportunities cities are, and are bound to face in the future, whereas the latter is mainly directed towards the challenges of shrinkage and stagnation. As for Glaeser’s book it touches more upon cities in a more general, and global sense. His approaches are more in line with the conventional paradigm of growth approach as described in Wiechmann Pallagst (2012) and thus will serve the role as a contrasting element, in regards to the documents produced by the European Union. The Challenges Cities Face Today Few people would argue that cities does not have a lure to them, people all through time and place has flocked to them for the possibilities they provide. Following in the line of Glaeser (2012), Cities of Tomorrow acknowledge the importance and relevance of cities in contemporary Europe. They, cities, are viewed as the engines of growth and with a continuously larger proportion of the European population living in urban areas their importance cannot be underestimated (Cities of Tomorrow, 2011). However,

there is a paradox, more people are living in cities and moving to cities, yet all cities are not growing. Cities are experiencing increased problems, everything from demographic change, haltering or non-existent growth, weakened links between growth and job creation and the poor getting poorer, just to mention a few (Cities of Tomorrow, 2011). The population change that occurs can both be a cause of globalization, where mobility is stimulated by the globalization (Martinez el-Fernandez, et al, 2012) or it might also be a state of demographic change. Like the case of Germany the fertility rate is lower than the replacement level creating a state of natural population decrease, a situation that a lot of European countries are in (Cities of Tomorrow, 2011). One could best describe the geographical area of the EU as a heterogeneous one; there are areas of growth, and areas of decline. Approximately half of the urban regions in EU have lost population during recent years (Wiechmann & Pallagst, 2012). So, asking the same question that Glaeser (2012) posed in his book, why do cities decline? In the globalized world that we live in today the economic forces that roams the world moves in a much quicker pace than seen before, or that we are used to. This results in cities having a problem in finding their place and niche in this extremely competitive environment that constitutes the world economy (Martinez-el Fernandez, et al, 2012). Following in the line of previous paragraph, that is partly why some cities decline, although it is a tricky question seeing that each city has its own history and problems. Most of the cities mentioned in the paragraph above were once grand industrial sites, when the West was the industrial center of the world, something that is far from the reality of today. Through desperately holding on to the past and thinking that they could bounce back through investing in various housing projects or fancy transportation systems they just dag themselves deeper into the problem. It is a common mistake, to think that a city is its structure when in fact it is a connected mass of humanity that constitutes a city, as Glaeser (2012) puts it. None of these former industrial cities successfully reinvented themselves, since they are still identified as former industrial powerhouses. If successfully done, one does not recall its industrial past, only its revamped present (Glaeser, 2012). These cities become victims to a growth focused development path. Viewing development as a linear one, continuously aimed for growth, which lead to only increasing and intensifying the negative consequences of shrinkage (Wiechmann & Pallagst, 2012). These urban areas that are not catching up with development are bound to unless they change their outlook on the situation, to deteriorate even further (Cities of tomorrow, 2011). That said there is no universal reason as to why some cities decline. However, with society going through a phase of structural reshaping and many declining cities having similar economic structure it is safe to argue that they do share some similar denominators.

One of the core problems of the challenges facing cities today lies in the reluctance to accept the reality in which one lives. Something the Urbact report (2013) highlights as a key issue that city officials need to acknowledge the state that in which their cities are. If its route is one down contraction, there is no point in creating single policies aimed for economic growth, since one policy will not change the context and state in which the city is in (Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neill, 2013). Changing the perceptions about what is a desirable future for shrinking cities is perhaps one of the most daunting challenges. This entails moving away from the traditional development paths and models for urban development move away from the linear development path and embracing a paradigm shift for “smart-shrinking” (Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neil, 2013). In their report Dr Hans Schlappa and Professor Neil (2013) illustrate this through discussing a replacement of the linear model with that of a cyclical. Arguably, one of the reasons as to why accepting this development is so problematic is that we probably tend to still identify cities and urban areas with development and growth, and accepting decline would go against what we constitute as natural for a city. In the words of Glaeser cities are the triumph of human However slowly, there is an increased awareness and acceptance of this new development, shrinkage and stagnation is not as stigmatized as it was before. In Cities of Tomorrow there is recognition of the notion that Europe is not in a “situation of continuous economic growth” (Cities of tomorrow, 2011, page 8). With these concepts being two of the main challenges described in both Cities of tomorrow and URBACT (Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neill (2013) it seems as if the EU has accepted the fact that its area cannot grow economically forever. This “new realism” as Urbact describes it, seems to be an example of this paradigm shift that Martinez-Fernandez et al (2012) are discussing. They write that we need to admit that there is an alternative, a reality besides that of urban growth. I think through accepting this and not pursuing careless development strategies, such as those in Detroit, tax money can be spend on better things and provide a sustained quality of services. The Strategies On the point of investment and strategies, here the documents differ a bit. In his book, Glaeser (2012) advocates a development of density and height, he states that for megacities such as Mumbai, Paris, New York one ought to build upwards, increase the number of skyscrapers. However, this relates poorly to the urban structure of Europe. Megacities such as London and Paris are oddities in an internal structure that is dominated by medium sized cities (Cities of tomorrow, 2011). These megacities, which Glaeser brings up in his book, have more in common with each other than their domestic counterparts. He focuses on these huge urban structures and international known cities all over the world, urban areas that differs quite drastically from the European reality. In other words, giving his solution and definitions a rather limited applicability in a European context. Seeing that building 47

The road ahead is straight for some. Image by: Josef Gustafsson (2013)

skyscrapers is not the solution for smaller cities, it is only something that bigger cities can afford. Furthermore, he refers to a state of continued demographic growth in this case, something that much of Europe is not experiencing, as touched upon in Cities of Tomorrow (2011). Arguably, I would claim that these kinds of investment are still in line with the paradigm of growth, not the “new” one promoted by Cities of Tomorrow and Urbact. Furthermore it seems as if Glaeser (2012) looks at the current conditions in urban areas a something bound to happen. There are little talks of alleviating the conditions under which people are living in, instead he argues that the poor are given better possibilities through living they way they are in cities than they would in rural areas (Glaeser, 2012). I would claim it is problematic to just blindly accept the state of socially deprived people and claiming they are better of just because they are in urban areas. Seeing that in Europe we are witnessing an increasing polarization, of the poorer getting poorer, as described in Cities of Tomorrow (2011). A state that both of the EU documents wants to combat, since increased social polarization does not go in line with a socially and economically cohesive area, one of the overall aims with the European project. This development is hazardous and, I would say, poses a threat to contemporary urban society and if just blindly accepted the situation could probably easily deteriorate and tear up the urban fabric of our cities. In other words, to tackle these problems that our cities face today, be it population decline or economic decline, one needs to prioritize the citizens. Involve them in the strategies, make them their own agents of change and allow them to create the city they wish to live in. On to Glaeser’s (2012) description of how he view cities ought to shrink, or shrink to greatness as he puts it. He discusses some different ways in which this might take place, transportation investment being one of them, and the most effective way when the investment enables poorer areas to better connect to dynamic metropolitan regions. This has been the case in Spain, 48

and Glaeser (2012) argues could be the case for compact England as well. Another strategy that has paid off well, for one city at least is a cultural led development strategy done by Bilbao and its Guggenheim museum. Although, to his defense he is skeptical about its success story: “for every Guggenheim, there dozens of expensive failures” (Glaeser, 2012, page 66). Another European example of shrinkage talked about in Triumph of the City (2011) is Leipzig, where it not as much a creative or ambitious strategy that is the impressive fact, rather the rational thinking of the city officials to accept the fact that its empty housing stock will not ever be used again. Some of the approaches are in line with that of the Cities of Tomorrow (2011) and Urbact (2013). There are elements of a progressive look like the ones in the more recent policy documents of the EU, however the section is brief and in no way puts the current state of the developed world in justice. It almost feels as if it is just mentioned because it has to, an element of window dressing. However, the book is a global book touching upon cities in an global sense, not just the developed world. Albeit, there is one fundamental issue on which they differ. The examples Glaeser (2012) tends to bring up involves rather big cities, and investments that require a substantial amount of money. Looking at a prime example of a European city in decline, Athena, a former industrial city that hoped that growth would return it did nothing for years, which in turn lead to more and more problems. Finally, when accepting its fate, little if any money was present to invest. In other words there seems to be a difference between the examples brought up by Glaeser (2012) compared to the EU ones (Cities of Tomorrow 2011 and Urbact 2013). As for Athena, it finally found a way, it sought inwards, seeking help from the citizens and through their efforts it enabled to turn around the deprived state in which the city had been in for centuries. It is on this issue where one sees a contrasting standpoint between Glaeser and the European union documents.

Urban Shrinkage in Europe

An uncertain future for the European Union cities. Image by: Josef Gustafsson (2013)

One could say the EU documents represent a cyclical perspective on urban strategy development; cities go through growth, crisis and choice. When faced with crisis there is confusion and cities need to envision themselves within a new context, which at times take time, a lot of time, in the case of Athena it took decades. However, the importance is allowing for a change to take place, to follow a new direction and not just rely on old remedies (Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neill 2013). Similar to the cyclical approach discussed in Urbact, Martinez-el Fernandez (2012) also discusses viewing the city from a life cycle approach, which entails growth and decline as something natural. However, I would argue that the cyclical model from Urbact is more allowing, since it includes episodes of reconfiguration and redevelopment, which is allowed time, time to develop and cities to find their own path. When placing these examples after each other one sees that there is an attitude difference between the documents and mentioned strategies. One of them is in favor or more traditional approach whereas the other one involves a more progressive one, a more people oriented. Important to emphasize is that the two EU documents have a focus area and target group in mind, whereas Glaeser is writing a general book about the importance of cities, globally. However, he himself does not problematize or discuss limitations of his remedies. Interestingly enough, URBACT (2013) highlights that there seems to be a disconnect between the different levels. Locally the actors are accepting the paradigm shift, in contrast to the higher levels of power. Looking at key policy documents and strategies such as Europe2020 and Lisbon strategy both are addressing and targeting growing cities, not shrinking. URBACT (2013) highlights the need for a change on the higher levels to better correspond to the reality faced by the subnational and regional levels so that these does not face socio-economic policies which are diametrically opposite towards reality.

Summary In conclusion, it seems as if the policy papers from the EU accepts in a larger notion the needed paradigm shift away from continuous growth, at least in the most recent reports and even more so than Glaeser. EU’s approaches seem to be more targeted towards providing the citizens with adequate service and development plans that are based on local context. In contrast, Glaeser’s approach seem to be a bit generic, build, high build dense, as touched upon previously that is not a viable case for the majority of the urban areas in Europe seeing that they tend to be small and medium cities.

References Dr Hans Schlappa & Professor William J V Neill (2013) Cities of Tomorrow – Action Today. Urbact II Capitalization. From Crisis to choice: re-imagining the future in shrinking cities : http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/ general_library/19765_Urbact_WS1_SHRINKING_ low_FINAL.pdf European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy (2011) Cities of Tomorrow : http:// ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/ studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final. pdf Glaeser, Edward. (2012). Triumph of the city. London: Pan Books Martinez-Fernandez, C., Audirac, I., Fol, S. and Cunningham -‐Sabot, E. (2012), Shrinking Cities: Urban Challenges of Globalization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36: 213 – 225. Wiechman , T. and Pallagst , K. M. (2012), Urban shrinkage in Germany and the USA: A Comparison of Transformation Patterns and Local Strategies. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36: 261–280. 49

Utopian City If the umbrella does not fit â&#x20AC;&#x201C; try to find a new one

Guerrilla Urbanism Towards Spatial (in)Justice And now what? Christina Larsson

The traditional planning process of today is in need of an update to keep up with the tempo of the modern city’s development. The discourses of changes in public places show contemporary trends and phenomenon. A clear example of this is guerrilla urbanism. In “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities” several case studies are presented in a descriptive way, however the problem is that discourses do not extend further than theoretical case studies for the most part. In order to create spatial justice and just cities different measures are needed, in particular new ways to plan for varied and useful public spaces. Grassroots projects like Trädgård på spåret can be a great example to see the needs of change in these public spaces.

Introduction The city’s structure and organization is an ongoing mechanism, the changes takes place at different levels and at different speeds throughout time, these changes also require new strategies in planning. This article will focus on contemporary changes in public space, inspired by the book “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities” by Jeffrey Hou. The text is an argumentative text highlighting the shortcomings in the ongoing discussions of the matter. An important part of the structure of society is public space, here people can socialize, do sports, walk, clear their thoughts or anything else that might elevate the enjoyment of life, hence public space is not always just a matter of a physical place. Communication, socialisation and networking that take place there are not something to underestimate, the psychical structure is possible to organize by planning but the psychological matter is just as important (if not more). In today’s discourses handling public spaces there are ongoing discussions that deal with how reconstruction of public space is occurring and why it has occurred. But the discourse does not provide suggestions of direct actions that could lead to long-term changes in planning for sustainable and modern public places, the discussions unfortunately often stop at the observation that changes actually take place. More strategies and action plans that address the issue of how decision-makers can work on the matter are needed, rather than as today when it is mostly a case for grass root movements approaching the issues in search for a solution. This paper is addressing these issues in four parts. The first section will highlight the importance and relevance of spatial justice and the just city. The chapter following takes a closer look at the trend of guerilla urbanism, what is it and how can this phenomenon be seen throughout public places? Next will give the matter a Swedish context with the case study of Trädgård på spåret and how this project was approved and conducted. Finishing with a concluding discussion whether guerrilla urbanism can lead the way in contemporary planning of public space or not.

Christina Larsson is born and raised in Stockholm. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Engineering from the Royal Institute of Technology, where she is now studying at Master levels. She has a special interest in public participation and equitable planning.

The just city and spatial justice One matter that cannot be left unnoticeable when discussing public space is the issue of a just city and spatial justice. What a just city and spatial justice means depends on who, where and when it is discussed as Harvey (1993) states. Everyone should be entitled to the city and a glorious mix of people, should live side by side and use the site in a varied manner. The co-presence and pre-existing mixture of people and uses of tenures should be a given fact. The right to the city involves re-creating ourselves in the process of re-creating our cities; this will enhance creation of a higher value of equality and social justice. Spatial justice can be seen as a critique of systematic exclusion, domination and oppression; a critique aimed at cultivating new sensibilities that could establish actions towards injustice embedded in space and spatial dynamics (Dikec, 2001). The issue should not be about reducing the differences in people, instead bringing them 53

Does the public place fit all?

together to get a diverse and more just city. Fainstein (2010) sees spatial justice as a fair distribution of resources; she illuminates diversity, democracy and equity as the key components for a just city and these qualities must be present while planning for the just city. This will also decrease the issue of powerlessness she mentions in her studies, which means that the less fortunate in society can feels left out and have no or little power to influence the planning of their cities. Actions towards planning changes does require that all who want/need a change and are willing to become proactive and dedicated to the matter. The characteristics Fainstein lists will help to ensure that a larger variety of opinions are considered when designing a public space as well. Fainstein argues that differences are what they are and we need to see the world for what it is and start working with what we have. The worse off do not have to be equal to everybody else, but no policy should in fact make those who are most disadvantaged more disadvantaged. This ought to be quite obvious; the question is how to practically solve problems Fainstein highlights theoretically? Harvey argues for a recipe that can provide spontaneous self-diversification among urban population. This may also seem pretty obvious in most people’s eyes (at least if you’re talking about those that are set aside in society), but the question is how this can be done in practice? Needless to say, the city here discussed is not only public spaces, but can easily be applied to the subject when the idea of public space should be that it is accessible to all. Power relations are according to Fainstein are also a major issue in the process of creating just cities. The top-down approach of planning for public spaces creates unnecessary power relations. Although deciding politicians are elected by public, a participatory planning will signalize the effort and insight of the matter to actually create useful and attractive public space. The egalitarian view in these matters are problematic since obviously people does not live under the same conditions, so it is not possible to treat them that way either. (Dikec, 2001; Harvey, 1993) “ There is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequals” (Harvey, 1993:394).

Injustice is about exclusion and this exclusion must be fought, the future should hold conditions of a city with high-functioning social relations with differences without exclusion. If disadvantaged groups are given en stronger role in the policy decisions it will get more just redistribution of justice, so a broader civic participation and deliberation will give a more just outcome. Civic participation can be a good complement to the traditional ways of planning for places, but still, the problem how to bring a varied group of people involved remains. If a homogeneous group expressing only their opinions, it will still be an issue of an exclusionary planning just in another form than earlier. This may be a problem with grassroots initiatives in planning, as it is often

a uniformed group working together to create a place as desired by themselves. Guerrilla urbanism Grassroots initiatives not permitted and approved by the city is surely one form of guerrilla urbanism. Guerrilla urbanism can be explained as a form of pop-up urbanism where people, groups or organisation sets out to solve self-defined problems of the urban structure without any further approval from the town it concerns, these actions are carried out in public space. Public space in urban planning is a concept of space indoors or outdoors where the public has easy access. This includes, in particular, streets, squares and parks. In “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities” the editor has collected case studies from a numerous different authors and places where the authors present different examples of urban public spaces reconstructed by guerilla urbanism, fitting the people that actually are using the place, as an alternative to the traditional planning. Some examples from the book are: eXperimentcity in Berlin where abandoned lots in the city is turned in to venues for cooperatives, ecological housing and youth projects. Emerging night markets in the heart of Seattle´s Chinatown. Temporary parks constructed in parking-spaces in San Francisco. The different cases studied clearly show different reasons for the need of remaking of public space such as identity/ belonging issues, underutilized/abandoned areas, protests/ dissatisfactions, lack of recreation areas, lack of housing or other lacking characteristics in the neighborhood are just some reasons. These actions most often are created from the bottom-up and have no particular leader or government based association. “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities” is a fine example of the lack of hands-on strategies for these issues, since Hou is adapting a descriptive approach and leaves few insights into his own thoughts and ideas in relation to the subject. Rather than argue for pros and cons he notes the contemporary trend of guerrilla urbanism rather than to critically examine this phenomenon. Traditional planning is often based on a top-down planning, leaving the people with a fixed thought of use and physical form of public places, while guerrilla urbanism serves opportunities only limited of imagination. A mixture of the two approaches is probably the best solution. The examples found in Hue’s book is mainly from Asia and North America, it is not uncomplicated to compare it to a Swedish context where the Swedish legislations in planning is more controlled than in most parts of the world. Where laws do not regulate how public spaces should be designed to the same extent as in Sweden, clear trends can be seen; that private interests reigns and the need for a guerrilla urbanism becomes more apparent. Trädgård på spåret (Garden on the rail) The case studies described in “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities” is defined

Guerrilla Urbanism Towards Spatial (in)Justice – And now what?

Grassroots movements providing an alternative track for transforming public space.

by the editor as guerrilla urbanism, I will not go into a more detailed definition of this concept, in some ways all forms of modern transformation of public spaces may be a case of this. The question rather is who are lucky enough to find the right decision maker in the affected city who pay positive attention to the “project” and are willing to invest in it to be able to transform the initiative from guerrilla urbanism to legitimate planning. It is extremely unclear today how this works. Looking at it from a Swedish perspective and the example of Trädgård på spåret (engl. Garden on the rail), Christina Winberg at the Development Administration of Stockholm is saying (p. 47): “ To Trädgård på spåret I said yes, because it is easy to install and also easy to remove everything. And it is interesting. We know that many people are interested in planting and growing and I personally like it too.” Trädgård på spåret is a non-profit organization created by Philipp Olsmeyer. The site is located on an old train rail (no longer in use) in Skanstull on the island of Södermalm i Stockholm, hence the name Trädgård på spåret (Garden on the rail). Trädgård på spåret serves as an urban garden, plant school and cafe. His original idea to develop this project came from a passion for farming, but he had limited knowledge of it and was eager to learn more. He liked the area nearby Skanstull and found the underutilized spot to be a good place for implementing his ideas. He did not wanted to rent the site as a private person for the sake of personal responsibilities “... nor did he ever intend to start some kind of guerrilla gardening (which one could say is another worldwide trend or phenomenon)” (Breyer, 2013:32). After having reached

agreement with the municipality of Stockholm Philipp got the permission to rent the site for, more or less, a symbolic sum and work could begin. The project is successful and the organization has over 300 members, the site is in no way exclusive, people are welcome without being a member, and no physical demarcation action is performed. The limitations are more related to personal interests than anything else, but in this regard it is possible to use the site in different ways. Planting, socializing, “fika” (having a coffee), shop locally produces or simply enjoy the splendour of the plants. It might seem like it is a completely successful project, but the story does not tell where the people who previously utilized the site in unconventional ways have gone today, for example homeless people that earlier used the site. Trädgård på spåret can be described as a totally successful project for accepted and normative activities, but can unfortunately not fully be called nonexclusive. Concluding discussion It is imperative that residents have knowledge of the opportunities and rights they actually have in relation to public places that are available (and not available). “Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities”, guerrilla urbanism and the project Trädgård på spåret are good example of opportunities already existing right in front of us today, but still there are obstacles that must be overcome to be able to say that public spaces are for all. The problem with exclusion still exist even if the initiatives comes from the citizens and a bottom-up perspective, still it will be a matter of exclusion 55

if the people who use the area are a homogenous group with a narrow agenda. The lack of strategies for new ways to plan public space from a top-down perspective is enhancing the problems with homogenous initiatives; strategies are needed to promote democracy, pluralism and justice. The elected officials have a responsibility to represent all different groups and individuals in society, not only those who have trendy ideas. The use of a public space in Skanstull in order to create Trädgård på spåret can be regarded as a successful initiative in many ways. But the question how to adapt it in plans from a top-down perspective for these locations still remains. There is no guarantee at all that the same concept will be functioning in other places, especially when these sorts of projects often are all about personal interests and commitment. In contemporary urban planning it is often a question of seeking a bottom-up initiative, but in the matter of public space, I find the opposite more important. Top-down planning is the form of planning really in need to be developed to fit the contemporary need of public space in order to get efficient, attractive and useful places. Top-down planning have a lot to learn from the public bottom-up perspective and the work must go on, today public space is not just a matter of housewives exercising their children. When times and the cities are changing, planning must do so as well. We need to find new applications that will match people’s needs. The solution lies not only in the new skate parks and urban gardens popping up. Planners should take lessons from the guerrilla urbanism happening today and make use of it, rather than call it guerrilla urbanism this phenomenon could be encourage and thus see how public space have the capacity and needs to be used. As seen at Trädgård på spåret the boundary between Guerrilla Urbanism and legitimate exploitation is subtle. It should not be a subjective matter; all projects should be assessed on the same grounds. But this is, as mentioned earlier is not possible unless new strategies for this type of planning designed in a statutory level. Today’s civic participation with the possibility of actual influence is not always is a given matter. The process of consultation with the population, so called civic participation is a legislative procedure and it is not given that it is performed in order to gain insight into the problem, but sometimes just because it is statutory.

References Breyer, M. 2013. Owning by doing - In Search of the Urban Commons. Degree project. KTH Royal School of Tecnology Dikec, M. 2001 “Justice and the spatial imagination”, Environment and Planning A 2001, volume 33, pages 1785-1805. Fainstein, S. 2010, The Just City. Cornwell University Press, US Harvey, D. 1993. “Social Justice, Postmodernism and the City”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16, 588-601. Hou, J. 2010 (ed.). Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities, London: Routledge

Guerrilla Urbanism is not always the optimal solution for all the problems in spatial justice, but can be a way for societies vulnerable to assert them spatially; if used in the right way. In Sweden the guerrilla part tends to feel a bit exaggerative, but in other parts of the world it could be a matter of no other alternatives. Places occupied by people who do not have their fair share of public space must have the right to exist somewhere. My intent is not to criticize the act of guerrilla urbanism, which can be a good option, but rather that the phenomenon is not utilized properly within the official planning. No one can ignore the fact that changes are needed in a place that is not used in the sense it was originally intended. Is it then a question of guerrilla urbanism from the residents or is the city exercising guerrilla planning?

Guerrilla Urbanism Towards Spatial (in)Justice – And now what?

Publicness of public space The Role of Guerrilla Urbanism in Achieving Publicness Onno de Vries

Public space, home of urban life is changing due to privatisation. This can be a good tool for cities to fulfil their task of providing public space, which is becoming too expensive. However, the Occupy movement showed us in 2011 that this privatisation leads to an increasing control on public space. Privately owned public space excludes and restricts certain groups and uses. This is in line with the concept of public space; open for all. We should ask the question; are these spaces still public? Rebar and Space Hijackers are two groups that counter this decline of public space, by trying to make it more public instead. This is a complex assignment since they don’t own these spaces. What can we learn from this development and how can we make public space (more) public (again)?

Onno de Vries is master student Urban design and planning at Delft University of Technology with a background in architecture, currently studying at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm. He is interested in how global issues can be translated to local scale and in creating liveable cities for people.

Privatisation of public space Public spaces are important for cities; it is the place where urban life happens. These spaces make cities liveable and vibrant. Can you imagine living in a city without any parks or squares? Public space is made for people to practice social, recreational and political activities (Shiffman & Hou, 2012). The essence of this space is that it is public; open to all. Henaff and Strong argue that “Public space means ...: open to all, well known by all and acknowledged by all.” (as cited in Hou, 2010, p.2) So, apart from physical access, it is also important that everyone knows that it is accessible to all and that everyone agrees on this. We might take this for granted nowadays, but this was not always like this. In the past, people got excluded from public space based on race, class or gender. The political aspect of public space maybe less obvious, but is nevertheless important as well. Public space used to be a place for political control and power display (Hou, 2010). With the freedom of speech in modern democracies, people have the right to use public space for protests or demonstrations. Hou argues that “such freedom has never come without considerable struggles and vigilance.” (Hou, 2010, p.3) Even now in modern democracies, the freedom in and publicness of public space are still questionable. On one hand there is an increasing amount of control and restrictions in public space due to the threat of terrorism. On the other hand there is a trend of privatisation of public space (Hou, 2010). In this article I will discuss this phenomenon of privatisation and the effects it has on public space. Privatisation of public space is the process that more and more public space is owned by private companies. Where public space used to be developed and owned by the government or municipality, it is now often developed with involvement of private companies (Vasagar, 2012). This can result in privately owned or quasi public space. When public space becomes private property, the private party can make the rules and regulations (Minton, 2006), which can lead to more control and restrictions. “The control of public space is now a worldwide phenomenon that shows how form follows capital.” (Hou, 2010, p.6) This is not a new phenomenon; look for example at shopping malls, but it is an increasing trend (Vasagar, 2012), which transforms major squares and parks into privately owned public space. The public realm in cities is becoming too big and too expensive to be developed and managed by the city only. That is why the city is engaging collaboration with private companies, and rewards them generously for this (Hou, 2010). Privately owned public space doesn’t necessarily have to be a bad thing. I will illustrate this in the next chapter with two cases. Then I will continue on the concept of public space and its publicness. After this I will discuss two attempts to change the increasing control on public space. Finally I will conclude with the question; how can we make our public space (more) public (again)?

Is this public space? Zucotti Park after OWS protesters were evicted. Photo by Shankbone (2011).

Two sides of the story I will discuss two cases to illustrate both positive and negative sides of privatisation of public space. The first case is about POPS (privately owned public space) in New York. The second case is Occupy Wall Street in New York and the Occupy movement in London that derived from this. Around 1900 in New York skyscrapers were built rapidly and they were getter higher and higher. As a result of this development, people started to be concerned about light and air in the streets (Kayden, 2000). In 1916 there was a zoning resolution introduced which addressed the use, height and area. There was a relation between height and area in this resolution; “the more the building sat back from the street, the higher it could go” (Kayden, 2000, p.8). Later on, in 1967 the City Planning Commission saw the need for a pedestrian network and encouraged these setbacks by providing zoning bonuses to developers. During the 60s and 70s many plazas were created out of these privately owned public spaces (POPS), although the quality and openness to the public were often bad (Kayden, 2000). The private owners didn’t provide useful public space; they just wanted the zoning bonuses. From 1975 on, the city imposed higher design standards for the POPS with as goal; “for the use and enjoyment of large numbers of people” (Kayden, 2000, p.17). Nowadays these POPS are successful; with 503 realized examples is it an essential part of the urban structure of Manhattan. Other cities copied New York’s policy to encourage POPS as well, for example in San Francisco where they are called POPOS (privately owned public open spaces). I think this collaboration between cities and private companies works good, both parties have benefits. The creation of these POPS can be used as a tool to create more public space in a city which is increasingly densifying. Furthermore, it is an inexpensive way, since the private company finances, manages and maintains the public space.

The second case is about Occupy Wall Street. On September 17th 2011, in Zucotti Park (which is POPS) in New York started an occupation by people who did not tolerate the inequalities of our system anymore. The system “that favoured one economic class over another – the 1% over the 99%. ... that favoured Wall Street over Main Street” (Brown & Shiffman, 2012, p.xix). Occupy Wall Street (OWS) was later on adopted in many other countries, as well in London; Occupy London. People occupied Paternoster Square, a privately owned public square right outside the London Stock Exchange. This particular space was once public, which made it a perfect illustration for their protest (Rice, 2013). “Occupation of urban space raises the question of who has the right to the city.” (Rice, 2013, p.73) It did indeed raise this question and opened a debate about privatisation of public space. The police had to remove the protesters from Paternoster Square because they were not allowed to protest on this private property (Vasagar, 2012). The protesters then found a new and legal place for their occupation just outside the square; at St. Paul’s Cathedral. Occupy London shows that public space, in this case of private ownership, is not always public. A lot of people never realised that “private owners can refuse right of entry to members of the public” (Vasagar, 2012). Thanks to Occupy London a debate started on the right to city and what public space essentially is or should be. The first case shows that privatisation can be positive, used as a tool to create new public space. As the second case illustrates the negative and more common side of privatisation describes a process of public space owned by the government that get privatised. This leads to a decrease of truly public space and is obvious no progression, but a decline of public space. The concept of public space We will continue on the concept of public space and what this essentially means. “Public space is very difficult to define, not least because very few spaces and places are, or ever have been,

Publicness of public space

Guerrilla urbanism as tool to open POPOS to the public. Photo by Rebar (2007).

truly public.” (Minton, 2006, p.9) A well known example of the concept of public space in the past is the agora in ancient Greece. This was the central space for citizens where they gathered for social, economical and political reasons. Even though this is a classic example of public space, it was not truly public (Minton, 2006). Only free, non-foreign men had citizen rights and could participate in this system, which means that more than half of the population was excluded from using this public space (Minton, 2006). Apart from this classic example, Hardin argues that public space always needs some kind of control; “some form of control is often required or desired, else a “tragedy of the commons” arises whereby each actor advances her own position at the expense of others and only the fittest survive.” (Németh, 2012, p.813) This results in some rules and restrictions, which makes the existence of truly public space questionable. Although public space is difficult to define, access is a returning element in all researches (Németh, 2012). Access means “legally open and accessible to all without permission of anyone else” (Németh, 2012, p.813). To measure this open access Minton argues that we should look at the attitude towards homeless people. Especially in privately owned public space, homeless people are not welcome (Minton, 2006). The same often applies to other unwanted groups like skateboarders and beggars. According to property owners this control is needed to create a ‘clean and safe’ environment (Minton, 2006). Common critics on this are that street life and public space become uniform and that social problems are just moved to neighbouring areas (Minton, 2006). Occupy London is an example of this exclusion of undesired groups. The private owner didn’t allow protest on its property, so protesters had to go somewhere else. As we saw before, the owner can make the rules and controls activities in the public space this way. This is a clear decline of the original concept of public space. Where political expression used to be an important characteristic of public space, this is now only possible in real public space, owned by the government. You can imagine that when this process of privatisation continues, there are only a few designated places left for protest. Only those places will be truly democratic, because protest is a essential part of democracy. So in a way this decline of public space is also the decline of democracy (Minton, 2006). Another example of increasing control is security. In recent years there is a threat of terrorism with our public spaces as possible targets (Burney, 2012). Restrictions in public space are needed to prevent possible attacks. “We are caught in a dilemma: the resistance to terrorism ends up forcing us to infringe the very liberties that we are defending from terrorism.” (Burnley, 2012,

p.275) This makes clear that we have to give in on the freedom of public space. Sometimes we need to compromise in order to reach a higher goal, but we should never lose the basic concept of public space out of sight. The Occupy movement protested against the control of the financially powerful (Shiffman & Hou, 2012). “This is not a debate about capitalism, socialism, or communism, it is a debate about democracy and a politic system.” (Shiffman & Hou, 2012, p.384) It is about how power and control is practised within this democratic system. Hou argues that the root of the problem is the privatisation of our political system (Hou, 2012), privatisation of public space is only a part of it. Therefore we cannot simply solve it by creating more, more inclusive and accessible public space (Hou, 2012). Although the problem might be bigger, as an urban designer or planner we should focus on the privatisation of public space and its increasing control. The question we should think about is; how can we make public space (more) public (again)? To answer this I will discuss two groups that try to address the issues of privatisation and control, both groups aim particularly on public space. Attempts to change Space hijackers is a group based in London, who call themselves anarchitects. They organise events or projects where they use public space in an unusual way. Their purpose is “intervening in the everyday life of the city to reveal how the use of the urban public realm is being narrowed by corporate interests and complicit power brokers.” (Gilchrist & Ravenscroft, 2013, p.57) So, the space hijackers are also fighting against increasing control, but instead of protest only they take action. One of their projects that they repeated a few times is Midnight Cricket. This is simply a game of cricket played in the heart of the financial centre in London; Paternoster square, the very same public space where Occupy London got evicted from. They encouraged business men to join the game, to make them aware of the silent protest what this game was actually about. As expected the police showed up (Gilchrist & Ravenscroft, 2013), which emphasized the point the space hijackers were making; the control over public space. It seems just like fun activities that they are organising, but by doing this they point out that our public space can be used in other unusual ways. These ways are actually often rejected or not allowed by the private owners of the public space (Gilchrist & Ravenscroft, 2013). The alternative uses are mainly activities that people elsewhere have to pay for; like sports and dance clubs. At the same time this is a protest against capitalism. The space hijackers see capitalism as the root of the problem of privatisation (Gilchrist & Ravenscroft, 2013). They believe that by changing 59

the mindset of the people they can change the system. For this reason there projects are mainly about creating awareness. Rebar is a collective in San Francisco that did projects on earlier discussed POPOS. The project, named Commonspace, raised the question how public POPOS actually are (Merker, 2010). Their approach is quite similar to the space hijackers, but their ideas are less radical. The purpose of the project was to map POPOS, by their location but also by their rules. Often the public does not know that these spaces are public or that they even exist (Merker, 2010). By mapping POPOS, Rebar is trying to make them inclusive and better accessible in the urban structure; which make them more public. Nappening is one of the activities that Rebar organised in these POPOS. The idea was to create a spot for under slept office workers (Merker, 2010). Again they had to do with security, private security guards this time. “Whereas some were suspicious of our activities and even unaware of their obligation to provide an open space to the public, others responded positively to the generous spirit of the activities we initiated.” (Merker, 2010, p.53) This time the activities were not stopped by security guards. It seems that these public spaces are rather unknown yet and I wonder how the rules of these POPOS will change when they become more common public spaces. As said before Rebar is less radical in their approach, they work with the system trying to make POPOS more public.

the public. Is it possible to shape this collaboration in a way that the freedom and publicness of public space won’t be reduced? There might be some kind of conditional privatisation of public space possible. With conditional I mean that the government or municipality should have a say about the rules and regulation of the public space even when it is privately owned. This is actually difficult to achieve, not at least because private companies might be less interested in a collaboration, but also because we have to convince decision makers. To convince decision makers that the current trend of privatisation of public space is leading to a decline of public space, we should make them aware of results. For this we can use guerrilla urbanism or protest as OWS showed.

How can we make public space (more) public (again)? As we have seen public space is hardly ever truly public, this is in the strict definition of public. There is clearly a difference in publicness between privately owned and traditional public space. It is obvious that these privately owned public spaces are more controlled and restricted than the traditional ones. In order to reclaim the values where public stands for we have to ask; how can we make public space (more) public (again)? When we look at the earlier discussed concept of public space there are two things important; access for everyone and the possibility to practise social, recreational and political activities. We have to realise that we cannot directly make public space more public, since we do not own the space or make the rules. Therefore we should look what we can do within our range of influence as an urban designer or planner. Because we won’t be ask by property owners to make their privately owned public space more public, we are limited to the kind of guerrilla urbanism that Rebar and Space hijackers are doing. Their attempts both aimed mainly at awareness on the issue of privatisation of public space. Rebar tried to integrate and open POPOS into the structure of public space, so they worked on access. With their projects the POPOS are becoming more public. They show people that they are allowed to use these spaces; they are actually opening them to the public. Space hijackers showed with their projects the restriction of activities in public space, this is more about awareness. By pushing the boundaries of the rules of the privately owned public space we can try to stretch them. For example if a lot of people play frequently midnight cricket in a public space, this will become a normal activity and it will be accepted. When more of these kinds of activities happen, more will be tolerated. By exposing the effects of privatisation to a wider public and making them aware what it really means, we can create a critical counter movement. The more people know about it the stronger the point is we can make. These two attempts are good examples of how we can try to improve the publicness of public space in a creative way, however there is a long way to go in this privatised system. On the other hand we can question the root of the problem; does the government really need this collaboration and is it not able to provide, finance and maintain all public space on its own. With the government as owner of public space, publicness can be more guaranteed. If the government is not able to fulfil their task of providing public space, then we should look how we can reshape this form of collaboration between the private and 60

Publicness of public space

References Brown, L.J., & Shiffman, R. (2012). Introduction. In R. Shiffman, R. Bell, L.J. Brown & L. Elizabeth (Eds.), Beyond Zuccotti Park: freedom of assembly and the occupation of public space. (pp.xix-xxii). Oakland, CA: New Village Press. Burnley, D. (2012). Is “public space” possible? In R. Shiffman, R. Bell, L.J. Brown & L. Elizabeth (Eds.), Beyond Zuccotti Park: freedom of assembly and the occupation of public space. (pp.271-276). Oakland, CA: New Village Press. Gilchrist , P., & Ravenscroft, N. (2013). Space hijacking and the anarchopolitics of leisure. Leisure studies, 32, 1, 49-68. Hou, J. (2012). Making public, beyond public space. In R. Shiffman, R. Bell, L.J. Brown & L. Elizabeth (Eds.), Beyond Zuccotti Park: freedom of assembly and the occupation of public space. (pp.89-98). Oakland, CA: New Village Press. Hou, J. (2010). (Not) your everyday public space. In J. Hou (Ed.), Insurgent public space: guerilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities. (pp.1-17). New York, NY: Routlegde. Kayden, J.S. (2000). Privately owned public space: the New York City experience. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Merker, B. (2010). Taking place: Rebar’s absurd tactics in generous urbanism. In J. Hou (Ed.), Insurgent public space: guerilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities. (pp.45-58). New York, NY: Routlegde. Minton, A. (2006). The privatisation of public space: what kind of world are we building? London: RICS. Retrieved from http://annaminton.com/ Privatepublicspace.pdf. Németh, J. (2012, November). Controlling the commons: how public is public space? Urban Affairs Review, 48, 6, 811-835. Rice, L. (2013, November/December). Occupied space. AD (Architectural Design), 83, 6, 70-75. Shiffman, R., & Hou, J. (2012). A call for actions. In R. Shiffman, R. Bell, L.J. Brown & L. Elizabeth (Eds.), Beyond Zuccotti Park: freedom of assembly and the occupation of public space. (pp.383-386). Oakland, CA: New Village Press. Vasagar, J. (2012, June 11). Public spaces in Britain’s cities fall into private hands. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com. Images Shankbone, D. (Photographer). 2011. Retrieved on 27 November 2014 from http://commons. wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Day_60_Occupy_Wall_Street_ November_15_2011_Shankbone_50.JPG Rebar. (Photographer). 2007 Retrieved on 9 December 2014 from https://www.flickr.com/photos/ rebarartcollective/2284944742

Performing on City Stage Shenzhen Fringe as Insurgent Public Space Jiamin Zheng

This essay is my reflections on the book Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities, edited by Jeffery Hou. The general public always desires and struggles to claim their rights to the urban space and public life. These grassroots struggles are spontaneous, unconventional, informal, bottom-up, temporary and innovative, resulting in the production of insurgent public space. Based on my knowledge and experience in my hometown, Shenzhen, I elaborate on the case of Shenzhen International Fringe Festival which introduces alternative ways of using public spaces and provides the opportunities for different classes to integrate and participate in public life. In order to increase the possibilities for insurgent public space and make the city more integrated and attractive, flexible public space should be encouraged to prepare the city for spontaneous activities and events.

Jiamin Zheng is a master student in the program of Sustainable Urban Planning and Design at KTH, Stockholm. Sheâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interested in how landscape and urban form can influence public space, as well as social issues around that.

Public Space and Insurgent Public Space in Shenzhen Shenzhen is situated in Southern China, immediately north of Hong Kong. It has transformed from a small fishing village to an economic powerhouse and a modern city that is developing with unparalleled speed, since the establishment of the Special Economic Zone thirty years ago. Shenzhen has also seen its population develop rapidly from around three million in 1979 to roughly ten million in 2010. It is the largest migrant city in China. According to Shenzhen Government, the number of migrants in the city in 2010 was over 74 percent of the total population (Shenzhen Government, 2012). Although some of the migrants manage to become middle class and enjoy the commodities of their new city lives, there is still a group pf migrants stuck at the bottom of society as lower working class. They are vulnerable and thus form a socially segregated group within the urban system, which will lead to a wide range of social problems (Liu, Li and Breitung, 2012). Despite social segregation, there is also the problem of spatial segregation. Migrant groups tend to live together within urban villages with low rent housing. These urban villages often function as a network within itself, disconnected from the larger city scale (Madrazo and Kempen, 2012). People living in these specific areas do not share the same environmental, economic and social opportunities as other citizens, and have limited access to public life in the city. During the time of the Emperors power, public spaces in Chinese cities like squares and parks are exclusive spaces, solely accessible to the high and middle class of state officials and some rich merchants (Hassenpflug, 2004). Nowadays, this exclusion remains that some public spaces are designed only for specific group of people, excluding the majority of residents or the migrant groups. That is to say, some official public space in Shenzhen has indeed long been exclusionary, contrary to Youngâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2002) notion of a public space that embodies differences and diversity. For example, people are not treated as active users on Deng Xiaoping Portrait Square. Also, the square in front of the city hall is not inviting activities or stimulating inter-group interactions, only to show the modernity of Shenzhen. When it comes to large private developed buildings, modern shopping malls tend to aim at upper class residents, thereby ignoring the needs of the lowincome inhabitants. There is a disconnection of these buildings with the local urban environment, making it even harder for the general public to access. To conclude, the situation in Shenzhen contradicts with the characteristics of public space, which should serve all residents without excluding people from use, regardless of their social or economic status. This exclusion prevent social interaction between different classes from happening. However, migrants are struggling for their rights to the city and public life, which can be seen from various informal and unconventional use of space in the city. For example, some residents put their own furniture in the street to create outdoor 61

Shenzhen Fringe Festival invading city square. Collage by author. Source: (Deng Xiaoping Portrait Square) https://www. flickr.com/photos/tilo972/10929390924/in/set-72157637812144464, (Symbol of Shenzhen Fringe Festival) http://www.szfringe.org/2013/

sitting space where people can play Chinese chess or play mahjong. You can sometimes hear Cantonese opera in a park. Illegal markets exist in some place. Not paying any rent, migrants sell low-cost food and goods or even cut hair on the street without permits. Moreover, every winter when Chinese New Year is coming, merchants go to Aiguo Road Flower Market to load the street with orchids, orange trees and other traditional New Year plants, creating New Year’s atmosphere. Struggle is the only way that the right to public space can be achieved (Mitchell, 2003). These acts show that the roots of the public are constantly desiring and struggling to break the limit in their public life. Social interactions between residents are being performed as well. Shenzhen and the Fringe Festival Shenzhen is a young and vibrant city and has opportunities for entertainment and cultural appreciation. For example, it is very likely that you will hear some music by some bands in the bustling courtyard beside Shenzhen Concert Hall and Book City. Street artists regard this kind of area in Shenzhen as a stage to gain experience, while locals and migrants alike embrace the joy that street artists bring to the city. As a city of migrants and a meeting point for people from other parts of China, Shenzhen sees various cultural traditions mixing together and crashing into each other, which provides an open environment for new things to happen and allows young artists to find a place to express themselves. This explains why Shenzhen becomes the first city organising Fringe festival in mainland China and has the ability to facilitate the growth of such festival. Originated in Edinburgh, the idea of a fringe festival was adopted as alternative arts and is now held around the world. The term of fringe indicates that the festival is alternative and unofficial. This can be drawn from its origin that eight groups of artists decided to organise their performances when excluded from the Edinburgh International Festival. The alternative and

unofficial character of the Fringe Festival largely contributes to its popularity. Shenzhen International Fringe Festival intends to get everyone involved in arts, both performers and audiences, including migrants and the newest arrivals to the city. Instead of being excluded from events that requires entrance fee, they are invited to participate in urban public life and interact with the street space through the festival. Events are ranging from dramas, independent films, cutting edge music, dancing, workshops, charity programs, youth creation camps to art exhibitions. Hong Kong sound artist Dickson Dee who gave an open-air concert at Haide Square in Shenzhen said, “When a variety of sounds can be heard by people walking in the street, people’s cultural horizons will widen, and the overall cultural quality of a city will improve.” The integration of diverse cultural expressions forms helps the integration of immigrants in the city. In this way, Fringe Festival creates a threshold platform for cultural diversity where Shenzhen residents communicate and interact, where immigrants claims their rights to participate in the city. Spaces Defined by Festival The fringe festival not only encourages innovative and pioneering performances, but also breaks the limitations of traditional theatre, turning the whole city into one big public space. Parks, big lawns, plazas, cafe, shopping malls and even fountains could be part of the stage for artists and performers. Various art events taking place in Shenzhen attaches new meanings to architecture and public spaces. For example, a modern dancing video was projected on Poly theatre’s egg-shaped body so that the audience could enjoying seeing dances dancing on the building. People would be surprised by art performance freely at any moment at any corner of the street, either standing in a square or sitting on a lawn. Everyone could be performer or audience. This way of using streets as theatres challenges the conventional and official notion of public space. And these events in a way reorganise urban

Performing on City Stage

People reaching for the city. Collage by author. Source: (Shenzhen Panorama) https://www.flickr.com/ photos/jessewarren/15922753032/in/pool-szprc, (People in concert) https:// wallpaperscraft.com/tag/concert

spaces into festival spaces, constructing informal venues that are open and spontaneous, less influenced by the constraints coming from traditional theatres. Here I will identify three spaces defined by the festival. The first is defined when Coastal City shopping mall and its surrounding area was the main venue for the first Shenzhen International Fringe Festival. This luxury shopping mall has been the destination for upscale consumers in the past. However, during the Fringe Festival, people paid attention to performances instead of goods and prices. The space filled with crowds of participants and artists was reclaimed as public for people. People from all walks of life gathering in the mall actually created a sense of community. The relationship between people and the space was then fostered by this festival as well. The second one is generated from Fringe Parade. It started from Wenxin Plaza, passing along Shenzhen Bay Footbridge, and finished at Haide Plaza. The parade came in matrixes laid out by schools, associations, artists and business institutions, and performances such as body art, installation art and interactive art. There were makeup artists and prop people standing along the line, and audience were invited to join the parade. Different neighbourhoods were linked together by the parade, creating flowing space as a new form of stage. The last one is a new type of space resulting from the PechaKucha Night being held in conjunction with the 2012 Shenzhen International Fringe Festival at the Tiley Plaza in Nanshan District. Organising this temporary event when it becomes dark adds a different experience to the place. They were actually developing new typologies of public activities for Tiley plaza and transforming the city. This reminds me of the case of “Yangge” dancers in the streets of Beijing that they also create their temporary grassroots dancing typology from bottom to up. When they are excluded from parks with entrance fee, they strive

to claim their dancing rights and continue participating in public life in loose and residual spaces in the city. (Chen, 2010) These spaces, activities and events, generated by fringe festivals are indeed redefining and expanding the roles, functions and meanings of the public realm and the production of space. They bring about new opportunities and possibilities of urban space and public life. The Right to Public Life In the urban context, Lefebvre defined space as social construction with its territorial, physical and demographic characteristics, and defined the term “the right to the city” as the right to urban life in a transformed and renewed form. He states that it is an enabling right, implying not only the participation of the urban citizen in urban social life, but more importantly, his or her active participation in the political life, management, and administration of the city (Dikéc, 2001). The right to public life is an essential part of the right to the city which can be attained through struggles. In other words, Grassroots struggles are attached great importance in achieving people’s basic needs for the right to the city and public life. The Shenzhen International Fringe Festival is a case in point. It provides unlimited possibilities for grassroots, alternative and independent art to happen in the city that assures people’s right to public life. All the activities open to the public aim to stimulate public enthusiasm and function as an important part of urban culture. Through these acts, people, including newest arrivals, are interacting with the city through the public participation process. Moreover, the threshold environment created by this festival allows migrant populations to join, to participate in public life, and enjoy the spectacle of Shenzhen. Moreover, as Chen (2010) mentioned in “Dancing in the streets of Beijing”, dancing is a basic human right that belongs to both natives and visitors of any age in Beijing. It is a therapy to 63

rehabilitate themselves from illness and stay alive. I think it’s the human spirit that people need to express themselves. Thus, this festival not only suits the majority of populations in Shenzhen, but also enables and supports creativity to grow in the city, so that residents are able to claim their rights to express themselves through arts or other forms of public life. Encouraging Flexible Public Space The case of Shenzhen International Fringe Festival demonstrates how grassroots struggles making use of the urban contexts to reclaim their right to the city and transforming every corner of the city into insurgent public space. Citizen initiatives and informal activities created new forms of public space, including spontaneous events and unintended uses. (Hou, 2010) These acts, reflecting people enjoying their participation in the city, bring endless energy and vivid colour to Shenzhen. This interaction resulting from the festival also forms an essential part in providing opportunities to the lower class inhabitants. Therefore, they should be encouraged and learned from.

have their ability to reinforce themselves and landscape has the potential to be attractive recreational area. We should also respect spontaneous acts by residents in urban planning and design process (Jacobs, 1961).What we need to do is to make a prepared ground for possible activities, events and festivals and increase its potential of containing diverse functions and uses through different typologies of space, public facilities and public art. On this flexible prepared ground, residents are encourage to explore the space, make their owe interventions, choose their activities, and use public space freely. By designing flexible public space, exchange between different classes are promoted, thereby helping the integration of the migrant population. On the other hand, it foster the relationship between people and the living environment.

These insurgent space to some extent draws the attention to the notion of “loose spaces” or “found spaces”. Loose spaces are places where there exists no fixed space, encouraged by free access to public spaces, anonymity among strangers, diversity of persons, fluidity of meaning . These spaces allow for chance of encounter, spontaneous events, enjoyment of diversity and discovery of the unexpected. (Frank and Stefens, 2010) It is when the residents who appropriate these unofficial spaces in the city that they develop new typologies of public space. As far as I am concerned, in order to encourage more insurgent public space initiated by citizens instead of setting boundaries, critical concerns should be attached to intentionally designed space. In over-planned and over –programmed cities where zones of public and private use are clearly demarcated, lines of ownership and access highly secured, and different functions and conforming behaviours tightly prescribed, the room for spatial manoeuvre can be limited. (Tonkiss, 2014) Alternatively, flexible public space can be encouraged to be a platform enabling residents spontaneously carry out activities and events. Japan has a tradition of flexible public space. For example, the tatami room can be used for various functions such as a traditional tea ceremony, a study and a bedroom. The engawa between the garden and a room is seen differently in different situation. Japanese flexibility can even be seen in their clothing. A kimono is fastened with a sash which can be loosened if one gains weight. This traditional concept influence public spaces in Japan in that loose spaces are created for festivals. In downtown Tokyo, the first floors of some houses are designed with festivals in mind. (Hidaka & Tanaka, 2001) Unlike plaza or parks, this kind of public space is defined by events, which serves as a good solution for temporary events in the Japanese context where supply of land is tight. Japanese housing typology and event-based public spaces serves as a prepared ground for festivals. From this case, it can be concluded that designing loose and flexible space revitalise the feeling of community and increase the possibilities of insurgent public space, which brings the most vitality to the city. As urban planners and designers, we should trust that cities 64

Performing on City Stage

References Chen, C. (2010). Dancing in the streets of Beijing: Improvised uses within the urban system. Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities, 21-35. Dikec, M. (2001). Justice and the spatial imagination. Environment and Planning A, 33(10), 1785-1806. Franck, K., & Stevens, Q. (Eds.). (2013). Loose space: Possibility and diversity in urban life. Routledge. Hassenpflug, D. (2004). The Rise of Public Urban Space in China. City Future. Chicago. Hidaka, T., & Tanaka, M. (2001). Japanese Public Space as Defined by Event. In Public Places in Asia Pacific Cities (pp. 107-118). Springer Netherlands. Hou, J., (2010). (Not) your everyday public space. In: J. Hou, ed. Insurgent Public Space- Guerrilla Urbanism and the Remaking of Contemporary Cities. New York: Routledge, pp. 2-16. Jacobs, J. (2010). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. The Blackwell City Reader. London: John Wiley & Sons, 273-278. Liu, Y., Li, Z., & Breitung, W. (2012). The social networks of new-generation migrants in China’s urbanized villages: A case study of Guangzhou. Habitat International, 36(1), 192-200. Madrazo, B. & Kempen, R. V. (2012). Explaining divided cities in China. Geoforum, 43, 158-168. Mitchell, D. (2003). The right to the city: Social justice and the fight for public space. Guilford Press. Shenzhen Government. (2010). Shenzhen sixth national population census. Shenzhen International Fringe Festival. http://www. szfringe.org/2013/ Tonkiss, F. (2014). Cities by design: the social life of urban form. John Wiley & Sons, p.108

Matchmaking Markets in Chinese Public Parks Rick Hoogduyn

With the reformation of China into the People’s Republic of China a lot has changed in its society. Ongoing population increase and economic growth are the order of the day in China. Rapid changes make the gap between the older generations and the younger generations greater and might lead to disparities. The older generations grew up with the traditions that they should have a strong influence on the partner choice of their children. However, this is not always the opinion of the younger generations. Yet we see that the older generations clings on to the old traditions and expresses those in the public spaces. The so-called ‘marriage markets’ of China are an interesting phenomena that reveal themselves in public parks in the cities. The effects of this ‘insurgent’ use of the public space vary from site to site. In one example the government decided to move the marriage registration office into the park itself. Where the limits are of the ‘invasion’ of other services into the public parks is unknown and will remain a question for the future.

Educated at the University of Delft in the Netherlands, Rick Hoogduyn took his bachelor degree in spatial planning. After graduating he began his master study Spatial Planning and Urban Design at the Blekinge University of Technology in Karlskrona, Sweden. For this master degree he took part of two semesters in Nanjing, China.

Introduction The Chinese society is one with a very long history. Ages of different dynasties have ruled the enormous amounts of lands and alternated each other after wars had been fought out. In the recent history, China has undergone perhaps one of its most drastic changes. Since 1949, China has left its history of dynasties behind and reformed into the ‘People’s Republic of China’. This reformation has had huge influences on both the political- and social structure of China. Compared to the Western society, the Chinese society differs in a lot of aspects. The Chinese society is characterized by a strong influence of the state and a high social pressure. These differences in society and culture reveal themselves in exceptional uses of the public space. In this essay I will outline one of these extraordinary phenomenons; the Chinese Marriage Markets. Population development in China With more than 1.3 billion inhabitants China has the largest population in the world. This population takes about 19.24% of the total world population to his account (Worldmeters, 2014). The history of the Chinese population has known its ups and downs. In 1949 the Chinese reformation led by Mao Zedong was characterized by a strong encouragement of having as many children as possible in order to stimulate the countries growth. This encouragement lasted until the 1970’s. In addition to the governmental stimulant, several other factors helped causing the Chinese population to grow even more rapid; a decline of the death birth rate and the increase of the life expectancies at birth (Bergaglio, M., 2001). These factors combined have led to a population growth of around 540 million people in 1949 to 940 million in the year 1976. The Chinese leaders however started to realize that their prospected increasing capita per income was hard to keep if the population would continue to grow at the same pace (Feng, W., 1996). When these problems were realized, the government began to take measures in order to limit the population growth. One of the measures is the controversial ‘One child policy’ that was implemented in 1979. Along with this policy came certain negative effects, among others a tremendous inequality of gender. China has a culturally preference for boys. With the introduction of the one child policy, this has led to the disappearing of many girls every year. This gendercide has caused that one out of six girls is eliminated by sex selected abortion, abandonment, or infanticide (Allgirlsallowed, no date). The effects of these actions are now clearly visible; the Chinese society has a ‘surplus’ of about 40 million men over their total of 1.3 billion inhabitants (Hamme, E., 2011). Led by Mao Zedong, China has developed itself to a powerful nation. In economic terms, the globalization has had huge effects for China which came almost simultaneously with their population boost. While more and more people benefited from these developments, urban life became a desired destination. The 65

Marriage markets in a park in Shanghai. Photo by Rick Hoogduyn

expanse in the demand for urban living therefor puts the Chinese cities under major pressures. The current migration of Chinese inhabitants moving from the rural lands towards the urban environments is the biggest migration that has ever taking place in the human history (Zhang, K. 2003). These migrants are trying to pick some of the grains that the economic boost has to offer. Social pressure Even thought the city life is very different from that of the rural one, traditional family traditions are still keeping strong. Traditionally, Chinese parents have a strong influence in the decision making of their children’s life. When parents are not able to take care of themselves anymore they generally move into their children’s homes. These children are then responsible for taking care of their parents. It is therefor that it is important to the parents that their children live a good prosperous life. One of the elements that can influence this target is the finding of the right partner. The ‘right partner’ however has a slightly different definition in Chinese terms than that a average Western person would give to it. Apart from becoming happy as a couple, it is important for many Chinese that the significant other fits to the family’s honor. That often means that parents focus on high income levels and classy families. In the start of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, a new marriage law was introduced by Mao Zedong. This law was aiming to change away from the ancient wedding traditions and creating equal rights. The traditional Chinese Marriage became a common act around 475 B.C. - 256 B.C. Adherent to these ancient weddings several traditions were followed. Typically the wedding was arranged by the parents or matchmakers. Mao Zedong tried to diminish the parents influences in the marriages by the new law. Before this law, the rights of women were not represented. Another feature of the law, was that both parties should agree to the marriage, banning the forced weddings. In 1980 the law was revised and introduced 66

the possibilities of divorce for women. This new law did his inauguration at the same period of the one child policy. Even though the Chinese Marriage Law of 1980 and the Chinese government promotes later marriage and childbirth, the social pressure of marrying on a young age is still there. In general, people older then 27 are seen as to old as marriage partners. This causes huge problems for people that are older then 27 without having found their partner yet. Having not found a husband after the age of 27 is seen as a rather bad thing in China. These women are the so-called ’Shengnu’, or ‘leftover women’. After this age their changes of finding the right partner are shrinking drastically, since the men also have their requirements. Parents fear that their daughters will live a childless life, and are vulnerable to the poor social safety net of China (Makinen, J. And Lee, D., 2013). Marriage markets A study of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences estimates that by the year of 2020, more then 24 million Chinese men between the age of 20 and 44 will be single (AFP, 2010). Despite the prohibition of parental influences regarding marriages in the new marriage law, older Chinese generations have found a way to hold onto their traditional culture. Every weekend in the People’s park in Shanghai, hundreds of paper flyers are transforming the park. These flyers contain personal resume’s of children that not have found a suited wedding partner yet. The resume’s contains demands such as desired height, income, age and education of their ideal spouse. It are however not the single’s themselves who place the flyers, but the parents who try to find a good spouse for their children. These kind of processes are called ‘Zhenghun’ (Becoming, V. 2013). In most cases, contradictionary to the surplus of single Chinese men, the flyers contain information about women searching for their ideal partner. One would guess these women have many men to choose from. However, due to increasing gender equality, these women are

Matchmaking markets in Chinese public parks

Crowded marriage markets in a park in Shanghai. Photo by Rick Hoogduyn.

getting higher requirements for their potential husband. The women claim that finding a men that is as accomplished as they are is very hard (Makinen, J. And Lee, D., 2013). The women are generally high educated and have decent incomes. Insurgent public space Hou, J. describes a variety of eye-catching uses of the public space in his book ‘Insurgent Public Space’. Among others he describes the phenomenon of Chinese dancers using spaces under overhead highways and other marginal spaces. The people performing these dances show some similarities with the marriage markets. First of all they all use the public space in an unconventional way. Their actions might not be illegal, but they do hold a certain resistance in them. The dancers are performing acts that were by law no longer allowed, but they refuse to give it up. Even though the younger generation does not share the same compassion to these traditions as the older ones, this does not stop them from doing what do they like most. The new Chinese marriage law from 1980 also tried to stop the ancient cultural traditions. As with the dancers, the older generation does not give up on their believes and culture. These described marriage markets takes place in the public space and are comparable to the online based dating sites, such as match.com in real life. It is in this public space that the parents feel that they have a change of finding the right partner to their children. The global trend in the developed countries is that these kind of matchmaking efforts are taking place online more then ever. It is therefor interesting and worth appreciating these kind of activities taking place in the public space. Not everyone is happy with the commitment of the parents thought; in most cases the children do not know that their parents are trying to ’market’ their child in the parks (Tomlison, S. 2014). Some do know about their parents activities, and do not agree on it. However the parents are convinced of their good efforts and persist not doing it anyway.

The marriage market in the People’s park in Shanghai is the most famous marriage market of China. However, their are many more similar markets differing in their size. In Nanjing for example the Xianwu lake park acts as a gathering place for older generations trying to find the perfect partner for their children. The small open area in the park with just a few trees is everything that is needed for setting up their markets areas. With ropes tied between the trees, the parents hang their children’s resumes and start chatting with other parents. On first sight these markets look really informal and provisional. They do however posses a certain level of professionalism. This can be noticed by the availability of translators when needed. Another aspect of this commercialization of matchmaking is that several parks ask fee for the parents to hang their resume’s. Several companies have understood the enormous demand for matchmaking and are selling their expertise as matchmakers at the markets. A five month advertisement cost around $3,20. Unlimited phone numbers can be obtained from marriage brokers for a registration fee of $16 (Tacon, D. 2013). One can wonder if this is appropriated in the public space, where apparently money is being earned by making use of the public areas. These kinds of activities do attract a lot of people every weekend, giving these brokers a decent sales market. The Chinese have made the act of marriage into a total industrial process. The romantic aspects of a marriage is losing terrain in this assembly line like process. This is partly due to the single child policy, creating an even stronger pressure on that one child. Nowadays the Chinese needs to register their wedding first at the marriage registration office, which requires several official certificates. In Nanshan, a district of the city Shenzhen, urbanist have tried to make a new type of design for these registration offices in order to try and keep the romantic feeling to getting married. In many cases there is a long queue in front of the marriage offices, due to the high numbers of marriage couples 67

(Chinese Architects, No Date).That these registration offices are a subject of discussion get clear when you take a look at the Yuexiu district in Guangzhou. This district noticed the incremental need for marriage registration and also saw the marriage markets in the public space taking place. Therefor the municipality relocated their two stories marriage registration office to the Dongfeng park. This act is received in varies ways by the public. It became the start off for a debate, whether or not this is an invasion of the public space. Some bloggers where excited to hear this news and called it creative and it help to create the marital atmosphere. Some of the more concerned people opted that there are most often long queues that would cause disturbance for the people that were enjoying a nice time in the park. Another comments is that a park is meant for a place where people walk, rest and exercise, while a marriage registration office is a place that provides a public service. When these kinds of public services are placed in a park, will other governmental institutions invade the park as well? Tianhe district in Guangzhuo city is now also considering relocation their marriage registration office to the Tianhe park (Kun, L. 2014). These kind of developments show a trend of form following function. The use of visitors to the parks has led to these municipal actions, who are reacting one the uses. Judging by the public display of the ads, one could think that the parents are really open in their actions. This hold only true to a certain degree, since most parents do not appreciated the taking of photographs. An explanation for this can be found in the fear of embarrassing their children. Conclusions The Chinese marriage markets are an extraordinary phenomenon in a fast changing society of China. Whether people are pro or against these kinds of uses of public space, they do posses a certain elegance. The public space is used in a way where one of the most personal things is made public; the search for a life partner. Personal information and desires such as length, weight and income are expressed openly without any kind of censorship. This ‘insurgent’use of public space is interesting as it is controversial against the internet based society where more and more social interactions between humans are being performed over the world wide web. These kind of uses do, however, lead to sometimes unwanted effects. The replacement of the marital registration offices to these parks might be seen as invasion of the public space and one could wonder whether this is the end of such extra services in the public space.

Matchmaking markets in Chinese public parks

References AFP, (2010). China’s Gender Gap Leaves Millions of Single Men, available at: http://news.discovery.com/ Allgirlsallowed, (no date). Gendercide statistics, available at: http://www.allgirlsallowed.org/ Becoming, V. (2013). Under cover at the Shanghai marriage market, available at: http://chinadailymail. com/ Bergaglio, M., (2001). Population growth in China: the basic characteristics of China’s demographic transition. Chinese architects, (no date), A Chinese Wedding, available at: http://www.chinese-architects.com/ Feng, W., (1996). A decade of the one-child policy: achievements and implications. p.100 Hamme, E., (2011). China’s One-Child Policy Expected to Produce 40-Million ‘Surplus’ Males by 2020, available at: http://www.cnsnews.com/ Kun, L., (2014). Guangzhou Puts Marriage Registration Office in A Public Park, available at: http://english.cri.cn/ Makinen. J., and Lee, D., (2013). LA Times, China’s shengnu, or ‘leftover women,’ face intense pressure to marry Chinese parents, and even the government, are wringing their hands over young, educated, urban women who are taking their time finding a husband, available at: http://articles.latimes.com/ Schneider, M. M., (2014). The Ugly Wife Is a Treasure at Home: True Stories of Love and Marriage in Communist China. Tacon, D., (2013). Finding a spouse in a Chinese marriage market, available at: http://www.aljazeera. com/ Tomlinson, S. (2014). The Great Wall of... Lonely Hearts ads: Weekly marriage market in China sees parents post notices advertising their single sons and daughters (including how much they earn), available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ Worldmeters (2014). China population (live), available at: http://www.worldometers.info/ Zhang, K., (2003). Rural–urban migration and urbanization in China: Evidence from time-series and cross-section analyses.

Out with the Modern, in with the Authentic James Thoem

With Sharon Zukin’s 2010 Naked City as a point of departure, this paper examines the role of authenticity in the revitalization of Toronto’s Regent Park. Typical of modernist social housing slum-clearance projects, Regent Park abandoned the former urban landscape to make way for a new, healthier Regent Park. Over the next 50 years, the development proved to be problematic, eventually leading to a complete, second round of revitalisation. This paper examines how the return to a more ‘urban’ architectural vernacular speaks to the production and consumption of urban authenticity as discussed by Zukin. Findings suggest that the new initiative aims to integrate into the surrounding ‘authentic’ 19th century neighbourhoods through both built form and produced social diversity. The actors involved in the revitalization of Regent Park have flexed their cultural power in in order to exclude modernist architecture from the socially constructed idea of the authentic city.

As a masters student in the Sustainable Urban Planning and Design program at KTH, James Thoem is constantly trying to make sense of the landscapes around him. His interests have led him to work in youth mobility, urban agriculture and activism in both his native Toronto and current home, Stockholm.

In Italo Calvino’s dream-like account of the venetian empire in Invisible Cities, Marco Polo describes to Kublai Khan the fabled city of Fedora, a gray stone metropolis enamored with memorializing an unfounded past. “In every age someone, looking at Fedora as it was, imagined a way of making it the ideal city, but while he constructed his miniature model, Fedora was already no longer the same as before, and what had been until yesterday a possible future became only a toy in a glass globe” (Calvino, 1970, p. 32). Calvino eloquently raises the fluidity of cities in the face of utopian ideals. Subjective ideals materialised through architecture are preserved within what can essentially be seen as a sort of legislative snowglobe, heritage designation. Cities throughout the western world are struggling with how to address the many shortcomings of modernist era housing developments. While some, like Toronto’s Regent Park, are receiving costly and transformative reinventions, others continue to be subject to neglect in the fringes. The latest revitalization of Regent Park is bringing a more authentic street morphology to the neighbourhood. But when it comes to producing authenticity, the 50 year history of Regent Park as a modernist housing development has no belonging. This paper does not argue for or against the recent revitalization or architectural heritage preservation, but rather explores how ideas of authenticity have been discussed in the revitalization of Regent Park? To do so, I begin by introducing the reader to concepts surrounding authenticity, heritage and their relationship to the modernist era. I then go on to familiarise the reader with two eras of revitalisation in Toronto’s Regent Park before turning to a discussion exploring the relationship between a neighbourhood in transition and the role of authenticity. Authenticity and the city In documenting the changing landscapes of cities in Naked City, Zukin (2010) devotes significant attention to the role of ‘authenticity’ and the cultural power of those who establish and consume it. Theoretically, her discussions rely on Jean Baudrillard’s notion of habitus in understanding the power that lies with consumption choices and patterns (Baudrillard, 1970). For Zukin (2010) authenticity is a socially constructed concept that until the 2000s, was absent from the popular urban lexicon. Its populatiry has been largely tied to the rise of the experiencebased consumerism that values the visual experience (Gilmore & Pine, 2007). For cities, this often means place branding, humanscaled development and certain forms of heritage preservation. In contemporary discussions surrounding the authentic qualities of cities, especially in regards to gentrifying neighbourhoods, grittiness matters. But not just any grittiness will do, gentrifiers desire the grit of a certain vintage. The grit of a failed modernist housing complex does not compare to that of a spacious loft with exposed brick walls and utility pipes (Zukin, 2010, p. 21). For Zukin, defining authenticity’ is an exercise in leveraging cultural power in order to appropriate space, often carried out with the assistance of powerful actors such as the state, politicians, media and markets. New middle class residents often embrace social 69

The demolition of one of Dickinson’s five Regent Park towers. Photo by Crystal Luxmore. Accessed via https://www.flickr.com/photos/crystal_luxmore/ Shared under Creative Commons agreement

diversity and grittiness merely on a superficial, consumptive level in gentrifying neighbourhoods (Feinstein, 2014). While these processes often lead to displacement, Zukin calls for a new approach to ensuring authenticity the leverages state power in assuring tenure for the potentially displaced. One particularly powerful tool in establishing authenticity held by the state is the designation of certain buildings as untouchable heritage sites. Heritage has shifted meaning from property passed down through generations to a wideranging representation of symbolic meanings of the material (Macleod, 2010). In this new understanding of the term, age does not always play the defining role. As Timothy and Boyd (2003) discuss, ‘heritage’ now applies “not only to the historic environment, both natural and built, but also to every dimension of material culture, intellectual inheritances and cultural identities” (p.5). This broad contemporary notion of heritage, in theory, allows (and perhaps encourages) everything from the monumental to the mundane to be listed alongside one another. Since it’s inception, modernism has had a complex and shifting relationship with heritage preservationism. Two years after the Athens Charter of 1931 called for the preservation of historically significant architecture came CIAM’s (International Charter of Modern Architecture) tremendously influential Athens Charter of 1933 (Dull, 2012). The Athens Charter (1933) makes no hesitation in denouncing many cities born in the pre industrial age to be decaying, unsanitary slums, that “merit only the pickaxe” (CIAM, 1933, p. 62). The concepts championed by Le Corbusier and his cosignatories of CIAM caught on like wildfire, dramatically reshaping the skylines of cities from Toronto to New Delhi, Stockholm to St Louis. In many cases, the heavyhanded, top-down city building initiatives of the modernist era were met with grassroots protests citing social and built heritage claims of the spaces threatened by modernization. In Toronto, a grassroots movement with the likes of Jane Jacobs and Marshal McLuhan on board protested plans for a six-lane expressway bisecting the city core. The heritage designation of a historic neighborhood along the proposed route eventually proved a valuable tool in cancelling the proposed expressway in 1971. This move to preserve landscapes deemed as heritage, was only a chapter in a widespread revolt against modernism, with the 70

demolition of St Louis’s Pruit Igoe arguably serving as the final blow (Jencks, 2002). Since then, modernists landscapes have fallen out of fashion, themselves becoming “merit only to the pickaxe” (CIAM, 1933, p. 62). And now, decades later, with more and more modernist developments threatened by demolition, city managers as well as grassroots organisers are exerting their power to designate the works of the very same architects that fought against what they perceived to be an outdated city frozen by heritage preservation. Introducing Regent Park Current efforts to revitalise Toronto’s downtown neighbourhood of Regent Park target spatial poverty issues that have been observed since the late 19th Century. A 1932 Bruce Report, documented the inadequate and unsanitary housing conditions of the neighbourhood then known as Cabbagetown, calling for a fresh Garden City inspired take on housing reform (ERA Architects, 2013). Further action was delayed until following the Second World War, when a nationwide housing shortage, strong economic growth and population growth led to wide sweeping housing efforts. What materialised in Regent Park (no longer Cabbagetown) twenty years after the Bruce Report was more Le Corbusier than Ebenezer Howard. In this complete modernisation of the neighbourhood, roughly 10,000 inhabitants lived in 721 social housing units in mid-rise cruciform and high rise tower blocks situated within green fields replaced the dilapidated, street oriented row houses of a past era (James, 1961). Plans settled on five 14 storey towers designed by the young british architect Peter Dickinson. Situated within an open park space to facilitate fresh air and light, these buildings were unique in offering multi level units “so that the children could sleep upstairs and the parents can have a life” (Dickinson’s wife Vera Dickinson in Marin-Mataiga, 2010. p.183). Lauded for the unique geometrical layout of the windows, Dickinson’s buildings were recipient to the Massey Silver Medal award for Architecture. Within ten years of completion, modernisation project leader, Alfred Rose, had declared the project a failure citing the new engineered concentration of poverty (Rose, 1968). Yet, no significant changes were made. And as the decades went on, architectural tastes changed, Toronto Community Housing lost funding sources, and infrastructure aged, plummeting

Out with the Modern, in with the Authentic

The new face of Regent Park reflecting a more ‘authentic’ urban built form. Photo by City of Toronto via https://www.flickr.com/photos/cityoftoronto/ Shared under Creative Commons agreement

Regent Park, once again into, a state of disrepair, neglect and stigmatisation. Meanwhile, the surrounding neighbourhoods, with their original victorian workers homes, tight street grid, and mixed use main streets, witnessed tremendous gentrification. Despite the utopian undertones of modernist era social housing, the built form Regent Park turned out to be disorienting, isolated and impersonal. Local planners have attributed the built form and layout of Regent park to the neighbourhoods fate (Gladki, 2009). With washrooms on one floor, bedrooms on the other, Dickinson’s interior design was criticised from an accessibility and child safety perspective (ERA Architects, 2013). The maintenance of the building has also been problematic. Residents routinely complain of pest infestations, mold and faulty plumbing (Ballingall, 2014; Change.org, 2013). Once a white, working class neighbourhood, Regent Park evolved into an incredibly diverse community, with over 70 languages spoken. As of 2002, the largest cultural representations were Chinese, Vietnamese, Somali, and Tamil (Meagher & Boston, 2003). Through nearly two decades of organisation and protest, this community was instrumental in seeing Regent Park through a second phase of revitalisation (Metcalf Foundation, 2013). 50 years following the modernisation of the neighbourhood, Regent Park was, once again, slated for revitalisation. But while the previous generation took an top-down, paternalistic approach, the new efforts were driven by deliberative planning theories. After early consultation phases, the initiative was able to consult 85% of an incredibly diverse population. The 12-year, $1 billion private-public-partnership aims to turn a neighbourhood stigmatized by widespread poverty and crime into a mixed income, mixed use neighbourhood that fits into the surrounding urban fabric (James, 2010). Social infrastructure has been built into the project by including a large scale community hub, community gardens, theater spaces, and education institutions to name a few (Bozikovic, 2012). The built form of this new development returned to the traditional street grid, with a mix townhomes, storefronts, mid and high rise residential buildings featuring both rent geared to income and market rate units in an effort to integrate into the surrounding neighbourhoods. The first of three phases of construction began in 2009. Just as the first phase had begun, one of Dickinson’s five towers, 14 Blevins Place, was listed as a heritage property by the City of Toronto. Though having a building listed does not legally protect the building from being altered, or even razed, it is an important first step in having a building climb a sort of heritage hierarchy to become a designated heritage property, legally protecting it from any plans that would affect the site’s heritage attributes

(Ontario Heritage Act, 1990). This move was met with mixed reactions. Pointing to the buildings connection to an architectural era, City staff, journalists and other preservationists saw reason for it’s preservation (City Report, Webb, 2012; Mays, 2013; City of Toronto, 2013). But the seemingly overwhelming majority, including developers, the local city councillor and residents would have rather seen the building torn down pointing to shortcomings in both design and maintenance (Webb, 2012). One resident went so far as to gather signatures on an online petition calling for the demolition (Change.org, 2013). An external report commissioned by the City declared retrofitting the building to accommodate new market rate and/or subsidised housing stock to be too costly to carry out. In the end, the City opted to write an extensive report documenting the building’s architectural and cultural significance and acknowledging the ‘lessons learned’ to “examine how to better integrate heritage conservation planning approaches to help facilitate the rehabilitation and de-stigmatization for older TCHC buildings” (ERA Architects, 2012). Dickinson’s last remaining Regent Park tower, 14 Blevins Place, failed to obtain heritage designation, and currently awaits demolition. Excluding Modernity from the Authentic City Regent Park’s saving grace is it’s geography and active community. Given it’s community organization, central location, proximity to major transit hubs, business districts and highly valued properties, the neighbourhood was clearly visible. Unlike the neighbourhood’s suburban cohorts from the same era, Regent Park was not ‘out of sight, out of mind’. The geography has provided a context for revitalization. In some ways, the modernisation of Regent Park in the 1950s has been a painful, yet necessary chapter in ensuring an economically diverse population. If the original “slum” had never been torn down and replaced by modern tower blocks, gradual shifts in market tastes and forces would have surely resulted in a gentrified landscape as witnessed in the surrounding 19th century neighbourhoods. The only catch, is that residents of Regent Park were subjected to five decades of miss-directed top-down planning, neglected infrastructure and spatial stigmatization in this massive ongoing experiment. Now decades later, the revitalization of Regent Park borrows the authentic architectural vernacular of the surrounding downtown core. Though while the revitalisation may make for a more authentic neighbourhood in Zukin’s eyes, others critique this model of neighbourhood revitalisation. Goetz has criticized similar mixed-income housing projects in the US as once again imposing paternal ideals and standing in opposition to self-determination (Goetz, 2003).

The actors involved in the revitalization of Regent Park have flexed their cultural power in in order to exclude modernist architecture from the socially constructed idea of the authentic city. As Zukin and Baudrillard would assure us, authenticity is incredibly subjective. Though despite this subjectivity, it takes significant cultural power in order to shift what is perceived to be authentic. In the case of Regent Park, the authentic modern housing development has no role in the new, more ‘urban’ development. It takes considerable economic, social and cultural capital to translate authenticity into built form. In Naked City, Zukin calls for an approach to neighbourhood building that not only favours the physical diversity of the Jacobian neighbourhood, but the social diversity as well. In many ways, the contemporary revitalization of Regent Park has adhered to these suggestions. By encouraging a new mixed income population while retaining the same number of social housing units, the revitalisation allows residents the “right to put down roots and remain in place” (Zukin, 2010, p. 246). While many of the residents of Regent Park traditionally found themselves disenfranchised from formal decision making processes, deliberative planning practices have raised the status of residents as actors, endowing them with stronger cultural and social powers to exercise on the local. This shift has introduced the marginalized residents as new actors, beyond the typical cast of developers, media and government. Now residents, with their newfound strength as actors in city building, reflected their extremely personal experiences with modernist architecture, in establishing a normative authenticity in the new Regent Park. However, one may not downplay the strong role held by the market and developers. This strength can be observed on many scales throughout the transformation. The new private-publicpartnership model of a mixed income neighbourhood relied on the profitability of redeveloping the neighbourhood in order to attract initial investors and developers. In order to secure funding to begin construction, the developers had to first market the market-rate units to prospective buyers, pitching the opportunity to live in a new, more authentic Regent Park. The possibility of revitalisation, hinged on consumption patterns that had established the areas surrounding Regent Park as authentic. This allowed the new Regent Park to successfully adopt an ‘authentic’

urban built form. And when this new authentically urban plan was threatened by the heritage preservation of 14 Blevins, the driving factor in the application denial was not the state of repair, but rather the costs cited by a third party feasibility study of the adaptive reuse of the Dickinson’s building. This decision, to exclude modernism from the authentic, has been built upon the culturally powerful actors of the state, businesses and Toronto Community Housing as well as the power of local, often-marginalized residents. Nowhere has this use of power better illustrated than in the debate and discussions surrounding the potential heritage preservation of 14 Blevins Place. It’s unclear where exactly this last ditch effort to designate the Dickinson building as heritage originated from, but the sustained public discussion on the building’s importance to an architectural era exposed power relations in the process. Nearly all support for the towers preservation could be found from voices outside the neighbourhood. Journalists in the upper middle class liberal newspaper, the Globe and Mail and city bureaucrats presented the strongest arguments for preservation, while the building’s residents and neighbours called for its demolition. Had the building been designated heritage, it would have provided an interesting case of bureaucracy preserving a testament to its power. The two separate revilitisations of Regent Park have been driven by different underlying concerns. The modernists, in their quest for equal access to open air, light and green space, embarked on an experiment that had no interest in the material authenticity of the preindustrial city. Their normative visions could perhaps be seen as creating an authentically healthy landscape, but to them, what some may now refer to as an authentic city, was the target of renewal efforts. By embarking on Regent Park’s second revitalization experiment in 50 years, the initiative and associated actors have exercised their power in defining the authentic urban as one that exists without a trace of modernist era city planning. In this new generation of the ideal city, the modernist vision for Regent Park, much like the past images of an ideal Fedora described in Calvino’s Invisible Cities, has become nothing more than a “toy in a glass globe”.

References Baudrillard, J. (1970). The Consumer Society: Myths and Strucures. Sage Publishing. London, UK.

Gilmore, J., & Pine, J. (2007). Authenticity: What Consumers Really Want. Harvard Business School Press. Cambridge, MA.

Bozikovic, A. (2010). Park and Re-Creation. Canadian Architect. Toronto. Dull, I. (2012). Memorializing Modernity: Cambodia’s Modernist ‘Heritage’ in a ‘Developing’ City.

Gladki, J. (2009). Regent Park Phase II - Planning Report. Toronto. Gladki Planning Associates.

Change.org (2013). Demolish 14 Blevins Place as part of phase 3 of Regent Park Revitalization. Accesed via https://www.change.org/p/city-of-toronto-demolish14-blevins-place-as-part-of-phase-3-of-regent-parkrevitalization on November 26, 2014. Congress Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne. (1946). The Athens Charter. Library of the Graduate School of Destign, Harvard University. City of Toronto. (2013) Staff Report: Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act - 14 Blevins Place. Presented to Toronto Preservation Board. Calvino, I. (1974). Invisible Cities. Translation by William Weaver. Harcourt Publishing. Florida ERA Architects. (2013). Heritage Impact Assessment and Options Report: 14 Blevins Place, Regent Park South, Toronto. Accesed via http://www1.toronto.ca/ city_of_toronto/city_planning/community_planning/ files/pdf/regentpark_heritage.pdf on November 25, 2014. Fainstein, S. (201f). The just city. International Journal of Urban Sciences. 18(1). Pg 1-18.

Goetz, E (2005). Comment: Public Housing demolition and the benefits to low-income families. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(4). Pp 407-410. James, R. (2010). From ‘Slum Clearance’ to ‘Revitalisation’: Planning, expertise and moral regulation in Toronto’s Regent Park. Planning Perspectives. 25(1). Pp. 69-86.

Mays, J.(2013). As Regent Park Rebuilds, a Pause to Consider What Came Before. The Globe and Mail. Accessed via http://www.theglobeandmail.com/ life/home-and-garden/architecture/as-regent-parkrebuilds-a-pause-to-consider-what-came-before/ article9146731/ on November 22, 2014 Ontario Heritage Act. (1990). R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 0.18. Rose, A. (1968). The Individual, the Family, and the Community in the Process of Urban Renewal. The University of Toronto Law Journal. 18(3). Pp 319-329. Timothy, D. & Boyd, S. (2003). Heritage Tourism. Prentice Hall. UK.

Jencks, C. (2002) The New Paradigm in Architecture: The Langauge of Post-Modernism. Yale University Press.

Webb, L. (2013). 14 Blevins Place - Historic Treasure or Blight. Corktowner. Winter 2013 Edition. Toronto, Ontario.

Macleod, D. (2010). Power, Culture and the Production of Heritage. in Tourism, Power and Culture. Eds: Macleod, D & Carrier, J. Channel View Publications. UK

Zukin, S. (2010). Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford University Press. New York, NY.

Martins-Manteiga, J. (2010). Peter Dickinson. Dominion Modern, Toronto, Canada. Micallef, S. (2013). Regent Park: A Story of Collective Impact. Published by the Metcalf Foundation. Meaher, S. & Boston, T. (2003). Community Engagement and the Regent Park Redevelopment. Accessed via Regentparkplan.ca November 26, 2014.

Out with the Modern, in with the Authentic

Capitalism Didn’t Kill Architecture Nuno Azevedo

This article aims to talk about architecture, practice and different focus, its relation with power, and how it is adapting to the dominant ideology shaping our world today – capitalism.

The field of architecture is quite broad and rich. In the domain of scale of interventions we see architects designing interior spaces, landscapes, or the built environment - the building, the street, the city block or other parts of a city. And in the domain of practice (just naming a few examples) one can see architects working independently or within teams in academic research, architecture studios, design competitions, or municipalities. One way or the other and with small or big impact or success, architects have always attempted to use of their practice to positively influence peoples lives and their physical environment. Framing it in a simple manner, this has happened not only when their practices were more aesthetical / object / product oriented (affecting people needs in a more emotional, philosophic and egoistic way in response to their more self-centered needs), but also when they were more project / process oriented (affecting people and society needs in a more pragmatic and contextualized way, in the sense that it was seen has a tool to address economic and politic constrains keeping them from developing fully. But architecture practice is more complex than how it has been described so far, and Manfredo Tafuri in his book “Architecture and Utopia, Design and Capitalist Development “written in 1975 added to it an additional layer: the ever existing relationship between architecture and power. Basically what Tafuri did was to raise the issue that once architecture practice falls in the hands of power it ceases to serve its ideals and becomes an instrument of its agenda – profit and perpetuation of power. His book was a critique to the ideological context in which, at the time, modern architecture was performing: Capitalism. Ultimately, because of the underlying message that in the hands of capitalism architecture practice had become useless and dead, the book had a big impact within the field. One of the controversial issues that the author addressed was that even when architects discourse pointed to the opposite, their practices were still in service of capitalist ideology.

Nuno Azevedo is a portuguese architect from Porto whose main practice both in Portugal and Sweden has been on retail and interiors. At the moment he is a master student at the school of architecture and the built environment (ABE) at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), where he is expanding his knowledge on the field of sustainable urban planning and design.

These days, mutated in the western world into neoliberal economies and on the occidental world into authoritarian economies, capitalism prevails and so its influence in architecture practice. It is also important to consider that since the 70s the socio-ecological issues that the world had didn’t disappear, they increased. Today there are more class inequalities, more social injustices, more contaminated lands and seas, more unemployment, and less biodiversity (just mentioning a few). From a purely philosophic perspective one might accept that architecture practice has succumbed to capitalist ideology. That would mean that today architects might be still practicing under the illusion Tafuri referred. Reinforce the authors arguments it is interesting to introduce in this discussion what Slavoj Zizek (a contemporary Marxist philosopher) around the topic of ideology 73

References M. Tafuri, Architecture and Utopia, Design and Capitalist Development (Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 1976)

A parking lot occupation in Seattle.An alternative function for this space this intervention suggesting the creation of a new node where people can meet and interact creatively.

mentioned at a seminar in Paris: “…the illusion is not on the side of knowledge, it is already on the side of reality itself, of what people are doing. What they do not know is that their social reality itself, their activity, is guided by an illusion, by a fetishistic inversion. What they overlook, what they misrecognize, is not the reality but the illusion which is structuring their reality, their real social activity. They know very well how things really are, but still they are doing as if they did not know. The illusion is therefore double: it consists in overlooking the illusion which is structuring our real effective relationship with reality. And this overlooked, unconscious illusion is what may be called the ideological fantasy.” Zizeks point was that ideology does not operate on the level of knowledge (as false consciousness), but on the level of practices. In this line of thought it becomes apparent that the path of architecture critique/theory – on the side of knowledge – might be the only way of operating free from the constraints of ideology (capitalism). But even though it makes sense it might not be completely true. It is usually the case that reality is not always either black or white, and the field of architecture is adapting and expanding the role of the architect.

cultural center or building a school) engage in a collective process of self-building. At a time of social, political and economic crises these and other architects around the globe are coming together and helping a variety of people and social groups to realize their dreams. These architects are redefining their professions by placing people before icons. Its architecture redefining itself. Maybe Tafuri was right at the time he published his book , maybe he right, but even more important is that today the architecture field is witnessing effective ways of operating within the prevailing structures of power and making a difference. Architecture is alive and kicking!

On one side we still do see plenty of practice driven by capital and power. Some more evident than others. The result is usually objects oriented (either buildings or cities), void of social meaning, where evident aesthetic prioritization is camouflaged by ecological concerns, creating not only iconic architecture “masterpieces” but also a new breed of architects: the “stararchitects”. But on the other side we see new emerging positions within architecture practice with different premises: a permanent concern with the social (integration, segregation, affordable housing) and ecological challenges (ecologic degradation, global warming) societies face. These architects advocate for a practices oriented by a bottom up process where sometimes public participation acquires not only a central role in the design process but also at the construction stage. Public participation is about collaboration, working in team. It is about listening, gaining trust, respect and including on a design process the future users. It is a tool that architects engaged in the urban scale have been advocating now more than ever. Specially the guerilla architects, who literally claim urban spaces for the public. These architects (sometimes architecture students or unemployed practitioners) develop their practice in a very non-conformist way. In a context of crisis where governments, municipalities and other entities are weakened ( lacking money) these architect, gaining the admiration of activists, rebels and grass root organizations, exploit planning laws, gain access to land and get projects approved for groups of people which could never normally afford an architect. An example of this rebel approach is the Spanish architecture office “Recetas Urbanas” (Urban Recipes). This group of architects takes public participation into a complete new level where people, working towards a common aim (like transforming an abandoned factory into a

Capitalism Didn’t Kill Architecture