In recent years the privatisation of public space has become the subject of much discussion and debate among critics of today’s urban development. In the United Kingdom and throughout the world, the appearance of our cities is being transformed by public space privatisation. In other parts of Europe this topic is becoming a very contemporary and controversial issue as well. As one of the biggest cities in Germany, Hamburg shows processes of privatisation of public space. Its current HafenCity project reveals one of the biggest regeneration projects managed from and financed by private and public sources.
What do we mean by the privatisation process and what are its benefits and disadvantages toward the quality of urban living?
Privatisation describes the process of change within the management and ownership of open spaces. It is perceived as a part of Post-modernism and the post-modern city, where the “city provides the context for the social, economic and cultural changes brought about by the globalised new economy” (Minton, A. (2006) p. 5). Corporate governance in shopping malls, business parks, entertainment complexes and business improvement districts can be seen as part of this progression. The trend towards community or joint private ownership of assets such as community centres and parks is an element of the progressive privatisation of public spaces which reduces the pool of openly shared public spaces in towns and cities. Membership passes and fees can be used to regulate who uses the facility and how the spaces are utilised.
Traditionally we differentiate public spaces in terms of the rules of access, the source and nature of control over entry and rules of use. Therefore a place is public when anyone can enter it and no restrictions, other than Common Law and public safety to behaviour or use of the place is given. Public space is commonly understood as a state owned open space free of regulations, which this essay will discuss.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Privatisation of public space
1.1. History and recent trends
1.2. Discussion
2. Case studies
2.1. Case study 1
2.2. Case study 2
2.3. Discussion
3. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This essay explores the implications of public space privatisation on urban development and design, examining how shifting ownership and management structures affect accessibility, social cohesion, and the quality of urban life. The study aims to determine the extent of this phenomenon in the UK and Germany, questioning whether urban designers can effectively mitigate the exclusionary effects of privately governed public spaces.
- The historical evolution and recent trends of public space privatisation.
- The socio-economic drivers and criticisms of "private-public" spaces.
- Comparative analysis of regeneration projects in London and Hamburg.
- The role and challenges of urban designers in creating inclusive environments.
Excerpt from the Book
1.1. History and recent trends
Privately owned spaces given to the public or a certain group of the public society is not a recent phenomenon. In the UK and other parts of Europe a process of privatisation can be recognized throughout history.
In the 18th century private estates created squares and other community centres to enhance the value of the surrounding properties and to increase the quality of life within the estate. Most of these places were gated and a limited number of people had access and permission to use the facility. Good examples can be found in Bloomsbury and Barnsbury. (See Figure 1)
Some of these squares were given to the public in the 19th or 20th century but some still belong to the developer and have restricted access and use.
In the time Margaret Thatcher was British Prime Minister (1979-1990), dramatic changes in land ownership and company management took place through a wide policy of privatisation to establish urban development corporations. “First, it seized control over urban development from local government and was undemocratic. Second, it resulted in the widespread privatisation of public space. (…) Such privatisation of public space erodes urbanity and social cohesion.” (McGuigan, J. (1996) p. 104)
Canary Wharf and the Docklands regeneration project is one of such major areas redeveloped during the Thatcher era. Many private estates and public spaces are also located in these areas.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the rise of public space privatisation as a global urban issue and defines the scope of the essay regarding accessibility and control.
1. Privatisation of public space: Examines historical precedents of private estates and analyzes current trends, such as shopping malls and gated communities, that restrict public access.
2. Case studies: Investigates two practical examples, the More London development in the UK and the HafenCity project in Hamburg, to contrast different management approaches.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes the necessity for urban designers to advocate for social inclusion and establish boundaries that protect public needs against private encroachment.
Keywords
Privatisation, Public Space, Urban Design, Urban Development, Regeneration, Gated Communities, Social Cohesion, Management, Ownership, Accessibility, Inclusion, Infrastructure, London, Hamburg, Community Centres
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The research examines the increasing trend of privatising public spaces and the subsequent impact this transition has on urban environments, social interactions, and the professional role of urban designers.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the historical context of privatised spaces, the emergence of "private-public" environments, the erosion of social cohesion, and the tension between economic regeneration and democratic access.
What is the core objective of this essay?
The goal is to analyze how the privatisation of public space acts as an issue for urban design and to explore whether current design practices can address the challenges of accessibility and social exclusion.
What methodology is employed in this study?
The essay utilizes a qualitative approach, combining literature review with a comparative case study analysis of urban regeneration projects in London and Hamburg.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body investigates the historical roots of privatisation, discusses the socioeconomic consequences such as "clean and safe" environments versus social exclusion, and contrasts the UK and German planning models.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Key terms include privatisation, urban design, regeneration, public realm, social cohesion, and gated communities.
How does the More London case study illustrate the research problem?
It demonstrates a privately owned and managed area that functions as a public node but enforces strict behavioral regulations, highlighting the conflict between private ownership and perceived public use.
How does the HafenCity project differ from London's approach?
The HafenCity project in Hamburg is distinguished by a more significant involvement of local and state government, aiming to achieve a better balance between private developer interests and collective public needs.
- Quote paper
- Susanne Grolle (Author), 2008, Privatisation of public space, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/129104
