This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Atkinson, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Domestication by Cappuccino or a Revenge on Urban Space? Control and Empowerment in the Management of Public Spaces

Department of Urban Studies, University of Glasgow, 25 Bute Gardens, Glasgow, G12 8RS, UK, R.Atkinson{at}socsci.gla.ac.uk

This paper explores some of the more extreme tendencies in the management of public space to consider whether current policy directions, in this case in central Scotland, are driven by a desire to empower or control users of such spaces. The title of the paper is taken from the theoretical lenses provided by Neil Smith and Sharon Zukin in their differential views on trends in the management and control of public spaces. The paper focuses on two local case studies to examine the possibility that a `revanchist' element is emerging in policies towards public spaces in Britain. The paper concludes that programmes designed to deal with urban and public space are a reaction to both real and perceived problems. However, there has been a privileging of a policy discourse which celebrates the displacement of social problems rather than their resolution. It is argued that such a discourse cannot ultimately provide sustainable policies for the regulation of public spaces and threatens the inclusion of some users of public spaces who may not be considered to be legitimate patrons. While this does more to foster fearful than inclusive public spaces, a thorny question remains over whether some degree of exclusion is a necessary price for policies which seek to secure public space and maintain a wider quality of life.

Urban Studies, Vol. 40, No. 9, 1829-1843 (2003)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000106627


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Herbert Contemporary geographies of exclusion I: traversing Skid Road Progress in Human Geography, October 1, 2008; 32(5): 659 - 666. [PDF]

				M. Karrholm The Territorialisation of a Pedestrian Precinct in Malmo: Materialities in the Commercialisation of Public Space Urban Stud, August 1, 2008; 45(9): 1903 - 1924. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Hodgetts, A. Radley, K. Chamberlain, and A. Hodgetts Health Inequalities and Homelessness: Considering Material, Spatial and Relational Dimensions J Health Psychol, September 1, 2007; 12(5): 709 - 725. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Yarwood The geographies of policing Progress in Human Geography, August 1, 2007; 31(4): 447 - 465. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Bell The hospitable city: social relations in commercial spaces Progress in Human Geography, February 1, 2007; 31(1): 7 - 22. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Allen Ambient Power: Berlin's Potsdamer Platz and the Seductive Logic of Public Spaces Urban Stud, February 1, 2006; 43(2): 441 - 455. [Abstract] [PDF]