Public space has increasingly received attention in urban planning and design. In addition to its physical features, such as configuration, form, function and use, its social and political dimensions, including materialities of appropriation, negotiation processes and possibilities of spatial justice have been subject to scrutiny in scientific debates and practice alike. Such a focus also entails consideration for a multitude of demands and claims on public space, particularly in the aftermath of the sweeping restrictions of COVID-19 prevention measures and in the light of social disruptions caused by war, energy shocks and environmental crises. These events, which have prompted sudden and visible changes in (the appearance of) public space, are triggers and expressions of the ongoing structural processes that thoroughly transform public spaces in cities (Weidner 2021).
The questions around often-conflicting uses, experiences and expectations of public spaces overlap with the numerous challenges posed by current urban development in view of the so-called Great Transformation (WBGU 2014). The financialization of the finite resource of ‘land’, the urgent need for climate adaptation, the much demanded but far from implemented mobility turnaround as well as the rediscovery of neighbourhoods as places to sustain balanced living and promote a diverse society, are all demonstrative of this. Urban public spaces and their degrees of landscape integration differ across cultures and are continuously recreated under different conditions with regard to daily struggles and insurgencies, inherent power relations and the desires directing future development. However, these aspects also render public space a topic which is global by nature and set a framework for comparison. With regards to the normative notions of urban planning and design, public space is a continuously unfolding terrain upon which common good is articulated and negotiated on different levels, thus intersecting with a multi-level governance approach (Leipzig Charter 2020).
A growing interest in urban public spaces also reflects a shift in focus from large-scale projects and development to approaches concerned with urban design and planning on a smaller scale, focused on places closer to mundane everyday life. This shift is influenced by a transformation of the public sector towards entrepreneurial and managerial governance models as much as social change is characterized by the pluralization of lifestyles that increasingly draw on the appropriation of and identification with a particular urban space.
The first paper of this issue of Urban Design and Planning by Tabrizi et al. (2023) focuses on a consideration for a specific target group in urban development and planning, in this case considering children in the context of neighborhood public spaces. Paradoxically, children are not engaged with often in planning processes despite the fact that they will be the future inhabitants of their neighbourhood or city. Not only should planning, as a future-oriented field directing urban development, take children's needs into consideration seriously, but it should also recognize children as potential drivers for engagement in a neighbourhood. Adhering to child-friendly planning principles can enhance deprived neighbourhoods. The authors support this planning perspective through their case study of the project ‘colourful alley’ in Tehran's Dastgheib neighbourhood, and put forward a checklist of principles for a child-friendly city.
The next paper, by Zhao et al. (2023), also focuses on public space. The authors note that nighttime landscapes and green spaces are underrated in literature. Their research compared the daytime and nighttime situations of 12 urban green spaces. Drawing on a statistical analysis of different environmental aspects, they focus on the potentials of lightning as a key element to enhance nighttime landscapes.
The third contribution to this issue by Boujari et al. (2023) deals with cities and the pandemic. The authors take a deeper look at the usage of public space, focusing specifically on density. This paper shows the results of an interdisciplinary literature review of 3344 studies using three databases, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science, per predefined criteria to attribute different dimensions to density: population, building, built environment and sociodemographic factors.
The contributions to this volume demonstrate the need for very different approaches to public space research. By illuminating the public spaces in our cities as stages of struggle, the authors herein invite those concerned with urban design and planning to approach these spaces in a transdisciplinary way, keeping both theory and practice in mind.
This journal publishes its most recent articles Ahead of Print on its Virtual Library.
