Our cities are undergoing a rapid transformation of public spaces due to different factors, such as economic and cultural globalization, demographic transformations, marketing strategies, urban planning and design approaches, medialization reinterpretations, social networks, and others. The urban realm itself is the collection of public spaces and places—buildings, squares, streets, landscapes, and ecosystems, as well as processes, mindscapes, and people that make up and shape any environment. In that respect, urban planning and design is really characterized by two distinct processes that transubstantiate space and place: static and dynamic. This qualitative, reflective article discusses these issues, taking a standpoint from the notion of public space as a common good. This notion is discussed in relation to the factors that transform our cities and is analyzed in relation to the concept of public good. We reflect this discussion vis-à-vis the views of the leading paradigms in urban planning and design, and their intake on and outlook on these complex issues.
AllmendingerP. (2002a). Planning theory. New York, NY: Palgrave.
2.
AllmendingerP. (2002b). Toward a post-positivist typology of planning theory. Planning Theory, 1(1), 77-99.
3.
AtkinsonR. (2003). Domestication by cappuccino or a revenge on urban space? Control and empowerment in the management of public spaces. Urban Studies, 40, 1829-43.
4.
BengsC. (2010, September). Heritage as a good. Speech given at the 4th Baltic Sea Region Cultural Heritage Forum, Riga, Latvia.
5.
BishopP.WilliamsL. (2012). The temporary city. London, England: Routledge.
CarmonaM.HeathT.OcT.TiesdellS. (2010). Public places, urban spaces. Boston, MA: Elsevier/Architectural Press.
8.
CarsG.OlssonK.SnickarsF.(1996). Kulturmiljö på spel. En studie av strategier att bevara och utveckla den byggda miljöns kulturvärden [Cultural Heritage on the Line. Strategies for conservation and development of cultural built heritage]. Stockholm, Sweden: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
9.
ChildsM. (2004). Squares: A public place design guide for urbanists. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
10.
CornesR.SandlerT. (1996). The theory of externalities, public goods, and club goods. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
11.
CrawfordM.ChaseJ.KaliskiJ. (Eds.). (2008). Everyday urbanism [Expanded ed.]. New York, NY: Monacelli Press.
12.
CullisJ.JonesP. (1992). Public finance and public choice: Analytical perspectives. London, England: McGraw-Hill.
13.
CuthbertA. (2006). The form of cities. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
14.
De MagalhaesC. (2010). Public space and the contracting-out of publicness: A framework for analysis. Journal of Urban Design, 15, 559-574.
15.
FainsteinS. (2000). New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35, 451-78.
16.
FainsteinS. (2010). The just city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17.
FarrD. (2007). Sustainable urbanism: Urban design with nature. New York, NY: Wiley.
18.
FrakerH. (2007). Where is the urban design discourse?Places Journal, 19(3), 61-63.
19.
GardeA. (2008). Innovations in urban design and urban form: The making of paradigms and the implications for public policy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, 61-72.
20.
HaasT. (Ed.). (2008). New urbanism and beyond: Designing cities for the future. New York, NY: Rizzoli.
21.
JohanssonB.SnickarsF. (1992). Infrastruktur. Byggsektorn i kunskapssamhället [Infrastructure. The building sector in knowledge society]. Stockholm, Sweden: Byggforskningsrådet.
22.
KatzP. (1994). The new urbanism: Toward an architecture of community. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
23.
KelbaughD. (2008a). Further thoughts on the three urbanisms. In KelbaughD.McCulloughK. K. (Eds.), Writing urbanism (pp. 105-114). New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
KelbaughD. (2008b). Three urbanisms: New, everyday, and post. In HaasT. (Ed.), New urbanism and beyond (pp. 40-47). New York, NY: Rizzoli.
25.
KhakeeA. (2006). Medborgardeltagande i samhällsplanering [Citizen participation in planning]. In BlücherG.GraningerG. (Eds.), Planering med nya förutsättningar. Ny lagstiftning, nya värderingar [New Planning Conditions. New legislation, new values] (pp. 11-23). Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University Electronic Press.
LaiL. W. C.DaviesS. N. G.LorneF. T. (2008). The political economy of Coase’s lighthouse in history, Part 1. Town Planning Review, 79, 395-425.
28.
LangJ. (2005). Urban design: A typology of procedures and products. Burlington, MA: Elsevier/Architectural Press.
29.
LehmannS. (Ed.). (2010). The principles of green urbanism: Transforming the city for sustainability. London, England: Routledge.
30.
MadanipourA. (1996). Design of urban space. New York, NY: Wiley.
31.
MadanipourA. (2005). Public spaces of European cities. Nordisk Arkitekturforskning, 2005, 7-16.
32.
MitchellD. (1995). The end of public space? People’s park, definitions of the public, and democracy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 85, 108-133.
33.
OlssonK. (2008). Citizen input in urban heritage management and planning: A quantitative approach to citizen participation. Town Planning Review, 79, 371-394.
34.
OlssonK.HaasT. (2013). Emergent urbanism: Structural change and urban planning and design. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/17549175.2013.763622
35.
OrvellM.MeikleJ. L. (Eds.). (2009). Public space and the ideology of place in American culture. New York, NY: Rodopi.
36.
PonziniD.NastasiM. (2011). Starchitecture: Scenes, actors and spectacles in contemporary cities. Turin, Italy: Umberto Allemandi.
37.
SchmidtS.NemethJ. (2010). Space, place and the city: Emerging research on public space design and planning. Journal of Urban Design, 15, 453-457.
38.
SchwarzerM. (2000). The contemporary city in four movements. Journal of Urban Design, 5, 127-144.
39.
StricklandR. (Ed.). (2005). Post urbanism & reurbanism: Michigan debates on urbanism (Vol. 3). New York, NY: Arts Press.
40.
StrömgrenA. (2007). Samordning, hyfs och reda. Stabilitet och förändring i svensk planpolitik 1945-2005 [Co-ordination, Manners and Order. Stability and Change in Swedish Planning Policy 1945-2005]. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala Universitet.
41.
TalenE. (2005). New urbanism & American planning: The conflict of cultures. New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
TiryakianE. A. (1968). Typologies. In SillsD. L. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social sciences (pp. 177-86). New York, NY: Macmillan.
43.
YiftachelO. (1989). Towards a new typology of urban planning theories. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 16, 23-39.
