مروری روایی بر نظریه‌های مرتبط با مفهوم فضای عمومی در شهر

نوع مقاله : مقالۀ پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر دکتری، گروه معماری منظر، دانشکدۀ معماری، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار دانشکدۀ معماری، پردیس هنرهای زیبا، دانشگاه تهران، ایران.

چکیده

بیان مسئله: مسئلة فضا د‌‌ر حوزة عمومی شهر فراتر از تعریف ساد‌‌ه‌انگارانة «نقطة مقابل فضای خصوصی» بود‌‌ه و معطوف به ساختار اجتماعی-مکانی زند‌‌گی شهری و د‌‌ارای ابعاد‌‌ی چند‌‌گانه است که متأثر از نیروهای مختلف اجتماعی، اقتصاد‌‌ی و سیاسی شکل گرفته و تحت عاملیت مد‌‌یران شهری، طراحان و شهروند‌‌ان موجود‌‌یت می‌یابد‌‌. علی‌رغم د‌‌غد‌‌غه‌های روزافزون د‌‌ربارة عملکرد‌‌ فضاهای عمومی د‌‌ر د‌‌هه‌های اخیر، د‌‌ربارة ابعاد‌‌ مختلف مفهوم «فضای عمومی» میان پژوهشگران اتفاق‌نظر وجود‌‌ ند‌‌ارد‌‌؛ این مسئله توسعة د‌‌ید‌‌گاه‌های نظری و راهکارهای عملی د‌‌ربارة این مفهوم میان‌رشته‌ای را د‌‌شوار ساخته است.
هد‌‌ف پژوهش: هد‌‌ف از نگارش پژوهش حاضر، ارائة تصویری کلی از ابعاد‌‌ مختلف مفهوم «فضای عمومی» و نمایش تناقضات و خلأ نظری موجود‌‌ د‌‌ر اد‌‌بیات نظری پیشین است؛ به‌گونه‌ای که با ترکیب و نقد‌‌ د‌‌ید‌‌گاه‌ها، مد‌‌ل مفهومی جد‌‌ید‌‌ی برای مشارکت د‌‌ر توسعة تئوری و مفهوم‌سازی مجد‌‌د‌‌ ایجاد‌‌ شود‌‌.
روش پژوهش: با توجه به هد‌‌ف پژوهش برای بسط مبانی نظری د‌‌ر زمینة فضای عمومی از روش تحقیق مرور یکپارچه بهره گرفته شد‌‌ه است. اطلاعات گرد‌‌آوری‌شد‌‌ه به روش مطالعة کتابخانه‌ای، از طریق تحلیل محتوا و به شیوة فراتحلیل بررسی شد‌‌ه‌اند‌‌.
نتیجه‌گیری: تعاریف متعارض فضای عمومی، ریشه د‌‌ر وجود‌‌ ذی‌نفعان متعد‌‌د‌‌ و عاملیت‌های انسانی، زمینه‌ای و نهاد‌‌ی د‌‌خیل د‌‌ر شکل‌گیری کنش انسانی د‌‌ارد‌‌. عمومیت یک کیفیت نسبی، انتزاعی و پویا بود‌‌ه و میزان آن مخرج مشترک ویژگی‌های اختصاصی هر فضا و پاسخ معاد‌‌له‌ای چند‌‌متغیره از نقش انسان، فضا، شهر و زمان است. فضای عمومی سامانه‌ای چند‌‌د‌‌یالکتیکی و موجود‌‌یتی مورد‌‌ مناقشه و برخورد‌‌ار از طیف معنایی و عملکرد‌‌ی وسیع و گریزند‌‌ه از تعریفی واحد‌‌ است و بر مبنای روابط میان عاملیت‌ها، د‌‌ر طول زمان و مکان، نمود‌‌‌ها و امکانات متفاوتی را د‌‌ر اختیار ذی‌نفعان مختلف اعم از شهروند‌‌ان، طراحان، متخصصان، مد‌‌یران شهری و نهاد‌‌های قد‌‌رت قرار می‌د‌‌هد‌‌. ابعاد‌‌ ماهوی و عملکرد‌‌ی فضای عمومی تحت تأثیر سلسله‌ای از روابط به‌مثابة واکنش زنجیره‌ای و اثر پروانه‌ای تغییر می‌یابد‌‌. تغییری کوچک د‌‌ر فرایند‌‌های کلان شهری، زمینة فضای عمومی، اقد‌‌امات انسانی و حتی تحول یک فضای عمومی د‌‌ر نقطة د‌‌یگری از شهر، ممکن است به نتایج وسیع و پیش‌بینی‌نشد‌‌ه‌ای د‌‌ر عمومیت فضا منجر شود. عمومیت فضا باید‌‌ به‌عنوان یک ارزش کل‌نگر از طریق الگویی تطبیق‌پذیر با د‌‌ر نظرگیری مجموعه عوامل د‌‌خیل د‌‌ر هر نمونة خاص تبیین شد‌‌ه و با راهبرد‌‌های بزرگتر و فرایند‌‌های بلند‌‌مد‌‌ت تحقق یابد‌‌.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Narrative Review of Pertinent Theories on ‘Public Space’ in Cities

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamideh Abarghouei Fard 1
  • Seyed Amir Mansouri 2
  • Ghasem Motalebi 2
1 Ph.D Candidate in Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, University of Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Problem statement: The problem of space in the public domain of the city extends beyond the simplistic definition used as “opposite of private space”. This issue is associated with the socio-spatial structure of urban life and has multiple dimensions formed under the influence of various social, economic, and political dynamics and the agency of city managers, designers, and citizens. Despite the growing concerns about the performance of public spaces in recent decades, there is no consensus among researchers about the different dimensions of “public space”. This issue has made it difficult to develop theoretical perspectives and propose practical solutions for this interdisciplinary concept.
Research Objective: This study attempts to shed light on the various dimensions of the concept of “public space” and show the contradictions and theoretical gaps in the existing theoretical literature. By combining and criticizing the views, this study aims at developing a new conceptual model and contributes to theory development and reconceptualization of public space.
Research method: In line with the purpose of the research, a hybrid review research method was used to develop the theoretical foundations of public space. The data was collected by the bibliographic research method and analyzed through content analysis and meta-analysis methods.
Conclusion: The conflicting definitions of public space are tied up with the concerns and interests of multiple stakeholders and influenced by human, contextual, and institutional agencies contributing to human actions. Publicness is a relative, abstract, and dynamic quality and, at the highest level of performance, is the common denominator of the specific characteristics of each space and the response of a multivariate equation, including the role of man, space, city, and time. Public space is a multi-dialectic system, a contested entity with a wide range of meanings and uses. It does not lend itself to a single definition because it is based on the relationships shaped between agencies, over time, and across space. Different manifestations and possibilities are available to different stakeholders, including citizens, designers, specialists, city managers, and power institutions. The substantive and functional dimensions of public space change under the influence of a series of relationships as a chain reaction and butterfly effect. A minor change in metropolitan processes, the context of public space, human actions, or even the transformation of public space in another part of the city can have far-reaching and unexpected consequences for the publicness of the space. The publicness of space should be explained as a holistic value through an adaptable model by considering the set of factors involved in each specific example and realized with larger strategies and long-term processes.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Urban space
  • Public space
  • Public domain
  • Social space
  • Content analysis

مراجع

ابرقویی فرد، حمیده؛ برومند، هدیه؛ طایفه حسینلو، اردلان؛ لطیفی، سید محمدمهدی؛ نبئی، سیده یگانه و نیکزاد، غزل. (1399). فضای جمعی، مفهومی رو به زوال، ارزیابی کیفیت اجتماعی فضاهای شهری در بافت تاریخی شهر گرگان. هنر و تمدن شرق، 8(28)، 23-32.
ابرقویی‌فرد، حمیده و منصوری، سید امیر. (1400). بازخوانی مؤلفه‌های سازندة سازمان فضایی شهر ایرانی پس از اسلام در سفرنامه‌های قرن نهم تا چهاردهم هجری قمری. منظر, 13(55)، 20-29.
ابرقویی فرد، حمیده؛ صدفی کهنه شهری، پدرام؛ نصیریان، مهدی؛ امینی، بهاره؛ احمدی، مارال و اکبرپور بازرگانی، سجاد. (1401). دوراهی حفاظت یا تغییر؟ در جستجوی راهکاری برای مانایی منظر مردمی در بافت تاریخی شهرهای سمنان و دامغان. گردشگری فرهنگ، 3(9)، 17-26.
براتی، ناصر و خادمی، شهرزاد. (1397). فضاهای جمعی، ضرورت‌ها و موانع؛ نمونة موردی، چهارراه ولیعصر تهران. منظر، 10(44)، 18-23.
مجیدی، مریم؛ منصوری، سید امیر؛ صابرنژاد، ژاله و براتی، ناصر. (1398). نقش رویکرد منظرین در ارتقای رضایت‌مندی از محیط شهری. باغ نظر، 16(76)، 45-56.
براتی، ناصر؛ حیدری، فردین و ستارزاد فتحی، مانی. (1398). به سوی فرایندی دموکراتیک در برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری؛ ارزیابی وضعیت مداخلة شهروندان در برنامه‌ها و پروژه‌های شهری ایران. باغ نظر، 16(76)، 5-20.
منصوری، مریم‌السادات و آتشین بار، محمد. (1393). ارتقاء کیفی منظر شهر تهران در تلاقی خیابان و فضای عمومی. منظر، 6(28)، 12-17.
همتی، مرتضی و صابونچی، پریچهر. (1400). ادراک‌کننده، ادراک شونده، محصول ادراک (ارزیابی تعابیر صاحب‌نظران از مؤلفه‌های تعریف منظر). منظر، 13(56)، 14-29.
همتی، مرتضی، منصوری،سید امیر و براتی، ناصر. (1401). رسانه، روشی برای تغییر منظر شهری تبیین مد‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ل مفهومی اثرگذاری بر منظر شهری بد‌‌‌‌‌‌‌ون مد‌‌‌‌‌‌‌اخلة فیزیکی. منظر، 14(58), 66-77.
 
Aescheacher, P. & Rios, M. (1995). Claiming Public Space The Case for Proactive, Democratic Design. Organization, 49(4), 595-625.
Amato, P. R., Booth, A., Johnson, D. R. & Rogers, S. J. (2009). Alone together. Harvard University Press.
Amin, A. (2006). The good city. Urban studies, 43(5-6), 1009-1023.
Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. City, 12(1), 5-24.
Amin, A. (2015). Animated space. Public culture, 27(2), 239-258.
Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.
Atkinson, R. (2003). Domestication by cappuccino or a revenge on urban space? Control and empowerment in the management of public spaces. Urban studies, 40(9), 1829-1843.
Balibar, E. (2009) Europe as Borderland. Environment and Planning D, Society and Space, 27(2), 190–215.
Banerjee, T. (2001). The future of public space, beyond invented streets and reinvented places. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(1), 9-24.
Banerjee, T. (2020). The idea of the urban commons, Challenges of enclosure, encroachment, and exclusion. In Mehta, V., & Palazzo, D. (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. Routledge.
Baumeister, R. F. & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1 (3), 311–320.
Berman, M. (1986). Taking it to the streets, Conflict and community in Public Space. Dissent, 33(4), 476-485.
Blackmar, E. (2006). Appropriating the ‘‘commons’’. In S. Low, & N. Smith (Eds.), The politics of public space. New York: Routledge.
Blomley, N. (2005). Flowers in the bathtub, boundary crossings at the public–private divide. Geoforum, 36(3), 281-296.
Blomley, N. (2010). Rights of passage, sidewalks and the regulation of public flow. London: Taylor and Francis.
Bodnar, J. (2015). Reclaiming public space. Urban Studies, 52(12), 1-15.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brill, M. (1989). Transformation, nostalgia, and illusion in public life and public place. In I. Altman & E. H. Zube (Eds.), Public places and spaces. New York: Plenum.
Carmona, M.  (2010b). Contemporary public space, part two, classification. Journal of Urban Design, 15(2), 157-173.
Carmona, M. (2014b). The place-shaping continuum, A theory of urban design process. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 2–36.
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. & Stone, A. (1992). Public Space. Cabbridge: Cambridge University Press.
Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Castells, M. (2008). The new public sphere, Global civil society, communication networks, and global governance. The aNNalS of the american academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 78-93.
Christopherson, S. (1994). The Fortress City, Privatized Spaces, Consumer Citizenship. In A.  Amin (Ed.), Post-Fordism, A Reader. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Corcoran, M. P. (2012). Society, space and the public realm, beyond gated individualism. Irish Journal of sociology, 20(1), 1-18.
Crawford, M. (2021). Blurring the boundaries, public space and private life. In V. Mehta & M. Mitrašinović (Eds.), Public Space Reader. London: Routledge.
De Magalhães, C. (2010). Public space and the contracting-out of publicness, A framework for analysis. Journal of Urban Design, 15(4), 559-574.
Deutsche, R. (1996). Evictions, Art and spatial politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dovey, K. & Pafka, E. (2020). Mapping the publicness of public space, An access/control typology. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. London: Routledge.
Flusty, S. (2001). The banality of interdiction, surveillance, control and the displacement of diversity. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(3), 658-664.
Francis, M. (1989). Control as a dimension of public-space quality. In I. Altman, & E. H. Zube (Eds.), Public places and spaces. Boston, MA: Springer.
Frank, H. & Hatak, I. (2014). Doing a research literature review. In A. Fayolle & M. Wright (Eds.), How to get published in the best entrepreneurship journals, A guide to steer your academic career. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere, A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, (25/26), 56-80.
Gałkowski, M. & Antosz, P. (2022). The hidden boundaries of public space, Awareness of civil rights restrictions in privatized urban squares in Poland. Cities, (127), 1-9.
Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings, using public space. Washington: Island press.
Gholamhosseini, R., Pojani, D., Mateo Babiano, I., Johnson, L. & Minnery, J. (2019). The place of public space in the lives of Middle Eastern women migrants in Australia. Journal of Urban Design, 24(2), 269-289.
Glasze, G. (2001). Privatisierung öffentlicher Räume? Einkaufszentren, Business Improvement Districts und geschlossene Wohnkomplexe. Berichte zur deutschen Landeskunde, 75(2-3), 160-177.
Goheen, P. G. (1994). Negotiating access to public space in mid-nineteenth century Toronto. Journal of Historical Geography, 20(4), 430-449.
Goheen, P. G. (1998). Public space and the geography of the modern city. Progress in Human Geography, 22(4), 479-496.
Goodsell, C. T. (2003). The concept of public space and its democratic manifestations. The American Review of Public Administration, 33(4), 361-383.
Haas, T. & M. Mehaffy. (2019) Introduction, The Future of Public Space. URBAN DESIGN Inter- national, 24(1), 75.
Habermas, J. (1962). The structural transformation of the public sphere, an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation ofthe Public Sphere, An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hartley, J. (1992). The Politics of Pictures, The Creation of the Public in the Age of Popular Media. London: Routledge.
Harvey, D. (2013). The political economy of public space. In S. Low & N. Smith, (Eds.). The politics of public space. Routledge.
Hatuka, T. (2010). Violent Acts and Urban Space in Contemporary Tel Aviv, Revisioning Moments. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Hatuka, T. (2012) Civilian Consciousness of the Mutable Nature of Power, Dissent Practices Along a Fragmented Border in Israel/Palestine. Political Geography, 31(6), 347–357.
Hatuka, T. (2020). Alternating narratives, The dynamic between public spaces, protests, and meanings. In V. Mehta, & D. Palazzo, (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. London: Routledge.
Hatuka, T. (2022). Public space and public rituals, Engagement and protest in the digital age. Urban Studies, 00420980221089770.
Hester, R. (1984). Planning Neighborhood Space with People. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Hou, J. (2010). (Not) your everyday public space. In J. Hou (Ed.), Insurgent public space, Guerilla urbanism and the remaking ofcontemporary cities. New York: Routledge.
Hou, J. (2020). Public space as a space of resistance and democratic resilience. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. Routledge.
i Rubió, M. D. S. M. (2021). The Impossible Project of Public Space. In V. Mehta & M. Mitrašinović (Eds.), Public Space Reader. London: Routledge.
Inroy, N. M. (2000). Urban regeneration and public space, the story of an urban park. Space and Polity, 4(1), 23-40.
Iveson, K. (1998). Putting the public back into public space. Urban policy and Research, 16(1), 21-33.
Jackson, P. (1998). Domesticating the Street, The Contested Spaces of the High Street and the Mall. In N. R. Fyfe (Ed.), Images ofthe Street, Planning, Identity, and Control in Public Space. London: Routledge
Jalaladdini, S. & Oktay, D. (2012). Urban public spaces and vitality, a socio-spatial analysis in the streets of Cypriot towns. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, (35), 664-674.
Jesson, J. & Lacey, F. (2006). How to do (or not to do) a critical literature review. Pharmacy Education, 6(2), 139- 148.
Johnson, A. J., & Glover, T. D. (2013). Understanding urban public space in a leisure context. Leisure Sciences, 35(2), 190-197.
Joseph, I. (1998). La ville sans qualités. La tour d’Aigues.France: Editions de l’Aube.
Karimnia, E. & Haas, T. (2020). Appropriation of public space, A dialectical approach in designing publicness. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space. London:  Routledge.
Kirby, A. (2008). The production of private space and its implications for urban social relations. Political Geography, 27(1), 74-95.
Koch, R. & Latham, A. (2012). Rethinking urban public space, accounts from a junction in West London. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(4), 1-15.
Kohn, M. (2004). Brave New Neighborhoods, The Privatization of Public Space. NewYork: Routledge.
Kullmann, K. (2020). LANDSCAPE URBANISM The topography of public space. V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to Public Space. London: Routledge.
Kumar, K., & Makarova, E. (2008). The portable home, The domestication of public space. Sociological Theory, 26(4), 324-343.
Langstraat, F. & Van Melik, R. (2013). Challenging the ‘end of public space’, A comparative analysis of publicness in British and Dutch urban spaces. Journal of Urban Design, 18(3), 429-448.
Leclercq, E., Pojani, D. & Van Bueren, E. (2020). Is public space privatization always bad for the public? Mixed evidence from the United Kingdom. Cities, (100), 102649.
Lee, N. K. (2009). How is a political public space made?–The birth of Tiananmen Square and the May Fourth Movement. Political Geography, 28(1), 32-43.
Lees, L. (1998). Urban renaissance and the street. In N. R. Fyfe (Ed.), Images of the street, Planning, identity and control in public space. Routledge.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Lofland, L. (1998). The Public Realm, Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Low, S. (2016). Spatializing culture, The ethnography of space and place. taylor & Francis.
Low, S. M. (1997). Urban fear, building the fortress city. City & Society, 9(1), 53-71.
Low, S. M. (2009) Towards an Anthropological Theory ofSpace and Place. Semiotica, 175, 21–37.
Low, S. M. & Smith, N. (2006). Introduction, The Imperative of Public Space. In S. M. Low & N. Smith. (Eds.), The Politics of Public Space. New York, London: Routledge.
Luger, J., & Lees, L. (2020). PLANETARY PUBLIC SPACE Scale, context, and politics. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space. Routledge.
Madanipour, A. (1995) Dimensions of Urban Public Space, The Case of the Metro Centre, Gateshead. Urban Design Studies, (1), 45–56.
Madanipour, A. (1996). Urban design and dilemmas of space. Environment and planning D, Society and Space, 14(3), 331-355.
Madanipour, A. (1999). Why are the design and development of public spaces significant for cities?. Environment and planning B, Planning and Design, 26(6), 879-891.
Madanipour, A. (2003). Public and Private Spaces of the City. London: Routledge.
Madanipour, A. (2006). Roles and challenges of urban design. Journal of Urban Design, 11(2), 173-193.
Madanipour, A. (Ed.). (2010). Whose public space?, International case studies in urban design and development. London: Routledge.
Madden, D. J. (2010). Revisiting the end of public space, Assembling the public in an urban park. City & Community, 9(2), 187-207.
Malone, K. (2002). Street life, youth, culture and competing uses of public space. Environment and urbanization, 14(2), 157-168.
Marston, S. (1990). ‘Who are the people’? Gender, citizenship, and the making of the American nation. Environment and Planning D, Society and Space, (8), 449–458.
Matthews, G. (1992). The rise of public woman. New York: Oxford University Press.
McLeod, M. (1996). `Other’ spaces and `others’. In, D. Agrest, P. Conway & L. Weisman (Eds.), The Sex of Architecture. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
Mehta, V. & Palazzo, D. (Eds.). (2020). Companion to Public Space. London: Routledge.
Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 53-88.
Mehta, V. (2019). Streets and social life in cities, a taxonomy of sociability. Urban Design International, 24(1), 16-37.
Melucci, A. & Avritzer, L. (2000). Complexity, cultural pluralism and democracy, collective action in the public space. Social Science Information, 39(4), 507-527.
Mensch, J. (2007). Public space. Continental Philosophy Review, 40(1), 31-47.
Mitchell, D. (1995). The end of public space? People’s Park, definitions of the public, and democracy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 85(1), 108-133.
Mitchell, D. (1996). Introduction, Public space and the city. Urban Geography, 17(2), 127-131.
Mitchell, D. (2003). The Right to the City, Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York and London: Guilford Press.
Mitchell, K. (2006). Geographies of identity, the new exceptionalism. Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 95-106
Mitchell, D. (2017). People’s Park again, on the end and ends of public space. Environment and planning A, economy and space, 49(3), 503-518.
Neal, Z. (2009). Locating Public Space. In A. M. Orum & Z, Neal. (Eds.), Common ground?, readings and reflections on public space. London: Routledge.
Németh, J. (2012). Controlling the commons, how public is public space?. Urban Affairs Review, 48(6), 811-835.
Németh, J., & Schmidt, S. (2011). The privatization of public space, modeling and measuring publicness. Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design, 38(1), 5-23
Nissen, S. (2008). Urban transformation from public and private space to spaces of hybrid character. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 44(06), 1129-1149.
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The Great Good Place. Berkeley: University of California Press
Orum, A. M., & Neal, Z. (2009). Common ground?, readings and reflections on public space. London: Routledge.
Orum, M. A. (2009). Public Space as Power and Resistance. In A. M. Orum & Z. Neal (Eds.), Common ground?, readings and reflections on public space. London: Routledge.
Paay, J., & Kjeldskov, J. (2008). Understanding situated social interactions, a case study of public places in the city. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 17(2), 275-290.
Pojani, D. (2008) Santa Monica’s Third Street Promenade, The Failure and Resurgence of a Pedestrian Mall. Urban Design International, 13(3), 141–155.
Pojani, D., & Maci, G. (2015). The detriments and benefits of the fall of planning, The evolution of public space in a Balkan post-socialist capital. Journal of Urban Design, 20(2), 251–272.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone, America’s declining social capital. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Raco, M. (2003). Remaking place and securitising space, urban regeneration and the strategies tactics and prac- tices of policing in the UK. Urban Studies, (40), 1869–87.
Ramlee, M., Omar, D., Yunus, R. M. & Samadi, Z. (2015). Revitalization of urban public spaces, An overview. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, (201), 360-367.
Relf, E. (1976). Place & Placeness. London: Pion.
Rishbeth, C. (2020). The collective outdoors, Memories, desires and becoming local in an era of mobility. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space.  Routledge.
Ruddick, S. (1996). Constructing difference in public spaces, Race, class, and gender as interlocking systems. Urban geography, 17(2), 132-151.
Ruddick, S. (2021). Constructing Differences in Public Spaces, Race, Class and Gender as Interlocking Systems. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space. London: Routledge.
Ryan, M. (1989). The American parade, representa- tions of nineteenth-century social order. In L. Hunt (Ed.), The new cultural history. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Rybczynski, W. (1993). The New Downtowns. Atlantic Monthly, (271), 98 – 106.
Sennett, R. (1970). Families against the city; middle class homes of industrial Chicago, 1872-1890. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Sennett, R. (1977). The fall of public man, on the social psychology of capitalism. New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Sennett, R. (1992). The uses of disorder, Personal identity and city life. WW: Norton & Company.
Sennett, R. (2017). The fall of public man. WW: Norton & Company.
Sezer, C. (2020). Visibility in public space and socially inclusive cities. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space. London: Routledge.
Simões Aelbrecht, P. (2016). ‘Fourth places’, the contemporary public settings for informal social interaction among strangers. Journal of Urban Design, 21(1), 124-152.
Smihth, N., & Low, S. (2021). The Imperative of Public Space. In V. Mehta & D. Palazzo (Eds.), Companion to public space. London: Routledge.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology, An overview and guidelines. Journal of  Business Research, (104), 333-339.
Soja, E. W. (1980). The Socio–Spatial Dialectic. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 70(2), 207–225.
Soja, E. W. (2003). Writing the City Spatially. City, (7), 269–280.
Sorkin, M. (Ed.) (1992). Variations on a Theme Park, The New American City and the End of Public Space. New York: Hill & Wang.
Spierings, B., Van Melik, R. & Van Aalst, I. (2016) Parallel Lives on the Plaza, Young Women of Immigrant Descent and Their Feelings of Social Comfort and Control on Rotterdam’s Schouwburg- plein. Space and Culture, 19(2), 150–163
Staeheli, L. (1996). Publicity, privacy, and women’s political action. Environment and Planning D, Society and Space, (14), 601-619.
Staeheli, L. A. & Mitchell, D. (2007). Locating the public in research and practice. Progress in Human Geography, 31(6), 792-811.
Stone, G. (1954). City shoppers and urban identification, observations on the social psychology of city life. American Journal of Sociology, 60 (1), 36–45
Sucker, K. (2010). Istanbul and the Heritage of the European City. Mokslas – Lietuvos ateitis [Science – Future of Lithuania], 2(3), 31–37.
Thomas, M. (1991). The Demise of Public Space. In V. Nadin & J. Doak (Eds.), Town Planning Responses to City Change, Avebury: Aldershot.
Tonnelat, S. (2010). The sociology of urban public spaces. Territorial evolution and planning solution. experiences from China and France, 84-92.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of system- atic review. British Journal of Management, 14 (3), 207–22.
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H. & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis, Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405.
Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H. & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Nursing Education and Practice, 5(6), 100-110.
Van Deusen, R. (2002). Public space design as class warfare, Urban design, theright to the city’and the production of Clinton Square. Syracuse, NY. GeoJournal, 58(2-3), 149-158.
Van Oostrum, M. (2022). Appropriating public space, transformations of public life and loose parts in urban villages. Journal of Urbanism, International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 15(1), 84-105.
Varna, G., & S. Tiesdell. (2010). Assessing the publicness of public space, The Star Model of publicness. Journal of Urban Design (15), 575-98.
Vertovec, S. (2007). New complexities of cohesion in Britain: Super-diversity, transnationalism and civil-integration. London: Communities and Local Government Publications.
Walzer, M. (1986). Public space-pleasures and costs of urbanity. Dissent, 33(4), 470-475.
Ward, V., House, A. & Hamer, S. (2009). Developing a framework for transferring knowledge into action, A thematic analysis of the literature. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, (14), 156–164.
Watson, S. (2006) City Publics, The (Dis)enchantment of Urban Encounters. London: Routledge.
Weintraub, J. (1997). The theory and politics of the public/private distinction. In J. Weintraub & K. Kumar (Eds.), Public and private in thought and practice, Perspectives on a grand dichotomy. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J. & Pawson, R. (2013). RAMESES publication standards, Meta-narrative reviews. BMC Medicine, (11), 20.
Worpole, K. & Knox, K. (2007). The Social Value of Public Spaces. New York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Young, M. I. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Zamanifard, H., Alizadeh, T. & Bosman, C. (2018). Towards a framework of public space governance. Cities, (78), 155-165.
Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Cambridge: MA, Blackwell.
باغ نظر
دوره 19، شماره 116
بهمن 1401
صفحه 85-102

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار