Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10397/105057
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor | School of Design | - |
dc.creator | Bruyns, G | - |
dc.creator | Nel, D | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-03T01:46:00Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-04-03T01:46:00Z | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1357-5317 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10397/105057 | - |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | Palgrave Macmillan | en_US |
dc.rights | © Springer Nature Limited 2020 | en_US |
dc.rights | This version of the article has been accepted for publication, after peer review (when applicable) and is subject to Springer Nature’s AM terms of use (https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/policies/accepted-manuscript-terms), but is not the Version of Record and does not reflect post-acceptance improvements, or any corrections. The Version of Record is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41289-020-00127-5. | en_US |
dc.subject | High-density city | en_US |
dc.subject | Hong Kong | en_US |
dc.subject | Lateral-privatisation | en_US |
dc.subject | Public space | en_US |
dc.subject | Spatial piracy | en_US |
dc.title | Lateral-privatisation of the publics : Hong Kong’s spatial struggles | en_US |
dc.type | Journal/Magazine Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 266 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 279 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 25 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1057/s41289-020-00127-5 | - |
dcterms.abstract | Hong Kong is one of the most ‘public’ open space challenged cities in the world. As a result of the city’s ‘patchwork’ planning practices, the privatisation of all space has become a means of control that directly impacts developmental typologies and social mobility. It remains a landscape which is more opportunistic than strategic, resulting in spatial compression for the sake of profitability. Through over privatisation, the multi-utilities of ‘spaces for the public’ constitutes negotiated spatial norms, a process whereby space is re-claimed through tactical means. This paper focuses on how the social mechanises the concept of spatial piracy of accessible (in and exterior) space to define what we term ‘lateral-privatisation’, in the lieu of a civic-spatial relationship. The argument presents two examples that expedite lateral-privatisation, discussing the umbrella movement and weekly takeover of open space by foreign domestic helpers. Conclusions are made by arguing that lateral-privatisation should be viewed as a spatial alternative, an informal design mechanism that advocates socially driven, spatially situated social justice. Through examining ‘by who’, ‘for whom’ and ‘where’, the lateral-privatisation concept positions an alternative model, between the privatisation of cities and the social (re)claims made within dense landscapes that promotes social dis-inclusion. | - |
dcterms.accessRights | open access | en_US |
dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Urban design international, 2022, v. 25, p. 266-279 | - |
dcterms.isPartOf | Urban design international | - |
dcterms.issued | 2020 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-85084212406 | - |
dc.description.validate | 202403 bckw | - |
dc.description.oa | Accepted Manuscript | en_US |
dc.identifier.FolderNumber | SD-0090 | en_US |
dc.description.fundingSource | Self-funded | en_US |
dc.description.pubStatus | Published | en_US |
dc.identifier.OPUS | 20506983 | en_US |
dc.description.oaCategory | Green (AAM) | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Journal/Magazine Article |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bruyns_Lateral-Privatisation_Publics_Hong.pdf | Pre-Published version | 322.84 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Page views
19
Citations as of Jul 7, 2024
Downloads
5
Citations as of Jul 7, 2024
SCOPUSTM
Citations
4
Citations as of Jul 4, 2024
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
1
Citations as of Jul 4, 2024
![](/image/google_scholar.jpg)
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.