Considering place-based participation a crucial factor for the development of sustainable and resilient cities in the post-digital turn age, this paper addresses the socio-spatial implications of the recent transformation of relationality networks. To understand the drivers of spatial claims emerged in conditions of digitally augmented spectacle and simulation, it focuses on changes occurring in key nodes of central urban public and semi-public spaces of rapidly developing cities. Firstly, it proposes a theoretical framework for the analysis of problems related to socio-spatial fragmentation, polarisation and segregation of urban commons subject to external control. Secondly, it discusses opportunities and criticalities emerging from a representational paradox depending on the ambivalence in the play of desire found in digitally augmented semi-public spaces. The discussion is structured to shed light on specific socio-spatial relational practices that counteract the dissipation of the “common worlds” caused by sustained processes of urban gentrification and homogenisation. The theoretical framework is developed from a comparative critical urbanism approach inspired by the right to the city and the right to difference, and elaborates on the discourse on sustainable development that informs the United Nations’ New Urban Agenda. The analysis focuses on how digitally augmented geographies reintroduce practices of participation and commoning that reassemble fragmented relational infrastructures and recombine translocal social, cultural and material elements. Empirical studies on the production of advanced simulative and transductive spatialities in places of enhanced consumption found in Auckland, New Zealand, ground the discussion. These provide evidence of the extent to which the agency of the augmented territorialisation forces reconstitutes inclusive and participatory systems of relationality. The concluding notes, speculating on the emancipatory potential found in these social laboratories, are a call for a radical redefinition of the approach to the problem of the urban commons. Such a change would improve the capacity of urbanism disciplines to adequately engage with the digital turn and efficaciously contribute to a maximally different spatial production that enhances and strengthens democracy and pluralism in the public sphere.
The Authors retain copyright for articles published in The Journal of Public Space, with first publication rights granted to the journal.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial Licence (CC-BY-NC) - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
You are free to:
• Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
• Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago.
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.
Bäckström, K. (2011), “Shopping as leisure: an exploration of manifoldness and dynamics in consumers shopping experiences”, Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 18(3), 200-209.
Banerjee, T. (2001). The future of public space: Beyond invented streets and reinvented places. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(1), 9–24.
Benhabib, S. (2000). The reluctant modernism of Hannah Arendt. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Bohme, G. (2012). Flanieren in der Postmoderne. Die Shopping Mall als ästhetischer Raum. Der Architekt, 2, 28–32.
Bollier, D. (2002), Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth, New York: Routledge.
Borch, C., & Kornberger, M. (Eds.). (2015). Urban commons: Rethinking the city. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2005). Neoliberalism and the urban condition. City, 9(1), 101–107.
Brighenti, A. M. (2014). Mobilizing territories, territorializing mobilities. Sociologica, 1.
Calhoun, C. (1992). Introduction: Habermas and the public sphere, in C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere. Studies in contemporary German social thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–50.
Connolly, W. (2005). The evangelical-capitalist resonance machine. Political Theory, 33(6), 869-886.
Coyne, R. (2010). The tuning of place: Sociable spaces and pervasive digital media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cuthbert, A., & McKinnel, K. (2001). Public domain, private interest: Social space in Hong Kong, in P. Miao (Ed.), Public places in Asia Pacific cities. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 191–211.
Davis, M. (1990). City of quartz: Excavating the future in Los Angeles. New York: Verso.
Dawson, A. (2010). Introduction: New enclosures. New Formations, 69, 8–22.
Debord, G. (1983). Society of the spectacle. Detroit: Black & Red.
Dehaene M., & De Cauter, L. (2008a). Heterotopia: A postcivil society, in M. Dehaene & L. De Cauter (Eds.), Heterotopia and the city: Public space in a postcivil society. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 3–9.
Dehaene M., & De Cauter, L. (2008b). Notes, in M. Dehaene & L. De Cauter (Eds.), in Heterotopia and the city: Public space in a postcivil society. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 22–29.
Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition, New York: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze G., & Guattari, F. (2000) Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and schizophrenia, London: Athlone.
Doherty, J., Busch-Geertsema, V., Karpuskiene, V., Korhonen, J., O'Sullivan, E., Sahlin, I., Tosi, A., Petrillo, A., & Julia W. (2008). Homelessness and exclusion: Regulating public space in European cities. Surveillance and Inequality, 5(3), 290–314.
Farías, I., & Bender, T. (Eds) (2010). Urban assemblages: How actor-network theory changes urban studies, London: Routledge.
Firat, A. F., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 239–267.
Flusty, S. (1997). Building paranoia, in N. Ellin (Ed.), Architecture of fear. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 47–60.
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison, New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, M. (2008 ). Space, Knowledge, And Power. Interview conducted by Paul Rabinow, in J (Ed.), Power, Essential Works of Foucault (1954-1984), Vol. 3. New York: New Press, 349-364.
Foucault, M. (2008). Of other spaces, in M. Dehaene and L. De Cauter (Eds.), in Heterotopia and the city: Public space in a postcivil society. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 13–29.
Fuller, A., Hickey, M., & Bunnell, T. (2012). Asian urbanisms and mallness in Recording the Future (RtF) (183). Singapore: Asia Research Institute.
Garnett, N. S. (2012). Managing the urban commons. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 160, 1995–2027.
Goss, J. (1993). The "magic of the mall": An analysis of form, function, and meaning in the contemporary retail built environment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 83(1), 18–47.
Hardt, M. (2010) The common in communism. Rethinking Marxism, 22(3), 346–356.
Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2009). Commonwealth. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University.
Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 71(1), 3–17.
Harvey, D. (2003). The new imperialism. New York: University Press.
Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review, 53, 23–40.
Harvey, D. (2011). The future of the commons. Radical History Review, 109.
Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution. New York: Verso Books.
Hodkinson, S. (2012). The new urban enclosures. City, 16(5), 500–518.
Holston, J. (2009). Insurgent citizenship: Disjunctions of democracy and modernity in Brazil. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kärrholm, M. (2012). Retailising space: Architecture, retail and the territorialisation of public space. Surrey, England: Ashgate.
Goonewardena, K., Kipfer, S., Milgrom, R., & Schmid, C. (Eds.). (2008). Space, difference, everyday life: Henri Lefebvre and radical politics. London: Routledge.
Hjorth, L., & Richardson, I. (2017). Pokémon GO: Mobile media play, place-making, and the digital wayfarer, Mobile Media & Communication, 5(1), 3-14.
Koolhaas, R. (2002). Junkspace. Obsolescence, 100, 175–190.
Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT, in Law J. & Hassard J. (Eds.), Actor-network theory and after. Oxford: Blackwell, 15–25.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics, in B. S. Turner (Ed.), The new Blackwell companion to social theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 141–158.
LeBlanc, A., & Chaput, J.P. (2017). Pokémon Go: A game changer for the physical inactivity crisis? Preventive Medicine, 101, 235-237.
Lee, S., & Webster, C. (2006). Enclosure of the urban commons. GeoJournal, 66, 27–42.
Lefebvre, H. (1991 ). The critique of everyday life, Volume 1 (J. Moore trans.). London: Verso.
Lefebvre, H. (1991 ). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Lefebvre, H. (2003 ). The urban revolution (R. Bononno, trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Lefebvre, H. (2004 ). Rhythmanalysis, space, time and everyday life. London: Continuum.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (1993). Privatisation of public open space: The Los Angeles experience. The Town Planning Review, 64(2), 139–167.
Low, S. (2006). How private interests take over public space: Zoning, taxes, and incorporation of gated communities, in S. Low & N. Smith (Eds), Politics of public space. New York: Routledge, 81-104.
Low, S., & Smith, N. (Eds.). (2006). Politics of public space. New York: Routledge.
Manfredini, M. (2017). The augmented meta-public space: Interpreting emerging transductive territories in enhanced centres of consumption. The Journal of Public Space, 2(3), 111–128.
Manfredini, M. (2019). Give us space: Improving community well-being by enhancing performance and communication of semi-public space in the evolving public realm. Retrieved from https://www.drh.nz/give-us-space/
Manfredini, M., & Jenner, R. (2015). The virtual public thing: De-re-territorialisations of public space through shopping in Auckland’s urban space. Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts, 16, 70–81.
Manfredini, M., & Rieger, U. (2017). Dynamics of territorial production in situated and community projects, in D. Brown, M. Manfredini, P. McPherson, A. Pretty, U. Rieger, & M. Southcombe (Eds.), Crossing boundaries: Reflections on applied collaborative architectural research. Siracusa, Italy: Lettera Ventidue, 159–166.
Manfredini, M., & Ta, A. N. (2016). Co-creative urbanism: The production of plural evolutionary spatialities through conflicts and complicities between public and private in the streets of Hanoi, Vietnam. Joelho, Journal of Architectural Culture, 7, 132–155.
Manfredini, M., & Ta, A. N. (2017). The production of pluralistic spatialities: The persistence of counter-space territories in the streets of Hanoi, Vietnam, in R. Galdini, A. Marata & M. Spada (Eds.), Creative cities: Public space and everyday places. Rome: CNAPPC, 373–381.
Manfredini, M., Xin, T, Jenner, R., & Besgen, A. (2017). Transductive urbanism: A method for the analysis of the relational infrastructure of malled metropolitan centres in Auckland, New Zealand. Athens Journal of Architecture, 3(4), 411–440.
Manfredini, M., Zamani G., F., & Leardini, P. (2017). Instances of emerging agonistic spatialities in the contemporary city: The production of differential geographies in the public space of Istanbul. Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, 5(5), 281–291.
Massey, D. (2007). World city. Cambridge, England: Polity.
Massicotte, M. C., Michon, R., Chebat, J. C., Joseph Sirgy, M., & Borges, A. (2011). Effects of mall atmosphere on mall evaluation: Teenage versus adult shoppers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18(1), 74–80.
McFarlane, C. (2011). Learning the city: Knowledge and translocal assemblage. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
McQuire, S. (2008). The media city: Media, architecture and urban space. Los Angeles: Sage.
Merriman, P. (2012). Human geography without time‐space. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), 13–27.
Miles, S. (2010). Spaces for consumption: Pleasure and placelessness in the post-industrial city. Los Angeles: Sage.
Miles, S. (2012). The neoliberal city and the pro-active complicity of the citizen consumer. Journal of Consumer Culture, 12(2), 216–230.
Miles, S., & Miles, M. (2004). Consuming cities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Minton, A. (2012). Ground control: Fear and happiness in the twenty-first century city. London: Penguin.
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, 108–133.
Mitchell, D. (2003). The right to the city: Social justice and the fight for public space. New York: Guilford.
Mommaas, H. (2004) Cultural clusters and the post-industrial city: Towards the remapping of urban cultural policy. Urban Studies, 41(3), 507–532.
Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(3), 745–758.
Mouffe, C. (2008). Public spaces and democratic politics. In J. Boomgaard (Ed), Highrise–common ground. Art and the Amsterdam Zuidas area, Amsterdam: Valiz, 135–156.
Murdoch, J. (1998). The spaces of actor-network theory. Geoforum, 29(4), 357–374.
Park, R. (1967). On social control and collective behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Parr, A. (2015) Urban debt, neoliberalism and the politics of the commons. Theory, Culture & Society, 32(3), 69–91.
Petrescu, D. (2005). Losing control, keeping desire, in P. Blundell Jones, D. Petrescu, & J. Till (Eds.), Architecture and participation, Abingdon, Oxon: Taylor & Francis, 43-61.
Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58(2–3), 99–108.
Purcell, M. (2014). Possible worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the Right to the City. Journal of Urban Affairs, 36(1), 141–154.
Rifkin, J. (2000). The age of access: The new culture of hypercapitalism, where all of life is a paid-for experience. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.
Sennett, R. (1977). The fall of public man. New York: Knopf.
Sennett, R. (2008). Reflections on the public realm, in G. Bridge & S. Watson (Eds.), A companion to the city. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 390-397.
Sennett, Richard (2018). Building and Dwelling: Ethics for the City. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Shepherd, R. (2002). Commodiﬁcation, culture and tourism. Tourist Studies, 2(2), 183–201.
Shane, D. G. (2005). Recombinant urbanism: Conceptual modeling in architecture, urban design, and city theory. London: Wiley-Academy.
Shane, D. G. (2011). Urban design since 1945: A global perspective. London: Wiley-Academy.
Smith, D. (2006). The concept of the simulacrum: Deleuze and the overturning of Platonism. Continental Philosophy Review, 38(1-2), 89–123.
Smith, D. (2007). Deleuze and the question of desire: Toward an immanent theory of ethics, Parrhesia, 2, 66–78.
Smith, N. (2002). New globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as global urban strategy. Antipode, 34(3), 427–450.
Soja, E. (1989). Postmodern Geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory. London: Verso Press.
Soja, E. (2000). Postmetropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions. Oxford: Blackwell.
Soja, E. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Sorkin, M. (Ed.). (1992). Variations on a theme park: The new American city and the end of public space, New York: Hill and Wang.
Stanek, L. (2011). Henri Lefebvre on space. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Steel, M., & Symes, M. (2005). The privatisation of public space? The American experience of business improvement districts and their relationship to local governance. Local Government Studies, 31(3), 321–334.
Styhre, A., & Hagberg, J. (2013). The production of social space: Shopping malls as relational and transductive spaces. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 11(3), 354–374.
Susilo, C., & De Meulder, B. (2018). The Boulevard Commercial Project of Manado, Indonesia: Trickled-down globalization versus a catalyzed super local, in J. Gosseye & T. Avermaete (Eds.), Acculturating the shopping centre. London: Routledge, 147–163.
Susser, I., & Tonnelat, S. (2013). Transformative cities: The three urban commons. Focaal, 66, 105–121.
United Nations General Assembly (2016). New Urban Agenda, (A/RES/71/256), New York: United Nations.
Villa, D. (1992). Postmodernism and the public sphere. American Political Science Review, 86(3), 712–721.
Witkin, R. W. (2003). Adorno on popular culture. London: Routledge.
Xin, T., Manfredini, M., Zamani, F., Xu, L., Li, Y., & Wang T. (2018). Public life in megamalls. Chinese & Overseas Architecture, 4, 18–23.
Zukin, S. (1991). Landscapes of power: From Detroit to Disney World, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Oxford: Blackwell.