Unfolding Process-Based Indicators: Linking Participation, Perceived Ownership, and Stewardship Practice to Public Space Sustainability Reflections from Neighbourhood-scale Public Spaces in Surakarta and Banjarmasin, Indonesia
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
This paper examines how community-centric design processes influence the sustainability of neighbourhood-scale public spaces through the lens of perceived ownership and stewardship practices. While participatory approaches are widely promoted in public space development, their contribution to the long-term maintenance and care that contribute to the sustainability of the space remains insufficiently discussed. Building on insights from ‘collective ownership’ literature that links perceived ownership to stewardship behaviours in shared environments, the study investigates how these dynamics unfold in practice. Drawing on two neighbourhood-scale public space projects co-designed with local communities in Indonesia, Sungai Jingah (Banjarmasin, 2012) and Mangkubumen (Surakarta, 2022), the paper explores how participatory processes that were designed to facilitate community aspirations and build ownership are translated into patterns of use, social inclusion, and maintenance. The paper adopts qualitative, practice-based research approaches, combining in-depth semi-structured interviews with reflective process, field observations and project archives on impact assessments. The findings show that community-centric design contributes most to the usership and inclusivity of the space, ensuring that the design of spaces reflects the needs of the user. Although the participatory process facilitates the emergence of ownership and stewardship practice, the result is highly context dependent. Ownership and stewardship practice does not automatically emerge from participation but develops through a combination of various factors such as interest, control over the space, attachment and familiarity, and investments, mediated by factors such as tenure stability, social cohesion, governance arrangements, and access to resources. While stewardship practices emerge through community initiative, their continuity often depends on larger institutional support. This paper proposed a process-based evaluation framework that not only focuses on the design process of the space but also covers aspects that nurture the sustainability of the space, particularly by facilitating the ownership building and stewardship practices that contribute to the sustainability of small-scale public spaces.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
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.
References
Arnstein, S.R. (1969) ‘A ladder of citizen participation’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), pp. 216–224.
Blomley, N. (2004) Unsettling the City: Urban Land and the Politics of Property. New York: Routledge.
Carmona, M., et al. (2003) Public places, urban spaces. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Carmona, M., de Magalhães, C. and Hammond, L. (2008) Public space: the management dimension. London: Routledge.
Carmona, M. (2019) ‘Principles for public space design, planning to do better’, Urban Design International, 24, pp. 47–59.
Collins, K. and Ison, R. (2009) ‘Jumping off Arnstein’s ladder: social learning as a new policy paradigm for climate change adaptation’, Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(6), pp. 358–373. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.523
Cornwall, A. (2002) Making Spaces, Changing Places: Situating Participation in Development. IDS Working Paper 170. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
Chung, M. (2025) ‘Our park, our community: Exploring psychological ownership in public open spaces’, Leisure Sciences, pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2025.2464571
Davidoff, P. (1965) ‘Advocacy and pluralism in planning’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), pp. 331–338.
Fals-Borda, O. and Rahman, M.A. (eds.) (1991) Action and Knowledge: Breaking the Monopoly with Participatory Action Research. New York: Apex Press.
Forester, J. (1989) Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gehl, J. (2011) Life between buildings: Using public space. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hester, R.T. (1990) Community design primer. Mendocino, CA: Ridge Times Press.
Han, S., Song, D., Xu, L. et al. (2022) ‘Behaviour in public open spaces: A systematic review of studies with quantitative research methods’, Building and Environment, 223, p. 109444.
Hickey, S. and Mohan, G. (eds.) (2004) Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development. London: Zed Books.
Lefebvre, H. (1996) ‘The right to the city’, in Kofman, E. and Lebas, E. (eds.) Writings on cities. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 63–181.
Madanipour, A. (2015). ‘Urban Design and Public Space’, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, pp. 789–794. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.74049-9
Madanipour, A. (2017) Cities in time: Temporary urbanism and the future of the city. London: Bloomsbury.
Mehta, V. (2014) ‘Evaluating public space’, Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), pp. 53–88.
Miraftab, F. (2004) ‘Invited and invented spaces of participation: Neoliberal citizenship and feminists’ expanded notion of politics’, Wagadu: A Journal of Transnational Women’s and Gender Studies, 1, pp. 1–7.
Mullenbach, L.E., Baker, B.L., Benfield, J.A., Hickerson, B. and Mowen, A.J. (2019) ‘Assessing the relationship between community engagement and perceived ownership of an urban park in Philadelphia’, Journal of Leisure Research, 50(3), pp. 201–219.
Peck, J., Sene-Harper, A. and Wallace, L. (2021) ‘Caring for the commons: Using psychological ownership to enhance stewardship behavior for public goods’, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 40(4), pp. 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156211000940
Pierce, J.L., Kostova, T. and Dirks, K.T. (2001) ‘Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations’, Academy of Management Review, 26(2), pp. 298–310.
Roy, A. (2005) ‘Urban Informality: Toward an Epistemology of Planning’, Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2), pp. 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976689
Sanoff, H. (2000) Community participation methods in design and planning. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sendra, P. and Fitzpatrick, D. (2020) Community-led regeneration: A toolkit for residents and planners. London: UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13xpsj7
Sendra, P. (2024) ‘The ethics of co-design’, Journal of Urban Design, 29(1), pp. 4–22. doi: 10.1080/13574809.2023.2171856.
She, S., Chen, X. et al. (2022) ‘Exploring the concept, antecedents, and consequences of environmental psychological ownership’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), p. 12621.
Tritter, J.Q. and McCallum, A. (2006) ‘The snakes and ladders of user involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein’, Health Policy, 76(2), pp. 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.05.008
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). ‘Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor’. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.
UN-Habitat (2015) Global public space toolkit: From global principles to local policies and practice. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). Available at: https://www.local2030.org/library/82/Global-Public-Space-Toolkit--From-Global-Principles-to-Local-Policies-and-Practice.pdf (Accessed: 18 March 2026).
UN-Habitat (2020) City-wide public space assessment toolkit: a guide to community-led digital inventory and assessment of public spaces. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat).
Varna, G. and Tiesdell, S. (2010) ‘Assessing the publicness of public space: The Star Model of Publicness’, Journal of Urban Design, 15(4), pp. 575–598.
Village Well (2025) ‘An overview of Village Well’s Regenerative Placemaking Model’, Village Well, 21 July. Available at: [website URL] (Accessed: [insert access date]).
Whyte, W.H. (1980) The social life of small urban spaces. Washington, DC: Conservation Foundation.
