Capital Spaces: the multiple
complex public spaces of a
global city
Matthew Carmona & Filipa Wunderlich
The importance of high quality public space is often highlighted in public policy whilst
the academic literature is replete with critiques of contemporary public space. Those
responsible are criticised for:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Neglecting public space, physically and to market forces
Sacrificing public space to the car
Allowing fear of crime to dominate design and management strategies
Failing to address the needs of the least mobile and most vulnerable
Allowing public space to be commercialised and privatised
Failing to halt a retreat into domestic and virtual worlds
Condoning placeless formulae-driven entertainment space
Presiding over a general homogenisation of the built environment.
Tapping into a resurgence in London’s public spaces, Capital Spaces1 reports on a
project which aimed to achieve a better understanding of the dominant critiques by
gauging if and how they relate to the design, development, use and management of
new (and regenerated) spaces in London. A London-wide survey and 14 multidimensional case studies were used to empirically test the theory. The research
revealed:
o The doom-laden assessments of critiques are far from the mark and should
be challenged
o Contemporary public spaces find a ready constituency of users who greatly
value these spaces
o Stakeholders, public and private, have complimentary aspirations to deliver
long-term social, economic and environmental value
o Their diversity of spaces – corporate, consumption, civic, community,
domestic, and residual – mark out large cities
o Spaces of difference and diversity can be accommodated that don’t all cater
for every public space purpose or section of society.
Contact:
Prof Matthew Carmona
The Bartlett school of Planning, UCL
[email protected]
1
Capital Spaces: The Multiple Complex Public Spaces of a Global City is published
by Routledge: http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415527095/