Changing public space

3 Current trends in the design and
management of public space
Based on: Van Melik, R., I. Van Aalst and J. Van Weesep (2007), Fear and fantasy in the
public domain: The development of secured and themed urban space. Journal of Urban
Design, 12(1), pp. 25-42.
3.1 Introduction
Chapter 2 has shown that changes in public space reflect changes in society. Although the built
environment cannot always keep pace with its users’ changing characteristics and demands, it
will eventually adjust to societal changes (Van Aalst & Ennen, 2002). Researchers from the
Netherlands Institute for Spatial Research (RPB, 2004) also state that societal changes ought
to form the point of departure to interpret urban space. To understand the increasing number of
redeveloped public spaces, it is thus necessary to look at changes that currently occur in society.
The twofold research question central in this chapter is therefore: What are the current trends
in the design and management of Dutch public space? Which socio-cultural, economic, and political
dynamics have induced these trends?
The previous chapter described the different functions and designs city squares have held
throughout the centuries. The central line of thought in this historic description was the notion
of city squares as reflections of an evolving society. This argumentation can also be extended into
the future, since current and forthcoming societal developments will also leave their imprints
on public space. As described in the previous chapter, major investments have already been
made to reinvigorate dilapidated public spaces by banning cars, laying new pavements, installing
street furniture, and so on. Each of these redesigned projects seemed to be inspired by two
considerations. Either it created secured space, taking steps to increase safety and reduce feelings
of fear, or it induced themed space, focusing on urban entertainment and fantasy. On the one
hand, a rising anxiety about crime induced people to avoid the public domain of the city and
retreat into the private sphere (Montgomery, 1997; Banerjee, 2001; Ellin, 2001). Yet the appeal
of urban entertainment also grew, inducing people to indulge in fantasy and new experiences
outside the home (Pine & Gilmore, 1999). The design and management of public space seems
to be responding to these two trends. However, the ecology of fear (Davis, 1998) and the ecology
of fantasy (Crawford, 1990) are not separate realms. Rather, they are two aspects of the same
tendency towards greater control over public space. This argument is elaborated in Section 3.4.
The terms fear and fantasy might seem value-laden. Fear suggests a negative perception of
certain places, while fantasy has predominantly positive connotations. However, they are used in
a neutral sense here; secured and themed public spaces are neither negative nor positive spatial
developments. For instance, themed events in public space might create a lively atmosphere,
47