Abstract
AbstractThe term ‘co-production’ has been used in various fields, including planning, as collaborative forms of public goods and service delivery gain significance. Co-production has two sides—the ‘co’ side refers to actors and their motivations, while the ‘production’ side refers to phases and instruments. This paper examines privately owned public space/s (POPS) based on the two sides of co-production. Thereby, it addresses two research gaps. First, less has been written to date on the involvement of actors other than local authorities and developers. Second, little attention has been paid to the phase through which POPS are co-produced. The paper fills these research gaps by presenting the empirical work undertaken in HafenCity, Hamburg. It reveals a wide range of actors engaged in four different phases through various instruments. This paper also identifies challenges of co-production of POPS, and makes recommendations.
Funder
Technische Universität Dortmund
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Urban Studies,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference46 articles.
1. Alfaro-d’Alençon, P., and H. Torrent. 2020. From actors to space, through processes: Reflections from co-production and commoning. Journal of Science Communication 19 (04): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.19040306.
2. Alford, J. 2014. The multiple facets of co-production. Building on the work of Elinor Ostrom. Public Management Review 16 (3): 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.806578.
3. Berding, U., A. Havermann, J. Pegels, and B. Perenthaler. 2010. Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern. Eine Einleitung: Aktivitäten. In Stadträume in Spanungsfeldern: Plätze, Parks und Promenaden im Schnittbereich öffentlicher und privater Aktivitäten, ed. U. Berding and A. Havermann. Rohn: Detmold.
4. Berding, U., A. Havermann, and J. Pegels. 2012. Challenges in co-producing publicly accessible spaces. The example of Bücherplatz in Aachen. Metropolitics 19: 1–6.
5. Bovaird, T. 2007. Beyond engagement and participation: User and community co-production of public services. Public Administration Review 67 (5): 846–860. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x.