《Learning from temporary use and the making of on-demand communities in London’s Olympic “fringes”》
打印
- 作者
- Mara Ferreri
- 来源
- URBAN GEOGRAPHY,Vol.41,Issue3,P.409-427
- 语言
- 英文
- 关键字
- London 2012 Olympic Games,interim uses,on-demand communities,pop-up geographies,urban regeneration
- 作者单位
- Vice Chancellor Fellow in Human Geography, Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Northumbria University , Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK
- 摘要
- Community-oriented temporary uses are a subset of interim use in vacant urban spaces, alongside creative and commercial practices. Its proponents argue that they can inform more incremental and residents-led local urban development. Under urban austerity, however, temporary uses can become vehicles for the short-term and conditional delivery of social benefits. In this paper, I analyse a community-oriented interim use project commissioned by a public development body as part of the London 2012 Olympic Games urban regeneration program. Drawing upon policy analysis and interviews with planners, policymakers, architects and community members, I unravel competing discourses, positions, power dynamics and temporalities, and their relationship to the Games’ legacy. The paper contributes to debates about the normalization of temporary urbanism and pop-up geographies in times of urban austerity, shedding light on the potential long-term implications of the logic of “on-demand communities” in urban development and planning. KEYWORDS: London 2012 Olympic Gamesinterim useson-demand communitiespop-up geographiesurban regeneration Acknowledgments I would like to thank all participants in the Re-valuing temporary urban use project and particularly my collaborator Andreas Lang, with whom I developed this study and discussed previous drafts of this paper. Thank you also to the participants of the workshop ‘Transience and Permanence in Urban Development’, University of Sheffield (2015), to Laura Flierl and to the anonymous reviewers for their detailed feedback. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author. Additional informationFundingThe Re-valuing temporary urban use project was funded by Creativeworks London, AHRC-funded Knowledge Exchange Hub (2014). The writing of this article was further supported by funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 6655919.