Actors, the Actor Network and Their Impact on Public Space Management: Social Network Analysis as a Method

Authors

  • Dahae Lee Technical University of Dortmund

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/rur.683

Keywords:

Public space management, park management, social network analysis, network theory

Abstract

Public space is an essential element of cities as it offers several benefits. Due to its significance, there is much discussion of its design, development and use. Although equally important, the management of public space lacks attention in academia and policy. This is regrettable given concerns about the quality of public space and calls for substantial changes in public space management. Moreover, while multi-actor involvement in public space management has become popular, its impact has been less studied. This paper attempts to fill the research gap by presenting an empirical study on Görlitzer Park in Berlin, Germany. Thereby, it focuses on multi-actor involvement in public space management. Based on the results of social network analysis, the paper provides a valuable insight into the actors involved, the actor network and their impact on public space management. Most importantly, the paper argues that the structure of the actor network matters for managing public space. This suggests that improving the actor network can be a key to enhancing the quality of public space. The paper also discusses how to improve communication between actors to better manage public space.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bezirksamt Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg von Berlin (2013): Integratives Parkmanagement 2011-2013. Görlitzer Park. Berlin.

Bezirksamt Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg von Berlin (2016): Handlungskonzept Görlitzer Park. Berlin.

Borgatti, S.P.; Halgin, D.S. (2011): On network theory. In: Organization Science 22, 5, 1168–1181. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2260993

Borgatti, S.P.; Ofem, B. (2010): Overview: Social network theory and analysis. In: Daly, A.J. (ed.): Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge, 17–29.

CABE – Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (2004): The value of public space. How high quality parks and public spaces create economic, social and environmental value. London.

Carmona, M. (2010): Contemporary public space: critique and classification. Part one: Critique. In: Journal of Urban Design 15, 1, 123–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800903435651

Carmona, M.; De Magalhães, C.; Hammond, L. (2008): Public space: The management dimension. London.

Cellucci, C.; Di Sivo, M. (2021): Post-pandemic public space. The challenges for the promotion of well-being and public health in the post-covid city. In: Charytonowicz, J.; Maciejko, A.; Falcão, C.S. (eds.): Advances in human factors in architecture, sustainable urban planning and infrastructure. Cham, 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80710-8_22

De Magalhães, C.; Carmona, M. (2009). Dimensions and models of contemporary public space management in England. In: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52, 1, 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560802504704

Duivenvoorden, E.; Hartmann, T.; Brinkhuijsen, M.; Hesselmans, T. (2021): Managing public space – A blind spot of urban planning and design. In: Cities 109, 103032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.103032

Gehrke, C. (2021): Polizei-Statistik: Das sind die gefährlichsten Parks in Berlin. In: Berliner Zeitung vom 19. Juli 2021. https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/polizeibericht-berlin/statistik-das-sind-die-gefaehrlichsten-parks-in-berlin-li.171833 (19.01.2023).

Klijn, E.H.; Koppenjan, J.F.M. (2014): Complexity in governance network theory. In: Complexity, Governance and Networks 1, 1, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.7564/14-CGN8

Krupa, M.; Cenek, M.; Powell, J.; Tammell, E.J. (2018): Mapping the stakeholders: Using social network analysis to increase the legitimacy and transparency of participatory scenario planning. In: Society and Natural Resources 31, 1, 136–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1376140

Lee, D. (2022): Public space in transition. Co-production and co-management of privately owned public space in Seoul and Berlin. Bielefeld.

Luttik, J. (2000). The value of trees, water and open spaces as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands. In: Landscape and Urban Planning 48, 3‑4, 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00039‑6

Prell, C.; Hubacek, K.; Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. In: Society and Natural Resources 22, 6, 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920802199202

Punter, J.V. (1990): The privatisation of the public realm. In: Planning Practice and Research 5, 3, 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459008722771

Van Melik, R.G. (2008): Changing public space: The recent redevelopment of Dutch city squares. Utrecht.

Zamanifard, H.; Alizadeh, T.; Bosman, C. (2018). Towards a framework of public space governance. In: Cities 78, 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.02.010

Zetter, R.; Butina Watson, G. (2006). Designing sustainable cities in the developing world. Oxford.

Published

Issue publication date 2023-08-31 (version 2)
Published online first 2023-03-30 (version 1)

Versions

Issue

Section

Research Article

How to Cite

1.
Lee D. Actors, the Actor Network and Their Impact on Public Space Management: Social Network Analysis as a Method. RuR [Internet]. 2023 Aug. 31 [cited 2024 Jun. 17];81(4):373-87. Available from: https://rur.oekom.de/index.php/rur/article/view/683

Share