Governance of temporary use

Agnes Matoga

doi:10.1680/jurdp.18.00052

Abstract

Temporary urbanism has recently gained great scholarly attention and has made its way into planning practice within the last couple of years. This paper analyses interim use as a form of temporary urbanism and discusses the governance structures of this practice in the cities of Vienna and Leipzig. It addresses actor involvement, forms of relations as well as means and motivations of different stakeholders. Additionally, the recent dynamic around temporality as urban strategy is being explored through document analysis. The paper argues that historic events are crucial for establishing collaborative governance structures and shows how overregulation and intense administration can lead to an instrumentalisation of bottom-up, creative and informal actions. Also the recent interest of private developers in informal temporary projects is addressed and critically reflected. The paper concludes with policy recommendations concerning urban informalities and their integration into urban development processes.

Highlights

Pop-up shops, street festivals, food trucks, flash mobs, street protests, temporary homes for refugees – temporary urbanism appears in various forms and seems to be a common, deliberate or unplanned practice in cities worldwide
A total of 27 documents published by the respective municipality, social partners and intermediary institutions have been analysed to help understand the framework as well as the public discourse with regard to interim use in Vienna and Leipzig
This paper discusses different approaches to temporary use resulting in diverse urban governance structures

Summary

Introduction

Pop-up shops, street festivals, food trucks, flash mobs, street protests, temporary homes for refugees – temporary urbanism appears in various forms and seems to be a common, deliberate or unplanned practice in cities worldwide. With a focus on the aestheticisation of social life, they argue that bottom-up initiatives are ‘much too often swallowed up on a strategic level by financial interests and traditional master planning’ (Fabian and Samson, 2016) and highlight the need for planners to learn from such DIY practices and urban activism in different ways All, they conclude with a fundamental demand for DIY activism to be integrated as an equal partner in planning processes. A comparative approach is being applied to highlight different governance structures within temporary projects It provides insight into alternative approaches to local, creative, bottom-up and informal urban development tactics by critically examining means and motivations of the actors involved. Temporary uses have been applied in all mentioned contexts

Temporary use of vacant spaces: theory and practice

The Viennese model of ‘guided temporary use’

Leipzig’s ‘guarded houses’ model in transition

Discussion: varying governance structures

Findings

Concluding remarks