This research aims to explore the transformative specifications of public space in unplanned settlements. The neglected state of some urban specification, par- ticularly urban spaces is one of the current problems in cities undergoing rapid urbanization. Public spaces in unplanned settlements manifest the resultant of the socio-economic condition in a specific context. The research employed the qualitative method and techniques such as unobtrusive observation, photogra- phy, mapping, and graphical analysis to collect, analyze, and interpret the data. The findings reveal a dynamic system of reproduction of the public spaces based on the mass-space proportions and private-public relationships with temporary, portable, and assembled components with low quality in the area. In this regard, the transformative character of the public spaces could categorize in four types including de-form, less-form, soft-form, and anti-form spaces. The result of the research reveals that although there is a process of changing the private spaces to semi-private, paths and open spaces are more vulnerable under the pressure of users to privatize the spaces. The results of this research could help the policymak- ers and designers for real insight into the public spaces in unplanned settlements. "> [PDF] The transformative characteristics of public spaces in unplanned settlements | [PDF] The transformative characteristics of public spaces in unplanned settlements This research aims to explore the transformative specifications of public space in unplanned settlements. The neglected state of some urban specification, par- ticularly urban spaces is one of the current problems in cities undergoing rapid urbanization. Public spaces in unplanned settlements manifest the resultant of the socio-economic condition in a specific context. The research employed the qualitative method and techniques such as unobtrusive observation, photogra- phy, mapping, and graphical analysis to collect, analyze, and interpret the data. The findings reveal a dynamic system of reproduction of the public spaces based on the mass-space proportions and private-public relationships with temporary, portable, and assembled components with low quality in the area. In this regard, the transformative character of the public spaces could categorize in four types including de-form, less-form, soft-form, and anti-form spaces. The result of the research reveals that although there is a process of changing the private spaces to semi-private, paths and open spaces are more vulnerable under the pressure of users to privatize the spaces. The results of this research could help the policymak- ers and designers for real insight into the public spaces in unplanned settlements. ">

The transformative characteristics of public spaces in unplanned settlements

The transformative characteristics of public spaces in unplanned settlements

This research aims to explore the transformative specifications of public space in unplanned settlements. The neglected state of some urban specification, par- ticularly urban spaces is one of the current problems in cities undergoing rapid urbanization. Public spaces in unplanned settlements manifest the resultant of the socio-economic condition in a specific context. The research employed the qualitative method and techniques such as unobtrusive observation, photogra- phy, mapping, and graphical analysis to collect, analyze, and interpret the data. The findings reveal a dynamic system of reproduction of the public spaces based on the mass-space proportions and private-public relationships with temporary, portable, and assembled components with low quality in the area. In this regard, the transformative character of the public spaces could categorize in four types including de-form, less-form, soft-form, and anti-form spaces. The result of the research reveals that although there is a process of changing the private spaces to semi-private, paths and open spaces are more vulnerable under the pressure of users to privatize the spaces. The results of this research could help the policymak- ers and designers for real insight into the public spaces in unplanned settlements.

___

  • lSayyad, N. (2004). Urban infor- mality as a new way of life. In A. Roy, & N. AlSayyad (Eds.), Urban informality: Transnational perspectives from the Mid- dle East, Latin America, and South Asia (pp. 7-30). New York: Lexington Books.
  • Avni, N., & Yiftachel, O. (2014). The new divided city? Planning and ‘gray space’ between global north-west and south-east. In S. Parnell , & S. Oldfield (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on cities of the global south (pp. 487-505). New York: Routledge.
  • Bayat, A. (2004). Globalization and the politics of the informal’s in the global south. In A. Roy, & N. AlSayyad (Eds.), Urban informality: Transnational perspectives from the Middle East, Latin America, and South Asia (pp. 79-102). New York: Lexington Books.
  • Bonnes, M., & Bonaiuto, M. (2002). Environmental psychology: From spa- tial-physical environment to sustain- able development. In R. B. Bechtle, & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of en- vironment psychology (pp. 28-54). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Bryceson, D. F. (2014). Re-evaluating the influence of urban agglomeration in sub-saharan Africa: population density, technological innovation and produc- tivity. In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield, The Routledge handbook on cities of the glob- al south (pp. 75-85). London: Routledge.
  • Buckley, R., & Kallergis, A. (2014). Does African urban policy provide a platform for sustained economic growth? In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield, The Routledge handbook on cities of the global south (pp. 173-190). London: Routledge.
  • Burton, E., & Mitchell, L. (2006). In- clusive urban design: Streets for life. Lon- don: Architectural Press.
  • Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2003). Public places- urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. London: Architectural Press.
  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Construct- ing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: SAGE Publications.
  • Deming, E. M., & Swaffield, S. (2011). Landscape architecture research: Inquiry, strategy, design. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Dringelis, L., Ramanauskas, E., Po- vilaitienė, I., & Mačiukėnaitė, J. (2015). Exploration and expectation of the spa- tial structure of cities, towns, townships, and villages as a significant formant of their identity. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 39(1), 79-100.
  • Georgoula, O., Stamnas, A., Patias, P., Georgiadis, C., & Fragkoulidou, V. (2013). Historical coastal urban land- scapes digital documentation and temporal study with 2D/3D modeling functionality: The case of Thessaloni- ki, Greece. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 14(5), 396-402.
  • Gilbert, A. (2004). Love in the time of enhanced capital flows reflections on the links between liberalization and informality. In A. Roy, & N. AlSayyad (Eds.), Urban informality: Transnational perspectives from the Middle East, Latin America, and South Asia (pp. 33-66). New York: Lexington Books.
  • Goulding, C. (1999, June). Grounded theory: Some reflections on paradigm, procedures and misconceptions. Work- ing Paper Series, WP006(99).
  • Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2002). Archi- tectural research methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons INC.
  • Habermas, J. (1991). The structur- al transformation of the public sphere (translated by Thomas Burger ed.). Massachusetts: MIT Press paperback edition.
  • Huchzermeyer, M. (2011). Cities with ‘slums’: From slum eradication to a right to the city in Africa. Cape Town: Univer- sity of Cape Town Press.
  • Jones, B. G. (2009). Cities without slums’? Global architectures of power and the African city. African perspectives 2009. The African inner city (pp. i-xiii). Pretoria: University of Pretoria.
  • Katoppo, M. L., & Sudradjat, I. (2015). Combining participatory action research (PAR) and design thinking (DT) as an alternative research method in architecture. Procedia - Social and Be- havioral Sciences, 184,, 118 – 125.
  • Khan, F., & Pieterse, E. (2004). The homeless people’s alliance: Purposive cre- ation and ambiguated realities. the centre for civil society, School of Development Studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal. Durban: School of development studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal. Retrieved from http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs/
  • Lang, J. (2005). Urban design: A ty- pology of procedures and products. Lon- don: Architectural Press.
  • Laseau, P. (2001). Graphical thinking for architecture and designers. Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Madanipour, A. (1996). Design of ur- ban space: An inquiry into a socio-spa- tial process. London, UK: John Wiley & Sons Publisher.
  • Miller, G., Dingwall, R., & Morphy, E. (2004). Using qualitative data and analysis. In D. Silverman, Qualitative re- search: Theory, method, and practice (pp. 325-341). London: Sage Publications.
  • Mininfra. (2016). Development of urban infrastructure in Agatare area of Nyarugenge district in the city of Kigali. Kigali, Rwanda: Ministry of infrastruc- ture.
  • Mininfra. (2015). National informal settlement upgrading strategy. Kigali, Rwanda: Ministry of infrastructure.
  • Mininfra. (2015). Rwanda habitat III. Kigali, Rwanda : Ministry of infrastruc- ture.
  • Miraftab, F. (2007). Governing post apartheid spatiality: Implementing city improvement districts in Cape Town. Antipode: Radical Journal of Geogra- phy, 39(4), 602-626. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/jour- nal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291467-8330
  • Moughtin, C. (2003). Urban design: Street and square. London: Routledge.
  • Moughtin, C., Cuesta, R., Sarris, C., & Signoretta, P. (1999). Urban design: Methods and techniques. Oxford: Archi- tectural Press.
  • Mugerauer, R. (1995). Interpreting environments: Tradition, deconstruction, hermeneutics. Texas: University of Tex- as.
  • Mugerauer, R. (2014). Interpreting nature: The emerging field of environ- mental hermeneutics. Robert: Fordham University Press.
  • Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches,. London: Pearson Educa- tion, Ink, Fifth Edition.
  • Oldfield, S. (2014). Negotiating soci- ety and identity in urban spaces in the south. In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield, The Routledge handbook on cities of the glob- al south (pp. 339-340). London: Rout- ledge.
  • Oliver, P. (2006). Build to meet need: Cultural issue in vernacular architecture. New York: Architectural Press.
  • Oz, a. c. (2007). Conceptual master plan of Kigali city. Kigali: City of Kigali.
  • Parnell, S., Pieterse, E., & Watson, V. (2009). Planning for cities in the global South: an African research agenda for sustainable human settlements. Progress in Planning, 72, 195–250.
  • Pieterse, E. (2004). Untangling ‘in- tegration’ in urban development policy debates. Urban Forum, 15(1), 1-25.
  • Pieterse, e. (2008). city futures, con- fronting the crisis of urban development. Lansdowne, South Africa: UCT Press.
  • ieterse, E. (2010). Cityness and Afri- can urban development. Urban Forum, 21(3), 205-219. doi:10.1007/s12132- 010-9092-7
  • Pieterse, E. (2013). Rethinking the purpose and modalities of community development in South African cities. Active citizenship matters, perspectives from civil society on local governance in South Africa (pp. 19-33). Cape Town: GGLN (Good Governance Learning Network) .
  • Rapid Planning. (2017). The entry project. Kigali, Rwanda: Rapid Planning.
  • Rapoport, A. (1969). House form and culture. New York: Prentice Hall.
  • Regis, R. (2003). Sketchbook: piazza di spagna, Rome. In D. Watson, A. Plat- tus, & R. Shibley, Time-saver standards for urban design (pp. 441-448). New York: Mc Grow Hill.
  • Robinson, J. (2014). New geographies of theorizing the urban: putting com- parison to work for global urban stud- ies. In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on cities of the global south (pp. 57-70). London: Rout- ledge.
  • Roy, A. (2004). Transnational tres- passing’s the geopolitics of urban in- formality. In A. Roy, & N. AlSayyad (Eds.), Urban informality: Transnational perspectives from the Middle East, Latin America, and South Asia (pp. 289-318). New York: Lexington Books.
  • Roy, A. (2005). Urban informality, toward an epistemology of planning. Journal of the American Planning Asso- ciation, 71(2), 147-158.
  • Roy, A. (2014). Toward a post-co- lonial urban theory. In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield (Eds.), The Routledge handbook on cities the global south (pp. 9-20). Lon- don: Routledge.
  • Schmid, C. (2008). Henri Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space: to- wards a three-dimensional dialectic. In K. Goonewardena, S. Kipfer, R. Mil- grom, & C. Schmid (Eds.), Space, differ- ence, everyday life: Reading Henri Lefe- bvre (pp. 27-45). New York: Routledge.
  • Sebina, G. K., & Koma, O. (2015). Right to the city and public spaces: In- ner city revitalization in South African’s capital city. In Right to the city for a safe and just world: The Brics city (pp. 138- 161). Rio de Janeiro: Oxfam or the Brics Policy Center.
  • Sideris , L. A., & Banerjee, T. (2007). Postmodern urban form. In M. C. Tiesdell, Urban design reader (pp. 43- 51). New York: Architectural Press.
  • Simone , A., & Fauzan, A. U. (2013). On the way to being middle class: The practices of emergence in Jakarta, City: analysis of urban trends, culture, theo- ry, policy, action. City, 17(3), 279-298. doi:10.1080/13604813.2013.795331
  • Simone, A. (2003). For the city yet to come: Remaking urban life in Africa. Mapping Africa (pp. 1-17). Barcelona: Centre of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona. Retrieved from www.urban. cccb.org
  • Simone, A. (2004). People as infra- structure: Intersecting fragments in Johannesburg. Public Culture, 16(3), 407–429.
  • Simone, A. (2008). Some reflections on making popular culture in urban Africa. African Studies Review, 51(3), 75–89.
  • Simone, A. (2010). Social infrastruc- tures of city life in contemporary Afri- ca. Discussion Paper , 51, 4-33.
  • Simone, A. (2014). The missing peo- ple: reflections on an urban majority in cities of the south. In S. Parnell, & S. Oldfield, The Routledge handbook on cities of the global south (pp. 322-336). London: Routledge.
  • Simone, A. (2015). The urban poor and their ambivalent excep- tionalities some notes from Jakar- ta. Current Anthropology, 56, 15-23. doi:10.1086/682283
  • Sperlregen, P. D. (2003). Making as visual survey. In D. Watson, A. Plattus, & R. Shibley, Time-saver standards for urban design (pp. 431-440). New York: Mc Grow Hill.
  • Sticzay , N., & Koch, L. (2015). Slum upgrading . New York: United Nations.
  • Tafahomi, R., & Nadi, R. (2016). Dehistoricisation the urban landscape through transition of the enclosure ratio in urban fabric of Gonabad city in Iran. J Archit Eng Tech, Volume 5(Issue 2), 1-6. doi:10.4172/2168- 9717.1000162
  • Tafahomi, R., & Nadi, R. (2020). In- sight into the missing aspects of thera- peutic landscape in psychological cen- ters in Kigali, Rwanda. Cities & Health, Online, 1-13. doi:10.1080/23748834.20 20.1774035
  • UNDESA. (2014). World urban- ization prospects. New York: Unit- ed Nations. Retrieved from http:// esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Highlights/ WUP2014-Highlights.pdf
  • UNDP. (2008). Upgrading of slum zones. Retrieved from UNDP in Rwan- da : www.rwanda.undp.org
  • UN-Habitat . (2003a). Global report on human settlements: The challenge of slums. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.
  • UN-Habitat. (2012). State of the world’s cities report 2012/2013: Prosper- ity of cities. Nairobi, Kenya: Malta by Progress Press Ltd.
  • UN-Habitat. (2014). Housing & slum upgrading: Urban themes. UN-Habitat. Retrieved June 1, 2016, from http:// unhabitat.org/urbanthemes/hous- ing-slum-upgrading/.
  • UNODC, & UN-Habitat. (2011). In- troductory handbook on policing urban space: Criminal justics handbook series. New York : UN.
  • Woolley, H. (2003). Urban open spac- es. New York : Taylor & Francis.