...
首页> 外文期刊>Cities >Is public space privatization always bad for the public? Mixed evidence from the United Kingdom
【24h】

Is public space privatization always bad for the public? Mixed evidence from the United Kingdom

机译:公共空间私有化总是对公众差不多?来自英国的混合证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In the last four decades, public space production has shifted from being predominantly led by the public sector to include a greater variety of private actors, large and small, for-profit and non-profit. This study, set in Liverpool, England, analyses and compares three variations of the privatization of public space production: entirely private development; public private partnership (PPP); and community-led development. The purpose is to determine whether, why, and by how much 'publicness' has declined in the production of urban spaces. While most planning literature has tended to demonize privatization, this study reveals that processes which tend to be collaborative and involve multiple public and private stakeholders have a higher degree of 'publicness' compared to both entirely privately-led and entirely publicly-led processes.
机译:在过去的四十年中,公共场所生产已从公共部门主导的主要领导地位,包括更多各种私人行为者,大而小,营利性和非营利性。本研究,在利物浦,英格兰,分析并比较了公共空间生产私有化的三种变化:完全私立发展;公共私人伙伴关系(PPP);和社区主导的发展。目的是确定为什么,为什么以及在城市空间的生产中有多少“公共效应”。虽然大多数规划文学倾向于妖魔化私有化,但本研究表明,与完全私人主导的和完全公开的流程相比,往往具有更高的公共和私人利益相关者的进程往往具有更高程度的“公共场所”。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号