URBAN ACTIVISM AND TACTICAL URBANISM: THE CASE OF ZHYTOMYR IN THE CONTEXT OF INTEGRATED CITY DEVELOPMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-7154/2024.92.14-25Keywords:
city, integrated development, urban activism, tactical urbanism, semantic differential, ZhytomyrAbstract
This article examines urban activism and tactical urbanism as key elements of participatory urban planning within the framework of integrated urban development. Using the case of Zhytomyr, the study highlights the positive influence of urban activism on decision-making and urban planning processes, underscoring the critical role of tactical urbanism in enhancing residents’ quality of life and preserving the city’s historical heritage. The analysis of urban activism was carried out through media screening to track information flows and identify spatial expressions of urban activism. The evaluation of urban development stakeholders by Zhytomyr residents, based on their perception, potential, and prospects, was conducted using the semantic differential method. The variability and consistency of respondents’ answers were analyzed using the box-and-whisker plot method to identify data distribution patterns, including anomalous and extreme values. The findings reveal that urban activism in Zhytomyr manifests across various scales and organizational forms. However, it remains predominantly localized and small-scale, with limited evidence of significant protest-oriented activities. Respondents identified non-governmental organizations and urban activists as having the highest potential and future prospects in urban development, while local authorities received the lowest ratings. Mapping analysis of Zhytomyr’s “Center” zone identified and visualized challenges related to the use of and interaction with public spaces. Within the scope of urban activism, phased tactical urbanism measures were proposed for the city’s central area, including workshops on public space prototyping, parklet installations, and the creation of interactive engagement spaces. These initiatives are intended to foster a more comfortable and appealing urban environment, providing a platform for testing innovative solutions and actively engaging residents in the city-making process.
First received: 4 November 2024
Accepted: 27 December 2024
Published: 31 December 2024
Competing Interests
Nataliia PROVOTAR:
The author is the editor, therefore, they did not participate in the review and decision-making process regarding the publication of this article.
References
Agarin, T. (2016). Introduction to the special issue: Citizens’ participation in post-communist Europe. Communist and Post-communist Studies, 49(3), 201-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2016.06.008.
Appadurai, A. (2002). Deep democracy: urban governmentality and the horizon of politics. Public Culture, 14(1), 21-47. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-14-1-21.
Beauregard, R. A. (1986). Urban form and the redevelopment of central business districts. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 3(3), 183-198.
Becker, S., Naumann, M., & Moss, T. (2017). Between coproduction and commons: Understanding initiatives to reclaim urban energy provision in Berlin and Hamburg. Urban Research & Practice, 10(1), 63-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2016.1156735.
Bitušíková, A. (2015). Urban activism in Central and Eastern Europe: A theoretical framework. Slovak Ethnology, 4, 326-338.
Bobrova, A., & Verbytsky, I. (2018). What is urban planning? A brief history and six definitions. [in Ukrainian]. [Боброва, А., & Вербицький, І. (2018). Що таке урбаністика? Коротка історія і шість визначень.]. URL: https://mistosite.org.ua/articles/shcho-take-urbanistyka-korotka-istoriia-i-shist-vyznachen.
Císař, O. (2013). A typology of extra-parliamentary political activism in post-communist settings: The case of the Czech Republic. In K. Jacobsson, S. Saxonberg (eds.), Beyond NGO-ization. The Development of Social Movements in Central and Eastern Europe (pp. 139-167). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Dlamini, B., & Zogli, L. (2021). Assessing the integrated development plan as a performance management system in a municipality. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 25(1), 1-21.
Freeman, L. (2009). Neighbourhood diversity, metropolitan segregation and gentrification: What are the links in the US? Urban Studies, 46(10), 2079-2101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009339426.
Jacobsson, K., & Saxonberg, S. (2013). Beyond NGO-ization. The Development of Social Movements in Central and Eastern Europe. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Jacobsson, K., & Saxonberg, S. (2014). Social Movements in Post-Communist Europe and Russia.
Lydon, M., & Garcia A. (2015). Tactical Urbanism: Short-term Action for Long-term Change. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Lefebvre, H. (1969). Right to the City. URL: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/henri-lefebvre-right-to-the-city
Loktionova, D. (2019). Tactical urbanism in the context of the development of urban practices in Ukraine. Grani, 22(1), 42-49. [in Ukrainian]. [Локтіонова, Д. (2019). Тактичний урбанізм у контексті розвитку урбаністичних практик в Україні. Грані, 22(1), 42-49]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15421/17196.
Lorrain, D., & Stoker, G. (1997). The Privatisation of Urban Services in Europe. London: Routledge.
Malchykova, D. (2021). Participatory budgeting practices and civic activism for urban space renovation: the case of Kherson. Ekonomichna ta Sotsialna Geografiya / Економічна та соціальна географія, 85, 38-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-7154/2021.85.38-48.
Mezentsev, K., Neugebauer, C., & Mezentseva, N. (2017). Civil Society. In I. Brade, C.S. Neugebauer (eds.), Urban Eurasia. Cities in Transformation (pp. 275-282). Berlin: DOM publishers.
Mezentsev, K., Provotar, N., & Palchuk, M. (2020). Public spaces through the lens of participatory urban planning – the case of Kyiv. Ukrainian Geographical Journal, 2(110), 30-37. [in Ukrainian]. [Мезенцев, К. В, Провотар, Н. І., Пальчук, М. В. (2020). Публічні простори через призму партисипативного міського планування – приклад Києва. Український географічний журнал, 2(110), 30-37]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2020.02.030
Provotar, N., & Ohiichuk, N. (2021). Public spaces of Zhytomyr: a place that encourages residents to go out to the city. Ekonomichna ta Sotsialna Geografiya, 86, 40-52. [in Ukrainian]. [Провотар Н., Огійчук Н. (2021). Публічні простори Житомира: місця, які спонукають мешканців виходити в місто. Економічна та соціальна географія, 86, 40-52]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-7154/2021.86.40-52.
Smith, N. (2008). Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking Spatial Justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Subtelo, O. (2020). Post-industrial transformations of old-industrial districts of Kharkiv. Ekonomichna ta Sotsialna Geografiya, 83, 53-62. [in Ukrainian]. [Суптело, О. (2020). Постіндустріальні трансформації старопромислових районів міста Харкова. Економічна та соціальна географія, 83, 53-62]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-7154/2020.83.53-62.
The concept of Untegrated development of Zhytomyr until 2030 (2019). [In Ukrainian]. [Концепція інтегрованого розвитку Житомира до 2030 року. 2019. 258 с.].
The Leipzig Charter: Basis for Integrated Urban Development. URL: https://www.nationale-stadtentwicklungspolitik.de/NSPWeb/EN/Initiative/Leipzig-Charter/leipzig-charter_node.html.
The new Leipzig charter. The transformative power of cities for the common good. URL: http://surl.li/tlebc.
Yip, N. M., López, M. A. & Sun, X. (2019). Contested Cities and Urban Activism.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nataliia PROVOTAR, Nadiia OHIICHUK
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article and any related published material are available under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0). Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to publish the article.
