How Creative Placemaking is Impacting Camden,NJ

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zipporah D. Lockett
Keyword(s):  
Creative Placemaking

Can We Design for Culture? Paradigms and Provocations

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-53
Author(s):  
Anna Marazuela Kim
Keyword(s):  
Built Environment ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Creative Placemaking ◽  
Cultural Infrastructure

While creative placemaking has proved a long-standing paradigm for the arts in city-making strategy, recently there has been a shift towards a cultural infrastructure approach. This article takes critical stock of this paradigm shift, to engage the broader question of whether we can design for culture in the built environment. Conceptualizing creative placemaking within a larger genealogical framework, I argue that this shift might be understood as responsive to some of the limitations and unintended social consequences of the movement: its temporal nature and contribution to cycles of gentrification and displacement.

An Overview of Creative Placemaking as an Enabler for a Sustainable Urban Regeneration

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (13) ◽  
pp. 345
Author(s):  
Nurul Atikah Ramli ◽  
Norsidah Ujang
Keyword(s):  
Urban Design ◽  
Publishing House ◽  
Social Sustainability ◽  
Urban Regeneration ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Significant Function ◽  
Creative Placemaking ◽  
International Publishing ◽  
Urban Places ◽  
Open Access Article

As the rapid growth of cities continues to pose a significant threat to the well-being of people, its adverse effects have moved to the forefront of social sustainability. Urban regeneration has become one of the adaptations in solving a social issue. Alongside these interventions, creative placemaking emerges as an evolving field of practice driving a broader agenda for growth and transformation of cities. This paper reviews the concept of creative placemaking as an approach to urban regeneration and theories extracted from planning and urban design literature. The findings provide an understanding of the significant function of social attributes of place in crafting strategies in the creation of successful creative placemaking.Keywords: Urban regeneration; Creative placemaking; Urban places; Social sustainabilityeISSN: 2398-4287 © 2020. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v5i13.2056

Pop-Up Planning

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon C.C. Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Public Space ◽  
Aesthetic Experience ◽  
Public Spaces ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Cultural Value ◽  
Space Design ◽  
Creative Placemaking ◽  
Tactical Urbanism ◽  
Social Environmental ◽  
Public Space Design

Chapter 6 looks at the world of official urban planning and placemaking, providing different perspectives on its relationship to DIY urbanism. Through the voices of professional planners, the chapter explores their conflicted opinions on DIY approaches: criticizing their informality and emphasizing the importance of regulations and accountability for everything from basic functionality to social equity, yet sympathetic to do-it-yourselfers’ frustrations and often excited to adopt their tactics, harness their energy, and exploit their cultural value. The chapter then describes how some DIY projects have found pathways to formal adoption and inspired popular “tactical urbanism” and “creative placemaking” approaches to public space design. Many such interventions can result in innovative public spaces with social, environmental, and economic benefits. But the reproduction of an aesthetic experience selectively inspired by a hip grassroots trend and combined with “creative class” values can mark the resulting spaces themselves as elite and exclusionary.

Making Up Creative Placemaking

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 278-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Zitcer
Keyword(s):  
Planning Practice ◽  
Creative Placemaking ◽  
Arts And Culture ◽  
Prevalent Form ◽  
The Way

Creative placemaking is an increasingly prevalent form of planning practice that invokes arts and culture as tools for revitalization. Planners, policymakers, funders, and practitioners are engaged in a discursive struggle to define what is meant by creative placemaking and what value it holds for cities. Using frameworks developed by Foucault and Hacking, I analyze the emergence and ongoing contestation of this term, contrasting the way creative placemaking is understood and enacted by actors in Philadelphia with definitions employed by national funders. I argue that practitioner and community voices deserve amplification in the unfinished work of creative placemaking as urban practice.

Determining and representing value in creative placemaking

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Josephine Vaughan ◽  
Kim Maund ◽  
Thayaparan Gajendran ◽  
Justine Lloyd ◽  
Cathy Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Creative Placemaking ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Research Gap ◽  
Quantitative Indicators ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose This study aims to address the research gap about value in the holistic discourse of creative placemaking. It identifies and synthesises the often discounted social and environmental values of creative placemaking along with typically emphasised economic values. Design/methodology/approach This paper builds upon two research phases; first, a review and extraction of creative placemaking value indicators from relevant current urban, cultural and planning literature; and second, the identification of relevant, practice-based, value indicators through interviews with 23 placemaking experts including practitioners, urban planners, developers and place managers from the two largest cities of NSW, Australia; Sydney and Newcastle. Findings This study identifies three broad thematics for valuing creative placemaking along with several sub-categories of qualitative and quantitative indicators. These indicators reveal the holistic value of creative placemaking for its key stakeholders, including expert placemakers, designers, building developers, government and community groups. A key conclusion of the research is the need for tools that grasp the interconnected, and at times conflicting, nature of placemaking’s social, economic and environmental outcomes. Originality/value While a variety of value indicators exist to understand the need for ongoing resourcing of creative placemaking, stakeholders identified the limitations of current approaches to determine, represent and appraise the value of creative placemaking. The indicators of value proposed in this research consolidate and extend current discourse about the value of creative placemaking specifically. The indicators themselves have profound practical implications for how creative placemaking is conceived, executed and evaluated. Theoretically, the study builds on the deep relationships between values and practice in creative placemaking, as well as critiquing narrow forms of evaluation that entrench economic benefits over other outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document