The purpose of this dissertation is to gain an understanding of the subjective perceptions and methods of framing used by various entities to understand the concept of the contemporary publicness of the publicly open space. The main research methods of this dissertation include 1) a systematic literature review and 2) the Q-methodology, which is a useful method of illuminating cognitive characteristics according to the internal criteria of individuals. By doing so, this study emphasizes the importance of everyday discourse and perceptions of publicness and public spaces.
First, the literature review reveals that various statutes or actions have related to the realization of contemporary spatial publicness across contexts. Drawing a line between "continuous" and "new" characteristics of contemporary spatial publicness proves abstruse. To distinguish the two, this study will delineate the predominant positions on new characteristics of contemporary spatial publicness, derived from three distinct types of conditions: (1) prerequisite conditions, (2) subjective conditions, and (3) practical conditions.
Findings from the systematic literature review of 49 published articles show that types of spatial publicness are divided into three categories: (1) subjective publicness, regarding who ultimately takes responsibility for publicness; (2) procedural publicness, in terms of whether democratic procedures are being followed; and (3) contextual publicness, regarding whether publicness conforms to social values. Since the type of spatial publicness can vary depending on how it is interpreted, these key dimensions of publicness adequately provide answers to discursive questions about what constitutes spatial publicness. This study also systematically categorizes the attributes of contemporary spatial publicness expressed in the academic literature. Measured items of spatial publicness stem from three key dimensions, each containing three elements: (1) procedure (openness, communication, and democracy); (2) contents (commonality, distribution, and sustainability); and (3) features (accessibility, quality, and specificity).
Lastly, as a result of the Q-analysis, the perceptions of the general public toward the concepts of spatial publicness are divided into five types. Factor A is the open condition-oriented group, Factor B is the critical communication-oriented group, Factor C is the distribution value-oriented group, Factor D is the diversity recognition-oriented group, and Factor E is the instrumental discussion-oriented group. This study is expected to provide a foundation for publicness research to promote the realization of socially oriented values in the future. Another Q-set of 40 images showing analysis of publicly open spaces illustrates that three opinion groups have been classified: an experience-based group (Factor AA), a green-preferring group (Factor BB), and a convivial atmosphere-based group (Factor CC).
This research provides helpful insights for the planning of publicly open spaces as well as the design and public engagement process, along with baseline data that can be used to enhance policymakers' and design professionals' understanding of people's attitudes toward spatial publicness and preferences for different publicly open spatial types. / Doctor of Philosophy / We live in an era where private and public spaces are hard to distinguish. Private spaces, such as a shopping mall, have been lauded as a parody and a caricature of an authentic public space. Locations without authentic public places, such as suburbs or rural areas, shopping malls are one of the few places that are spatially substituted as, and utilized as, public spaces.
This research centralizes spatial publicness by congealing various insights from disciplinary fields with acknowledgement that an absolute, universal definition is nearly impossible to achieve. While utilizing publicness in a single register of meaning reduces its multidimensional nature, it also allows for a unified explanation by isolating a particularly relevant aspect to publicness in a given space. In this way, utilizing publicness opens up the potential to clearly conceptualize public spaces over obscure and esoteric definitions that limit practical applicability.
This dissertation poses a broad question, "what makes a public space public?" In other words, it asks "how can conceptualize and measure the publicness of publicly open spaces?".
Appropriations considered in relation to the micro-practices of place indicate that the spatial publicness is planned, designed, practiced, and contested in different stages and scales, and that the consequences of these relationships are interwoven and observed in space. Accordingly, the spatial publicness is contingent and in constant flux. Users practicing publicness are affected not only by larger policies that grant them physical and social accessibility, but also by spatial experiences such as unconscious togetherness or desired places. As appropriations reveal, spatial publicness is not a product of or compatible with planning, designing, or using space, nor is it only an effect of each stage of the production process, such as rules, forms, or behaviors. Rather, contemporary spatial publicness is affected by the interstices between these processes. Therefore, the spatial publicness of each case can be described in terms of different emergent meanings based on the levels and types of appropriations.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:VTETD/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/111267 |
| Date | 15 July 2022 |
| Creators | Han, Soyoung |
| Contributors | Architecture, Kim, Mintai, Bohannon, C. L., Clements, Terry Lynn, Edge, Kay F., Ansell, Aaron |
| Publisher | Virginia Tech |
| Source Sets | Virginia Tech Theses and Dissertation |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Dissertation |
| Format | ETD, application/pdf, application/pdf, application/pdf, application/pdf |
| Rights | In Copyright, http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
Page generated in 0.003 seconds