Search

This paper discusses the opportunities and challenges of public space management (PSM) in the Latin American context by analysing the perspectives of different governance actors. Issues in the PSM literature include ineffective political decisions, prevalence of the private sector, lack of coordination between government institutions, and a need for more effective social participation. While most PSM studies focus on European cities, empirical PSM knowledge in the Latin American context is scarce. To address this gap, this research elucidates the Mexican context by investigating PSM in Mexico City and Puebla. The case study research is based on qualitative document research and interview analysis from four groups of governance actors: government officials, academics, NGOs, and architecture/urban planning firms. We found multiple PSM challenges: uncoordinated efforts in the maintenance of public space, lack of and polarisation of investment, and privatisation of public space. At the intra-governmental level, the research identified a lack of coordination between government institutions, increasing reliance on the private sector for PSM, and limited opportunities for residents to participate in PSM processes. The paper highlights the missing links between existing governance actors involved in PSM and wider residents, in the pursuit of the ambitious role of achieving public space quality., This is a preprint version.

Top-down approaches fail to involve, collaborate with, and consider social actors in the process of planning, design, and maintenance of public spaces (PDMPS). Through this research we address how social participation is included in PDMPS in the Mexican case, by identifying the actors, the level of communication achieved, and their authority and power in the PDMPS process. The paper employs a case study approach, informed by semi-structured interviews. We use a democracy diagram to uncover the diversity of involved actors. We show how government provide little support for social participation to implement participatory processes in PDMPS on a broader scale., This is a preprint version

The objective of this paper is to present an analysis of the current development conditions of public spaces in Mexico through the perspectives of different actors. It will also explain the main issues of the actual planning regulatory framework concerning the inclusion of civil society in the planning and design process of public spaces in Mexico. We take into account the Federal law of human settlements, territorial order, and urban development (Diario Oficial de la Federacion, 2016)presented in November of 2016, which became the first federal legislation in Mexico that defines and relates the terms “urban development”, “public space” and “social participation” (ANPR & WRI México, 2018). This research aims to present a background of the current conditions of planning public spaces in Mexico according to the federal government for the period (2018-2024), non-governmental institutions, and the private sector where each actor has a different perspective of the conditions of how public spaces should be developed., L’objectif de cet article est de présenter une analyse des conditions actuelles de développement des espaces publics au Mexique à travers l’examen des perspectives des différents acteurs. Il déterminera également les principaux problèmes du cadre réglementaire actuel de planification concernant l’inclusion de la société civile dans le processus de planification et de conception des espaces publics au Mexique. Nous prenons en compte la loi fédérale sur les établissements humains, l’ordre territorial et le développement urbain (Federacion, 2016), présentée en novembre 2016 et qui est devenue la première législation fédérale au Mexique qui définit et relie les termes « développement urbain », « espace public » et « participation sociale » (World Resource Institute, 2018). Cette recherche vise à présenter un contexte des conditions réelles de planification des espaces publics au Mexique selon le gouvernement fédéral pour la période (2018-2024), les institutions non gouvernementales et le secteur privé, où chaque acteur a une perspective différente