Cited by 73Urban Agriculture and SustainabilityUrban Planning and GovernanceUrban Planning and Landscape Design

Urban Gardening and Green Space Governance: Towards New Collaborative Planning Practices

Open access
Nikolaidou, Sofia, Klöti, Tanja, Tappert, Simone, Drilling, Matthias·2016·Urban Planning

Abstract

In the context of urban densification and central urban areas’ lack of open spaces, new forms of small-scale urban gardening practices have emerged. These gardening practices respond to urban pressures and open new modes of green space governance, presenting alternative and multifunctional ways to manage and revitalise cities. Focusing on the case of Geneva, the article unfolds two levels of discussion. On the one hand—and with reference to the theorist Habermas—it examines how multiple actors with different interests interplay and cooperate with each other in order to negotiate over open space, while discussing implications for local politics and planning. On the other hand, it describes how these negotiations result in new, innovative, and hybrid forms of public green space. The main findings indicate emerging forms of collaboration, partnerships, and governance patterns that involve public and private sectors and increase participation by civil society actors. Cooperation amongst several interested groups and the collective re-invention of public urban spaces increase these spaces’ accessibility for multiple users and actors, as well as present possibilities for alternative and diversified uses and activities. This might underline the hypothesis that future cities will be governed in less formalised ways, and that urban forms will be created through spontaneous, temporary, mobile, and adaptive negotiation processes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17645/up.v1i1.520

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To the authors' knowledge, this kind of management is unknown for riparian management in the urban context, but it is known from urban participative gardening, which could help transform rules for usage and develop social structures in riparian zones.

    “To our knowledge, this kind of management is unknown for riparian management in the urban context, but it is known from urban participative gardening [206], which could help to transform rules for usage and to develop social structures in riparian zones.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Allmendinger, P. (2009). Planning theory (2nd ed.). Houndsmill and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  2. Hagerman, C. (2007). Shaping neighbourhoods and na- ture: Urban political ecologies of urban waterfront transformations in Portland, Oregon. Cities, 24(4), 285-297.
  3. Kulke, E., Brammer, M., Otto, B., Baer, D., Weiß, J., & Za- kirova, B. (2011). Urban economy. In W. Endlicher, P. Hostert, I. Kowarik, E. Kulke, J. Lossau, J. Marzlff, E. Van der merr . . . G. Wessolek (Eds.), Perspectives in urban ecology. Studies of ecosystems and interaction between humans and nature in the metropolis of Berlin (pp. 196-230). London: Springer.
  4. McCann, E. J. (2001). Collaborative visioning of urban planning as therapy? The politics of public-private policy making. Professional Geographer, 53(2), 207- 218.
  5. Shannon, M. A. (1999). Moving from the limits and prob- lems of rational planning toward a collaborative and participatory planning approach. In P. Glück, G. Oes- ten, H. Schanz, & K. R. Volz (Eds.), EFI Proceedings 30: Formulation and implementation of national forest programmes (pp. 139-151). Finland: European Forest Institute.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nikolaidou, S., Klöti, T., Tappert, S., & Drilling, M.
Affiliations
  • Panteion University (GR)
  • FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (CH)
Venue
Urban Planning
Publisher
Cogitatio
Published
2016-02-29
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
5-19
ISSN
2183-7635 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2291781398
Cited by
73
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Urban Planning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Northwestern University
  • Staatssekretariat für Bildung, Forschung und Innovation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Planning and Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Planning and Landscape Design
Keywords
urban gardening, collaborative planning, urban densification, public green spaces, Jürgen Habermas, civil society participation, public-private partnerships, urban regeneration, Geneva, participatory planning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review