Summary
Risk has become a prominent feature of our society. Changes in legislation, media coverage, and public attitudes have resulted in greater awareness of risk, and a propensity to litigation arising from personal injury claims. This article examines whether and how changing attitudes to risk in the UK impact on the design of public spaces, reducing the quality of streets, squares, and parks, and draws implications for local government. The research design involved elite stakeholder interviews and case studies, two of which are reported here. The analysis reveals that risk aversion and the compensation culture are powerful forces. However, there is evidence that strong leadership by key actors - especially local government politicians, urban design professionals, risk managers, and the insurance industry - can mitigate its impact. Knowledge of local government's legal responsibilities for public space and case law, together with creative public space maintenance regimes, provide important resources against risk averse design and liability claims.
See the full content of this document
Extract
Risk and the Design of Public Space: Implications for Local Governments1
INTRODUCTION
Risk has become a prominent feature of our society (Beck 1992) although human societies have always lived with risk (Rose 2000). Changes in legislation, media coverage, and public attitudes have produced an environment in which there is now much greater awareness of risk, and one in which litigation arising from personal injury claims has stimulated a compensation culture. As a result, both public and business organizations now give greater priority to risk management. The design of public space is one of many activities affected by perceptions of risk. In this article, we explore whether and how changing attitudes to risk impact on the quality of public space, including the design of streets, squares, and parks. We examine whether risk aversion is restricting innovation by creating dull and standardised places, and assess the extent to which risk can be managed so that stimulating and enjoyable urban environments can be produced.This question has particular significance for local governments because of their responsibilities for regulating urban development and shaping the quality of public spaces. The urban planning, transportation, licensing, policing, and parks functions of local governments, as well as their own development projects, all help shape the cityscape. Squares, streets, and parks offer public spaces - areas that are open to a range of activities by citizens. These include informal activities such as walking, play with children, sports pursuits, and sightseeing. They also provide a framework for more formalised activities, including street vending and markets, and organised events such as festivals, open-air concerts, and parades. Public spaces, however, are also places whose use changes over a twenty-four hour period. At certain times, citizens may avoid them for fear of crime. Local government has a responsibility to understand the risks associated with public spaces in order to meet the needs of citizens for security, and to avoid undue expenditure arising from litigation where accidents or injuries have occurred.In this article, we report research undertaken in the UK on the impact of risk aversion on public space design, and draw out the implications for local governments. The authors were contracted to undertake the study by the UK's Commission on Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), an independent body whose role is to advise local and national government, developers, architects, and urban designers. The next sec...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
