By Rosaria Battista and Milagros Hurtig
Why Critical Reflection Matters in Placemaking
As placemakers, we aim to address growing urban complexities through people-centred solutions. Our goal is to shape vibrant, inclusive spaces for the greater good. But even with the best intentions, placemaking can unintentionally lead to exclusion.
In this blogpost, we take a critical look at what happens when participatory efforts are not truly inclusive, and how we can do better.
The Dark Side of Regenerative Planning
Gentrification, Commercialisation, and Privatisation
When we think of public space, the word public makes us assume that the space is for all—but is it really? Urban policies and regenerative planning can nonetheless lead to exclusion. Consider this: your perception of safety as a cis-white man is likely very different from that of a POC trans woman’s perspective when walking in the exact same street or sitting in the exact same square.
Exclusion from public space occurs because planning processes can fail to actively include the voices of those who are most marginalised. As we engage in regenerative planning, we must take a step back and consider how we can carefully design spaces that genuinely account for the needs and perspectives of diverse communities, particularly those who have historically been excluded.
Gentrification: Who Gets to Stay?
Beautified, regenerated areas often attract higher-income residents and businesses. As property values rise, original communities, those who were meant to benefit from improvements, are pushed out.
“What starts as a project to improve an area’s quality of life can inadvertently lead to the exclusion of marginalised groups.”
— Milagros Hurtig, Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook, 2025
There’s no denying that improving a neglected space can enhance both mental and physical well-being. A more beautiful environment can foster a sense of pride and connection. However, we must also acknowledge that urban upgrades can lead to these negative effects.
But beautification itself isn’t the issue; are the adverse effects within it and the intentions behind it. A critical look caring on the inclusion of communities that truly matter raises questions to our community: Who are we regenerating for? What are we hoping to achieve, and most importantly, how and who are we involving? When do they get involved? Are they from the start part of the conversation? To create truly inclusive urban spaces, it’s essential to actively engage the people who already live in these areas, making sure developments meet their needs and preserve the social connections that make the neighbourhoods unique (Clerval, 2021).
Just because a project labels itself as participatory doesn’t mean it’s truly inclusive. Regeneration efforts may use buzzwords like “community led”, but in reality, they might not give local people any real power in the process. When participation is more about appearances than actual influence, it can push people out instead of empowering them. And that’s how even the best intentioned projects can end up leaving behind the very communities they were meant to help (Ferilli, Sacco, 2016).
Commercialisation: From Gathering Spaces to Consumption Zones
When revitalisation is driven by economic goals, public spaces begin to shift from places meant for gathering to places designed for spending. Community value gets replaced by market value, and people who just want to linger, connect, or play start to feel like they’re in the way..
“These spaces, once intended for communal gathering and interaction, become more focused on serving tourists and high-end consumers, alienating local residents and eroding the sense of community.”
— Milagros Hurtig, Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook, 2025
Think about this: have you ever found yourself on a beautiful public waterfront, lined with cafés and restaurants, but with nowhere else to sit? And suddenly, you feel like you have to buy a coffee just to justify being there? That subtle pressure to consume turns even the most inviting spaces into quiet exclusion zones for anyone who can’t, or simply doesn’t want to, spend money just to ‘hang out’.
What starts as an effort to revitalise often ends up replacing informal gathering spots with polished businesses, subtly redefining who belongs. Hanging out becomes transactional. If you’re not spending, you’re loitering. If you’re a kid kicking a ball around, you’re disturbing the paying customers.
Meanwhile, some forward-thinking designers in Vienna are pushing back against this in creative ways. Social Design students from the University of Applied Arts Vienna, Irini Schwab and Jonathan Panhofer, imagined two possible futures for the city’s Donaukanal through a project called “Donaukanal Zukunftsfit!”. One future envisions the space as equitable and accessible, while the other imagines it as fully privatised and commercialised. Using AI-generated visuals styled to match the city’s official branding, they presented these contrasting scenarios on-site to spark conversation with local residents and passersby (Panhofer & Schwab, 2025).
This spirit of reclaiming public space from commercial pressures is echoed in grassroots initiatives along the same waterway. A great example is the SCHWIMM PARADE (SWIM PARADE), an annual event organised by Schwimmverein Donaukanal (Danube Canal Swimming Club), celebrating the Danube Canal as a sports and recreational space and as a gigantic public swimming pool belonging to all Viennese. Swim Parade 2024 was the first officially registered Danube Canal swim event in nearly 100 years (Schwimmverein Donaukanal, 2025). In contrast to the increasing privatisation and commodification of urban waterfronts, often repurposed for high end developments, exclusive terraces, or private events, the Swim Parade reclaims the canal as a truly public, inclusive commons. It resists the narrative that urban riversides are only valuable when monetised, instead activating the space through joy, community, and access. By inviting people to jump in, literally and symbolically, the event subverts dominant logics of ownership and profit, making a powerful statement about the right to the city (and its bodies of water), and the need to protect shared urban resources from commercial encroachment.
Privatisation: Public in Name Only
Regenerated spaces may be publicly accessible but privately managed, limiting who truly feels welcome. Subtle barriers such as surveillance, lack of seating, design geared to high-value consumers can quietly push people out.
“Privatisation causes spaces, which should be open and accessible to all, to become exclusionary. In response to these challenges, there has been a growing movement towards inclusive and critical placemaking.”
— Milagros Hurtig, Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook, 2025
A key example of this tension is known as POPS, or Privately Owned Public Spaces. Defined by Cirolia and Rubin (2020) as “spaces that are owned and managed by private actors, yet are legally required to be accessible to the public,” POPS occupy an ambiguous position between public right and private interest (Cirolia & Rubin, 2020). Though seemingly public, these spaces often operate under rules set by their private owners, which may include restrictions on behaviour, loitering, and protest. The authors point out that the design and management of POPS can result in subtle exclusion through poor signage, excessive surveillance, or environments that feel unwelcoming to certain groups (especially the homeless and skateboarders). As a result, many POPS remain underused or misunderstood, functioning less as genuine public commons and more as controlled, sanitised environments tailored to specific audiences.
The promise of publicness becomes conditional, granted only to those who conform. As placemakers and urban thinkers, we must challenge this trend. It’s time to move from public in name only to truly public in nature.
Introducing Inclusive Placemaking
How do we make placemaking inclusive? What is Inclusive Placemaking?
Inclusive placemaking is about reshaping our cities so that everyone feels like they belong. It’s a shift from the usual top-down approach to one that listens more closely to people who are often left out of the conversation. That means thinking not just about physical access, but also about who feels safe, welcome, and represented in public spaces. It’s about care, trust, and collaboration. As the European Union puts it: inclusion means creating spaces where people of all backgrounds and abilities can fully take part in social, economic, and cultural life. When we bring these values into urban planning, we start building cities that aren’t just functional, they’re fair, vibrant, and genuinely shared (Hurtig, et al., 2025).
Inclusive cities are shaped by intentional choices. The Inclusive City Toolkit: Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook highlights the key features for an inclusive city:
- Accessibility: Spaces should be easy to access and feel welcoming to everyone, both physically and emotionally.
- Safety: Public areas must feel secure (for ALL), with good lighting, upkeep, and visibility.
- Diverse Activities: Spaces should offer something for all ages, backgrounds, and interests, from play areas to cultural events.
- Community Engagement: Locals should be involved in planning and design so places reflect their needs and values.
- Intercultural Design: Design should celebrate the community’s diversity and encourage interaction between different groups.
- Equity: Fair access to spaces and resources for all, regardless of identity, income or ability.
- 15-Minute City Approach: Neighbourhoods should provide essential services within a short walk or bike ride, supporting local, sustainable lifestyles.
Be Careful of Place-washing!
Much like greenwashing, place-washing occurs when developers and city planners use the language of placemaking without truly embracing its core values. Projects may be marketed as “inclusive” or “community-driven” while offering minimal real participation.
When placemaking becomes a marketing tool rather than a participatory process, its potential as a driver of social equity is severely weakened.
A The Town Team Movement and Project for Public Spaces (PPS) describe:
“The term ‘placemaking’ is used in many settings—not just by citizens and organisations committed to grassroots community improvement, but also by planners and developers who use it as a ‘brand’ to imply authenticity and quality, even when their projects don’t always live up to that promise. But using ‘placemaking’ to describe a process that isn’t rooted in public participation dilutes its true value.”
— Project for Public Spaces, 2022
As more communities engage in placemaking and more professionals label their work as such, it’s essential to preserve the integrity of the process. A great public space isn’t defined by its physical features alone; it must also serve as a vital community resource, where function always takes precedence over form.
The Inclusive City Toolkit: Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook
The Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook, created by the Inclusive City project, offers a practical toolkit for designing more inclusive public spaces. Process guided by Milagros Hurtig and co-curated with the consortium partners across Europe, it brings together real stories, actionable strategies, and reflective exercises to help urban planners, designers, and community leaders address exclusion in placemaking. By focusing on care, trust, empowerment, and solidarity, it encourages a rethink of traditional facilitation and power dynamics in urban development.
This resource is especially valuable for those working with marginalised communities, as it highlights the need for participatory processes that truly include all voices. While many toolkits already exist around placemaking and participation, this one digs into the socio-political contexts that influence inclusion, promoting processes that strengthen local networks, trust, and a sense of belonging. Whether you’re a professional in planning, architecture, or community activism, this toolkit helps create urban spaces where no one is left behind.
You can find out more about the Inclusive City project by following the official LinkedIn and Instagram accounts. To download and learn how to use the toolkit, click here. To read more about how Placemaking Europe is involved in the project, click here.
Remember, Inclusive placemaking isn’t just about who shows up. It’s about who feels safe, heard, and able to stay. By recognising the blind spots in even well-meaning urban design, we can begin to build places that truly belong to everyone.
Sources:
Clerval, A. (2021). Displacement: Cause and consequence of gentrification. Urban Geography, 42(8), 1054–1057. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2021.1936413
Ferilli, G., & Sacco, P. L. (2016). Beyond the rhetoric of participation: New challenges and prospects for inclusive urban regeneration. City, Culture and Society, 7(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2015.09.001
Hurtig, M., Gallis, H., Bösker, S., König, T., Weger, K., & Mosquera, A. (2025). Inclusive Placemaking Inspirational Cookbook.
Lee, D. (2020). Whose space is privately owned public space? Exclusion, underuse and the lack of knowledge and awareness. Urban Research & Practice, 15(3), 366–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2020.1815828
Schwab, I., & Panhofer, J. (2025). Donaukanal Zukunftsfit! University of Applied Arts Vienna.
Schwimmverein Donaukanal. (2024). Swim Parade 2024.
