Ukr. geogr. z. 2020, N2:30-37

K.V. Mezentsev - Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv;
N.I. Provotar - Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv;
M.V. Palchuk - State Enterprise Y.Bilokon Ukrainian State Scientific-Research Institute of Urban Design “DIPROMISTO”.


The aim of this paper is to analyze the distribution and degree of different types of public spaces representation in different planning zones and zones of urban value, as well as to reveal the peculiarities of the participatory urban planning implementation in the city of Kyiv. Public spaces are to some extent a reflection of the success of a city’s development. Their distribution within the city, the creation of new ones, and renovation determine the level of spatial justice. A number of researches are devoted to the study of the urban public spaces in the United States, Great Britain, Germany, Australia, China, but not enough in relation to post-Soviet cities, including cities of Ukraine. The article tries to answer the question of how even and fair the distribution of public spaces in Kyiv is. The hypothesis of their injustice spatial distribution is confirmed. Ways to overcome the distributive injustice, uneven accessibility and quality of public spaces are linked to the dwellers involvement in urban planning. Therefore, the second key issue of the article is the assessment of the impact of the implementation of participatory urban planning on availability and quality of public spaces in Kyiv, in particular, the analysis of the role and peculiarities of public space projects in participatory budgeting in terms of their location by the center-periphery line.

Key words: 
public space, green public space, mall, urban planning, spatial justice, participation, Kyiv

1. Whyte H.W. (2000). How to Turn a Place Around. A Handbook for Creating Successful Public Spaces. Projects for Public Space Inc. 121 p.
2. Kabisch N., Haase D. (2014). Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 122, 129-139.
3. Xu C., Haase D., Pribadi D.O., Pauleit S. (2018). Spatial variation of green space equity and its relation with urban dynamics: A case study in the region of Munich. Ecological Indicators, 93, 512-523.
4. Schindler M., Le Texier M., Caruso G. (2018). Spatial sorting, attitudes and the use of green space in Brussels. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 31, 169-184.
5. Nasution A.D., Zahrah W. (2014). Community Perception on Public Open Space and Quality of Life in Medan, Indonesia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 584-594.
6. Low S. (2013). Public space and diversity: Distributive, procedural and interactional justice for parks. In G. Young, & D. Stevenson (eds.). The Ashgate research companion to planning and culture. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, 295-310.
7. Schlosberg D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 238 p.
8. Wolch J.R., Byrne J., Newell J.P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities 'just green enough'. Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 234-244.
9. Young I.M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 286 p.
10. Dai D. (2011). Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene? Landscape and Urban Planning, 102(4), 234-244.
11. Ye C., Hu L., Li M. (2018). Urban green space accessibility changes in a high-density city: A case study of Macau from 2010 to 2015. Journal of Transport Geography, 66, 106-115.
12. Wüstemann H., Kalisch D., Kolbe J. (2017). Access to urban green space and environmental inequalities in Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 164, 124-131.
13. Estabrooks P.A., Lee R.E., Gyurcsik N.C. (2003). Resources for Physical Activity Participation: Does Availability and Accessibility Differ by Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status? Physical Activity Resources, 25(2), 100-104.
14. Byrne J., Wolch J., Zhang J. (2009). Planning for environmental justice in an urban national park? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(3), 365-392.
15. Li H., Liu Y. (2016). Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and urban public green spaces availability: a localized modeling approach to inform land use policy. Land Use Policy, 57, 470-478.
16. Boone C.G., Buckley G.L., Grove J.M., Sister C. (2009). Parks and people: an environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99, 767-787.
17. Tang B.-s. (2017). Is the distribution of public open space in Hong Kong equitable, why not? Landscape and Urban Planning, 161, 80-89.
18. Schüle S.A., Gabriel K.M.A., Bolte G. (2017). Relationship between neighbourhood socioeconomic position and neighbourhood public green space availability: An environmental inequality analysis in a large German city applying generalized linear models. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 220, 711-718.
19. Fan P., Xu L., Yue W., Chen J. (2017). Accessibility of public urban green space in an urban periphery: The case of Shanghai. Landscape and Urban Planning, 165, 177-192.
20. Provotar N.I., Mezentsev K.V., Palchuk M.V. (2019). Social geography of the public spaces: social environment vs peripherality. Journal of the Belorussian State University. Geography and Geology, 2, 15-24. [In Russian]. [Провотар Н.И., Мезенцев К.В., Пальчук М.В. Социальная география публичных пространств: социальная среда vs периферийность // Журнал Белорусского государственного университета. География. Геология. 2019. Вып. 2. С. 15-24.]
21. Shen Y., Sun F., Che Y. (2017). Public green spaces and human wellbeing: Mapping the spatial inequity and mismatching status of public green space in the Central City of Shanghai. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 59-68.
22. Michels A., De Graaf L. (2010). Examining Citizen Participation: Local Participatory Policy Making and Democracy. Local Government Studies, 36(4), 477-491.
23. Bernaciak A., Rzeńca A., Sobol A. (2018). "New" public urban space: citizens' initiatives in participatory budgeting in Katowice, Łódź and Poznań. Miscellanea Geographica - Regional Studies on Development, 22(4), 197-202.
24. State Building Code B.2.2-12:2019. (2019). Territory planning and development. Kyiv, 177 p. [In Ukrainian]. [ДБН Б.2.2-12:2019. Планування і забудова територій. Київ, 2019. 177 с.]
25. Mezentsev K., Neugebauer C.S., Mezentseva N. (2017). Civil Society. In: I. Brade, C.S. Neugebauer (eds.). Urban Eurasia. Cities in Transformation. Berlin: DOM publishers. 275-282.
26. Arnstein S.R. (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216-224.
27. Mezentsev K., Mezentseva N. (2011). Kyiv's public spaces: availability for population and contemporary transformation. Journal of Human Geography, 11(2), 39-47. [In Ukrainian]. [Мезенцев К.В., Мезенцева Н.І. Публічні простори Києва: забезпеченість населення та сучасні трансформації // Часопис соціально-економічної географії. 2011. Вип. 11(2). С. 39-47.]
28. Mezentsev K.V., Mezentseva N.I., Bura T.L. (2011). Transformation of public spaces in large Ukrainian cities - the case of malls. Economic and Social Geography, 63, 174-186. [In Ukrainian]. [Мезенцева Н.І., Мезенцев К.В., Бура Т.Л. Трансформація публічних просторів у великих містах України на прик-ладі торговельно-розважальних центрів // Економічна та соціальна географія. 2011. Вип. 63. С. 174-186.]
29. Mezentseva N., Palchuk M. (2018). Open public spaces of Kyiv in the context of socio-spatial approach. Economic and Social Geography, 80, 18-27. [In Ukrainian]. [Мезенцева Н., Пальчук М. Відкриті публічні простори Києва у контексті соціально-просторового підходу // Економічна та соціальна географія. 2018. Вип. 80. С. 18-27.]
30. Birskyte L. (2013). Involving citizens in public decision making: the case of participatory budgeting in Lithuania. Financial Theory and Practice, 37(4), 383-402.