Article: Spatial practice, conceived space and lived space: Hong Kong's 'Piers saga' through the Lefebvrian lens

File Download
  • No File Attached
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
Supplementary
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleSpatial practice, conceived space and lived space: Hong Kong's 'Piers saga' through the Lefebvrian lens
AuthorsNg, MK1
Tang, WS2
Lee, J3
Leung, D1
KeywordsColonial spatial planning practice
Harbour reclamation
Hong Kong
Lefebvre
Urban planning and civil society
Issue Date2010
PublisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/02665433.asp
CitationPlanning Perspectives, 2010, v. 25 n. 4, p. 411-431 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2010.505060
AbstractBy applying the Lefebvrian lens, this paper tries to understand why unlike previous similar cases, the latest removal of the Star Ferry and Queen's Pier was so controversial. To Lefebvre, embedded in 'spatial practices' that 'secrete' a place are two contradicting spaces: 'conceived spaces' produced by planners to create exchange values and 'lived spaces' appropriated by citizens for use values. Applying Lefebvre's framework to examine the 'Piers saga', it is found that the pre-Second World War (WWII) piers were 'conceived' by spatial practices of a colonial and racially segregated trading enclave. The public space in the commercial heart that housed the previous generations of piers was not accessible to the Chinese community, thus denying them opportunities to appropriate them and turn them into 'lived' spaces. It was only after WWII when the Government carried out further reclamation to meet the needs of an industrializing economy that inclusive public spaces were conceived in the commercial heart, enabling the general public to 'appropriate' them as 'lived' space. When the Government planned to remove this very first 'lived' space in the political and economic heart of the city to conceive further reclamation for the restructuring economy, the more enlightened citizens were determined to defend it. © 2010 Taylor & Francis.
ISSN0266-5433
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.027
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2010.505060
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
DC Field
Value
dc.contributor.authorNg, MK
dc.contributor.authorTang, WS
dc.contributor.authorLee, J
dc.contributor.authorLeung, D
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-23T08:46:51Z
dc.date.available2010-12-23T08:46:51Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.description.abstractBy applying the Lefebvrian lens, this paper tries to understand why unlike previous similar cases, the latest removal of the Star Ferry and Queen's Pier was so controversial. To Lefebvre, embedded in 'spatial practices' that 'secrete' a place are two contradicting spaces: 'conceived spaces' produced by planners to create exchange values and 'lived spaces' appropriated by citizens for use values. Applying Lefebvre's framework to examine the 'Piers saga', it is found that the pre-Second World War (WWII) piers were 'conceived' by spatial practices of a colonial and racially segregated trading enclave. The public space in the commercial heart that housed the previous generations of piers was not accessible to the Chinese community, thus denying them opportunities to appropriate them and turn them into 'lived' spaces. It was only after WWII when the Government carried out further reclamation to meet the needs of an industrializing economy that inclusive public spaces were conceived in the commercial heart, enabling the general public to 'appropriate' them as 'lived' space. When the Government planned to remove this very first 'lived' space in the political and economic heart of the city to conceive further reclamation for the restructuring economy, the more enlightened citizens were determined to defend it. © 2010 Taylor & Francis.
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
dc.identifier.citationPlanning Perspectives, 2010, v. 25 n. 4, p. 411-431 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2010.505060
dc.identifier.citeulike8363310
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2010.505060
dc.identifier.epage431
dc.identifier.hkuros177889
dc.identifier.issn0266-5433
2011 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.027
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.pmid20857601
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-77956828054
dc.identifier.spage411
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/130089
dc.identifier.volume25
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/02665433.asp
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom
dc.relation.ispartofPlanning Perspectives
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
dc.rightsThis is an electronic version of an article published in [include the complete citation information for the final version of the article as published in the print edition of the journal]. [JOURNAL TITLE] is available online at: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/ with the open URL of your article
dc.subjectColonial spatial planning practice
dc.subjectHarbour reclamation
dc.subjectHong Kong
dc.subjectLefebvre
dc.subjectUrban planning and civil society
dc.titleSpatial practice, conceived space and lived space: Hong Kong's 'Piers saga' through the Lefebvrian lens
dc.typeArticle
Author Affiliations
  1. The University of Hong Kong
  2. Hong Kong Baptist University
  3. Chinese University of Hong Kong