Public spaces are an essential aspect of the cities. They comprise of parks, playgrounds, street markets, and community centers. Public space allows for the city residents to meet up and engage with different people within the community. They enhance diversity in the group of people that live within the city, and they play a positive role in the social life of those living in the city. People meet in public spaces to have new experiences that create value in their lives. Public spaces enhance a good feeling among people, and quiet parks have therapeutic benefits in people’s lives. Additionally, they provide an opportunity for individuals to share their culture and display their identities. By creating awareness of diversities, children, and young people from different backgrounds meet up to hang out, and this enhances unity among the people living in the community. Everyone has a democratic right to access public spaces without getting exposed to any kind of discrimination. The private regulation of such places has, however, enhanced discrimination because the private owners of public spaces work on their personal interests without having the interest of community members at heart. This paper outlines the benefits of public spaces, the regulatory authorities, and the proposed policies that would prevent discrimination in public spaces.
The benefits of public space include s ocial benefits where people from all backgrounds are allowed to meet up and share resources (Mehta, 2013) . They provide a platform for people to get in contact with the social world to mingle with others. The parks and city squares give people a chance to mingle and get new ideas through interaction. Public spaces provide a chance for different cultures to thrive. It enhances cultural development within the community by allowing people from different backgrounds and races to meet up and get experience with new cultures that they were not familiar with. Individuals with different cultural backgrounds have unique ways of dressing, different customs, beliefs, and behavior. This allows people to learn and borrow positive aspects from a variety of cultures. The cultural diversity experiences in social places are the factor behind the economic success of such cities. Public spaces enhance the economic growth of cities in that the tourists who visit such places pay for the available services hence a boost to the economy.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The regulation of public spaces is under private regulators that do not involve the federal government (Kayden, 2000). Private firms have brought changes in public spaces. Privatization of public space regulation is a common trend enhanced by the private ownership of city assets such as national parks and public malls. Most of the public spaces are under the ownership of private firms. Racism and in quality is an aspect that has been witnessed in the regulation of public spaces in that law enforcement officers take sides with people of one color whenever there is a conflict. Power in the regulation authorities flows in one direction. The segregation of some public spaces through regulatory authorities such as children from poor backgrounds getting blocked from accessing a segregated playground has led to inequality in urban areas. This has led to the issue of racism in public spaces, especially parks. Inequality is evident in public spaces in that people from poor backgrounds can hardly access and have a good time due to the costly services. No food and drinks are allowed in national parks, and for one to spend a day, they have to budget for meals and drinks.
There is discrimination of color, and ethnic classes when it comes to the access of public spaces/ certain categories of city dwellers get hindered from accessing public spaces. The accessibility measures put in place by the regulating authorities have led to inequality. The minorities and homeless people do not have the right to access public spaces even though the law does not advocate for such kinds of discrimination. Even though public spaces are considered as places where everyone is allowed to visit, privatization of such places has made it impossible for the poor people within cities to access them due to the associated visitation costs. Commercial centers and malls have put restrictions on access by a segment of the population that is within the low-class population. The private police force that is in charge of public space regulations excludes some community members such as beggars, street vendors, and homeless people, among other groups. When it comes to racial inequalities, the privatization of these places is secluded and can only get accessed by people of a specific race. This is a hindrance to everybody’s right to access public space.
Gentrification is the aspect of rich people taking up land that was previously owned by low-income earners for their own interests. It takes place when there is an influx of capital within the community; there is access to goods and services within a place that such goods were previously non-existent. This takes place when people of an upper class move to a region a neighborhood that belonged to low-class people. As much as gentrification enhances development and rapid economic growth, the process has massive negative effects on low-income, and the minority communities in the residents who previously had their homes within the neighborhoods are forced to move out (Burns, Lavoie & Rose, 2012). Poor people become displaced and left with no place to call home.
There is discrimination by people in power that leads to gentrification. The discriminatory behavior by individuals in power through gentrification leads to the exclusion of low-income earning people and, at times, racial discrimination (Weller & Van Hulten, 2012, p.25) . Poor communities get transformed into rich estates. The option of expensive housing in such regions forces the original inhabitants of such places to look for alternative homes are they are forced out of the neighborhoods. The increases in housing prices due to the high demand by rich people make the livelihood too expensive for poor people who get flushed out. The displacement of low-income earners and people of color who consist of older people leads to frustration, and most of them end up in the street with nowhere to go. When low-income earning individuals get displaced due to the risen costs of property, they become vulnerable for exclusion from the available spaces in the gentrified communities. Poor people become replaced by wealthy people who invest in expensive businesses. The increase in the cost of housing becomes unaffordable for the previous residents due to the difference in income levels with the rich. The low-income earners, who do not get flushed-out, struggle to make ends meet in supporting their families in the expensive neighborhoods. The displaced people neighborhoods get to settle in regions with poor security due to the overconcentration of low-income earning people within such places. The urban renewal projects such as parks promote gratification as wealthy people buy regions that were previously inhabited by low-income earners to use them for economic benefits. It is a negative development because it works against the low-income earners who are forced to relocate due to the increase in rental prices.
The best policy solution that would address the social problem of low-income earners and minorities not having access to public spaces as the high and middle-class society members would be to advocate for the government to work with the private sectors in the management of public spaces. This would enhance equality because the government would work with members of the community against an individual’s interests to enhance common good for all city dwellers regardless of the background. Government involvement would ensure that people’s interests prevail over private interests. This can be done by the government, making an effort to prevent the privatization of public spaces hence preventing private owners from running the places inappropriately. All people have a right to access public spaces, were it not for the privatization of such places. Additionally, the government’s management of public spaces would ensure that there is adequate land for public spaces so that space could be large enough to accommodate large numbers of people.
The government’s decision to oversee all public spaces would enhance transparency and defend the public interest. This would ensure that public spaces have adequate resources for operation and maintenance to avoid the high fee required before people can access some public spaces such as several national parks. Government participation would advocate for equality through the fair regulation measures that are to be adhered to. Activities should be diverse and affordable to protect the low-income earners from getting locked out of the public spaces. Government regulation ensures that all citizens get entitled to their right of access to public spaces.
The impact of this policy on low-income earners and the minority in society is that the policy would enhance equality among all people without any form of discrimination. The government must provide citizens with their rights, and access to public spaces is a fundamental right to citizens, were it not for the privatization of the spaces that as enhanced discrimination in all sectors. The government would promote the recognition of public space as a local service and an essential all city dwellers would have a right to access the places. The government would ensure adequate distribution of public space without the need of gentrification. Gentrification occurs when wealthy private individuals take over a region that was earlier occupied by low-earning members of the society to build expensive construction for their interests. Protecting the public space from privatization would protect the lives of the vulnerable by providing them with protection from private individuals that would otherwise displace them to take over the land for their selfish gains (Kohn, 2013) .
In conclusion, all members of the community in urban centers have the right to access public spaces regardless of the background. Public spaces have social. Economic and cultural benefits as it allow people from different backgrounds to meet up and share cultural practices. People meet up to engage with others and to have a new experience with people from different cultures and backgrounds. The places enhance economic benefits to the country as tourists who visit public spaces spend money on a variety of goods and services. Public spaces are under the regulation of private investors, and this aspect has enhanced discrimination and inequality in such places. Gentrification has negative effects on low-income earners as they are forced to relocate from their original homes as the land gets taken away by private individuals who use it for commercial purposes. Gentrification is just a form of discrimination inflicted on low-class members of societies by rich people. It leaves the low-earning members in society homeless as the land is taken up for commercial development. The Governments’s involvement in the management of public spaces would enhance equality and prevent gentrification as the government must protect the rights of all people. Ownership of public spaces by private dwellers denies some people of the democratic right to visit such places. For instance, there is racial discrimination in some areas whereby people of a certain race are the only individuals allowed to access the public spaces. This indicates the high discrimination levels experiences in public spaces.
References
Burns, V. F., Lavoie, J. P., & Rose, D. (2012). Revisiting the role of neighborhood change in social exclusion and inclusion of older people. Journal of Aging Research , 2012 .
Kayden, J. S. (2000). Privately owned public space: The New York City experience . John Wiley & Sons.
Kohn, M. (2013). What is wrong with gentrification? Urban Research & Practice , 6 (3), 297-310.
Mehta, V. (2013). The street: a quintessential social public space . Routledge.
Weller, S., & Van Hulten, A. (2012). Gentrification and displacement: the effects of a housing crisis on Melbourne’s low-income residents. Urban Policy and Research , 30 (1), 25-42.
