الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 183 |  |  |
| | | from | 183 | | |
Abstract
This is the concluding chapter for studying the transformations of leftover spaces in relation to everyday life. Chapter One introduced the research problem, aim, objectives, methodology of the study and the proposed structure for the study.
The research is divided into two main parts: theoretical and empirical. The theoretical part has two chapters. In order to learn about the variables associated with everyday practices in public spaces, chapter Two was meant to find out the typologies of public spaces. Therefore, it starts by defining public spaces. Then the chapter discussed the right to use public space and its significance. Afterward, it discussed different classifications and types of public spaces, as cited by Carmona (2008), Stanley et al. (2012) and Carr et al. (1992). Then it discussed the forms and qualities of leftover spaces as suggested by Rivlin and Windsor (1986), Korosec & G.E.P.E. (1977), Hudson & Shaw (2011), Maatouk et al. (2021), Azhar & Gjerde (2016) and Villagomez (2010), as well as the intangible values associated with leftover spaces.
The third chapter discussed everyday practice. It addressed various theories dealing with everyday practices in leftover spaces, including; the Production of Space by Lefebvre (1991), Arousal Theory by Mehrabian and Russel (1974), Stimulus Load Theory by Veitch and Arkkelin (1995), the Behavior Constraint Theory by Bell et al. (1996), Perception- Cognition Theory by Gifford (2002), and Adaptation Level Theory by Ela Alanyali (2009).
The research has adopted the adaptation level and production of space theories to analyze the leftover space transformations. This study focused on four case studies in Cairo. After the theoretical part, A matrix was created between the adaptation level theory and the physical qualities of leftover spaces. These are examined through observations and interviews.
Having covered the theoretical framework in Part I (Chapters Two and Three), the second part is dedicated to the empirical study. Chapter Four introduces and analyses four selected case studies of leftover spaces in Cairo, Egypt. It addresses the changes introduced to each case to adapt its spatial configurations toward fulfilling everyday practices. The documented appropriations were structured following the outcome of the theoretical part. The study’s findings are then discussed in a subsegment section to conclude with the differences and similarities between the four cases and how they relate to the theoretical findings.
The present chapter (Chapter Five) sets the conclusion of the thesis findings and introduces the study limitations and the suggested topics for future research.
5.2 Research Findings
This research was meant to study the impact of everyday practices on the appropriation of leftover spaces. Everyday practices are shared between people in lived spaces. Everydayness gives the place added layers of functioning and meaning. The space can be appropriated and re-appropriated several times by the same users. Appropriation is people’s language for social relatedness and cultural communication in urban space. The space’s physical and social features can transform intentionally or spontaneously by appropriation as a product of everyday practices.
Public spaces are not just a factual reality. Because public spaces are where people express their individuality and sociability through participation and appropriation, the ongoing existence of that society is subjective (Ozkan, 2010). The city became a monofunctional area (Gehl, 2011). Leftover spaces seem to be a space full of potential (Positive space). Space becomes measured, precise, knowable, exchangeable and repetitive, encouraging the unreflexively nature of the natural attitude.
Findings show that users’ appropriations give meaning to the space, create a dynamic space, and increase the sense of belonging with the space. It allows the users to create their own spaces. This appropriation gives the users the right to use the space to fulfill their needs. People’s everyday practices could re-invent leftover spaces by realizing new functions and meanings.
Also, findings show that designers and urban planners cannot predict and imagine everydayness, making each user perceive the space in his/her way. Everyday life is far beyond the architect’s vision. The study advises the users to appropriate the space in their own way to achieve their everyday practices and the designers to use the users’ everyday practices while designing these spaces. And finally, the organizers to set rules that can legalize the users’ appropriations.
5.3 Reflections
The studied spaces witnessed many appropriations by different users. The residents and the shopkeepers were the main appropriators of these spaces. Visitors’ interventions came next, at a more superficial/temporary level.
While the case-study selection was meant to explore the influence of historic/modern and commercial/residential settings upon the possible appropriations, the findings showed that the historic influence was not the major dimension. The influence of commercial use seemed to have a clearer effect. For example, the intensity and diversity of appropriations documented in (el-Saha) and (Kunst passageway), being both commercial areas, have outweighed those taking place in the non-commercial spaces such as: (El-Mamar) and (Cinema Zawya passageway). This suggests the absence of common appropriation patterns between the two historic cases, just as it was absent from the two modern cases. This contrasts with the commonalities between the two commercial cases and the two non-commercial spaces.
The perceived space resembles the users’ perception of the existing physical qualities of the space without their changes. Such physical attributes can directly affect the opportunities for appropriations. For example, the types and intensities of appropriations in the spaces surrounded by public facilities were quite eye-catching, probably with the attraction of diverse user groups.
On another hand, the conceived space is about the designers’ projected vision of space. In many incidents, the design did not fully fit the user’s needs which was the main reason behind the documented appropriations.
In contrast, the lived space is the space of the users who appropriate it and adjust it to fulfill their needs. As discussed earlier, the users appropriate space to give it meaning, enhance their sense of attachment to it, and create a new identity to the space that reflects their cultural background, hence creating their own space.
However, while the present study agrees that no architect can predict precisely how a space will be used, it is argued that a glimpse of the everyday knowledge throughout the different design phases can significantly add to the design quality and effectiveness.
Due to the presence of different user groups in the same space, conflicts between them are likely to appear, as documented in the empirical investigation of the present research. For example, at a direct level, residents were unhappy with some shopkeepers’ appropriations for invading their privacy and obstructing their movement in the space. On the other hand, shopkeepers believed they had a purpose for these appropriations, which improves functionality and enhances economic value. Likewise, shopkeepers found residents’ appropriations disappointing. For example, despite being residents’ safe heaven for their children’s play, children’s ball games and cycling in front of shops were disturbing to shopkeepers, for it repelled some of their prospect clients.
It is also important to shed light on such conflicting views at a perceptual level. While some interventions could be seen as positive appropriations in some cases, they may be perceived as vandalizing public spaces in other incidents. For example, as much as graffiti can be seen as a channel for expressing self-identity or political standing-points, and despite its known artistic value, it might sometimes involve offensive graphics or inappropriate wording, which may adversely affect space users. Although the present research was focused on functional and symbolic appropriations as a positive means of improving the space qualities, it is equally important to pay attention to the thin line between appropriation and vandalism in future studies.
Therefore, due to such physical and perceptual disagreements, encouraging the active participation of all stakeholders by devising appropriate communication means can greatly benefit future endeavors for open space improvement and community development. While designers have the technical expertise, users can provide them with clearer insights regarding their genuine everyday needs, and the authorities can ensure compliance with the cities’ broader structure.
At the same time, it is important to maintain the balance between these three main forces. The authorities need to develop more flexible regulatory guidelines to allow for innovative and dynamic changes to public spaces to accommodate everyday needs. Designers should not think that they solely monopolize knowledge. They should be open and willing to listen and learn from the actual users of their design spaces. At last, users should be able to introduce their needs in logical frameworks and be creative and flexible to collaborate with other stakeholders towards realizing their genuine priorities in a technically sound fashion and broadly harmonious with the city’s image.
This shall put together all efforts towards promoting active engagement in the use and development of open spaces rather than marginalizing the public role into a passive zone. This may, in turn, realize more flexible, resilient and dynamic spaces that can effectively contribute to more desirable sustainable development patterns.