IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v53y2021i4p704-722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustaining municipal parks in an era of neoliberal austerity: The contested commercialisation of Gunnersbury Park

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Smith

Abstract

This paper analyses a potentially path shaping moment for the UK’s public parks by analysing a pivotal case study of park neoliberalisation. Like many municipal parks, Gunnersbury Park in West London is experiencing the effects of local government budget cuts. Governance, policy and physical changes have been introduced to reduce dependence on public funding and the result is a more commercially oriented park. This case is used to better understand how the period of neoliberal austerity 2010–2019 reshaped municipal parks. The paper highlights concerns over the transparency and accountability of the social enterprise that now manages Gunnersbury Park. It also shows how neoliberalisation and commercialisation are manifested in the park landscape: free events are replaced with ticketed ones, spaces for sport are transformed into bookable facilities, cafes are taken over by corporate chains and playgrounds are supplemented with paid entry alternatives. One of the main consequences is the financial and symbolic exclusion of those unable or unwilling to pay. The paper explores who has contested the recent changes, and why. Opponents are dismissed as idealistic NIMBYs but, by refusing to accept the post-political inevitability of park neoliberalisation, they are helping to ensure Gunnersbury Park remains a public and open space. The case is contextualised by situating it within a review of new park governance arrangements across London, and by comparing neoliberalisation processes here with those affecting New York parks. Ultimately, the research highlights the pitfalls of shifting away from the public funding and public management of municipal parks.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Smith, 2021. "Sustaining municipal parks in an era of neoliberal austerity: The contested commercialisation of Gunnersbury Park," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(4), pages 704-722, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:53:y:2021:i:4:p:704-722
    DOI: 10.1177/0308518X20951814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0308518X20951814
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0308518X20951814?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margit Mayer, 2013. "First world urban activism," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 5-19, February.
    2. Kevin Loughran, 2020. "Urban parks and urban problems: An historical perspective on green space development as a cultural fix," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2321-2338, August.
    3. Vivien Lowndes & Alison Gardner, 2016. "Local governance under the Conservatives: super-austerity, devolution and the ‘smarter state’," Local Government Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 357-375, May.
    4. Amanda Fitzgerald & Ruth Lupton, 2015. "The Limits to Resilience? The Impact of Local Government Spending Cuts in London," Local Government Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 582-600, July.
    5. Claudio de Magalhães & Sonia Freire Trigo, 2017. "‘Clubification’ of urban public spaces? The withdrawal or the re-definition of the role of local government in the management of public spaces," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(6), pages 738-756, November.
    6. Roger Keil, 2009. "The urban politics of roll‐with‐it neoliberalization," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2-3), pages 230-245, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Annette Hastings & Nick Bailey & Glen Bramley & Maria Gannon, 2017. "Austerity urbanism in England: The ‘regressive redistribution’ of local government services and the impact on the poor and marginalised," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(9), pages 2007-2024, September.
    2. Mark Thomas & Steven Tufts, 2016. "‘Enabling dissent’: Contesting austerity and right populism in Toronto, Canada," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 27(1), pages 29-45, March.
    3. Pera, Marina, 2020. "Potential benefits and challenges of the relationship between social movements and the commons in the city of Barcelona," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Talia Margalit & Adriana Kemp, 2019. "The uneven geographies of post-political planning: Objections to urban regeneration projects in peripheral and central Israeli cities," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(4), pages 931-949, June.
    5. Pauline McGuirk & Robyn Dowling, 2011. "Governing Social Reproduction in Masterplanned Estates," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(12), pages 2611-2628, September.
    6. Roger Keil, 2011. "The Global City Comes Home," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(12), pages 2495-2517, September.
    7. Alexander Nurse & Olivier Sykes, 2019. "It’s more complicated than that!: Unpacking ‘Left Behind Britain’ and some other spatial tropes following the UK’s 2016 EU referendum," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(6), pages 589-606, September.
    8. Vanesa Castán Broto, 2020. "Beyond tabulated utopias: Action and contradiction in urban environments," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2371-2379, August.
    9. Jean-Paul D. Addie & Roger Keil, 2015. "Real Existing Regionalism: The Region between Talk, Territory and Technology," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 407-417, March.
    10. Tamás Kaiser, 2023. "Understanding Narratives in Governance: Naming and Framing Regional Inequality in the United Kingdom," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Maximilian Lemprière & Vivien Lowndes, 2019. "Why did the North East Combined Authority fail to achieve a devolution deal with the UK government?," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(2), pages 149-166, March.
    12. John Lauermann, 2016. "Temporary projects, durable outcomes: Urban development through failed Olympic bids?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(9), pages 1885-1901, July.
    13. Nicolas Lewis & Laurence Murphy, 2015. "Anchor organisations in Auckland: Rolling constructively with neoliberalism?," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 30(1), pages 98-118, February.
    14. Cesare Di Feliciantonio, 2017. "Spaces of the Expelled as Spaces of the Urban Commons? Analysing the Re-emergence of Squatting Initiatives in Rome," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 708-725, September.
    15. Martin Kohler & Anita Engels & Ana Paula Koury & Cathrin Zengerling, 2021. "Thinking Urban Transformation through Elsewhere: A Conversation between Real-World Labs in São Paulo and Hamburg on Governance and Practical Action," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-23, November.
    16. Roger Keil, 2020. "An urban political ecology for a world of cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2357-2370, August.
    17. Baptiste Antoniazza & André Mach & Michael Andrea Strebel, 2023. "THE URBAN LEFT IN POWER: Comparing the Profiles of ‘Municipal Socialists’ and the ‘New Urban Left’ in Swiss Cities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(5), pages 745-772, September.
    18. Badach Joanna Maria & Stasiak Anna & Baranowski Andrzej, 2018. "The role of urban movements in the process of local spatial planning and the development of participation mechanism," Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, Sciendo, vol. 22(4), pages 187-196, December.
    19. Neil Lee, 2019. "Inclusive Growth in cities: a sympathetic critique," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(3), pages 424-434, March.
    20. Gordon MacLeod, 2011. "Urban Politics Reconsidered," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(12), pages 2629-2660, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:53:y:2021:i:4:p:704-722. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.