IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i10p2012-d1766419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation of Public Urban Space: From Social Value to Fair Value—Mind the Gap

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolaos Karanikolas

    (School of Spatial Planning and Development, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece)

  • Eleni Athanasouli

    (School of Spatial Planning and Development, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece)

  • Eleni Kyriakidou

    (School of Spatial Planning and Development, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece)

Abstract

Urban public spaces function as complex social and spatial systems, serving as fundamental elements in preserving cultural heritage and fostering democratic participation and urban stability. The dominant valuation methods depend on economic principles that prioritize financial returns and property values over social, ecological, and cultural aspects. This study examines the distinction between social value, which is based on personal experiences and social connections, and fair value, which relies on market operations and financial regulations. The research investigates how valuation practices affect spatial justice and urban governance through a conceptual framework and four empirical case studies: Syntagma Square in Athens, the metro station areas, the city of Barcelona, and waterfront redevelopment projects in Thessaloniki, London, and Mumbai. The official valuation systems we studied conceal the political elements of space while preserving social inequalities and forcing out the requirements of local communities. The proposed solution establishes an integrative, pluralist valuation system that incorporates qualitative, temporal, and ethical elements, supporting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the New Urban Agenda. The framework transforms public space discussions from commercialized urban resources into communal civic systems, creating sustainable cities for all.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolaos Karanikolas & Eleni Athanasouli & Eleni Kyriakidou, 2025. "Valuation of Public Urban Space: From Social Value to Fair Value—Mind the Gap," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-23, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:10:p:2012-:d:1766419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/10/2012/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/10/2012/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agustín Cócola Gant, 2016. "Holiday Rentals: The New Gentrification Battlefront," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 21(3), pages 112-120, August.
    2. Umberto Mecca & Beatrice Mecca, 2023. "Surfacing Values Created by Incentive Policies in Support of Sustainable Urban Development: A Theoretical Evaluation Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Ananya Roy, 2009. "The 21st-Century Metropolis: New Geographies of Theory," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 819-830.
    4. Kim Dovey & Elek Pafka, 2020. "What is walkability? The urban DMA," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(1), pages 93-108, January.
    5. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Antonia Astore & Luca Tricarico, 2024. "Understanding the Transformations of San Lorenzo, Rome: An Attempt at Conceptual Order between Gentrification and Urban Policy," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, October.
    4. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    5. Azunre, Gideon Abagna & Amponsah, Owusu & Takyi, Stephen Appiah & Mensah, Henry & Braimah, Imoro, 2022. "Urban informalities in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): A solution for or barrier against sustainable city development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    6. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    7. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    10. Shin, HaeRan & Chae, Sangwon, 2018. "Urbanisation and land use transition in a second-tier city: The emergence of small factories in Gimpo, South Korea," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 534-541.
    11. Hillary Angelo & David Wachsmuth, 2015. "Urbanizing Urban Political Ecology: A Critique of Methodological Cityism," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 16-27, January.
    12. Hyun Bang Shin & Loretta Lees & Ernesto López-Morales, 2016. "Introduction: Locating gentrification in the Global East," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(3), pages 455-470, February.
    13. Seth Schindler, 2014. "Understanding Urban Processes in Flint, Michigan: Approaching ‘Subaltern Urbanism’ Inductively," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 791-804, May.
    14. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    15. Vasileios A. Tzanakakis & Andrea G. Capodaglio & Andreas N. Angelakis, 2023. "Insights into Global Water Reuse Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-30, August.
    16. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    17. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    19. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    20. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:10:p:2012-:d:1766419. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.