IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v60y2023i10p1932-1948.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban infrastructure patching: Citizen-led solutions to infrastructure ruptures

Author

Listed:
  • John R Bryson

    (University of Birmingham, UK)

  • Chloe Billing

    (University of Birmingham, UK)

  • Mark Tewdwr-Jones

    (University College London, UK)

Abstract

This article explores how citizens respond to ruptures and problems in the places they inhabit by enacting adaptive improvised and incremental urban infrastructure patching. This might relate to citizens deciding to undertake small scale interventions in their communities to develop solutions to problems that are being overlooked by local government; or it might involve a community response to an ongoing systemic place-based problem that formal agencies involved in managing change are not addressing. This paper develops the concept of urban infrastructure patching with reference to conceptual debates and informed by research undertaken in Birmingham, UK. Drawing upon observations, interviews, and collective art projects, citizen-led urban patching is identified as an important urban intervention process that emerges in response to tensions between professional urban policymakers’ ostensive views of a place and the lived experiences of inhabitants. Cities are in a continual process of becoming and this includes the impacts of citizen end-user adaptive and incremental patching to maintain and enhance urban social-material environments. Two distinct contributions are made. First, citizen-end-user urban patching is based on residents’ experiences of perceived or actual ruptures in local urban infrastructure. Secondly, patching in response to ruptures is an individual and collective response. As a collective response, the power of numbers can bring about transformational change in places, but such participatory action is often viewed as challenging existing hegemonic power structures associated with representative democracy, whereas citizen-led responses can serve as a useful and parallel activity to urban government if it is legitimised.

Suggested Citation

  • John R Bryson & Chloe Billing & Mark Tewdwr-Jones, 2023. "Urban infrastructure patching: Citizen-led solutions to infrastructure ruptures," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(10), pages 1932-1948, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:60:y:2023:i:10:p:1932-1948
    DOI: 10.1177/00420980221142438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00420980221142438
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00420980221142438?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. Silvia Beghelli & Gianni Guastella & Stefano Pareglio, 2020. "Governance fragmentation and urban spatial expansion: Evidence from Europe and the United States [Governance-Fragmentierung und urbane räumliche Expansion: Erkenntnisse aus Europa und den USA]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 40(1), pages 13-32, April.
    2. Jacob Vakkayil, 2022. "Order and openness in community-driven urban initiatives: Insights from a ‘spot-fix’," Post-Print hal-03979022, HAL.
    3. Fred Gault, 2012. "User innovation and the market," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 118-128, February.
    4. Lauren Andres & Hakeem Bakare & John R. Bryson & Winnie Khaemba & Lorena Melgaço & George R. Mwaniki, 2021. "Planning, temporary urbanism and citizen-led alternative-substitute place-making in the Global South," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(1), pages 29-39, January.
    5. Mia Gray & Anna Barford, 2018. "The depths of the cuts: the uneven geography of local government austerity," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 11(3), pages 541-563.
    6. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    7. Franke, Nikolaus & Schirg, Florian & Reinsberger, Kathrin, 2016. "The frequency of end-user innovation: A re-estimation of extant findings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1684-1689.
    8. John R. Bryson & Rachel Lombardi, 2009. "Balancing product and process sustainability against business profitability: sustainability as a competitive strategy in the property development process," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 97-107, February.
    9. Lisa Hansson & Johan Holmgren, 2011. "Bypassing public procurement regulation: A study of rationality in local decisionmaking," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 368-385, September.
    10. Heald, David & Steel, David, 2018. "The governance of public bodies in times of austerity," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 149-160.
    11. Mariana Mazzucato & Rainer Kattel, 2020. "COVID-19 and public-sector capacity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 256-269.
    12. Gemma Carey & Brad Crammond, 2015. "What Works in Joined-Up Government? An Evidence Synthesis," International Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(13-14), pages 1020-1029, December.
    13. Gregory Pierce, 2020. "How collectively organised residents in marginalised urban settlements secure multiple basic service enhancements: Evidence from Hyderabad, India," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(9), pages 1940-1956, July.
    14. Tracy Ross & Valerie A. Mitchell & Andrew J. May, 2012. "Bottom-up grassroots innovation in transport: motivations, barriers and enablers," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 469-489, January.
    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. Bengtsson, Lars & Edquist, Charles, 2020. "Towards a holistic user innovation policy," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    2. Fred Gault, 2019. "User Innovation in the Digital Economy," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 13(3), pages 6-12.
    3. Oo, Pyayt P. & Allison, Thomas H. & Sahaym, Arvin & Juasrikul, Sakdipon, 2019. "User entrepreneurs' multiple identities and crowdfunding performance: Effects through product innovativeness, perceived passion, and need similarity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1-1.
    4. Ho-Dac, Nga N., 2020. "The value of online user generated content in product development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 136-146.
    5. Rivieccio, Giorgia & Raïes, Karine & Schiavone, Francesco, 2023. "Are you attractive enough? An empirical analysis on user innovators' characteristics and the creation of new social ventures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Bradonjic, Philip & Franke, Nikolaus & Lüthje, Christian, 2019. "Decision-makers’ underestimation of user innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1354-1361.
    7. Matti Grosse, 2018. "How User-Innovators Pave the Way for a Sustainable Energy Future: A Study among German Energy Enthusiasts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Brem, Alexander & Bilgram, Volker & Marchuk, Anna, 2019. "How crowdfunding platforms change the nature of user innovation – from problem solving to entrepreneurship," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 348-360.
    9. Stanko, Michael A. & Allen, B.J., 2022. "Disentangling the collective motivations for user innovation in a 3D printing community," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    11. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    12. Isaksson, Olov H.D. & Simeth, Markus & Seifert, Ralf W., 2016. "Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain: Evidence from the high tech sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 699-706.
    13. Thomas Pircher & Conny J. M. Almekinders, 2021. "Making sense of farmers’ demand for seed of root, tuber and banana crops: a systematic review of methods," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(5), pages 1285-1301, October.
    14. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    15. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    16. Habicht, Hagen & Oliveira, Pedro & Shcherbatiuk, Viktoriia, 2012. "User Innovators: When Patients Set Out to Help Themselves and End Up Helping Many," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(3), pages 277-295.
    17. Oerlemans, L.A.G. & Meeus, M.T.H. & Boekema, F.W.M., 2001. "Firm clustering and innovation," Other publications TiSEM c4398688-1710-449a-83e7-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Ben-Menahem, Shiko M. & Franke, Nikolaus & Füller, Johann & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Treading new ground in household sector innovation research: Scope, emergence, business implications, and diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    19. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    20. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Neil Lee & Cornelius Lipp, 2021. "Golfing with Trump. Social capital, decline, inequality, and the rise of populism in the US," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 457-481.

    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:urbstu:v:60:y:2023:i:10:p:1932-1948. 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: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.