A Critical Review of the Literature on Privately Owned Public Spaces: From Intrinsic Critiques to Systematic Assessment

Since the 1960s, Privately Owned Public Space (POPS) has been studied as a significant development in urban space provision. Through a review of key studies (1980–2023), this paper traces how POPS scholarship has changed from fundamental critiques of privatization to evidence-based assessment of spatial practices. The analysis reveals three phases in the literature's development, demonstrating a shift from early concerns about intrinsic problems of private control to accepting POPS as a distinct type of public space requiring its systematic evaluation. The geographical expansion of research has explored how different cultural, institutional, and urban contexts shape the implementation of POPS and scholarly approaches to studying them.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Planning Literature
Published
2025-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122251400201
Primary Topic
Urban Planning and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Critical Review of the Literature on Privately Owned Public Spaces: From Intrinsic Critiques to Systematic Assessment

Quentin Stevens, Mohammad Mohammadi
Journal of Planning Literature
Urban Planning and Governance
article

A Critical Review of the Literature on Privately Owned Public Spaces: From Intrinsic Critiques to Systematic Assessment

Quentin Stevens, Mohammad Mohammadi
article en

Abstract

Since the 1960s, Privately Owned Public Space (POPS) has been studied as a significant development in urban space provision. Through a review of key studies (1980–2023), this paper traces how POPS scholarship has changed from fundamental critiques of privatization to evidence-based assessment of spatial practices. The analysis reveals three phases in the literature's development, demonstrating a shift from early concerns about intrinsic problems of private control to accepting POPS as a distinct type of public space requiring its systematic evaluation. The geographical expansion of research has explored how different cultural, institutional, and urban contexts shape the implementation of POPS and scholarly approaches to studying them.

Journal of Planning Literature
MIT University (MK), RMIT University (AU), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Urban Planning and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Critical Review of the Literature on Privately Owned Public Spaces: From Intrinsic Critiques to Systematic Assessment — Quentin Stevens, Mohammad Mohammadi · Journal of Planning Literature (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS