IN-PERSON Barcelona. Section A

Abstract

Ecological parks, as public spaces, not only need to fulfill needs such as leisure, nature appreciation, and urban disaster prevention in their planning and design but also consider the aesthetic aspects of their landscapes. Although aesthetics lack of objective standards for evaluation, given that the planning and use of public spaces involve different stakeholders, the ambiguity of aesthetics can lead to controversial views among different parties, resulting in disputes. This study takes the aesthetic controversy of Xinhai Ecological Park in Taiwan as an example, by interviews and textual analysis, explore how different actors justify their aesthetic positions, analyze the “publicness” each actor trying to protect, and how this controversy reveals the discontinuity between park design and maintenance. The study argues that when the ambiguity of aesthetics enters the discussion of public spaces, different actors can use discourse and mobilization to uphold their aesthetic claims or interests, where seemingly divergent aesthetic positions represent the publicness they advocate for. Local residents legitimize their aesthetic claims through the representation of public opinion, while landscape architects claim to be the “guardians of urban aesthetics,” asserting their discursive power in public space aesthetics. This shows the publicness of public spaces is not self-evident but has multiple dimensions in terms of scale and significance. Lastly, the study suggests viewing parks as ongoing processes, where maintenance and management not only passively maintain the status quo but also have the potential to change the original planning and design. Therefore, efforts should be made in both management and citizen participation to fill the gap between design and maintenance.