Learning from temporary use and the making of on-demand communities in London’s Olympic “fringes”

References

• AAA/PEPRAV (eds). (2007). Urban/act: A handbook for alternative practice. Montrouge: PEPRAV.
   Google Scholar
• Andres, Lauren. (2013). Differential spaces, power hierarchy and collaborative planning: A critique of the role of temporary uses in shaping and making places. Urban Studies, 50(4), 759–775.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop, Peter, & Williams, Leslie. (2012). The temporary city. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blokland, Talja, & Savage, Mike (Eds.). (2008). Networked urbanism: Social capital in the city. Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Colomb, Claire. (2012a). Staging the New Berlin: Place marketing and the politics of urban reinvention post-1989. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Colomb, Claire. (2012b). Pushing the urban frontier: Temporary uses of space, city marketing, and the creative city discourse in 2000s Berlin. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(2), 131–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, Juliet. (2014). A promised future and the open city: Issues of anticipation in Olympic legacy designs. Architectural Research Quarterly, 18(4), 324–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, Juliet. (2016). The making and remaking of Hackney Wick, 1870–2014: From urban Edgeland to olympic fringe. Planning Perspectives, 31(3), 425–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, Juliet, & Thornley, Andrew. (2010). Urban regeneration for the London 2012 Olympics: Issues of land acquisition and legacy. City, Culture and Society, 1(2), 89–98.
   Google Scholar
• Design for London. (2013). Stitching the fringes: Working around the Olympic Park. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Deslandes, Ann. (2013). Exemplary amateurism: Thoughts on DIY urbanism. Cultural Studies Review, 19(1), 216–227.
   Google Scholar
• Featherstone, David, Ince, Anthony, Mackinnon, Danny, Strauss, Kendra, & Cumbers, Andrew. (2012). Progressive localism and the construction of political alternatives. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(2), 177–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreri, Mara. (2015). The seductions of temporary urbanism. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 15(1), 181–191.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreri, Mara, & Lang, Andreas. (2016). Notes from the Temporary City: Hackney Wick and Fish Island,2014–2015. London: public works.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreri, Mara, & Trogal, Kim. (2018). “This is a private-public park”: Encountering architectures of spectacle in post-olympic London. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 22(4), 510–526.
   Google Scholar
• García-Lamarca, Melissa. (2015). Insurgent acts of being-in-common and housing in Spain: Making urban commons? In Mary Dellenbaugh, Kip Markus, Bieniok Majken, Agnes Müller, & Martin Schwegmann (Eds.), Urban commons: Moving beyond state and market (pp. 165–177). Basel: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, Ella. (2015). Navigating pop‐up geographies: Urban space–times of flexibility, interstitiality and immersion. Geography Compass, 9(11), 592–603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haydn, Florian. (2006). Temporary urban spaces: concepts for the use of city spaces. Basel: Birkäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Henneberry, John (ed.). (2017). Transience and permanence in urban development. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Horton, John. (2016). Anticipating service withdrawal: Young people in spaces of neoliberalisation, austerity and economic crisis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 41(4), 349–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou, Jeffrey (Ed.). (2010). Insurgent public space: Guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, Emma. (2012). Fixed in mobility: Young homeless people and the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(4), 725–741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiménez, A. C. (2014). The right to infrastructure: a prototype for open source urbanism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 32(2), 342–362.
   Google Scholar
• Lauermann, John. (2018). Municipal statecraft: Revisiting the geographies of the entrepreneurial city. Progress in Human Geography, 42(2), 205–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporation. (2012). Call for proposals: ‘Learning from others’. London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporation. (2013a). Local plan consultation document (December). London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporation. (2013b). Call for tender: Proposals and services contract. London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporation. (2014). Grass-root interim uses project guidelines. London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporation. (2015). Local plan. Policy B.3: Creating vitality through interim uses. London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• London Legacy Development Corporations. (2013c). Learning from others (Vol. 1). London: LLDC.
   Google Scholar
• Madanipour, Ali. (2018). Temporary use of space: Urban processes between flexibility, opportunity and precarity. Urban Studies, 55(5), 1093–1110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malin, Brenton J., & Chandler, Curry. (2016). Free to work anxiously: Splintering precarity among drivers for uber and lyft. Communication, Culture & Critique, 10(2), 382–400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marrero-Guillamón, Isaac. (2014a). The makeshift city. Wick Zine, 5(20), 3.
   Google Scholar
• Martínez, Miguel Ángel, & García, Ángela. (2015). Ocupar las plazas, liberar edificios. [Occupying squares, liberating buildings]. ACME: an International Journal for Critical Geographies, 14(1), 157–184.
   Google Scholar
• Mould, Oli. (2014). Tactical urbanism: The new vernacular of the creative city. Geography Compass, 8(8), 529–539.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, Paul (2010, July 1). LTGDC confirms Hackney Wick buys from kemsley’s rock. The Estates Gazette. Retrieved from http://www.egi.co.uk/
   Google Scholar
• O’Callaghan, Cian, Di Feliciantonio, Cesare, & Byrne, Michael. (2018). Governing urban vacancy in post-crash Dublin: Contested property and alternative social projects. Urban Geography, 39(6), 868–891.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oswalt, Philipp, Overmeyer, Klaus, & Misselwitz, Philipp. (2013). Urban catalyst: The power of temporary use. Berlin: DOM publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Paton, Kirsteen. (2018). Beyond legacy: Backstage stigmatisation and ‘trickle-up’ politics of urban regeneration. The Sociological Review Monographs, 66(4), 919–934.
   Google Scholar
• Peck, Jamie. (2011). Recreative City: Amsterdam, vehicular ideas and the adaptive spaces of creativity policy. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(3), 462–485.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck, Jamie. (2012). Austerity urbanism: American cities under extreme economy. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 16.6, 626–655.
   Google Scholar
• Penny, Joe. (2017). Between coercion and consent: The politics of “Cooperative Governance” at a time of “Austerity Localism” in London. Urban Geography, 38(9), 1352–1373.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petcou, Constantin, & Petrescu, Doina. (2015). R-URBAN or how to co-produce a resilient city. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 15(1), 249–262.
   Google Scholar
• Poynter, Gavin. (2009). The 2012 Olympic Games and the reshaping of East London. In Rob Imrie, Loretta Lees, & Mike Raco (Eds.), Regenerating London: Governance, sustainability and community in a global city (pp. 146–162). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Raco, Mike. (2012). The privatisation of urban development and the London Olympics 2012. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 16(4), 452–460.
   Google Scholar
• Raco, Mike. (2014). Delivering flagship projects in an Era of regulatory capitalism: State-led privatization and the London Olympics 2012. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(1), 176–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raco, Mike, & Tunney, Emma. (2010). Visibilities and invisibilities in urban development: Small business communities and the London Olympics 2012. Urban Studies, 47(10), 2069–2091.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds, Eric. (2011). Interwhile uses. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal, 4(4), 371–380.
   Google Scholar
• Slater, Tom. (2018). The invention of the ‘sink estate’: Consequential categorisation and the UK housing crisis. The Sociological Review, 66(4), 877–897.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Till, Karen. (2011). Interim use at a former death strip? Art, politics and urbanism at Skulpturenpark Berlin_Zentrum. In Marc Silberman (Ed.), The German wall: Fallout in Europe (pp. 99–122). Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Till, Karen, & McArdle, Rachel. (2016). The improvisional city: Valuing urbanity beyond the chimera of permanence. Irish Geography, 48(1), 37–68.
   Google Scholar
• Tonkiss, Fran. (2013). Austerity urbanism and the makeshift city. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 17(3), 312–324.
   Google Scholar
• Watt, Paul. (2013). ‘It’s not for us’ regeneration, the 2012 Olympics and the gentrification of East London. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action, 17(1), 99–118.
   Google Scholar
• Wick, Save Hackney. (2018). ‘Fish island bridges: Nine false or misleading statements made by the LLDC and mayor’s office’. Retrieved from https://savehackneywick.org/
   Google Scholar
• Ziehl, Michael, & Oßwald, Sarah. (2015). Practices in second hand spaces: Producing value from vacancy. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 15(1), 263–277.
   Google Scholar