Re-evaluating ‘public’ and ‘private’ in local development cultures: converging vocabularies of public good and market success in Toronto's New Urbanism

Abstract

This article queries the utility of the analytical categories of ‘public’ and ‘private’ in the development and planning processes of two New Urbanist communities in suburban Toronto. Through an analysis of the conditions under which these projects were planned and delivered, it demonstrates the extent to which the distinction between public interests and market forces is often exaggerated and yet reproduced by local development cultures. Drawing on a critical review of hybridity theories, it argues that ‘public’ and ‘private’ should not be reified as intrinsic actor categories, but rather problematised as contingent constructions through which development actors constitute, understand and reflect on their continuing activities and interactions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.