Abstract Municipal governments in Western Europe and the United States historically built and programmed public, urban park spaces to promote citizenship in accord with middle class values. In many cities these decades‐old green spaces have recently fallen into disrepair as fiscally austere governments cut parks budgets. Shared governance for green space is a new solution to parks disinvestment whereby responsibility for their upkeep is redistributed among corporations, non‐profits, and local residents. Individual citizenship status in this process is not gained by patronizing parks as in the past, but by assuming responsibility for rebuilding and reprogramming them. But while shared governance increases the number of stakeholders in decision making, its democratic potential is often subverted by entrepreneurial growth coalitions that wield disproportionate power to make market‐based, urban environmental decisions. An extension of what counts as governable green space comes with an increase in entrepreneurialism – from the largest waterfront redevelopment projects to the smallest gardens on vacant neighborhood lots. The uneven distribution and quality of green space under market forms of shared governance is intensified as ‘communities of self‐interest’ arise around green spaces in some locations whereas others continue to be disinvested in the absence of direct state support. I provide three examples of green space renovation in Milwaukee, Wisconsin to further demonstrate that shared governance arrangements possess democratic potential despite the injustice of their exclusivity as currently negotiated.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 61 citations exist upstream.