English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Since the late twentieth century, the governance of many public spaces in U.S. cities has shifted from municipal control to a variety of public–private partnerships (PPPs). Today, parks conservancies and other PPPs drive operational decisions, including siting, management, and budgets. They function as extrastate actors, working on behalf of the state, in place of the state. Whereas many scholars have written about the effects of this change on spatial access and inclusion in public life, this article examines how the archival records practices of public space PPPs affect popular data access and, in turn, the transparency and accountability attributed to the democratic state. I propose that when extrastate agencies are not required to make their records publicly available or to persistently contribute to the state archive, as state agencies are, the absence diminishes the long-term memory-making function of the state. This dynamic lessens the ability of stakeholders to make claims or to intervene in the democratic governance of public spaces and normalizes the structures of privatization. I use the case of Pioneer Courthouse Square (PCS) in Portland, Oregon, and its adjunct conservancy, Pioneer Courthouse Square, Inc. (PCSI), to illustrate this dynamic.

The Archive and the Square: Access to Archival Records Surrounding Privatized Public Space