Social Infrastructure
Area: Community participation
Social infrastructure refers to the physical places and institutions that facilitate the social life of citizens, supporting social connections and sociality (Latham and Layton, 2019); “spaces outside the home where they nonetheless feel at home”(Latham and Layton, 2022, p. 659). It entails the fundamental services and facilities that support the quality of life and well-being of a community. Such spaces include facilities that are intended for educational, health, recreational and cultural, religious, social, transportation and other public use purposes. The overarching point in thinking with social infrastructure is to broaden the understanding of the varieties and qualities of social life that exist is cities. In this perspective, sociologist Klinenberg (2018, p. 7) defines them inclusively:
Public institutions, such as libraries, schools, playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, and swimming pools, are vital parts of the social infrastructure. So too are sidewalks, courtyards, community gardens, and other spaces that invite people into the public realm. Community organizations, including churches and civic associations, act as social infrastructures when they have an established physical space where people can assemble, as do regularly scheduled markets for food, furniture, clothing, art, and other consumer goods. Commercial establishments can also be important parts of the social infrastructure.
The quality of social infrastructure in urban neighbourhoods play a critical role in the development of communities. According to Klinenberg (2018) a healthy community is not hold together by shared values, but by shared spaces, physical locations that create affordances for people to meet each other. Therefore, effective social infrastructure enhances social capital and can be a precondition for forming community, as it engages people in sustained interaction hence growing relationships among them. This argument highlights the importance of the provision and access to non-commodified neighbourhood spaces for the social sustainability of urban neighbourhoods.
Despite their significance in urban resilience and community life by facilitating shared use and collective experience, their success is not guaranteed (Latham and Layton, 2019). The continuous study of how these spaces are designed, maintained and used is therefore significant in understanding the factors that make them flourish or fail. Furthermore, their public or even commercial development and maintenance is highly dependent on the financial and political agendas of local and national governments and market. Therefore, alongside the rest of the built environment and services, such spaces are impacted by austerity policies, often ending up underfunded and neglected (Penny, 2019; Shaw, 2019).
In response, there is a rising engagement of citizens in contributing to the production and maintenance of such places and institutions, through developing community-led social infrastructure, such as in the example of urban commons. Especially in the case of disadvantaged areas tied to low public spending budgets, community-led infrastructures are crucial for the creation of liveable environments (Alcaide Manthey, 2024). Either publicly provided or community-led, social infrastructure can help mitigate pressing social challenges, such as isolation, polarisation, education, crime and even climate change (Klinenberg, 2018).
References
Alcaide Manthey, N. (2024) ‘The role of community-led social infrastructure in disadvantaged areas’, Cities, 147(February), p. 104831.
Klinenberg, E. (2018) Palaces for the people: How to build a more equal and united society.
Latham, A. and Layton, J. (2019) ‘Social infrastructure and the public life of cities: Studying urban sociality and public spaces’, Geography Compass, 13(7), pp. 1–15.
Latham, A. and Layton, J. (2022) ‘Social infrastructure: why it matters and how urban geographers might study it’, Urban Geography, 43(5), pp. 659–668.
Penny, J. (2019) ‘“Defend the Ten”: Everyday dissensus against the slow spoiling of Lambeth’s libraries’, 38(5), pp. 923–940.
Shaw, I. G. R. (2019) ‘Worlding austerity: The spatial violence of poverty’, 37(6), pp. 971–989.
Created on 20-06-2024 | Update on 23-10-2024
Related definitions
Co-creation
Area: Community participation
Created on 16-02-2022 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Community Empowerment
Area: Community participation
Created on 03-06-2022 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Social Sustainability
Area: Community participation
Created on 03-06-2022 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Urban Commons
Area: Community participation
Created on 14-10-2022 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Collaborative Governance
Area: Community participation
Created on 26-10-2023 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Placemaking
Area: Community participation
Created on 08-11-2023 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Spatial Agency
Area: Community participation
Created on 30-01-2024 | Update on 23-10-2024
Read more ->Related cases
No entries
Related publications
No entries