The Application of Tactical Urbanism in Designing Child-Friendly Urban Spaces; Revisiting an Experience in the Sang-e Siah Neighborhood of Shiraz

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Urban Planning & Design, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

2 M.A. Student in Urban Design, Department of Urban Planning & Design, Faculty of Art & Architecture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

Abstract
Extended Abstract
Background and Objectives: According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), children have the right to express their views about their living environment. They are also entitled to fundamental rights such as access to essential services, participation in decision-making, play, independent mobility and social interaction with friends, and access to safe, green, and accessible spaces within urban neighborhoods. In line with these principles, the concept of the child-friendly city and child-friendly urban spaces has become an important research topic in urban planning over the past three decades. Although extensive research has emphasized the importance and necessity of designing and implementing child-friendly urban spaces, their realization—particularly in developing countries such as Iran—remains limited.
One approach that has the potential to bridge the gap between research and practice in small-scale urban projects while maximizing public participation is tactical urbanism. Recognized as an emerging movement in urban planning, tactical urbanism promotes spontaneous, participatory, and community-led interventions in urban spaces. By emphasizing low-cost, short-term, and high-impact projects, this approach seeks to improve the quality of urban environments through the direct involvement of local communities.
This study aims to examine the application of tactical urbanism in the creation of child-friendly urban spaces and to develop a procedural and content-based framework for facilitating urban design with children through the tactical urbanism approach.
Methods: This applied study adopts a qualitative research strategy to examine the application of tactical urbanism in the creation of child-friendly urban spaces. Within this framework, an appropriate case study was selected, and data were collected from a focus group of 15 children living in the Sang-e Siah neighborhood, located in the historic fabric of Shiraz. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling in response to a public call issued by a local non-governmental organization (NGO) actively working in the neighborhood.
The focus group was facilitated by the researchers and conducted over three sessions comprising four stages, held at one-week intervals in the Moshir Mosque, located in the Sang-e Siah neighborhood of Shiraz. Following the tactical urbanism process, the initial stage focused on building empathy and trust among participants. Subsequently, data were collected through group discussions, children’s drawings, and written essays prepared by the participants.
The data obtained at each stage were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The findings were then categorized into five main themes: (1) characteristics of children’s preferred urban spaces; (2) children’s assessment of the current conditions of their neighborhood; (3) site selection by children for a child-friendly space within the neighborhood; (4) design development and scenario building for the selected site; and (5) the process of evaluating and selecting the preferred design alternative.
Findings: The findings of this study elucidate the tactical urbanism process for creating a child-friendly urban space. The results demonstrate that a thorough understanding of local characteristics and the specific context of project implementation plays a decisive role in informing decisions related to tactical urbanism interventions.
From a substantive perspective, the findings provide valuable insights into the characteristics of child-friendly urban spaces as perceived by children themselves. They indicate that safety and security, greenery, the availability of appropriate play and recreational facilities, and the cleanliness and hygiene of public spaces are the attributes that children consider most important.
From a procedural perspective, the study presents a five-stage tactical urbanism process consisting of empathy, problem definition, ideation, project implementation, and testing. Furthermore, it explains how these stages correspond to the design process of creating a child-friendly urban space at the neighborhood scale, providing a practical procedural framework for participatory urban design with children.
Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that tactical urbanism provides an appropriate framework, both conceptually and procedurally, for implementing child-friendly urban projects. Beyond supporting the realization of the essential qualities of child-friendly urban spaces, this approach enables children—the primary users of these spaces—to actively participate in decision-making and implementation processes.
Furthermore, given the low-cost, rapid, and flexible nature of tactical urbanism interventions, their application is particularly valuable in developing countries such as Iran, where limited financial resources and lengthy bureaucratic procedures often hinder urban quality improvement projects. By requiring relatively modest investment and minimal administrative complexity, tactical urbanism projects can enhance public satisfaction with urban spaces and strengthen residents’ sense of place attachment and neighborhood identity.
The findings of this research provide an initial conceptual and procedural framework that can serve as a practical guide for community-based organizations, urban planners, urban designers, and policymakers involved in urban management. This framework can facilitate the planning and implementation of child-centered tactical urbanism projects in Iranian cities.

Graphical Abstract

The Application of Tactical Urbanism in Designing Child-Friendly Urban Spaces; Revisiting an Experience in the Sang-e Siah Neighborhood of Shiraz

Highlights

- Tactical urbanism provides an effective process-oriented framework for creating child-friendly urban spaces.
- The simultaneous collection of verbal, written, and visual (drawing-based) data through focus group discussions facilitated by an urban designer can foster a shared understanding of child-friendly urban spaces between children and urban designers.

Keywords

Subjects

  1. Abd Elrahman A. S. (2015). Tactical Urbanism “A pop-up Local change for Cairo's built environment. In: Naselli, F. Pollice F. and Amer M.S. eds. 1th Urban Planning and Architecture Design for Sustainable Development Conference; October 2015 Lecce (Italy). Elsevier, Science Direct: 224-235.
  2. Alisdairi L. K., (2014).  A Cry and a Demand Tactical Urbanism and the Right to the City. Dissertation. University of Washington.
  3. Alyani S. A. S. and Herlily H. (2019). The Sense of Place in Community Participation Through Tactical Urbanism in Bundaran Hi, Jakarta. CSID Journal of Infrastructure Development; (2)1: 40-49.
  4. Aminzadeh, B., & Attaran, M. (2015). Comparison of Methods for Participation of Vulnerable Children in Neighborhood Rehabilitation (Case Studies: Tehran’s Southern Neighborhoods). International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development,17-24.
  5. Ansari, M., Asadpour, H, Lotfi, M, Negahdari, N., Delfi, M., Mozaffari, Aminlari, P., Shahvaran, F., Pouravaz, A., Ghahramani, A., Gholami. A., Ansari, M., Ghamar, S., Farazian Shirazi, F., Akbari Soltanie, A., Samiei, M., Hakimian, Sh.    (2024). Revitalizing an Urban Void Based on Participatory Planning with Tactical Urbanism Approach (Case Study: Sobhani Square, Shiraz), Manzar, 16 (67), 14-25 [in Persian].
  6. Barber R. (2013). Tactical Urbanism and Creative Placemaking in Transitional Christchurch. [Dissertation], Murdoch University, Department of Community Development, 275.
  7. Barata A. F. and Fontes A. S. (2017). Tactical Urbanism and Sustainability: Tactical Experience in the Promotion of Active Transportation. Civil Engineering Journal; 11 (6): 733- 739.
  8. Berglund L., (2019). Excluded by design: informality versus tactical urbanism in the redevelopment of Detroit Neighborhoods. Journal of Cultural Geography, 36(2), 144-181.
  9. Brenner, N. (2017).  Is “Tactical Urbanism” An Alternative to Neoliberal Urbanism? Reflections on an Exhibition at the Moma, In: Doina Petrescu, Kim Trogal, eds. The Social Re Production of Architecture. London: Routledge, 245-260
  10. Broberg, A., Kytta, M. & Fagerholmb, N. (2013). Child-friendly urban structures: Bullerby revisited. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 110-120.
  11. Courage C., (2013). The Global Phenomenon of Tactical Urbanism as an Indicator of New Forms of Citizenship. Engage Journal, 32, 87-97.
  12. Davis K., (2015). Can Pop-Up Shops Improve My Community? Exploring the Linkages between Tactical Urbanism and Community Development. [Academic research]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1853/53783. [Accessed, 15, Oct. 2021].
  13. De Smet, A. & Van Reusel, H. (2018). How one tree can change the future of a neighbourhood: The process behind the creation of the Boerenhof Park as an example for tactical urban planning, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 30, 286-294.
  14. Douglas, G. C. C. (2014). Do–It–Yourself Urban Design: The Social Practice of Informal “Improvement” Through Unauthorized Alteration. City & Community13(1), 5-25.
  15. Fabian L. & Samson, K. (2016). Claiming participation – a comparative analysis of DIY urbanism in Denmark, Journal of Urbanism; International Research on Place making and Urban sustainability; 9 (2): 166-184.
  16. Finn D., (2014). DIY urbanism: implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism; International Research on Place making and Urban sustainability,7 (4), 381-398.
  17. Horelli, L. (2007). Constructing a theoretical framework for environmental friendliness. Children, youth and environment. 17(4). 267-292.
  18. Hoseini, A., Pourahmad, A., Hataminejad, H., Zanganeh Shahraki, S., Mallahzade, F.(2022). Analyzing and Evaluating Business Improvement Districts (BID) in Cities with an Emphasis on Tactical Urban Planning Features: A Case Study on District 6 of Tehran, Journal of Urban Structure and Function Studies, 9(33), 249-269 [In Persian].
  19. Hussein S. and Abrahem A. (2019). Reviving Urban Spaces through Tactical Urbanism in Baghdad: Five Common Tactics, Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences,7 (1), 361-368.
  20. Iveson K., (2013).  Cities within the city: Do-it-yourself urbanism and the right to the city, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3): 941–956.
  21. Jackson A. & Marques, M., (2019). DIY Do’s and Don’ts: Limitations to Building University-Community Partnerships with Low Resource Communities of Color, Planning Practice & Research, 34 (3), 318-345.
  22. Lak, A, and Zarezadeh Kheibari, Sh., (2020). Towards a framework for facilitating the implementation of Tactical Urbanism Practices: Assessment Criteria in the Place-making Approach in Iran, Geoforum, 115, 54-66.
  23. Lydon M, Bartman D, Garcia T, Preston R, Woudstra R. (2015). Tactical urbanism. Short-term action, long-term Change. Washington, D.C: Island Press.
  24. Lydon, M. and Garcia, A., (2015). Tactical Urbanism, Short-term Action for Long-term Change. Washington:  Island Press
  25. Malone, K. (2008). How child-friendly is my community? A study of the child friendliness of the city of brim bank. University of Wollongong, Wollongong.
  26. Manouchehri, B., Burns, E.A., Rudner, J., & Davoudi, S. (2021). Creating a Child-Friendly Neighborhood: Iranian School children Talk about Desirable and Undesirable Elements in Their Neighborhoods, Journal of Children, Youth and Environments, Vol. 31 No. 3.
  27. Margarita A. (2019). Tactical Urbanism: Reclaiming the Right to Use Public Spaces in Thessaloniki, In E. G. Nathanail and I. D. Karakikes , Data Analytics: Paving the Way to Sustainable Urban Mobility , Paper presented at the proceedings of the 4th Conference Urban Mobility, (CSUM 2018), Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2019 September; 241–248.
  28. Marshall, W. E. Duval, A.L. and Main, D.S (2015). Large-scale tactical urbanism: the Denver bike share system, Journal of Urbanism; International Research on Placemaking and Urban sustainability, 9 (2), 135-147.
  29. Martin, E. & Wood J. (2018). Drumming to a New Beat: A Group Therapeutic Drumming and Talking Intervention to Improve Mental Health and Behaviour of Disadvantaged Adolescent Boys. Children Australia, 42(4). 268-276.
  30. Min, B., & Lee, J. (2006). Children's neighborhood place as a psychological and behavioral
  31. domain, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51-71.
  32. Minha, A., Muhajarineb, N., Janusc, M.,  Brownelld, M., & Guhna, M. (2017).A review of neighborhood effects and early child development: How, where, and for whom, do  neighborhoods matter, Journal of Health & Place , 155–174.
  33. Mould, O., (2014). Tactical Urbanism: The New Vernacular of the Creative City, Geography Compass, 8(8), 529-539.
  34. Ozdemir, A. (2019). An approach on children's experiences of participatory planning, Cities, 93, 206-214.
  35. Pfeifer, J. (2021). The Planner’s Guide to Tactical Urbanism [Guideline], Available from: https://dokumen.tips/documents/the-planners-guide-to-tactical-urbanism.html [Accessed 21 March 2021].
  36. Riggio, E. (2002). Child Friendly Cities: Good Governance in the Best Interests of the Child. Environment & Urbanization, 2(14), 45-58.
  37. Roosta, M., Ebadi, M., Soltani, A. (2022). Tactical Urbanism; What, Why and How? A Theoretical Framework for Tactical Urbanism, Urban Economics and Planning, 3 (2), 106-121[In Persian].
  38. Sadeghzadeh, S., Golkar, K., Lak, A. (2020). The experience of "Play Street": A Tactical Urbanism Experience in Roodaki Street, District 10, Tehran, Iran, Urban Design Discourse a Review of Contemporary Litreatures and Theories, 1 (2), 85-95 [In Persian].
  39. Sarvari, H. (2018). Participatory Planning; Providing Conceptual Model of Factors Affecting Children's, Participation in Urban Planning, Journal of Creative City Design, 37-42.
  40. Sawhney, N., de Klerk, C., & Malhotra, S. (2015). Civic Engagement through DIY Urbanism and Collective Networked Action. Planning Practice & Research, 30(3), 337–354.
  41. Silva, P., (2016). Tactical urbanism: Towards an evolutionary cities approach, Environment & Planning B, 43(6), 1040 – 1051.
  42. Unicef European (2021). Guidance on Child and Adolescent Participation as part of Phase III of the preparatory action for a European Child Guarante. https://www.unicef.org/eca/documents/guidance-child-and-adolescent-participation
  43. Vaxjo K., (2018). Advancing Tactical Urbanism [Dissertation]. Linnaeus University.
  44. Webb, D. (2018). Tactical Urbanism: Delineating a Critical Praxis, Planning Theory & Practice, 19(1), 58-73.
  45. Woolcock,G., & Steele, W. (2008). Child-friendly community indicators-a literature review. Queensland: Griffith university.
  46. Wortham G & Brooke D. (2013). An Anthropology of Urbanism: How People Make Places and What Designers and Planners Might Learn from It. Footprint, 7 (2): 21–40.
  47. Yassin, H., (2019). Livable city: An Approach to Pedestrianization through Tactical Urbanism, Alexandria Engineering Journal, 58 (1), 251-259.
  48. Yao, Sh. & Xiaoyana, L. (2017). Exploration on Ways of Research and Construction of Chinese Child- Friendly City- Case Study of Changsha. Procedia Engineering, 198, 699-706.
  49. ZakiulIslam, M., Moore, R., & Cosco, N. (2016). Child-Friendly, Active, Healthy Neighborhoods: Physical Characteristics and Children’s Time Outdoors, Environment and Behavior, Vol.48(5). 711-736.
  50. Zare, A., Rezaei, M., Laghai, H. (2020). Explaining the Role of Tactical Urbanism in Enhancing the Environmental Quality of Urban Historical fabrics (Case Study: Historical fabric of Shiraz City), Journal of Regional Planning, 36(9), 135-148 [In Persian].
  51. Zhang, H., & Jin L., M. (2010). Environmental Characteristics for Children’s Activities in the Neighborhood, Asia Pacific International Conference on Environment-Behaviour Studies, Grand Margherita Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia.

  • Receive Date 12 January 2024
  • Revise Date 10 June 2024
  • Accept Date 28 September 2024