- P-ISSN1225-6706
- E-ISSN2733-4295
- KCI
행위자-네트워크 이론을 통한 공간의 다중성 연구: 런던 포춘스트리트 공원과 킹스턴 마켓 광장 사례를 중심으로
An actor-network theory approach to multiplicity of space: a case study of Fortune Street Park and Kingston Market Square in London
초록
이 연구는 공공공간을 사회와 물체 간의 다양한 관계들을 통해 나타나는 유동적인 ‘상태’로 이해하며, 이를 바탕으로 공공공간의 다중적 성격에 대한 접근방법을 제안한다. 사회적 관계들이 공공공간에 어떻게 투영되며, 이들이 어떻게 다양한 인간 활동―또는 장소(place)―을 지속적으로 담아내는가를 행위자-네트워크 이론(Actor-Network Theory)을 통해 살펴본다. 연구를 위한 사례 대상지는 런던에 위치한 Fortune Street Park와 Kingston Ancient Market Place이며, 직접관찰, 인터뷰, 그리고 설문을 통한 이용자 행태 및 자료조사를 실시하였다. 이러한 과정을 통하여 본 연구는, 공공공간은 자신이 가지는 다양한 네트워크의 집합으로 개념화될 수 있으며, 각 공공공간들의 역할 수행을 관리 설계하는 데 있어서 행위자네트워크 이론이 효과적으로 쓰일 수 있음을 주장한다.
- keywords
- Actor-Network Theory, public space, multiplicity, user behaviour, 행위자-네트워크 이론, 공공공간, 다중성, 이용자 행태
Abstract
This research understands public space as ‘a fluid state’ emerged throughout the continual interactions between society and the built environment. Based on this, an empirical research method of Actor-Network Theory is suggested which examines how the physical/non-physical social actors are projected and produce multiple user activities constantly in public space. The case studies were conducted with two public spaces – Fortune Street Park and Kingston Ancient Market Place – in London where the data were gathered by observations, interviews, and questionnaires. Based on the findings, this research argues that public space can be conceptualized as collective networks and that this actor-network approach is an effective tool in designing and decision-making process.
- keywords
- Actor-Network Theory, public space, multiplicity, user behaviour, 행위자-네트워크 이론, 공공공간, 다중성, 이용자 행태
참고문헌
김나형·김숙진. 2013. ｢행위자-연결망 이론을 통해서 본 태백시 물 공급의 지리학｣. ≪대한지리학회지≫, 48(3), 366~386쪽.
김동완. 2014. ‘날것’으로서 공공공간과 타자의 복원: 로열 페스티벌 홀을 사례로. ≪공간과 사회≫, 24(3), 178~209쪽.
김준호. 2011. ｢공공공간에 대한 소수자의 권리를 위한 시론: 거리노숙인의 ‘도시에대한 권리’를 중심으로｣. ≪공간과 사회≫, 21(2), 35~65쪽.
김현철. 2015. ｢도시를 퀴어화하라. 성적 반체제자와 도시공간의 공공성: 2014 신촌퀴어퍼레이드를 중심으로｣. ≪공간과 사회≫, 25(1), 12~62쪽.
안진희·배정한. 2016. ｢광장에 대한 공론의 생성과 공간적 반영｣. ≪한국도시설계학회지 도시설계≫, 17(6), 63~78쪽.
이정아·이형숙·최윤의·전진형. 2012. ｢서울 소재 도시광장에 대한 이용자 만족도 분석: 중심 대 광장을 대상으로｣. ≪한국조경학회지≫, 40(3), 42~50쪽.
성동규·김성희. 2005. ｢서울광장 이용에 대한 시민 만족도 및 이미지에 관한 연구｣. ≪서울도시연구≫, 6(4), 191~214쪽.
최병두. 2015. ｢행위자-네트워크 이론과 위상학적 공간 개념｣. ≪공간과 사회≫, 25(3), 126~174쪽.
최우석·김기호. 2013. ｢행태의 장 개념을 통해 본 도심 내 광장의 이용 및 기능에대한 연구｣. ≪한국도시설계학회지 도시설계≫, 14(1), 109~120쪽.
Alexander, C. 1966. “A city is not a tree.” City, 122(1), pp. 58~62.
Alexander, C. 1979. The timeless way of building. USA: Oxford University Press.
Anthony, M. O., & Neal, Z. P. 2010. Common ground?: readings and reflections on public space. Taylor & Francis.
Appleyard, D., Gerson, M. S., & Lintell, M. 1982. Livable streets. University of California Press.
Barthes, R. 1972. Mythologies. Trans. Annette Lavers. New York: Hill and Wang.
Bijker, W. E. 1997. Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. MIT press.
Callon, M. 1986. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen.” In J. Law (Ed.). Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan.
Callon, M. 1990. “Techno-economic networks and irreversibility.” The sociological review, 38(S1), pp. 132~161.
Callon, M. 1998. The laws of the markets. New York: Blackwell.
Carmona, M., & Wunderlich, F. M. 2013. Capital spaces: the multiple complex public spaces of a global city. London and New York: Routledge.
Carmona, M., de Magalhães, C., & Hammond, L. 2008. Public space: the management dimension. London: Routledge.
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. G., & Stone, A. M. 1992. Public space. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Cerdá, I. 1867. Teoría general de la urbanización, y aplicación de sus principios y doctrinas a la reforma y ensanche de Barcelona(Vol. 1). Imprenta Española.
Craig, Cora L., Ross C. Brownson, Sue E. Cragg, and Andrea L. Dunn. 2002. “Exploring the effect of the environment on physical activity.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(2S), pp. 36~43.
De Laet, M., & Mol, A. 2000. “The Zimbabwe Bush Pump Mechanics of a Fluid Technology.” Social Studies of Science, 30(2), pp. 225~263.
Ercan, M. A. 2010. “Less public than before?” Whose Public Space?: International Case Studies in Urban Design and Development, 21.
Farias, I., & Bender, T. 2010. Urban Assemblages: How actor-network theory changes urban studies. Routledge.
Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. 2010. Actor-network theory in education. Routledge.
Franck, K., & Stevens, Q. 2006. Loose space: Possibility and diversity in urban life. Routledge.
Gehl, J., & Koch, J. 2001. Life between buildings: using public space. Arkitektens forlag Copenhagen.
Gottdiener, M., & Lagopoulos, A. P. 1986. The city and the sign: An introduction to urban semiotics. Columbia University Press.
Guggenheim, M. 2009. “Building memory: Architecture, networks and users.” Memory Studies, 2(1), pp. 39~53.
Habermas, J. 1991. The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT press.
Handy, Susan L., Marlon G. Boarnet, Reid Ewing, Richard E. Killingsworth. 2002. “How the built environment affects physical activity views from urban planning.”American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(2), pp. 64~73.
Hommels, A. 2005. Unbuilding cities: Obduracy in urban socio-technical change. The MIT Press.
Jacobs, J. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. Vintage.
Kärrholm, M. 2007. “The materiality of territorial production a conceptual discussion of territoriality, materiality, and the everyday life of public space.” Space and Culture, 10(4), pp. 437~453.
Kärrholm, M. 2009. “To the rhythm of shopping－on synchronisation in urban landscapes of consumption.” Social & Cultural Geography, 10(4), pp. 421~440.
Latour, B. 1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. 1992. “Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts.”Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, pp. 225~258.
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford:Clarendon.
Law, J. 1992. “Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity.” Systems Practice, 5(4), pp. 379~393.
Law, J. 2009. “Actor network theory and material semiotics.” In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The new Blackwell companion to social theory. Oxford, pp. 141~158.
Law, J., & Singleton, V. 2014. “ANT, multiplicity and policy.” Critical Policy Studies, 8(4), pp. 379~396.
Lefebvre, H. 1991. The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lehtovuori, P. 2010. Experience and conflict: The production of urban space. London: Routledge.
MacKenzie, D. A., Muniesa, F., & Siu, L. 2007. Do economists make markets?: On the performativity of economics. Princeton University Press.
Madanipour, A. 2003. Public and private spaces of the city. Routledge.
Madanipour, A. 2010. “Introduction.” In A. Madanipour (Ed.), whose public space? London:Routledge, pp. 1~15.
Madanipour, A., Knierbein, S., & Degros, A. 2013. Public space and the challenges of urban transformation in Europe. Routledge.
Mehta, V. 2009. “Look closely and you will see, listen carefully and you will hear: Urban design and social interaction on streets.” Journal of Urban Design, 14(1), pp. 29~64. http://doi.org/10.1080/13574800802452658
Mol, A. 2002. The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Duke University Press.
Mol, A., & Law, J. 1994. “Regions, networks and fluids: anaemia and social topology.”Social Studies of Science, 24(4), pp. 641~671.
Mol, A. 2002. “Complexities: an introduction.” In J. L. Annemarie Mol (Ed.). Complexities:Social Studies of Knowledge Practices. Duke University Press, pp. 1~22.
Murdoch, J. 2000. “Space against time: competing rationalities in planning for housing.”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 25(4), pp. 503~519.
Murdoch, J. 2006. Post-structural geography. London: Sage publications.
Neal, Z. 2010. “Seeking common ground: three perspectives on public space.” Proceedings of the ICE-Urban Design and Planning, 163(2), pp. 59~66.
Pineda, A. F. V. 2009. “How do we co-produce urban transport systems and the city?: The case of transmilenio and bogotá?” In Farias, I., & Bender, T. (ed.). Urban assemblages: how actor-network theory changes urban studies. Routledge, pp. 123~138.
Rapoport, A. 1982. The meaning of the built environment: a nonverbal communication approach. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Rydin, Y. 2012. “Using Actor–Network Theory to understand planning practice:Exploring relationships between actants in regulating low-carbon commercial development.” Planning Theory, 12(1), pp. 23~45.
Salingaros, N. A. 1999. “Urban space and its information field.” Journal of Urban Design, 4(1), pp. 29~49. http://doi.org/10.1080/13574809908724437.
Samuelson, P. A. 1954. “The pure theory of public expenditure.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, pp. 387~389.
Sonda, G., Coletta, C., & Gabbi, F. 2010. Urban plots, organizing cities. Ashgate Publishing.
Strathern, M. 2005. Partial connections. Rowman Altamira.
Teh, T.-H. 2014. “Actor-network theory coevolution framework for urban design.”Explorations in Urban Deisgn: An urban design research primer. Ashgate.
Teh, T.-H. 2015. “Bypassing the flush, creating new resources: analysing alternative sanitation futures in London.” Local Environment, 20(3), pp. 335~349.
Tornaghi, C., & Knierbein, S. 2014. Public space and relational perspectives: New challenges for architecture and planning. Routledge.
Webster, C. 2007. “Property rights, public space and urban design.” Town Planning Review, 78(1), pp. 81~101.
Whyte, W. H. 1980. The social life of small urban spaces. Washington, DC: Conservation Foundation.
Yaneva, A. 2009. The making of a building: A pragmatist approach to architecture. Peter Lang.
Zacharias, J. 2001. “Pedestrian behavior pedestrian behavior and perception in urban walking environments.” Journal of Planning Literature, 16(1), pp. 3~18.
- 다운로드 수
- 조회수
- 0KCI 피인용수
- 0WOS 피인용수