In the name of peace - sanitise

Abstract

Sanitised space is a concept that is quickly gaining momentum in the disciplines of urban planning and architecture (Bergamaschi, Castrignano and De Rubertis, 2014; Smith and Walters, 2018) and also in the social sciences (Buffel, Phillipson, and Scharf, 2013; Di Molfetta, 2023) where the focus is on the relationships between people and their cities. It refers to the process in which urban space is ‘cleansed’ from all things that make it dirty, undesirable, and differentiated. The process can involve the use of soft power or coercion, such as imposing penalties, fines, policies, and by-laws against certain activities and uses (Huey, 2009). Alternatively, it can also be achieved through hard power. This refers to the use of physical building structures, fencing, landscaping, and other forms of physical design, defensive architecture, and in extreme cases, through the use of violence (Smith and Walters, 2018). The sanitisation of space seeks to create a particular image of space legitimised by planning, political and capitalist norms, values, and rhetoric (Mashayamombe, 2018). It acts as a tool for urban organisation and social ‘normalisation’, which refers to the efforts made towards establishing spatial relations that encourage behaviours that are repeatable, predictable, and compatible with the dominant social roles and rules of engagement (Stavrides, 2015). More recently, we have witnessed these efforts of normalisation through the use of surveillance cameras, biometrics, and other forms of technology that shape human behaviour and sanitise public space.

Through the use of semi-structured interviews, observations, and spatial analysis techniques, this paper seeks to showcase the various efforts by different municipalities in South Africa to sanitise space in the name of peace and security. With the use of examples from train stations, public parks, and sidewalks, the paper argues that although the sanitisation of space is done in the name of public interest, peace, and security, it often conflicts with the public experience. The paper grounds its argument by drawing a parallel between the conception of conceived space by Henri Lefebvre and the concept of sanitisation to demonstrate how ideas of planning, order, and desire signify a re-emergence of discourses and practices that South Africa experienced during its colonial and apartheid period, where public spaces were a clear demonstration of state power, oppression, and control. The paper concludes by identifying clear patterns of continuities and discontinuities of practices of symbolic public violence in public spaces – designed in the name of safety and security. It offers moments of reflection, (re)learning, and questioning of planning ideas and decisions that seem peaceful at face value but have unintended consequences.