Search

Public urban parks are valued community amenities and an integral part of an environmentally just society. Given increasing concerns of gentrification associated with urban parks, this paper critically analyzed the discourse of urban park development to understand its main message, rhetorical devices, and potential to affect praxis. I find current discourse surrounding park development overstates the ability of public urban parks to reverse trends in social stratification while understating the possible downsides to urban park development. The discourse of 'parks-as-social-healers' is produced by urbanists with significant sociopolitical power in their respective fields who use three distinct discursive tools to enhance the discourse's utility and efficacy. Using the power and influence of wealthy foundations to back up their claims, this discourse exerts hegemonic influence on urban public space development. Downplaying gentrification and exaggerating social benefits—hallmarks of this discourse—can lead to environmental injustices, potentially exacerbating park access disparities. • Urban park development discourse leads to environmental injustices by overstating benefits and understating consequences • Producers of this discourse exert hegemonic power over contemporary urban park development using multiple discursive tools • Downplaying urban park development's social and environmental injustices will perpetuate such injustices [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article brings a perspective of governmentality theory to the studies on residential suburbanization of the European postsocialist cities. By examining the accounts of the mayors of fringe urban districts and municipalities located in the metropolitan area of Brno, the second-largest Czech city, we identify two interlinked discourses – the reactive discourse and the proactive discourse, both underlined by a specific sociospatial imaginary of rurality. The lens of governmentality theory led to the focus on the mayors' understanding of the process, their position within it, the political tools they did (not) apply and the legitimation of their decisions. The two-wave research design (2006–2009 and 2019, 26 interviews in total) enabled us to capture the substantial change in the intensity of these discourses over time to examine how they relate to the construction of the boundaries of municipal responsibility within the challenging suburbanization process. • Governmentality theory contributes to the understanding of post-socialist suburbanization. • Longitudinal research shows a significant cultural change in suburban governance. • A shift from reactive to proactive discourse was identified in mayors' accounts. • Rural imaginary plays a key role in the legitimation of municipal responsibility. • The boundaries of municipal responsibility have gradually broadened. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]