Page 99 - IJPS-11-6

International Journal of
Population Studies Redesigning public spaces in South Africa

2023; Lemanski & Smit, 2023). The spatial and symbolic been marginalized or excluded from spatial design
divide reflects and reinforces gendered and class-based processes (Rampaul & Magidimisha-Chipungu, 2022).
inequalities, creating barriers to equitable public space use HopeScape provides a practical vocabulary and actionable
(Bennet & Rupprecht, 2024). While urban policies may framework that enables planners, architects, policymakers,
gesture toward inclusivity, prevailing planning practices and communities to critically assess and reimagine the
continue to operate on assumptions of user neutrality, often inclusivity of existing and proposed public spaces. The
overlooking the differentiated needs, fears, and aspirations concept intentionally reframes public space as a terrain of
of women and girls in particular (Kitchin et al., 2023; Parnell possibility where hope, visibility, and empowerment can be
& Pieterse, 2024). The absence of gender-disaggregated data, cultivated through thoughtful, participatory, and equitable
participatory planning mechanisms, and inclusive tools design interventions (Gugerell & Penker, 2023).
exacerbates this oversight, limiting the potential for truly Although international literature has advanced calls for
equitable urban design (Matsinhe et al., 2024). gender-responsive urban design, most notably exemplified
This article responds to the critical recognition of gender in Vienna’s progressive planning strategies, empirical
inequality in public spaces as a central urban justice issue research originating from African urban contexts remains
rather than a peripheral concern (Schwanen & Zuniga- limited. Existing South African studies have predominantly
Teran, 2023). It introduces the HopeScape model—a focused on women’s experiences in informal settlements
conceptual and applied framework developed to guide the and transportation infrastructures (Teffo, Earl & Zuidgeest,
inclusive design and evaluation of public spaces in South 2019; Meth, 2010), leaving formal and highly symbolic
African cities through a gender-sensitive lens. Grounded public spaces such as waterfronts, promenades, civic
in empirical research, site observations, interviews, and plazas, and recreational parks largely understudied. These
perception surveys in Cape Town and Durban—combined formal public spaces are precisely where issues of visibility,
with comparative global best practice analysis—the model belonging, and symbolic inclusion are most intensely
distills six key indicators of inclusivity: safety and security, negotiated and contested (Brown-Luthango, 2016). This
accessibility, identity and expression, multifunctionality, article addresses this critical gap by investigating how
inclusive amenities, and clear signage and wayfinding. women interact with and are shaped by these spaces,
Each indicator addresses both the material and symbolic drawing on case studies from Cape Town and Durban to
dimensions of exclusion often faced by women, offering reveal prevailing patterns of exclusion alongside strategies
practical criteria for transforming these environments for transformative change.
into spaces of dignity and empowerment (Rampaul & This research aims to shift dominant models in South
Magidimisha-Chipungu, 2022). African urban planning by advocating for a feminist
At the core of the HopeScape model lies the reorientation of space making—one that centers the
fundamental recognition that safety—encompassing everyday lived experiences of women and girls and insists
freedom from violence, harassment, and fear—is essential that public space is as much about justice, identity, and
for women’s ability to access and fully enjoy public spaces hope as it is about infrastructure. Through the HopeScape
(Georgi et al., 2021). In this model, safety is not treated model, this article contributes a grounded and forward-
as a discrete or isolated element but is deeply embedded looking framework to ongoing debates on spatial equity,
within broader spatial dynamics, including the quality of participatory design, and gender-inclusive urbanism
infrastructure, esthetic considerations, and opportunities within the Global South.
for cultural expression that public spaces provide (Rigon
& Castan Broto, 2021). Accessibility is reconceptualized 1.1. Theoretical background
beyond mere physical mobility—it encompasses social 1.1.1. Understanding public spaces
and psychological ease of use, recognizing that women’s Public spaces are foundational to the spatial, social, and
experiences of public space are shaped by perceptions of cultural life of cities. They function as platforms for
inclusion or exclusion, comfort, and trust (Drey, 2022). democratic engagement, sites of cultural expression, and
Identity and expression within the HopeScape model stages for everyday social interaction. In an increasingly
refer to the extent to which diverse users feel represented, fragmented urban landscape, public space offers rare
welcomed, and free to occupy public space freely without opportunities for unplanned, cross-cultural encounters
fear of judgment, exclusion, or symbolic erasure.
that foster a sense of belonging and urban identity (Gehl,
The model is both aspirational and pragmatic—it 2010). These spaces include parks, plazas, sidewalks, and
avoids utopian ideals, focusing instead on the lived transit corridors—each playing diverse roles in shaping
experiences and needs of users who have historically the urban experience. Public spaces support relaxation,

Volume 11 Issue 6 (2025) 93 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.5813