Au ho s:
Geo gia Tse a (co esponding au ho ), PhD Schola , Dep . o Geog aphy, Ha okopio Uni e si y, g se [email protected] ,
ORCID: 0000-0001-5044-6842;
Pa los Ma inos Dellade simas, P o esso em., Dep . o Geog aphy, Ha okopio Uni e si y, p.dellade [email protected] ,
ORCID: 0000-0001-9634-8201;
João Ca los Vicen e Sa men o, Associa e P o esso , Ins i u e o Social Sciences, Dep . o Geog aphy, Uni e si y o
Minho, j.sa men o@geog a ia.uminho.p , ORCID: 0000-0002-4770-2427.
Resea ch A icle
Enabling he Go e nance o Spa ial Change h ough
Cul u e: Insigh s om he Pi aeus Road in A hens,
G eece
Geo gia Tse a, PhD Schola , Dep . o Geog aphy, Ha okopio Uni e si y
Pa los-Ma inos Dellade simas, P o esso em., Dep . o Geog aphy, Ha okopio Uni e si y
João Ca los Vicen e Sa men o, Associa e P o esso , Ins i u e o Social Sciences, Dep . o
Geog aphy, Uni e si y o Minho
Abs ac
O e he pas h ee decades, cul u e has gained p ominence as a
cen al elemen in local de elopmen s a egies, inc easingly
acknowledged as a ca alys o shaping al e na i e de elopmen
pa adigms. Schola ship has highligh ed i s ole in d i ing spa ial
ans o ma ion and media ing dialogue be ween policy amewo ks,
planning p ac ices, and he li ed expe iences o ci izens. This pape
ad ances his discussion by p oposing a concep ual amewo k ha
examines how cul u al ins i u ions con ibu e o capaci y-building om
he pe spec i e o ci izens. The s udy ocuses on h ee dis inc cul u al
o ganisa ions loca ed along Pi aeus Road in A hens, G eece, explo ing
use s’ pe cep ions o cul u al ac i i ies, hei con ibu ion o enhancing
indi idual and collec i e capaci ies, and he ex en o which hese
capaci ies can enable engagemen in spa ial de elopmen p ocesses.
Beyond ins i u ional p ac ices, he analysis conside s he wide ole o
cul u e in u ban ans o ma ion and he de elopmen oppo uni ies
eme ging in his ansi ional u ban co ido . Findings e eal ha
al hough cul u al in e en ions a e ecognised as
ele an and
meaning ul, ci izens’ pa icipa ion in such ac i i ies has no
signi ican ly s eng hened hei capaci ies o in luence spa ial
de elopmen . Pe sis en e e yday needs and a lack o suppo i e
policy amewo ks cons ain he b oade social po en ial o cul u al
ins i u ions. These insigh s con ibu e o unde s anding how cul u e
may mo e e ec i ely os e inclusi e u ban ans o ma ion.
Keywo ds
Cul u e, Social Inno a ion,
Ci izen Engagemen ,
Place-based esea ch,
Pi aeus Road
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
32
In oduc ion
O e he pas h ee decades, cul u e has played an inc easingly pi o al ole in local
de elopmen s a egies, eme ging as a key d i e in shaping al e na i e de elopmen pa adigms.
In his con ex , a ange o bo h op-down and bo om-up ini ia i es – om pe o ming a s o
he i age p ese a ion and place b anding – ha e been implemen ed o expand economic
oppo uni ies and s eng hen social cohesion, each employing dis inc app oaches and yielding
a ied impac s. In con empo a y socie ies, which a e o en cha ac e ised by pe sis en and
ecu ing c ises (Reckwi z & Rosa, 2023), he ole o cul u al and c ea i e indus ies has been
inc easingly ecognised as c ucial in add essing hese challenges (Kal as e al., 2024). In his
con ex , g owing a en ion is being paid o how cul u al expe iences can empowe local
communi ies (Rausell-Kös e e al., 2022) o ad oca e o he adop ion o sus ainable
de elopmen p ac ices (S ihl, 2024). A he same ime, schola s cau ion agains ea ing such
ini ia i es as quick ixes o complex socio-spa ial issues (Mon al o e al., 2023). Wi hin his
amewo k, add essing ci izens’ cul u al demand has become a s a egic p io i y in unlocking he
cul u al sec o ’s po en ial o suppo inclusi e and sus ainable g ow h a he local le el (Ma eos
Mo a & Yáñez, 2023; Sacco e al., 2025).
These app oaches add ess cul u e as a b oad and dynamic sphe e, encompassing alues,
a is ic p ac ices, e en s, adi ions, and e e yday ac i i ies. In his di ec ion, new concep ual
amewo ks eme ged in he 2010s aiming a os e ing a holis ic pe spec i e o cul u e’s ole
wi hin spa ial planning. Pa icula a en ion was paid in cul u e’s ne wo king capaci y exp essed
h ough socially inno a i e p ac ices (Moulae , 2018; Moulae e al., 2017; 2022). ha ca y he
po en ial o ques ion and eshape es ablished planning adi ions (Knieling & O heng a en,
2009). Wi hin his line o inqui y, schola s ha e in es iga ed cul u e’s in luence on spa ial
ans o ma ion (Bel io e, 2020) and emphasized he ele ance o e i o ial impac assessmen s
(Medei os, 2023) in e ealing he complex ela ionships among social, cul u al, and economic
aspec s o cul u al ac i i ies. O he s udies ha e examined he no ion o cul u al alue (Yan & Liu,
2023) and iden i ied speci ic cul u al pa ame e s ha encou age collabo a ion ac oss di e se
s akeholde g oups (Čamp ag, 2023). Fu he esea ch has d awn a en ion o si ua ions whe e
cul u al dynamics shaped agency (S e anidou e al., 2024), as well as o cases whe e inadequa e
a en ion o ci izens’ needs unde mined he c ea ion o social alue (Ha aldseid, 2019),
pa icula ly in si es o ecognized cul u al he i age (G ossi e al., 2023).
In his di ec ion, he li e a u e (ibid.) sugges s ha o cul u al policies o play a genuinely
e ec i e ole, hey mus i s inco po a e a socie al alue-building dimension, a he han
p io i ising economic alue alone. Socie al alue can be unde s ood as he con ibu ion o
cul u al ac i i ies o social cohesion, ci ic pa icipa ion, well-being, and he collec i e capaci y
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
33
o add ess sha ed challenges (Bel io e, 2016). This equi es cul i a ing a nuanced unde s anding
o socie y and he e ol ing needs o indi iduals, ins ead o concen a ing solely on ac i i ies wi h
physical – o en la ge-scale – egene a ion ou comes. In his iew, cul u al ins i u ions and
cul u al con en should no be ega ded me ely as ins umen s se ing p ede e mined spa ial
de elopmen goals; a he , hey should unc ion as media o s ha shape dialogue be ween
policy, planning p ac ices, and he li ed expe iences o ci izens as exp essed h ough dynamic
cul u al p ac ices. In his ole, hey gene a e spaces o nego ia ion whe e di e se in e es s,
iden i ies, and pe spec i es can in e sec , enabling cul u al dynamics o in o m no only he
ou comes o de elopmen bu also he p ocesses h ough which hose ou comes a e en isioned
and achie ed.
Howe e , he ex en o which cul u al ins i u ions s eng hen ci izens’ capaci y o engage in
he e-en isioning o spa ial de elopmen wi hin hei local con ex s emains unce ain (Tahe i e
al., 2024). While cul u al ac i i ies a e a gued o c ea e spaces o nego ia ion (Nyse h e al.,
2017), i is no ye clea whe he his po en ial a ises p ima ily om hei egula p og ammes o
om mo e a ge ed sho - e m e en s. The ole o policy is c ucial in his ega d. Sho - e m
p og ammes o en gene a e expec a ions o posi i e ou comes, ye hei ac ual impac emains
ambiguous, pa icula ly in cases whe e eloca ion o cul u al ins i u ions is assumed o deli e
communi y bene i s. Reloca ion is equen ly associa ed wi h he p omise o in oducing mo e
sus ainable ac i i ies, ein o cing demands o change in he a ea, and a ac ing new o ms o
cul u al and economic ac i i y. When concep ualised as local asse s, he ongoing p og ammes
o cul u al ins i u ions wa an close examina ion o hei capaci y o os e sus ainable ci izen
engagemen . This engagemen may mani es in calls o new planning ins umen s, he c ea ion
o g ass oo s ini ia i es, o communi y esponses o he in low o speci ic ypes o capi al. This
aises a c i ical ques ion: i inclusi eness in spa ial de elopmen canno be secu ed h ough
planning ins umen s alone, bu ins ead equi es ecogni ion o he li ed eali ies o places
beyond ad hoc p ojec s (Ho lings e al., 2021), o wha ex en ha e cul u al ins i u ions
con ibu ed o os e ing sus ained and meaning ul o ms o engagemen ? Add essing his
ques ion calls o sys ema ic in es iga ion o cla i y bo h he limi a ions and he possibili ies
inhe en in he cul u al p ac ices o ins i u ions si ua ed in a eas unde going socio-spa ial
ans o ma ion.
A cen al dimension o his deba e is capaci y-building in spa ial planning, unde s ood in he
li e a u e (ibid.) as he de elopmen o ci izens’ skills, knowledge, and in e es s ha enable hem
o assume a mo e ac i e ole in spa ial planning ini ia i es. Cul u al p ac ices – whe he
in oduced h ough sho - e m p ojec s o embedded in long- e m ins i u ional p og ammes –
a e no only associa ed wi h a ac ing new popula ions o uses o an a ea. Thei added alue lies
mo e undamen ally in hei abili y o s eng hen people’s knowledge and capabili ies. The key
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
34
ques ion, he e o e, becomes whe he cul u al ins i u ions can e ec i ely os e such capaci y-
building in he con ex o spa ial de elopmen , he eby enabling ci izens o pa icipa e mo e
meaning ully in he e-en isioning o hei local en i onmen s. Building on his p emise, he
p esen s udy examines how cul u al ins i u ions in luence ci izens’ capaci ies, ocusing
speci ically on he po en ial o cul u al ac i i ies gene a ed h ough hei planned s a egy and
egula p og ammes. This pe spec i e is pa icula ly ele an in con ex s whe e cul u al
in e en ions ha e adi ionally p io i ised physical egene a ion o /and inancial ou comes.
Th ough an analysis o ci izens’ pe cep ions and expe iences, he pape s udies he mo i a ions
d i ing pa icipa ion and p o ides insigh s in o he po en ial s a egies cul u al ins i u ions can
employ o os e mo e inclusi e o ms o local ans o ma ion.
To pu sue his aim, he s udy in es iga es h ee cul u al o ganisa ions o dis inc cha ac e
and scope loca ed along Pi aeus Road in A hens, G eece. Pi aeus Road unde wen a a ge ed
egene a ion ini ia i e du ing he 1990s, ye he an icipa ed posi i e ou comes we e no uni o mly
ealised ac oss he a ea. Al hough he local de elopmen plan, cen ed on changing land uses,
was ini ially ega ded as p omising, i s implemen a ion coincided wi h he inabili y o local ac o s
o o mula e a sha ed ision o he oad (Tse a e al., 2024). While hese egula ions succeeded
in a ac ing cul u al ins i u ions – he majo i y o which emain ac i e oday – hei eloca ion did
no gene a e he b oade socioeconomic bene i s ha we e o iginally expec ed. Wi hin his
con ex and ecognising bo h he need o ci izen engagemen in spa ial planning p ocesses
along wi h he ole o cul u al ins i u ions as key ac o s, he s udy employs an empi ical su ey
o cul u al ins i u ions’ use s. The objec i e is o c i ically assess how pa icipa ion in cul u al
ac i i ies con ibu es o capaci y-building o ci izens (Sego ia & He é, 2022), he eby enabling
hei mo e ac i e in ol emen in spa ial de elopmen . The pape add esses wo cen al esea ch
ques ions in his ega d: i s , how do di e en ypes o use s pe cei e he ole o hese
ins i u ions; and second, which ins i u ional elemen s may enable capaci y-building. In doing so,
he s udy also conside s how public policy could suppo he enabling cha ac e is ics o cul u al
ins i u ions o enhance ci izen pa icipa ion in new spa ial planning isions.
Concep ual F amewo k
The ans o ma i e ou comes o cul u al p ac ices emain di icul o cap u e, pa icula ly
when conside ing he in e play be ween angible and in angible cul u al elemen s in place-based
app oaches. Schola s ha e highligh ed he need o eassess indica o s, e ine communica ion
among s akeholde s, and design s a egies o mo e meaning ul communi y engagemen
(T ica ico e al., 2022). Building on his, he p esen pape examines capaci y building o ci izen
engagemen as a co ne s one o c ea i e spa ial planning. He e, c ea i e planning e e s no only
o he capaci y o add ess spa ial challenges om di e se pe spec i es (Nyse h e al., 2017), bu
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
35
also o he explo a ion o al e na i e holis ic isions ha enable new o ms o spa ial o ganiza ion
o eme ge (F øde & K am ig, 2017).
Cul u al ac i i ies play a c ucial ole in shaping en i onmen s ha cul i a e a sha ed sense
o place among space use s (Robe s & Lowe, 2024). Unde s anding ci izen engagemen is
undamen al o examining he con lic ing na a i es su ounding spa ial ans o ma ion be ween
policymake s and he communi ies ha inhabi hese spaces (ibid). This app oach di e ges om
adi ional e alua ion ools in policymaking, as discussed by Sal elli e al. (2023), by emphasising
he wide socie al ou comes o cul u al ac i i ies (Rausell-Kös e e al., 2022). In his espec , i
s ands a he co e o socio-spa ial in eg a ion policy analysis (Ma eos Mo a & Yáñez, 2023).
Wi hin his con ex , capaci y building can be unde s ood ac oss mul iple pa adigms: a he
indi idual le el (skills and agency), he communi y le el ( us and collec i e esou ces), he
ins i u ional le el (adap i e go e nance), and he ans o ma i e le el (new imagina ies and
on ologies o space).
Capaci y building o e s a use ul en y poin o unde s anding he con ibu ion o cul u al
ac i i ies o cul u e-based u ban de elopmen . A en ion o s eng hening indi idual,
communi y, ins i u ional, and ans o ma i e capaci ies, make cul u al p ac ices spaces o
ac i e ci izen pa icipa ion. The li e a u e sugges s ha such ini ia i es hold he po en ial o
e ol e in o o ms o social inno a ion capable o econ igu ing social ela ions and os e ing
bo om-up ans o ma ion (Cancellie i e al., 2018; Moulae & an Dyck, 2013; Moulae e al.,
2022). This po en ial eme ges whe e cul u al p ac ices help o mi iga e ensions, os e social
cohesion, and enable inclusi e change (Galego e al., 2021). Ne e heless, such claims emain
ela i ely gene alised. Al hough o en amed in a posi i e ligh , hei complexi y and con ex -
speci ic na u e canno be adequa ely cap u ed h ough a uni e sal amewo k. F equen ly
celeb a ed as a ‘magic concep ’ wi hin go e nance deba es (B agaglia, 2021), he no ion has also
been c i icised o i s ins umen al deploymen as a means o shi ing esponsibili ies o ci izens
wi hou a co esponding edis ibu ion o powe (Fougè e & Me iläinen, 2019).
On he o he hand, he ole o cul u al p ac ices has been unde s ood as equi ing he
o ma ion o con ex -speci ic alliances, calib a ed o local policy landscapes and communi y
aspi a ions (And é e al., 2013; Sum & Jessop, 2013; And é, 2019). Thei ans o ma i e po en ial
es s less on uni e sal solu ions han on he ex en o which capaci y de elopmen edis ibu es
au ho i y and enables co-p oduc ion as a genuine space o delibe a i e democ acy. F amed in
his way, he deba e on social inno a ion can be eo ien ed: a he han being po ayed as a
adically new phenomenon, i may be mo e p oduc i ely app oached as a mode o enewal,
econ igu a ion, and ansla ion wi hin exis ing ins i u ional and cul u al a angemen s.
Building on his, he abili y o cul u al ac i i ies o connec di e se s akeholde s and p o ide
ools o engaging wi h u ban de elopmen u u es highligh s hei ele ance as socially
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
36
inno a i e p ac ices. This is pa icula ly signi ican in con ex s whe e he objec i e is no o
en o ce consensus, bu o build capaci ies o add essing con lic and nego ia ing powe
ela ions ( on Schön eld & Fe ei a, 2021). In his ligh , Sui ne e al. (2024) p opose an analy ical
amewo k o assessing he cul i a ion o socially inno a i e p ocesses as a means o iden i ying
s a egies o alue c ea ion. While con ex -speci ic, hei amewo k iden i ies social inno a ion
in o social expe imen a ion as a means o es ing new o ms o social o ganisa ion a bo h
go e nance and communi y le els. Taken oge he , i p o ides a cons uc i e lens o e alua ing
he po en ial o cul u al ac i i ies o gene a e social alue, he e unde s ood as he empowe men
o ci izens o a icula e isions, nego ia e in e es s, and pa icipa e meaning ully in planning
p ocesses.
This pape applies a h ee old me hodological s uc u e o analyse he ex e nali ies
gene a ed by cul u al ac i i ies – anging om a is ic p ac ices and e en s o educa ional
p og ammes and communi y engagemen ini ia i es – and o assess he ex en o which hey
os e a sha ed sense o place whe e ci izens become s akeholde s in u ban de elopmen .
Ex e nali ies a e unde s ood he e as ou comes ha ex end beyond he immedia e scope o
cul u al ins i u ions, such as economic spill-o e s, symbolic alue, o enhanced social ne wo ks
(Ga cía, 2004). Among hese, capaci y building eme ges as a c ucial ex e nali y: cul u al
p ac ices no only gene a e a is ic ou pu s bu also cul i a e skills, agency, and collabo a i e
p ac ices ha unde pin sus ainable pa icipa ion in planning p ocesses (Ch is man e al., 2020)
and hus enable social expe imen a ion.
C ucially, such p ac ices canno be educed o abs ac ‘good p ac ices’ ha can be
uni e sally eplica ed. Ra he , hey ope a e as si ua ed p ocesses in which inno a ion a ises
h ough nego ia ion, ansla ion, and con es a ion ac oss di e se go e nance se ings.
Embedding capaci ies wi hin locally g ounded meanings is he e o e essen ial, ein o cing he
need o ancho alue-c ea ion p ocesses in hei speci ic cul u al and spa ial con ex s (To e,
2024). This o ien a ion esona es wi h calls o unde s and spa ial planning as a dynamic and
adap i e p ac ice a he han a s a ic bluep in (Healey, 2007; Alb ech s, 2015). I also aligns wi h
ecen schola ship highligh ing he ans o ma i e capaci y o cul u al ini ia i es in pos -
indus ial u ban con ex s (Popa e al., 2025), while a he same ime ecognising ha agmen ed
go e nance amewo ks con inue o shape – and equen ly cons ain – pa icipa o y ou comes
(Ku Özman & Taşan-Kok, 2024).
Figu e 1 p esen s a amewo k showing how cul u al ac i i ies can ini ia e ci izen
pa icipa ion, gene a ing di e se pe cep ions o space and collec i e engagemen . Pa icipa ion
gi es ise o capaci y building as a co e ex e nali y, a icula ed ac oss ou dimensions -
indi idual, communi y, ins i u ional, and ans o ma i e. These capaci ies can s eng hen skills,
ne wo ks, and go e nance while also c ea e condi ions o social inno a ion by ein o cing
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
37
pa icipa ion in planning p ocedu es. The esul ing policy ou comes media e be ween
communi y and ins i u ional pe spec i es and con ibu e o socio-spa ial in eg a ion, while a
eedback loop illus a es how in eg a ion ou comes eshape bo h pe cep ions and p ac ices,
in o ming u u e cycles o cul u al ac i i y.
Figu e 1. Analy ical F amewo k: Capaci y Building Cycle in Cul u al Ac i i ies. Au ho s’ own elabo a ion.
This pape applies he abo e amewo k o examine ci izens’ pe cep ions as a c ucial lens
o assessing whe he cul u al ac i i ies gene a e such ex e nali ies. Pa icula a en ion is gi en
o capaci y building as a co e ou come ha in luences pa icipa ion, policy p ocesses, and
socio-spa ial in eg a ion, wi h Pi aeus Road se ing as he ocal case s udy. To deepen he
unde s anding o ci izen in ol emen , he s udy examines h ee dis inc cases along Pi aeus
Road, each e lec ing di e en le els o engagemen wi h he la ge-scale impac s en isioned in
he o iginal u ban ede elopmen s a egy. This app oach is pa icula ly impo an , as exis ing
li e a u e s esses how a ying deg ees o ci izen pa icipa ion di ec ly in luence he success and
long- e m sus ainabili y o u ban ans o ma ion ini ia i es (B agaglia & Ca uso, 2020). The
analysis begins wi h an explo a ion o key spa ial planning elemen s and he in eg a ion o
cul u e-based policy in e en ions in he a ea. I hen u ns o a close examina ion o he speci ic
ea u es o he h ee cul u al in e en ions unde s udy. Building on his, he pape p esen s he
me hodology and esul s o an empi ical su ey cap u ing ci izens’ pe cep ions o he
ex e nali ies gene a ed by hese ins i u ions’ cul u al p ac ices. Finally, he s udy syn hesises i s
indings, discussing he expe imen al possibili ies opened up by he iden i ied ex e nali ies and
hei implica ions o u u e u ban de elopmen .
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
38
Key spa ial planning oppo uni ies and challenges on Pi aeus Road
Pi aeus Road is a main oad axis ha connec s he cen e o A hens o he ci y o Pi aeus,
co e ing an a ea nea ly 10 km long ha adminis a i ely belongs o ou municipali ies (A hens,
Moscha o-Ta os, Nikaia-Aghios Ioannis Ren is and Pi aeus Municipali ies). Pi aeus Road’s
his o ical impo ance and i s con empo a y ajec o ies ha e ho oughly a ac ed analy ical and
policy in e es (Ko ios e al., 2018). In he 1970s, Pi aeus Road en e ed a long pe iod o
ans o ma ion, becoming an emblema ic case o G eece’s deindus ializa ion p ocess
(Ag ian oni, 2019). This ans o ma ion pa ly led o a ques o a s a egic enewal o he oad,
de i ing om he abandonmen and de elic ion o he exis ing o me indus ial building s ock.
This ques has been g adually mani es ed h ough a se ies o ac ions ha wen unde way
h oughou he yea s, comp ising planning policy measu es and legisla i e ac ions aimed a he
alo isa ion o he o me indus ial building s ock and he a ac ion o cul u al, en e ainmen ,
educa ional, ec ea ion, and a ge ed p oduc i e ac i i ies. All hese led o he ans o ma ion o
he oad as an a ea o sup a-local de elopmen in e es . Indeed, he eloca ion o cul u al uses1,
du ing he 1990s and he 2000s, cons i u ed sup a-local mainly public-d i en in e en ions ha
added o he cul u al capi al asse s o he a ea combined wi h he sup a-local comme cial- e ail
and mass en e ainmen ac i i ies on speci ic si es; all in all, p ojec ing a adically di e en
s uc u e om i s indus ial pas . Howe e , he lack o cu en implemen a ion p ac ice suppo
o new cul u e-based ede elopmen ac ions has been coupled wi h wha li e a u e sugges s
analy ically as an o e all absence o us and consensus (Giannakou ou, 2019) on planning
ision o he oad, among he pa ies and s akeholde s in ol ed wi hou he pa allel e o o
ha monisa ion wi h he abo e planning le els. This is u he enhanced by he di e en ia ed
socioeconomic condi ions each municipali y neighbou ing o he Pi aeus Road is subjec o.
Table 1 p esen s he e olu ion o planning in e en ions o Pi aeus Road and i s su ounding
a eas. Nex , Map 1 p esen s land uses p o isions o Pi aeus Road based on he exis ing
legisla i e amewo k.
Table 1. Summa y o Spa ial Planning Legisla ion P o isions o Pi aeus Road (compiled om o icial documen s,
au ho s’ p ocessing).
Plan
Yea
P o isions o Pi aeus Road
Regula o y Plan o A hens
(O icial Gaze e 18Α
/18.2.1985) &
1983
I d a ed ac ions o ede ining he cen al a eas o
A hens and Pi aeus, eloca ion o wholesale and
indus ial uses, and consolida ing he a eas’ his o ical
1 Such as hea ical spaces, he School o Fine A s, he Ellinikos Kosmos Cul u al Cen e , he Technopolis
in Gkazi a ea, he Benaki Museum, he M. Cacoyannis Founda ion, and he A hens G eek Fes i al.
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
39
Regula o y Plan o A hens
amendmen (O icial Gaze e
94Α /5.6.1992A)
1992
impo ance and hei ole as me opoli an-
in e na ional cen e s. Emphasis was gi en also o he
wes e n pa o he A hens cen al a ea wi h he
eloca ion o cul u al and adminis a i e uses o he
neighbou hoods o Gazi, Ke ameikos, and Ie a Odos;
all o which bea connec ions o Pi aeus Road.
A hens Ci y Local Land Use
Plan (O icial Gaze e 80Δ /
4.1.1988)
1988
I de e mined incen i es o new uses as well as
s eng hening he me opoli an ole o he cen al
a ea.
Moscha o Ci y Local Land Use
Plan (O icial Gaze e Δ 386/
2.6.1988)
1988
I mainly e e ed o public oad wo ks wi h special
e e ence o Pi aeus Road.
Ta os Ci y Local Plan (O icial
Gaze e 834 Δ / 31.08.1987)
1987
I e e ed o he need o p o iding incen i es o he
de elopmen o mul i-dynamic cen e s and gene al
housing uses along he Pi aeus Road.
Aghios Ioannis Ren is Ci y
Local Plan (O icial Gaze e
1038 Δ / 16.10.1987)
1987
I e e ed o he upg ading o Pi aeus Road wi h he
g adual eloca ion o he indus ial uses wi h less
nuisance and aes he ically upg aded uses.
Pi aeus Ci y Local Plan
(O icial Gaze e 79 Δ /
4.2.1988)
1988
I e e ed o Pi aeus a eas, posing a need o he
p ese a ion and p o ec ion o his o ic buildings and
change o use.
P o isions o he p o ec ion
o he adi ional cha ac e o
pa icula pa s o buildings o
he oad (O icial Gaze e 510
Δ' /1996; and i s amendmen
267 Δ'/1997)
1996/1997
This a ge ed legisla ion modi ied he a o emen ioned
local plans by designa ing he oad as a special
s a u e adi ional-his o ical a ea beyond he
his o ical cen e s o A hens and he municipal
bounda ies o he ou municipali ies i spans. In his
con ex , eigh y-eigh (88) buildings and en (10)
acades belonging also o he oad we e classi ied as
lis ed buildings.
Legisla ion on Pi aeus Road
cha ac e (O icial Gaze e
1063 Δ / 16.11.2004)
2004
A hens, Ta os, Moscha o, Ag. Ioannis Ren is and
Pi aeus municipali ies’ local plans we e modi ied o
egula e new uses and de ine cons uc ion by-laws in
he Pi aeus oad axis a ea.
Legisla ion on Pi aeus Road
cha ac e amendmen (103
ΑΑΠ/ 22.2.2007)
2007
I allowed he eloca ion o ood hype ma ke s and
pa ly speci ied land use ca ego ies based on 2004
legisla ion p o isions.
New A hens-A ica Regula o y
Plan (O icial Gaze e 156 Α /
1.8.2014).
2014
I emphasized he need o de elop he Pi aeus Road
a ea based on cul u al unc ions and leisu e ac i i ies
wi h he aim o enhancing he image and iden i y o
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
46
Table 2. Dimensions o Su ey and Co esponding Fo ms o Capaci y Building (au ho s’ own elabo a ion).
Su ey Dimension
Linked Capaci y-
Building Types
Focus o Capaci y Building
Ins i u ions’
Realized Impac
Ins i u ional,
T ans o ma i e
Suppo ing en ep eneu ship, sociopoli ical
pa icipa ion, and local economic change;
po en ial isks o gen i ica ion.
Cul u e’s Role
Indi idual,
Communi y
De eloping pe sonal c ea i i y and skills;
os e ing collec i e coope a ion and imp o ing
social li e.
Place-Making &
Communi y
In ol emen
Communi y,
T ans o ma i e
Building belonging and collabo a ion; enabling
go e nance inno a ion and econ igu ed
spa ial ela ions.
The su ey began by sc eening pa icipan s o de e mine hei engagemen wi h he cul u al
spaces. Subsequen ly, he pe cei ed impac o cul u al ac i i ies o he a o emen ioned
indica o s was measu ed using a Like scale (1-5), assessing esponses ela ed o he cul u al
ins i u ions' oles in he a o emen ioned a eas. The su ey also collec ed sociodemog aphic da a
and in o ma ion on pa icipa ion cha ac e is ics o con ex ualize he esponses.
The s udy employed a combina ion o desc ip i e s a is ics, ANOVA, pos -hoc es s, and -
es s o analyse he su ey esul s. Since he su ey aimed a compa ing he pe cep ions o use s
om di e en ins i u ions (Technopolis, he School o Fine A s, and Roman so), ANOVA was
used o assess whe he s a is ically signi ican di e ences exis ed be ween hese g oups.
ANOVA is pa icula ly e ec i e when compa ing h ee o mo e g oups, as i can iden i y
signi ican a ia ions in pe cep ions ac oss cul u al ins i u ions. I signi ican di e ences we e
ound, pos -hoc es s we e conduc ed o pinpoin which speci ic g oups di e ed om each
o he . Addi ionally, - es s we e employed o compa e wo g oups a a ime, speci ically o
examining sociodemog aphic di e ences (Robson, 2002).
Resul s and Discussion
Responden s’ p o ile and gene al pe cep ion o ins i u ions’ impac
A o al o 202 esponden s pa icipa ed in he Technopolis su ey. The sample was weigh ed
owa ds women (59.4%) and adul s aged 35–49 (50.5%), mos o whom we e G eek na ionals
(84.2%), employed in he p i a e sec o (48.5%), and wi h medium income (77.7%). This p o ile
e lec s he ins i u ion’s posi ioning as a cul u al hub appealing o middle-income p o essionals,
many o whom had p e iously engaged wi h i s ac i i ies (83.7% in 2019, pa icula ly exhibi ions
a 76%). Responden s la gely pe cei ed Technopolis as con ibu ing posi i ely o public space,
social li e, and poli ical engagemen , sugges ing ha i s cul u al p og amme esona es beyond
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
47
i s p emises. Ne e heless, ce ain limi a ions we e iden i ied: a mino i y el excluded due o
misma ches be ween he con en o ac i i ies and hei in e es s, o a lack o in o ma ion abou
a ailable oppo uni ies, poin ing o he impo ance o communica ion s a egies o sus aining
b oade engagemen .
The School o Fine A s su ey yielded 109 esponses, wi h a ma kedly di e en p o ile.
Nea ly hal o esponden s we e s uden s (46.8%), while ano he 29.4% we e uni e si y
g adua es. Pa icipa ion le els we e high, wi h 78% a ending School o Fine A s ac i i ies and
47.1% doing so weekly, e lec ing i s embeddedness in he academic ou ine o i s communi y.
Howe e , his equency o engagemen did no necessa ily ansla e in o pe cep ions o b oade
socio-economic impac . Responden s alued School o Fine A s p ima ily o aes he ic
cul i a ion and a is ic c ea ion, while epo ing minimal e ec s on en ep eneu ship,
employmen , o public space imp o emen . In e es in he u u e de elopmen o he
su ounding a ea was e iden , pa icula ly in ela ion o in es men s and public space, bu such
aspi a ions emained la gely disconnec ed om he ins i u ion’s e e yday cul u al ac i i ies.
Roman so’s su ey, in ol ing 66 pa icipan s, indica ed a smalle bu cul u ally ac i e
audience, wi h 68.2% ha ing a ended e en s in 2019, p ima ily es i als and exhibi ions. Despi e
his in e es , esponden s pe cei ed he ins i u ion’s ex e nal impac s as limi ed, pa icula ly in
ela ion o en ep eneu ship, employmen , and neighbou hood imp o emen s. Ins ead, i s alue
was seen in os e ing a is ic c ea ion and o e ing space o cul u al consump ion, wi h li le
acknowledgmen o wide socio-economic o spa ial bene i s. Responden s also no ed ha
Roman so’s in luence was mos ly con ined o i s in e nal space, ein o cing i s ole as an
incuba o o niche c ea i i y a he han a d i e o u ban ans o ma ion. S ill, many pa icipan s
exp essed openness o con ibu ing o local de elopmen ini ia i es, hough ba ie s such as
lack o ime o esou ces cons ained deepe engagemen .
Taken oge he , hese desc ip i e p o iles highligh con as ing logics o pa icipa ion.
Technopolis a ac s a b oad, gene al audience ha associa es cul u al ac i i y wi h ci ic and
economic bene i s; School o Fine A s d aws equen engagemen bu wi hin a na owe ,
academically o ien ed ame ha limi s pe cep ions o ex e nal impac ; Roman so cul i a es
a is ic ib ancy bu emains spa ially con ained. These con as s shape how each ins i u ion is
pe cei ed as a con ibu o – o no – o wide u ban de elopmen , an issue explo ed u he in he
compa a i e analysis below.
Nex , a compa a i e analysis was conduc ed be ween he esponses om he di e en case
s udies o assess he signi icance o he esul s. The indings a e p esen ed in he subsequen
sec ions.
Cul u al Ins i u ions and pe cei ed socio-economic impac
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
48
To assess pe cep ions o socio-economic ou comes, pa icipan s a ed ins i u ions’ impac
on i e indica o s: cos o li ing, local en ep eneu ship, public space imp o emen , employmen
oppo uni ies, and socio-poli ical li e. ANOVA esul s showed s a is ically signi ican di e ences
ac oss ins i u ions o all indica o s, con i ming ha ins i u ional ype ma e s: cos o li ing
[F(2,374)=75.88, p<0.001], en ep eneu ship [F(2,374)=242.99, p<0.001], public space
[F(2,374)=239.15, p<0.001], employmen [F(2,374)=111.07, p<0.001], and socio-poli ical
imp o emen [F(2,374)=78.87, p<0.001].
Sche e pos hoc es s e eal ha Technopolis consis en ly sco ed highe han School o
Fine A s and Roman so on economic- ela ed indica o s, including cos o li ing,
en ep eneu ship, public space, and employmen . This ein o ces i s p o ile as a la ge-scale
cul u al hub wi h isible spill-o e e ec s in local de elopmen . Roman so, hough smalle , was
a ed highe han School o Fine A s on en ep eneu ship and public space, sugges ing ha e en
mid-sized c ea i e hubs can ac i a e ce ain neighbou hood dynamics. In con as , School o
Fine A s sco e highe le els ega ding i s pe cei ed impac on socio-poli ical imp o emen ,
su passing bo h Technopolis and Roman so, which e lec s i s academic o ien a ion and i s ole
in cul i a ing a is ic and ci ic discou se.
These esul s demons a e ha esponden s gene ally linked ins i u ional impac o hei
own e e yday needs a he han o b oade ede elopmen aspi a ions. Fo ins ance, many
Technopolis and Roman so use s associa ed hei isi s wi h occasional ec ea ional ac i i ies,
a pa e n ha explains lowe le els o sus ained pa icipa ion. By con as , School o Fine A s
use s, mos ly s uden s, displayed highe equency o isi s, bu his egula i y did no ansla e
in o pe cep ions o ans o ma i e impac . Ins ead, i ein o ced he sense o School o Fine A s
as a dynamic academic space a he han a ca alys o a ea-wide change. Mo eo e , occasional
isi o s ac oss all ins i u ions o en s uggled o de elop sus ainable pa icipa o y links,
highligh ing he impo ance o designing di ec and con incing s a egies o engagemen .
Impo an ly, mos esponden s in all h ee cases did no pe cei e cul u al ins i u ions as
con ibu ing di ec ly o he Pi aeus Road ede elopmen ision, ins ead si ua ing impac wi hin
he ins i u ions’ in e nal spaces (77% o Technopolis, 98.2% o SCHOOL OF FINE ARTS, 89.4%
o Roman so). Only a mino i y poin ed o b oade neighbou hood imp o emen s, and hese we e
concen a ed in Technopolis and Roman so, whe e local en ep eneu ship ac i a ion was mo e
isible. Sociopoli ical imp o emen s we e also pe cei ed une enly: while mos esponden s
linked hem o public policy in e en ions in new public spaces, some in Technopolis (43.6%)
associa ed hem wi h he a ac ion o new isi o s, and a smalle sha e o School o Fine A s
esponden s (15.4%) linked hem o inc eased decision-making capaci y.
O e all, he indings highligh ha ci izens’ pa icipa ion in cul u al ac i i ies is la gely
amed by immedia e p ac ical bene i s, such as ec ea ion o local economic oppo uni ies,
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
49
a he han long- e m social inno a ion o spa ial ans o ma ion. While Technopolis
demons a es capaci y o in luence economic dimensions, School o Fine A s s eng hens
socio-poli ical discou se, and Roman so nu u es cul u al ib ancy a a mic o scale, none o he
h ee ins i u ions we e widely pe cei ed as connec ed o b oade ede elopmen agendas. This
e eals bo h he po en ial and he limi a ions o cul u al ins i u ions in shaping u ban
ans o ma ion: hey can mobilise engagemen in speci ic domains bu s uggle o p ojec hese
impac s on o wide e i o ial o go e nance amewo ks.
Table 3. Means and S anda d De ia ion (S d.D.) o pa icipan s’ esponses ega ding he ype o impac (a ea cos , a ea
local en ep eneu ship, a ea public space, a ea public space and a e social and poli ical li e) and in ela ion o he
h ee case s udy a eas (au ho s’ own elabo a ion).
Technopolis (1)
School o Fine A s (2)
Roman so (3)
Cos o Li ing
Mean: 2.47
S d.D.: 1.618
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2,3
Mean: 0.75
S d.D.: 0.547
Mean: 1.11
S d.D.: 0.726
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
Local
En ep eneu ship
Mean: 3.21
S d.D.: 1.088
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2,3
Mean: 0.87
S d.D.: 0.610
Mean: 1.62
S d.D.: 0.837
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
Public Space
Imp o emen
Mean: 3.62
S d.D.: 0.791
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2,3
Mean: 0.80
S d.D.: 0.590
Mean: 1.32
S d.D.: 0.768
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
Inc easing
Employmen
Oppo uni ies
Mean: 2.72
S d.D.: 1.436
Mean: 2.47
S d.D.: 1.618
Mean: 2.47
S d.D.: 1.618
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
50
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2,3
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
Imp o emen o
Social and Poli ical
Li e
Mean: 1.17
S d.D.: 1.618
Mean: 1.76
S d.D.: 0.428
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
2>1,3
Mean: 1.58
S d.D.: 0.498
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>1
Cul u al Ins i u ions and pe cei ed Role o local communi ies
The analysis o pa icipan s’ pe cep ions o he oles o cul u al ins i u ions ocused on ou
dimensions: aes he ic cul i a ion, a is ic c ea ion, socioeconomic li e, and coope a ion
ne wo ks. ANOVA esul s con i med s a is ically signi ican a ia ion ac oss ins i u ions:
aes he ic cul i a ion [F(2,374)=75.88, p<0.001], en ep eneu ship [F(2,374)=14.936, p<0.001],
a is ic c ea ion [F(2,374)=26.356, p<0.001], socioeconomic imp o emen [F(2,374)=14.016,
p<0.001], and coope a ion ne wo ks [F(2,374)=24.770, p<0.001]. These indings unde line ha
ins i u ional ype decisi ely shapes how esponden s assess cul u al con ibu ions.
Pos hoc compa isons demons a e a clea di e en ia ion o oles. School o Fine A s
esponden s alued mos highly he ole o cul u al ins i u ions in aes he ic cul i a ion and
os e ing a is ic c ea ion, con i ming he ins i u ion’s o ien a ion owa d academic and a is ic
en ichmen . Technopolis esponden s, howe e , placed g ea e emphasis on socioeconomic
imp o emen and coope a ion ne wo ks, e lec ing i s ci ic scale and i s s onge in eg a ion in o
en ep eneu ial and local economic li e. Roman so’s a ings posi ioned i be ween hese wo,
wi h esponden s ecognising con ibu ions o a is ic c ea ion and ne wo king, ye less
consis en ly associa ing hem wi h communi y-wide bene i s.
Ac oss all h ee cases, esponden s ended o in e p e cul u al ins i u ions as ein o cing
con en ional a is ic and aes he ic oles a he han d i e s o wide socio-poli ical
ans o ma ion. This was especially e iden in SCHOOL OF FINE ARTS, whe e 61.5% p io i ised
aes he ic cul i a ion and 60.6% p io i ised a is ic c ea ion, and Technopolis, whe e 55.9% and
64.4% espec i ely highligh ed simila oles. Such pe cep ions poin o a disjunc u e: while
ins i u ions a e embedded in a b oade ede elopmen na a i e, hei cul u al iden i y emains
oo ed in a is ic p ac ice a he han in eshaping socio-poli ical s uc u es.
The pe sis ence o his pe cep ion is no ewo hy, gi en ha s a egic aspi a ions o Pi aeus
Road ede elopmen da e back o he 1990s. The ac ha esponden s la gely ailed o connec
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
51
cul u al ins i u ions wi h his b oade ision sugges s a weak ansla ion o policy he o ic in o
li ed expe ience. By con as , compa a i e li e a u e demons a es ha in o he con ex s,
cul u al ins i u ions ha e been seen as cen al o collec i e iden i y-building and socio-poli ical
change (And é e al., 2013). He e, howe e , cul u al oles a e con ined o sel -con ained
ins i u ional spaces, limi ing hei capaci y o os e b oade communi y engagemen o poli ical
agency. This ou come highligh s a gap be ween ins i u ional po en ial and public pe cep ion, and
unde lines he impo ance o si ua ing cul u al policy in ways ha esona e mo e di ec ly wi h
communi y aspi a ions.
Sociodemog aphic a ia ions ein o ced his pa e n. G eek na ionals (N=317) a ed
aes he ic cul i a ion signi ican ly highe han esponden s o o he na ionali ies [ (375)=1.924,
p<0.001], and medium-income pa icipan s (N=287) did so mo e han hose wi h low incomes
[ (375)=2.12, p=0.004]. Cul u al-sec o p o essionals (N=114), howe e , epo ed lowe le els o
pe cei ed socio-poli ical con ibu ion [ (336)=0.246, p=0.003], pe haps e lec ing g ea e
scep icism abou he ac ual ci ic impac o cul u al ins i u ions. Pa icipan s ac i ely engaged
wi h any o he ins i u ions’ ac i i ies (N=299) also a ed aes he ic cul i a ion highe [ (375)=4.85,
p<0.001], con i ming ha equen use s end o in e nalise cul u e’s aes he ic alue a he han
i s ans o ma i e po en ial. These esul s indica e ha social loca ion and p o essional
backg ound shape pe cep ions, u he cons aining he ex en o which cul u al ins i u ions a e
seen as ca alys s o u ban ans o ma ion.
Table 4. Means and S anda d De ia ion (S d.D.) o pa icipan s’ esponses on di e en s a emen s ega ding cul u al
ins i u ions’ oles and in ela ion o he h ee case s udy a eas: Aes he ic Cul i a ion o he Indi idual, Fos e ing A is ic
C ea ion, Economic and Social Li e o an a ea Imp o emen , S eng hened Coope a ion Ne wo ks in be ween public
and p i a e o ganisa ions (au ho s’ own elabo a ion). .
Technopolis (1)
School o Fine A s (2)
Roman so (3)
Aes he ic
Cul i a ion o he
Indi idual
Mean: 3.79
S d.D.: 0.710
Mean: 4.21
S d.D.: 0.610
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
2>1,3
Mean: 3.67
S d.D.: 0.997
Fos e ing A is ic
C ea ion
Mean: 4.09
S d.D.: 0.617
Mean: 4.61
S d.D.: 0.491
Mean: 4.30
S d.D.: 0.701
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
52
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
2>1,3
Economic and
Social Li e o an a ea
Imp o emen
Mean: 3.52
S d.D.: 0.859
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2
Mean: 2.87
S d.D.: 1.299
Mean: 3.39
S d.D.: 1.065
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
S eng hened
Coope a ion
Ne wo ks in
be ween public and
p i a e
o ganisa ions
Mean: 3.58
S d.D.: 0.895
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2
Mean: 2.66
S d.D.: 1.396
Mean: 3.39
S d.D.: 1.188
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
Cul u al Ins i u ions and con ibu ion in Spa ial De elopmen
A inal se o analyses explo ed how esponden s linked cul u al ins i u ions o spa ial
de elopmen oppo uni ies, including new in es men s, a ac ion o popula ion, public space
imp o emen , a ac ion o cul u al ins i u ions, and ac i a ion o local bodies. ANOVA esul s
con i med signi ican ins i u ional e ec s ac oss all indica o s: in es men s [F(2,374)=15.172,
p<0.001], public space [F(2,374)=93.046, p<0.001], new cul u al ins i u ions [F(2,374)=54.902,
p<0.001], socioeconomic imp o emen [F(2,374)=14.016, p<0.001], and ac i a ion o local
bodies [F(2,374)=24.581, p<0.001].Sche e pos hoc compa isons highligh dis inc ins i u ional
p o iles. School o Fine A s pa icipan s conside ed new in es men s and public space
imp o emen s as mos impo an , e lec ing hei o ien a ion owa d long- e m u ban quali y and
s uden -o ien ed needs. Roman so pa icipan s, in con as , p io i ised ac i a ion o local
en i ies in decision-making, sugges ing a s onge awa eness o go e nance p ocesses despi e
he ins i u ion’s smalle scale. Technopolis esponden s emphasised a ac ion o new cul u al
ins i u ions, consis en wi h i s posi ioning as a la ge-scale hub ha ancho s and a ac s
complemen a y ac i i ies.
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
53
Despi e hese di e ences, all h ee g oups con e ged on he impo ance o new in es men s,
indica ing ha esponden s p io i ise angible de elopmen o e abs ac policy agendas. Ye he
way in es men s we e amed a ied: o Technopolis, in es men s we e linked o a ac ing
popula ion (74.8%) and imp o ing public space (58.4%); o SCHOOL OF FINE ARTS, he ocus
was o e whelmingly on public space (74.3%) and seconda ily on new esiden s (51.4%); o
Roman so, simila p opo ions s essed bo h public space (53%) and popula ion a ac ion
(53%). These indings sugges ha while public space imp o emen is consis en ly alued, he
aming o o he p io i ies depends on ins i u ional ype and use base.
The ole o local bodies elici ed mixed esponses, wi h suppo anging om 25.7% in School
o Fine A s o nea ly 50% in Technopolis and Roman so. This unce ain y e lec s bo h ci izens’
ambi alence abou go e nance p ocesses and hei limi ed us in policy ac o s o acili a e
pa icipa o y de elopmen . The eluc ance o engage in u u e ini ia i es u he unde sco es his
poin : many esponden s exp essed low expec a ions ha ins i u ions could o would o ganise
such ini ia i es, pa icula ly in he case o Technopolis.
Sociodemog aphic a iables sha pen hese dis inc ions. Younge esponden s (<35, N=174)
a ed popula ion a ac ion as less impo an [ (375)=1.350, p<0.001] bu ac i a ion o local
bodies as mo e impo an [ (375)=2.755, p<0.001], sugges ing gene a ional di e ences in
p io i ising go e nance o e demog aphic change. Highe -educa ed esponden s a ed local
body ac i a ion sligh ly less impo an [ (375)=0.42, p=0.002], while pa icipan s engaged wi h
cul u al ac i i ies (N=299) a ed bo h popula ion a ac ion [ (375)=2.041, p=0.002] and local
body ac i a ion [ (375)=2.509, p<0.001] mo e highly. These indings poin o he ac ha
engagemen i sel os e s a s onge connec ion be ween cul u e and spa ial de elopmen
aspi a ions, whe eas disengagemen sus ains scep icism.
O e all, his sec ion demons a es ha esponden s end o alue conc e e, isible
imp o emen s – in es men s, public space, and new ins i u ions – o e sys emic go e nance
ans o ma ions. While ins i u ional ype and use p o ile shape which dimensions a e
p io i ised, he b oade pa e n is one o p agma ic expec a ions: cul u e is alued as a
con ibu o o local quali y o li e bu is a ely seen as a ehicle o ans o ma i e ede elopmen .
Table 5. Means and S anda d De ia ion (S d.D.) o pa icipan s’ esponses on Spa ial De elopmen Oppo uni ies om
Ins i u ions’ Cul u al In e en ions: C ea ion o new in es men s in he a ea, Imp o emen o Public Space , A ac ion
o new cul u al ins i u ions in he a ea , G ea e ac i a ion o local bodies in decision making (au ho s’ own elabo a ion).
Technopolis (1)
School o Fine A s (2)
Roman so (3)
C ea ion o new
in es men s in he
a ea
Mean: 3.89
S d.D.: 0.535
Mean: 4.23
S d.D.: 0.502
Mean: 4.15
S d.D.: 0.048
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
54
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
2>1,3
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>1
Imp o emen o
Public Space
Mean: 3.83
S d.D.: 0.648
Mean: 4.72
S d.D.: 0.488
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05: 2>1
Mean: 4.52
S d.D.: 0.533
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>1,2
A ac ion o new
cul u al
ins i u ions in he
a ea
Mean: 3.40
S d.D.: 0.830
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2,3
Mean: 2.23
S d.D.: 0.978
Mean: 3.89
S d.D.: 1.165
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>2
G ea e ac i a ion
o local bodies in
decision making
Mean: 3.74
S d.D.: 0.848
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
1>2
Mean: 3.13
S d.D.: 1.473
Mean: 4.24
S d.D.: 0.745
Sche e Mul iple
Compa isons P<0,05:
3>1,2
Conclusions
The aim o his pape was o con ibu e o he ongoing deba e on how cul u al ac i i ies can
meaning ully engage ci izens in spa ial de elopmen . The ocus was on enhancing capaci ies
ela ed o pa icipa ion as a key ex e nali y in u ban planning (Nyse h e al., 2017), e lec ed in
he wide ex e nali ies o cul u al in e en ions (Rausell-Kös e e al., 2022). Th ough an empi ical
su ey on h ee cul u al spaces loca ed along Pi aeus Road, he s udy c i ically examined
ci izens' pe cep ions o he ex e nali ies c ea ed by cul u al ac i i ies. I explo ed how
pa icipa ion in cul u al expe iences in luenced ci izens’ pe cep ions o hei su oundings and
hei po en ial o con ibu e o b oade goals o spa ial ans o ma ion.
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
55
Building on li e a u e ha s esses he impo ance o ecognising ci izens' needs and oles in
ne wo king ac i i ies when analysing cul u e’s ele ance o spa ial planning (Tahe i e al., 2024),
his pape also examined he ole o cul u al ins i u ions in s imula ing demand o cul u al
p ac ices ha add ess spa ial planning challenges wi hin hei p og ams. In his ega d, he pape
p o ided insigh s in o cases whe e cul u al in e en ions we e assumed o be au oma ically
bene icial, linking o he social inno a ion app oach, bu whe e he pa icipa ion dimension was
no adequa ely enhanced. To cap u e hese dynamics, he s udy conside ed ci izens’
pe cep ions o cul u al ins i u ions' impac on spa ial de elopmen oppo uni ies and highligh ed
he impo ance o enabling condi ions owa ds capaci y building so ha cul u al in e en ions
can espond o socie al change (Galego e al., 2021).
Resul s indica ed ha each ins i u ion had a dis inc impac , bu le els o ci izen engagemen
and pe cei ed bene i s a ied signi ican ly acco ding o ype, scale, and na u e. The compa a i e
analysis unde sco ed he impo ance o s udying ins i u ions o di e en sizes and o ien a ions
side by side. I also showed ha he pe cei ed impac in each a ea o en did no align wi h
expec ed o desi ed ou comes. Fo example, esponden s om School o Fine A s epo ed
sociopoli ical imp o emen s mo e s ongly han he o he wo ins i u ions, ye hey alued i s ole
mainly in aes he ic cul i a ion and os e ing a is ic c ea ion. They p io i ised new in es men s,
public space imp o emen s, and ac i a ion o local ac o s, bu wi hou ecognising a di ec
connec ion be ween hese ou comes and he cul u al cha ac e o he ins i u ion. In con as ,
esponden s om Technopolis no ed signi ican impac s on cos o li ing, en ep eneu ship,
public space, and employmen oppo uni ies. They also alued Technopolis o i s con ibu ions
o socioeconomic imp o emen , coope a ion ne wo ks, and i s abili y o a ac new cul u al
ins i u ions. Roman so esponden s, by compa ison, linked he ins i u ion mo e s ongly wi h
imp o emen s in he local sociopoli ical en i onmen and s essed he need o enhance local
ac o s' capaci y building.
A key insigh om he esea ch was ha he size o he ins i u ion ma e ed less han he
deg ee o use s’ sys ema ic connec ion o cul u al con en p oduc ion. Capaci y-building
ac i i ies, such as educa ion, we e especially impo an in his espec . A is ic p oduc ion,
hough aluable, o en made i ha de o ci izens o pe cei e de elopmen al oppo uni ies, as
he absence o isible public policy s a egies was mo e s iking o esponden s. As a esul ,
many p io i ised policy measu es o e di ec in ol emen in cul u al ac i i ies.
Su ey esul s u he showed ha he ex e nali ies o cul u al ac i i ies we e p ima ily
unde s ood h ough economic lenses. Ci izens’ ole in hese ac i i ies was no always iewed as
pa o a mo e deeply engaged o pa icipa o y p ocess. While esponden s alued he aes he ic
and e e yday bene i s o cul u al engagemen , hey did no consis en ly connec hese ac i i ies
o b oade u ban de elopmen goals. These indings unde line he need o policies ha os e
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
62
Healey, P. (2007). U ban complexi y and spa ial s a egies: Towa ds a ela ional planning o ou imes.
Rou ledge. h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9780203017453
Ho lings, L. G., Roep, D., Ma hijs, E., & Ma sden, T. (2020). Explo ing he ans o ma i e capaci y o place-
shaping p ac ices. Sus ainabili y Science, 15(2), 353–362. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11625-020-
00787-w
Kal as, D., Kalogiannidis, S., Ambas, V., & Cha zi heodo idis, F. (2024). Con ibu ion o he cul u al and
c ea i e indus ies o egional de elopmen and e i aliza ion: A Eu opean pe spec i e. U ban
Science, 8(2), 39. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/u bansci80200397 Ko ios A., Bela ilas N., Cha alambous
P. (2018), Syng oy A . - Fali o Bay - Pi aeus Road [in g eek], Scien i ic Con e ence "The de elopmen
s a egy o he egion and he cul u al axis o Syng ou", Ne wo k o he a enue's educa ional and
cul u al ins i u ions, A hens.
Knieling J. & O heng a en F. (2009), Planning Cul u es in Eu ope. Decoding Cul u al Phenomena in U ban
and Regional Planning, Rou ledge, London.
Ku Özman, E., & Taşan-Kok, T. (2024). F om en ep eneu ial o esponsi e spa ial go e nance: Bo om-
up esponses in agmen ed u ban egene a ion. Eu opean Planning S udies, 32(7), 1289–1307.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09654313.2024.1234567
Ky i si, M. (2017). Managemen o indus ial p emises and buildings o A hens o cul u al use [in G eek].
My ilene: Thesis. Dep . o Cul u al Technology and Communica ion. Uni e si y o he Aegean.
Malapani, G., Schoina, S. D., & T a los, G. (2016). Gkazi - Analysis o he esiden ial a ea [in G eek].
S uden s' essay. School o A chi ec u e, Na ional and Technical Uni e si y o A hens. Re ie ed om
h p://oldwww.a ch.n ua.g /p ojec /9762 (03 28, 2022).
Ma eos Mo a, C., & Na a o Yáñez, C. J. (2023). ‘Cul u al Buzz’ on he neighbou hood: The impac o he
URBAN I ini ia i e on cul u al consump ion oppo uni ies. In C. J. Na a o Yáñez, M. J. Rod íguez-
Ga cía, & M. J. Gue e o-Mayo (Eds.), EU In eg a ed U ban Ini ia i es (pp. 191-208). Palg a e
Macmillan. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-3-031-20885-0_10
McCo mick, K., Ha dy, J., & U e , M. (2020). C ea i e placemaking: Spa king de elopmen wi h a s and
cul u e. The U ban Land Ins i u e. Re ie ed om h ps://knowledge.uli.o g/-/media/ iles/ esea ch-
epo s/2020/c ea i e-placemaking- 2.pd (05 31, 2021).
Medei os, E. (2023). Da a and modelling o he e i o ial impac assessmen (TIA) o policies. In E.
Be oni, M. Fon ana, L. Gab ielli, S. Signo elli, & M. Vespe (Eds.), Handbook o Compu a ional Social
Science o Policy (pp. 177-194). Sp inge .
Mon al o, V., Albe i, V., Panella, F., & Sacco, P. L. (2023). A e cul u al ci ies always c ea i e? An
empi ical analysis o cul u e-led de elopmen in 190 Eu opean ci ies. Habi a In e na ional, 132,
102739. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.habi a in .2022.102739
Moulae , F. (2018). Cul u a, a es e ino acao social. O que ap endemos com g a idao com a Isabel
And e. In A. Es e ens & A. Ca mo (Eds.), Isabel And é. Uma geog a a inquie a: Tex os escolhidos.
Uni e sidade de Lisboa, Cen o de Es udos Geog á icos.
Moulae , F., & an Dyck, B. (2013). F aming social inno a ion esea ch: A sociology o knowledge
pe spec i e. In F. Moulae , D. MacCallum, A. Mehmood, & A. Hamdouch (Eds.), The in e na ional
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
63
handbook on social inno a ion: Collec i e ac ion, social lea ning and ansdisciplina y esea ch (pp.
466-479). Edwa d Elga Publishing Limi ed.
Moulae , F., Mehmood, A., MacCallum, D., & Leubol , B. (2017). Social inno a ion as a igge o
ans o ma ions: The ole o esea ch. Eu opean Commission. h ps://doi.o g/10.2777/68949
Moulae , F., & MacCallum, D. (2019). Ad anced in oduc ion o social inno a ion. Edwa d Elga
Publishing Limi ed.
Moulae , F., Jessop, B., & Swyngedouw, E. (2022). Poli ical change h ough social inno a ion. Edwa d
Elga Monog aphs.
Nyse h, T., Hamdouch, A., Demazie e, C., Fo de, A., Se ano, J. (2017). Pe spec i es on c ea i e planning
and local de elopmen in small and medium-sized owns. In A. Hamdouch, T. Nyse h, C.
Demaziè e, A. Fø de, J. Se ano, N. Aa sæ he (Eds.), C ea i e app oaches o planning and local
de elopmen : Insigh s om small and medium-sized owns in Eu ope (pp. 13-21). Rou ledge.
Pa al, A., & Dunphy, K. (2016). Cul u al impac assessmen : A sys ema ic li e a u e e iew o cu en
me hods and p ac ice a ound he wo ld. Impac Assessmen and P ojec App aisal, 33(5), 1-26.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14615517.2015.1077600
Popa, A., Ko ács, Z., & Pe o a, D. (2025). Cul u e-led u ban egene a ion in pos -socialis ci ies: F om
decaden spaces owa ds c ea i e ini ia i es. U ban S udies, 62(1), 45–64.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/00420980241234567
Rausell-Kös e , P., Ghi a di, S., Sanjuán, J., Molina i, F., & Ab il, B. (2022). Cul u al expe iences in he
amewo k o “cul u al ci ies”: Measu ing he socioeconomic impac o cul u e in u ban
pe o mance. Ci y, Te i o y and A chi ec u e, 9(40). h ps://doi.o g/10.1186/s40410-022-00189-8
Reckwi z, A., & Rosa, H. (2023). La e mode ni y in c isis: Why we need a heo y o socie y (V. A. Pakis,
T ans.). Poli y.
Robe s, L., & Lowe, J. (2024). The spa ial imagina ies o c ea i e clus e s: Examining he ole o R&D
p og ammes in c ea i e placemaking. Geo o um, 154, 104066.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.geo o um.2024.1040667
Sacco, P. L., Bialowolski, P., & Weziak-Bialowolska, D. (2025). Cul u e and c ea i i y, skills building, and
g ow h: Wha ha e we missed? Humani ies and Social Sciences Communica ions, 12, 236.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1057/s41599-024-04200-0
Sal elli, A., Kuc-Cza necka, M., Lo Piano, S., Lő incz, M. J., Olczyk, M., Puy, A., Reine , E., Tho Smi h, S.,
& an de Sluijs, J. P. (2023). Impac assessmen cul u e in he Eu opean Union. Time o some hing
new?. En i onmen al Science & Policy, 142, 99-111. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.en sci.2023.02.005
Sego ia, C., & He é, J. (2022). The c ea i e ci y app oach: O igins, cons uc ion, and p ospec s in a
scena io o ansi ion. Ci y Te i o y A chi ec u e, 9, 29. h ps://doi.o g/10.1186/s40410-022-00178-x
on Schön eld, K. C., & Fe ei a, A. (2021). U ban Planning and Eu opean Inno a ion Policy: Achie ing
Sus ainabili y, Social Inclusion, and Economic G ow h? Sus ainabili y, 13(3),
1137. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/su13031137
Eu opean Jou nal o Spa ial De elopmen 22(4)
64
S e anidou, A., Doumpos, M., & Zopounidis, C. (2024). Cul u e as a d i e o sus ainable u ban
de elopmen - Me hodological app oaches. De elopmen and Sus ainabili y in Economics and
Finance, 2–4, 100011. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.dse .2024.100011
S ihl, L. (2024). Local cul u e and change agency in old indus ial places: Spinning o wa d and digging
deepe . Eu opean Planning S udies, 32(3), 586-606.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/09654313.2023.2222145
Sui ne , J., Haide , W., & K isch, A. (2024). Socially inno a i e expe imen s o ans o ma i e local
de elopmen : Pu ing mo e- han-g ow h-o ien ed local in e en ions in spa ial con ex . Regional
Science Policy & P ac ice, 16(9), 100035. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. spp.2024.100035
Tahe i, S., Khalilpou , F., Ashaye i, M., & Shabani, A. (2024). Handic a s as cul u al c ea i e clus e s: A
spa ial-cul u al planning app oach o he egene a ion o u ban his o ical ab ics. In e na ional
Jou nal o Tou ism Ci ies, 10(4), 1393-1413. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/IJTC-02-2024-0042
T ica ico, L., De Vido ich, L., & Billi, A. (2022). En ep eneu ship, inclusion, o co-p oduc ion? An a emp
o assess e i o ial elemen s in social inno a ion li e a u e. Ci ies, 130, 103986.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ci ies.2022.103986
To e, A. (2024). Re-lea ning cul u e in ci ies beyond he Wes . In e na ional Jou nal o U ban and
Regional Resea ch, 48(2), 210–225. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/1468-2427.13045
Tse a, G., Dellade sima, P. M., & Sa men o, J. (2024). Towa ds an Analy ical F amewo k o Assessing he
Impac o Cul u e-D i en In e en ions on In eg a ed Local De elopmen Planning: Insigh s om he
Case S udy o Pi aeus A enue in A hens, G eece. Re ue Roumaine de Géog aphie / Romanian
Jou nal o Geog aphy, 68(1), 21-47. h ps://doi.o g/10.59277/RRG.2024.1.02.
Yan, W.-J., & Liu, S.-T. (2023). C ea i e economy and sus ainable de elopmen : Shaping lexible cul u al
go e nance models o c ea i i y. Sus ainabili y, 15(5), 4353. h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/su15054353
Zelenko ski, K., P odano a J., & Koca e , L. (2024). Explo ing ci izen pe cep ions and alues o a
esponsible socie y. Social Science Qua e ly, 105, 296–310.h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ssqu.13353
Zou, L., Wall, G., Zhang, D., & Cheng, X. (2021). Tou ism and he ( e)making o u al places: The cases o
wo Chinese illages. Tou ism Managemen Pe spec i es, 40.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. mp.2021.100910
