Paper short abstract:

This paper explores one of the most visible consequences of the regeneration plan carried out in the Sa Calatrava quarter: the dramatic decrease in the number of shops and bars. I argue that this process is closely connected with the changing conception of the public space triggered by this plan.

Paper long abstract:

This paper, based on a 30 months fieldwork, explores one of the most visible consequences of the urban regeneration plan carried out in the neighbourhood of Sa Calatrava: the dramatic decrease in the number of shops and bars. The article argues that this process is closely connected with the changing conception of the public space triggered by this plan, the main, explicit goal of which is the gentrification of the neighbourhood.

Through both the analysis of the policies and aims of the regeneration plan and the presentation of ethnographic 'vignettes', the paper will focus on two related issues:

(a) The strong link between, on the one hand, the disappearance of shops and bars and, on the other hand, some measures pursuing the embellishment and pacification of the public space.

(b) The complex relationship local shops and bars maintain with neighbourhood networks. Firstly, I will show how these places articulate networks of sociability and create a sense of community. Reciprocally, I will argue that the debilitation or fragmentation of these social bonds is one of the main reasons why shops and bars close down. This complex relationship will be exposed through the presentation of some conflicts, especially between shopkeepers and newcomers. .

After this analysis I will defend that the ultimate explanation of the decrease in the number of shops (and of the weakening of sociability) has to be found in the production of Sa Calatrava as a purified arena for capital and its aim of extracting surplus value from it. The objective of attracting visitors and investment lies at the core of a new conception of the public space that privileges its transformation into a landscape and undermines its communicative and relational dimensions. Nonetheless, the fact that this production privileges categories such as 'visitor' or 'house owner' to the detriment of categories such as 'neighbour' or 'resident', allows us to read this changes not only in economic terms but also in political ones. Thus, I will tentatively argue that this transformation in the conception of the public space must be understood as a form of spatial governmentality: given that it undermines place-bond experience (and instituted rights associated with it) it prevents contest and politicization.