In-Formality?: Two Cases of Temporary Uses in Urban Regeneration of South Korea

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article examines how temporary & tactical urbanism can contribute to a more durable redevelopment of cities by drawing on the of South Korea. It addresses an important research topic and makes a compelling argument through its in-depth case studies in Busan. The discussion of existing literature and methodology are both robust and the findings are very insightful. Apart from two very minor comments, I have no further issues with the article and believe that it should be accepted for publication.

 

Minor issues:

p.1: The study needs to explain what T&T stands for first before using the abbreviation.

p.4: Table 2 still has a Korean expression and it would be useful to know what it means in English.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

I appreciate for your comments. I have mended all the parts you have pointed.

1) The study needs to explain what T&T stands for first before using the  abbreviation (p.1)

    - The full title of abbreviation has been put 

2) Table 2 still has a Korean expression and it would be useful to know what it means in English (p.4).

    - the Koean expression has been changed in English as 'present'

 

Thank you again for your time and kind comments.

Best wishes,

author

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In-formality?: Two cases of temporary uses in urban regeneration of
South Korea

The article examines the concept of temporary and tactical urbanism in the context of urban regeneration by focusing on two case studies in South Korea. The study aims to demonstrate that temporary urbanism can help introduce new ideas and functions into urban space and bridge formal and informal relations. The article is well structured, but presents some issues that require revision.

Suggestions for improvement are outlined – section by section – below. I hope my comments can help the author improve the manuscript and advance knowledge on this important topic.

Introduction

The introduction to the article should present the issue of temporary and tactical urbanism more broadly and only then present the context of South Korea. This is important to open up to a wider readership. I would then suggest bringing some of the considerations made in this section on the Korean context into the one entitled "South Korea context of urban regeneration" where I would discuss not only urban regeneration, but also the tactical and temporary urbanism approach to it. Furthermore, the last lines of the introduction should present the article’s structure and briefly
mention what the reader will find in each section. I suggest to the author that the first time he uses the acronym T & T urbanism, it is presented in full.
Instead, the acronym is mentioned several times, but an explanation is given only in line 65. Finally, this section needs to explain these two terms more clearly.

T&T urbanism as a bridge between formality and informality

The section at present could be a better review of the existing international literature on temporary and tactical urbanism, which should be reinforced. At the end of this document, I suggest some contributions that the authors should consider to enhance the construction of the theoretical
framework.

South Korean context of urban regeneration

I suggest that this section be slightly expanded so that it presents, on the one hand, urban regeneration in South Korea and, on the other hand, how T&T urbanism is becoming an adopted solution in this context. This would help better contextualise the two case studies presented in the following pages.

Research process

The section on methodology needs to be improved as it is not described in sufficient detail. Additionally, data collection methods lack specificity and need to be more detailed, including how sources were chosen and evaluated. Moreover, since the number of interviews is very small, the reasons behind the choice of interviewees should be further strengthened, and the interview
methods should be better clarified. For instance, was it a structured interview or a semi-structured one? Providing more information on this would help improve the quality of the research.

Case studies and Discussion

These sections seem to me to be well articulated overall but could be further strengthened in light of the changes made to the previous sections. In particular, I believe that the dimension related to the distribution of power between stakeholders could be further discussed.

Conclusions

The conclusions as they stand at present are rather poor and should instead be expanded and strengthened, taking care to touch on two fundamental aspects:

1) How does the evidence learned from the case studies in South Korea contribute to the international debate on temporary and tactical urbanism by providing new knowledge?
2) In light of the evidence from the paper and the limitations of the current study, what could be an agenda for future research?

Suggested references:

Andres, L., Bakare, H., Bryson, J. R., Khaemba, W., Melgaço, L., and Mwaniki, G. R. (2021). Planning, temporary urbanism and citizen-led alternative-substitute place-making in the Global South. Regional Studies, 55(1), 29-39.

Bragaglia, F., and N. Caruso. (2020). “Temporary Uses: A new Form of Inclusive Urban Regeneration or a Tool for Neoliberal Policy?” Urban Research & Practice, 1–21.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please review the document carefully to correct typos and minor errors.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

I appreciate for your detailed comments.

I have changed all the parts that you pointed. All the changed parts are in red.

Introduction

1) present the issue of temporary and tactical urbanism more broadly and only then present the context of South Korea

• I put the general statements about the T&T issues in P.1 and edited some other parts

2) the last lines of the introduction should present the article’s structure and briefly mention what the reader will find in each section

• I put whole one paragraph explaining briefly the paper's structure (p.3)

T&T urbanism as a bridge between formality and informality

3) The section at present could be a better review of the existing international literature on temporary and tactical urbanism, which should be reinforced. At the end of this document, I suggest some contributions that the authors should consider to enhance the construction of the theoretical framework

• I put more sentences about the issues from the articles that you have recommended, and edit some of the paragraph

South Korean context of urban regeneration

4) this section be slightly expanded so that it presents, on the one hand, urban regeneration in South Korea and, on the other hand, how T&T urbanism is becoming an adopted solution in this context. 

• In p.4, there is an explanation and reasons how the regeneration issue became interested in the T&T projects

Research process

5) data collection methods lack specificity and need to be more detailed, including how sources were chosen and evaluated. Moreover, since the number of interviews is very small, the reasons behind the choice of interviewees should be further strengthened, and the interview methods should be better clarified.

• In p.5, I put a new table showing the archival data used in the research process, and put more details about the interviews that had conducted in semi-structured

Conclusions

6) How does the evidence learned from the case studies in South Korea contribute to the international debate on temporary and tactical urbanism by providing new knowledge? / In light of the evidence from the paper and the limitations of the current study, what could be an agenda for future research?

• I put one paragraph for the implication to the T&T studies and the direction of the future research (p.12)

Thank you again for your time and attention.

Best wishes,

Author