IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/tvecsg/v116y2025i2p146-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liveable, but for Whom? – Perceived Liveability and Citizen Participation in Amsterdam's Red‐Light District

Author

Listed:
  • Oishika Basak
  • Ilse van Liempt

Abstract

Popularly known as Amsterdam's Red‐Light District, De Wallen is one of the Netherlands' most well‐known yet controversial areas. This politicised neighbourhood has witnessed years of gentrification and touristification. Many contemporary debates concerning De Wallen, and the municipality's policy interventions have been around the topic of liveability. This case study examines the neighbourhood's liveability from the eyes of diverse local stakeholders and analyses how their perceptions of liveability get reflected, or not, in the citizen participation mechanisms. De Wallen's stakeholders, apart from the municipality, include residents, business owners, sex workers, socio‐cultural institutions, and employees of various establishments. By interviewing some of these diverse voices, the study highlights the plurality in the liveability perceptions of the local stakeholders. Thus, this research builds onto existing theoretical and empirical work by underscoring the importance of analysing liveability from a contextual lens and evaluating whose liveability perceptions are given primacy while creating policies for an urban area.

Suggested Citation

  • Oishika Basak & Ilse van Liempt, 2025. "Liveable, but for Whom? – Perceived Liveability and Citizen Participation in Amsterdam's Red‐Light District," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 116(2), pages 146-160, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:116:y:2025:i:2:p:146-160
    DOI: 10.1111/tesg.12664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12664
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/tesg.12664?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:tvecsg:v:116:y:2025:i:2:p:146-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0040-747X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.