An initial version of this text has been discussed and written with Ibrahim Bahreldin and Erina Iwasaki. I would like to thanks Pascal Menoret and the editorial team for their thorough reading.

2This special issue of ESMA looks at how “investigating the means of making and remaking public space provides a unique window on the politics of the public sphere” (Low and Smith 2006, 7). We argue that works on the production of space à la Henri Lefebvre often neglected public spaces, especially in Egypt, Sudan, and the MENA region.  Our ambition is threefold. First, we want to capture urban practices and pay attention to the places and processes where public spaces might develop. Second, we wish to overcome the lingering western-centric point of view that equates public spaces with democratic expression. Third, we analyze how public spaces reflect current urbanization and economic liberalization while expressing publicness — a term that, “compared to public space, [...] possesses the potential to overcome the ambiguity associated with the terms ‘publics’ and public sphere” (Wahdan 2021).

3Public spaces can be designed by architects and designers, created ad hoc by public usage, or even co-created. They are not defined by assigned functions but, rather, by how they foster interaction between several activities and diverse publics. This definition includes such intermediary spaces as coffee shops, collective seating places, and salons, diwaniyat or madhyaf-s in the Middle East (Ababsa 2020). The notion reflects conflicting visions that need to be thoroughly understood. Planners and users often clash in their notions of public space. Official and political notions of public space may differ greatly from ordinary and/or scientific definitions: for instance, streets and roads could be seen as public spaces but fail to play this role when they serve exclusive vehicular mobility, which is a dominant feature of current cities. Some scholars also see the subversion of public space by pedestrians, informal activities, or various encroachments as meaningful social critique (Bayat 2009; Menoret 2022).

4This special issue looks at public spaces as places of unrestricted accessibility and circulation, visibility, and diversity (Joseph 1992). This approach somehow conflates two conflicting narratives in Egypt and Sudan and more broadly in the Middle East: the “defeat of public spaces” and public space as “space of resistance”. Using the concept of publicness, we wish to study public spaces that are open to otherness and diversity, including in their gendered dimension (Monqid 2020). Public spaces span socio-political and religious events (mawlids, pilgrimages, etc.), ordinary urban practices, and civic and politicized movements.

5This issue of ESMA also questions how current social and spatial morphologies shape perceptions of public spaces in the region, and how these spaces might build a sense of citizenship. Going back to time-honored definitions may be useful. According to Habermas, the European public sphere began with the development of coffee houses and salons, where citizens, regardless of status, could freely discuss (Habermas 1991). However, this sphere lost its autonomy and was progressively controlled by the modern state; many historians and social scientists criticized Habermas’s restrictive definition, considering for instance the streets as an active public space for the people (Farge 1994) and redefining public spaces in their diverse meanings and shapes. Adopting a post-Habermasian perspective leads to reinventing our representations of public spaces in Egypt, Sudan, and other Middle Eastern societies according to the immense diversity of places where the public may interact, even if their expression is not directly political but rather an expression of urbanity. This perspective also suggests a fresh look at the last decade’s reinvention (Abaza 2014) and securitization of public spaces, whether the latter happened through eviction (Bouhali 2018) or access restriction (Jihad 2022), which both redefined politicization and moralization (Schielke 2008). New, creative definitions may be also needed to research public space in the vast peripheries of Egyptian and Sudanese cities, whether in gated communities, huge self-developed settlements, or large public housing projects that lack predefined public spaces (Elgendy and Frigerio 2019; Strycker et al. 2013).

6Our entry points are multiple and include such ordinary practices as the appropriation of spaces conceived for others (Adham 2011), the creation of public or intermediary spaces, and initiatives to reclaim the streets. This special issue argues that public spaces allow for a better understanding of current socio-spatial changes and approach them as engines of social change. By doing so, it questions  not only the massive protests that took place in the region since 2011, but also the growing commodification and privatization that modifies the understanding, practices, and politics of public spaces.

Public Space and Public Debate

7Let us start with an understanding of public spaces in Egypt after 2011. The attempt to turn physical spaces into political arenas has been explored many times since Dimitri Soudias’s work on spaces of discontent (Soudias 2009). This spatial turn renewed the study of social movements and the resource mobilization approach pioneered by Doug McAdam (McAdam 2008). The revolutionary moment was often characterized through different occupations of public space. Soudias studies the diversity of “protest spaces” vis-à-vis a power structure that decided to control them. His work looks at spontaneous movements that not only occupy central places, but also organize them (Soudias 2009: 32). Introducing a distinction between authorized and non authorized spaces, he shows how demonstrators try to overcome it. Demonstrators rediscovered the centrality of places and learned strategies of control as the police started to circle them and to circumscribe their spatial expression (Bayat 2009). Space occupation is a process of political learning that has culminated during the 2011 events and the 2018 Sudanese revolution (Bahreldin 2020). As Mona Abaza explained (Abaza 2014), “the stage of Tahrir was the exemplary moment that triggered extended and replicated dramaturgical violent public confrontations, public performances, and occupations in all the squares of Cairo” (Abaza 2014, 6). In Cairo and, almost a decade later, in Khartoum, a large public mobilized for justice and freedom, creatively and peacefully using sit-in techniques. The square became a space of diversity and solidarity beyond class and primary belongings. The city-center turned into a space of confrontation and protection (El Chazly 2012). On the Ukrainian Maidan as in Khartoum and Cairo, demonstrators changed their perception of self and world through days and nights of inhabiting the square together, making it a new collective home (Göle 2022). Due to current restrictions, public space has shrunk but semi-public spaces arose, enabling social cohesion and diversity of use.

Are Public Spaces Accessible to All?

8If we agree that Habermas’s public sphere as a pure expression of democratic citizenship is a fiction (Zask 2018), what definitions of public space could then facilitate political expression, public debate, sociability, and urbanity while also providing respiration, greenery, and leisure? According to Joëlle Zask, public space should be thought of as permeable to a “pluralisation of expression modes” and as a gathering space where users would remain distant and seemingly indifferent in order to allow collective affordances and otherness. Public spaces allow for flexibility of use, accessibility, and visibility.

9Privatization and appropriation of public spaces by state institutions are pervasive in Egypt and Sudan (Bahreldin 2020), an evolution that jeopardizes their existence as places of diversity, encounter, and public debate. Remaining pedestrian spaces and mixed streets offer some kind of compensation to this loss. New uses highlight the role of public spaces in welcoming small group sociabilities: the al-Borsa street in downtown Cairo has seen coffee-shops closing for security reasons since the mid-2010s, yet the street became a haven for roller skaters and strollers; the Al-Azhar park became a place where visitors play, walk, and enjoy unexpected encounters (Gillot 2008). Overlapping uses constantly reframe spaces, multiplying their ability to welcome a plurality of publics.

10Despite threats to public spaces, regeneration projects provide opportunities to test inclusive designs (Shehayeb 2011). On the one hand, functionalist design still signals power and authority, and is more and more influenced by security measures (Monfleur 2017). On the other hand, smaller spaces feature light infrastructure and furniture that enhance conviviality (Gomes 2022; Abosira et al. 2022) and show concern for female inclusion. Through redevelopment, urbanists and architects with a flair for public use prevent a commodification process that is encouraged by state authorities. Contradictions oppose participatory projects in the al-Khalifa or Darb al-Ahmar areas to the Cairo governorate. Many works underline the absence of public and green areas in the city core; these approaches favor small-scale interventions on open spaces that value planted playgrounds and biodiversity (Mansour, Al-Ibrashy, and el-Kousy 2020). In light of the current climate crisis, urban heat islands also became a matter of concern, especially in the densest areas of the city (Al Habachi 2020).

Shrinking and Reinventing Public Spaces

11Are public spaces open to all age groups, women, and migrants? Do they accept others and all expressions of faith or the lack thereof? How might we understand the securitization of public spaces and their loss? What is the current autonomy of public spaces and can public spaces survive without state intervention?

12Popular and informal markets and shops have been extensively studied in such metropolitan areas as Mexico, Accra, Bombay, Johannesburg, or Cairo. New research shows that these activities, which often clash with the fantasy of a world-class city, are displaced and made invisible (Spire 2022). Asef Bayat’s work on Cairo and Tehran shows how the poor step into the streets and how their quiet encroachment becomes a strategy of collective survival and a way of expressing their right to the city (Bayat 1997, 2009). The years following the 2011 revolution expressed this vitality and eagerness to make a living from and with public streets, rare vacant spaces, and car garages in the city-center. This other type of occupation shows the importance of informal trade, which was severely curbed in downtown Cairo (Stryker et al. 2013). In the Moski or Ataba areas, huge crowds shop for cheap clothes and fabrics, using the streets of downtown Cairo as a space of togetherness and leisure (Bouhali 2018). Popular markets in Egypt are major places of gathering and encounter, which shows the vitality and plasticity of de facto public commons in underserved districts (Deboulet et al. 2020).

13The four articles of this special issue look at often understudied practices that make spaces public despite conflicts, competition, and state control. Deshayes analyzes political mobilization in Sudan and shows that political expression happens in “interstitial spaces”. Alahwal and Elkousy study traffic calming measures and street activities in Historic Cairo and analyze their influence on local norms of governance and justice. Bonnefoi shows that popular cafés replaced a lacking public space. Cafés encroach on the public domain, but are also strongly monitored to allow cohabitation with other uses and avoid restrictions. Finally, Ndiaye focuses on street mechanics in downtown Cairo. Their appropriation of space is flexible, and makes the streets accessible through a variety of tactics and negotiations. From Khartoum to Cairo and back, these activities are all evidence of self-organization and concern for public spaces.