Creative economy as a space practice in the context of creative cities of the global south: the case of Poço da Draga

Abstract

In 2019, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recognized the capital of the Brazilian state of Ceará, Fortaleza, as a creative city of design. Since then, Fortaleza has been working to organize a Creative District between the spaces of two contiguous neighborhoods. On the urban margins surrounding these spaces is located the Poço da Draga community, which has been organizing a set of actions in favor of the creative economy. This study proposes a discussion about the creative economy as a practice, shedding light on alternative critical perspectives for analyzing public policies related to the organization of creative districts in cities of the global south. The concept of “practice of space” was considered as walking rhetoric, a way of being and doing for those living in the city. The objective was to discuss how the creative economy can act as a practice of space. The qualitative and exploratory methodology involved bibliographical and documentary surveys, complemented by interviews and observation procedures in the spaces under study. The analysis was based on the thematic examination of the identified practices of space, considering the research objective. The main results showed a set of practices of space, emancipatory and resistance permeated by creativity, put into action by the inhabitants of Poço da Draga. It is suggested that public policies for creative cities in the global south consider the potential “doings” of their inhabitants, aiming at organizing practices in marginalized urban spaces.

Keywords:
creative economy; creative city; practice of space; public policy

Resumo

Em 2019, Fortaleza, capital do Ceará, recebeu a chancela da Organização das Nações Unidas para a Educação, a Ciência e a Cultura (UNESCO) de cidade criativa do design. Com isso, a prefeitura vem atuando na organização de um distrito criativo entre os espaços de dois bairros contíguos. Nas margens urbanas que circundam esses espaços está situada a comunidade Poço da Draga, que vem organizando um conjunto de ações em prol da economia criativa. Este estudo propõe uma discussão sobre a economia criativa como prática, lançando luzes sobre perspectivas críticas alternativas de análise de políticas públicas relacionadas à organização de distritos criativos em cidades do Sul global. Para isso, considerou-se o conceito de “prática do espaço” como retórica ambulante, um modo de ser e fazer de quem habita a cidade. O objetivo é discutir como a economia criativa pode atuar como prática de espaço. A metodologia de natureza qualitativa envolveu levantamentos bibliográficos e documentais, complementados por entrevistas e procedimentos de observação nos espaços sob estudo. A análise se baseou no exame temático das práticas de espaço identificadas à luz do objetivo da pesquisa. Os principais resultados evidenciam um conjunto de práticas de espaço, emancipatórias e de resistência perpassadas pela criatividade, colocadas em ato pelos habitantes da comunidade do Poço da Draga. Sugere-se que as políticas públicas para as cidades criativas do Sul global considerem os “fazeres” potenciais de seus habitantes, visando à organização das práticas de espaços urbanos marginalizados.

Palavras-chave:
economia criativa; cidade criativa; prática de espaço; política pública

Resumen

En 2019, la ciudad de Fortaleza, capital del estado de Ceará, recibió el sello de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (UNESCO) como ciudad creativa del diseño. Con eso, la municipalidad de Fortaleza viene trabajando para organizar un distrito creativo en los espacios colindantes de dos barrios. En los márgenes urbanos que rodean estos espacios se ubica la comunidad de Poço da Draga que viene organizando un conjunto de acciones a favor de la economía creativa. Este estudio propone una discusión sobre la economía creativa como práctica, arrojando luz sobre perspectivas críticas alternativas para el análisis de políticas públicas relacionadas con la organización de distritos creativos en las ciudades del sur global. Se consideró el concepto de “práctica de espacio” como retórica ambulante, una forma de ser y hacer de quien vive en la ciudad. El objetivo fue discutir cómo la economía creativa puede actuar como una práctica de espacio. La metodología cualitativa y exploratoria implicó levantamientos bibliográficos y documentales, complementados con entrevistas y procedimientos de observación en los espacios en estudio. El análisis se basó en el examen temático de las prácticas de espacio identificadas a la luz del objetivo de la investigación. Los principales resultados mostraron un conjunto de prácticas de espacio, emancipadoras y de resistencia permeadas por la creatividad, puestas en acción por los habitantes de la comunidad de Poço da Draga. Se sugiere que las políticas públicas para las ciudades creativas del sur global consideren los “haceres” potenciales de sus habitantes, con el objetivo de organizar prácticas en espacios urbanos marginados.

Palabras clave:
economía creativa; ciudad creativa; práctica de espacio; política pública

1. INTRODUCTION

In the context of administration, the “city” dimension has been gaining more and more space in research, being problematized beyond economic and material aspects, involving scenarios that refer to culture and creativity in the formulation of urban public policies and in the experiences lived by the people who inhabit it (Fischer, 1997; Ipiranga, 2010; Mac-allister, 2004; Saraiva & Carrieri, 2012; S. M. F. Teixeira, Subirats, D. S. Lacerda, & Blanco, 2018).

Thus, cities are highly complex organizations of spaces organized through a set of practices, which can be performed by the creativity and inventiveness of the public and private actors involved (Landry & Bianchini, 1995; A. C. F. Reis & Kageyama, 2011).

This understanding of the urban is based on the dynamic between practices and space (Kornberger & Clegg, 2004), in which practices are sets of ways of being and doing, a mode of discourse and action of everyday creativity, through which subjects, actors of space, construct and (re)appropriate the place organized by the institutionalized forces of sociocultural production (Certeau, 1994). The practices and their actors create a non-linear fabric, much less a visible one, which is performed daily, based on a mixed web that builds the social whole of the city (Certeau, 1994; Gherardi, 2009). According to Certeau (1994), pedestrians walking through the city generate a “walking rhetoric” that refers to the inhabitants’ ways of being and doing things, performing the “practices of space.”

On the other hand, cities based on creativity are considered a model of urban organization in which actors use their inventiveness to create solutions and opportunities that harmonize tradition and innovation. For Landry (2013), the creative city mixes the old and the new with a sense of comfort and familiarity, as well as risk and caution. In this way, innovation emerges without excluding tradition. The feeling created by the city’s past, and future are not just ties; they mean starting points for the city to transform itself (Depiné, Medeiros, Bonetti, & Vanzin, 2018).

This discussion is also based on the creative economy approach, which includes processes, ideas, and ventures that mobilize creativity (Ster & Seifert, 2008; United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD], 2018). Based on processes as primary resources for development, the creative economy can be seen as the result of economic and cultural practices aimed at repairing urban inequalities and vulnerabilities by stimulating structural changes in the labor society (Bendassolli, Wood, Kirschbaum, & Cunha, 2009; Boccella & Salerno, 2016).

However, Arantes (2016) considered the relationship between culture and public policies, problematizing the instrumentalization of culture in favor of specific interests through practices that act on the uses of cultural heritage in the city. We can also mention the study by Leite (2015), who made a critical analysis of heritage policies related to the uses of the city, focusing on gentrification processes adapted to market logic. Alsayel, Jong, and Fransen (2022) discussed urban policy initiatives based on the tensions that arise when cities decide to adopt both creative and inclusive branding.

Along these lines, Frúgoli (2018) focused on the occupation of public spaces and the struggle for rights in the city through collective networks. For Leite (2002, p. 116), although the current urban regeneration has a segregating and aseptic character, the uses and counter-uses that are structured contribute, inversely, to their reactivation as public spaces. Finally, Sternberg (2017) questioned policies to support creativity to develop cities in the global South.

This study considers that the city is more than just a delimited urban space. It is the people who inhabit it whose life experiences reflect the dynamics of the city-organization (Saraiva & Carrieri, 2012). This includes their resistance, insurgent and emancipatory movements (Hoston, 2008; Mendes, 2012; Nogueira, 2019; Oliveira, 2018; Saraiva & Ipiranga, 2020). The aim is to contribute to an analysis that goes beyond public administration and urbanism, as well as the so-called creative, “incorporating those who live in the city and thus determine what it actually is” (Honorato & Saraiva, 2016, p. 158).

Particularly, Latin American cities are home to theoretical-methodological reflections on their socio-spatial contexts. Recently, critical urban studies (Brenner, 2016; Roy, 2015) have been challenged to engage in an understanding of spatial organization from the perspective of the context of the global South (Miraftab & Kudva, 2015). Some authors have put forward alternative critical proposals that have highlighted a differentiated organization of spaces interpreted from their margins (Barbalho & Barreto, 2020; Das & Poole, 2004; C. C. O. Lacerda, Ipiranga, & Thoene, 2023).

In 2019, Fortaleza, the capital of Ceará, received the seal of approval from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a creative city in design. With this, Fortaleza became part of the UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN). The purpose of the UCCN is to promote international cooperation between cities that recognize creativity as a process for development (UNESCO, 2020).

This article focuses on the community of Poço da Draga, located on the edge of the urban perimeter surrounding the neighborhoods of Praia de Iracema and Centro. In these urban spaces, the UNESCO Fortaleza Creative City of Design Project is being implemented by the city government, which aims to stimulate the creative economy in the city (Fortaleza Criativa, 2020; Silveira, 2019). Despite being one of the most valued urban spaces and receiving the most investment, the Poço da Draga community suffers from the neglect of the competent bodies that “leave it out” of the projects developed in its surroundings. In this way, its population experiences constant threats of removal, driven by tourist interest and the intense real estate speculation that characterizes the urban spaces of Fortaleza’s noble western waterfront region (Bezerra, 2018; Gondim, 2008; Nogueira, 2019).

Considering this context of urban policies and the breadth of the debate on the creative economy in the literature. This study is based on an understanding of the creative economy as a set of practices of space, ways of being and doing, capable of creatively (dis)organizing city spaces. By proposing the creative economy as a practice, this discussion aims to shed light on alternative critical perspectives of analysis regarding the organization of creative districts in a city in the global South. It is going beyond the more instrumental approaches of public administration to thinking about the city.

Thus, we presuppose that the organization of city space is based on an arrangement of practices mutually constructed by power relations, disputes and resistances, limits, and emancipatory insurgencies created or hindered by the practitioners themselves (Beyes & Steyaert, 2012; Hoston, 2008; Leite, 2015; Mendes, 2012; Nogueira, 2019; Ward, 2001).

This research aims to discuss how the creative economy can act as a practice of space. Thus, the study’s contribution lies in broadening the possible lenses for debate, considering the creative economy a set of everyday doings and sayings capable of (re)organizing practices of urban spaces (Certeau, 1994; Closs & Rocha-de-Oliveira, 2017; Grodach, 2017; Muzzio, 2019).

2. THE CREATIVE ECONOMY AND ITS PUBLIC POLICIES

The idea of cultural public policy was introduced in 1969 by UNESCO, proposing that governments recognize cultural actions as intrinsic to their public policies (A. C. F. Reis, 2012). Cultural policy is a program of interventions carried out by the State, civil institutions, private entities, or community groups aimed at “satisfying the cultural needs of the population and promoting the development of their symbolic representations” (Coelho, 1997, p. 293). This concept is based on the idea that the public is no longer synonymous with government policy but emphasizes what is collective by bringing together the perspectives of different social actors.

In the creative economy, Valiati and Moller (2016) discussed that cultural policies are based on a change in the perspective of the economy by acting beyond the standard economic frontier. The authors suggested rethinking paths for Brazilian development through assets and processes that generate qualitative economic value. They also suggested access to new markets characterized by high human capital, technology, and structural change in the distribution of production and income.

Serra and Fernandez (2014) warned of the need to link public policies for the creative economy with other policies, such as education and security. Thus, Emmendoerfer, Fioravante, and Cezar (2016) argue that the planning of the creative economy as a public policy in Brazil should emphasize communication as the central axis between the proposed actions. To this end, they propose the need to organize dialogic spaces on a territorial scale.

Conversely, Alsayel et al. (2022) discussed the tension between creative city and inclusive city practices in policymaking. For them, the dimension of creativity always prevails over inclusion, where only those aspects of inclusion that are not in conflict with creativity tend to be honored. Sternberg (2017), based on a critical evaluation of UNESCO’s 2013 Creative Economy Report, problematized policies to support creativity as a means of development policy for cities in the South. The author emphasizes that the idea of the creative economy, understood as a development policy tool, has several theoretical-conceptual shortcomings and that a critical analysis of each case is necessary.

Along these lines, S. M. F. Teixeira et al. (2018) bring to the debate the importance of observing public policies that work in cities as spaces of struggle and resistance, establishing institutional disputes between participation and exclusion, or even expulsion (Sassen, 2016).

Creativity, in the context of the economy, was first discussed in the first half of the 1990s in Australia as a public policy strategy for revitalizing the economy in the post-industrial era (Bendassolli et al., 2009; Ster & Seifert, 2008). Economic activities in the industrial period, which were agglutinated in the core of urban centers, became decentralized after the post-industrial age, leading to unemployment and low socioeconomic opportunities (A. C. F. Reis, 2012; Scarpato, Ashton, & Schreiber, 2021). In this context, there was a decline in industry typical of the industrial era and a rise in creativity as an alternative for cities to develop the capacity to reinvent themselves (UNCTAD, 2018).

In 1997, the Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS) in England, when mapping its competitive economic forces, identified 13 sectors with the most significant potential, called creative industries (Bendassolli et al., 2009). Although it is considered a plural concept, the creative industry can be understood as a set of productive segments supported by the tripod of creativity, skill, and talent, considered capital for the production of wealth and jobs from the exploitation of intellectual property (A. C. F. Reis, 2012; Stern & Seifert, 2008; Unctad, 2018).

The creative industry works based on transforming individual meanings into intellectual property. As a result, the consumption of these goods is primarily based on symbols rather than the material good itself, promoting a “convergence between the arts, business, and technology” (Bendassolli et al., 2009, p. 13).

The creative economy arises from the new economic, social, and cultural dynamics that have been transformed according to the notion of the creative industry, including processes, ideas, and ventures that make use of creativity, considering the connections formed in the production, distribution, and consumption of these goods, as well as the changes observed in the social, political, cultural, economic and organizational spheres (A. C. F. Reis, 2012; UNCTAD, 2018). It also works to ensure that national and international public policies can deepen the links between culture and territory, expanding opportunities for underprivileged and marginalized territories to develop (Boccella & Salerno, 2016; Mendes, 2012; Stern & Seifert, 2008; Sternberg, 2017).

In Brazil, the discussion about the creative economy took shape in 2004 at the XI Meeting of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (XI UNCTAD). The thesis defended that culture, and the economy were increasingly coming closer together (Leitão, 2016; A. C. F. Reis, 2012). According to the mapping provided by the Federation of Industries of the State of Rio de Janeiro (Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Rio de Janeiro [Firjan], 2022), Brazil has 935,000 creative professionals working in the four major areas involved in developing the creative economy: consumption, media, culture, and technology.

Considering the last ten years, and to understand the research scenario regarding the creative economy in Brazil, we carried out a bibliographic survey in the Spell database using the descriptor “creative economy”. We found 37 articles published between 2013 and 2021. It was observed that research on creative economy issues has focused on the plurality of its concepts (E. L. Almeida & Dias, 2021) and on the different theoretical approaches that have supported this discussion (A. S. Almeida, R. M. Teixeira, & Luft, 2014).

In the field of organizational studies, the creative economy has been discussed based on the organizing approach (Czarniawska, 2008), emphasizing its organizing processes, in which the organization is understood by collective action (I. D. Silva, Dias, & Santos, 2021; Menezes & Ipiranga, 2022). Some studies focus on the discussion of creative resources, emphasizing the role of leadership (Muzzio & Barbosa, 2018), as well as their links with the dimension of organizational culture (Haubrich, Bessi, Bohnenberger, & Freitas, 2020).

Other authors have discussed the articulations of the creative economy based on its public policies in terms of potential, limits, and the formulation of policies for its development (Emmendoerfer et al., 2016). Leitão (2016) was inspired by the Hamletian phrase quoted by Celso Furtado (1984, p. 25), “To have or not to have the right to creativity, that is the question,” to discuss a cultural policy that favors local and regional development. A considerable amount of production links the creative economy to tourism (Richards, 2018), development and innovation (Santos & C. M. Silva, 2020), entrepreneurship (Barcellos, Botura, & Ramirez, 2016; J. M. D. Reis & Zille, 2020) and questions about internationalization processes (Vasconcellos, Monticelli, Calixto, & Garrido, 2017).

In the last ten years, specifically considering the relationship between the economy and a creative city, studies have focused on its impact on urban and socio-economic development (Wittmann, 2019; Lima, Morais, & Souza, 2021), questioning the characteristics and potential of these relationships (Ashton et al. 2016; Muzzio, 2019; Scarpato et al., 2021), including from a critical point of view, considering emancipatory practices and alternatives to a hegemonic discourse (Mendes, 2012). There have also been studies that have problematized the uses and counter-uses of cities through the growing involvement of the private sector in developing heritage policy management (Arantes, 2006; Leite, 2015).

The research conducted reinforces the potential of the creative economy approach to discuss different integrative processes, highlighting possible gaps in this area of knowledge when related to critical issues of the organization of marginalized spaces in the city. These issues privilege practices of resistance and emancipation (Barbalho & Barreto, 2020; Das & Poole, 2004). To deepen this debate and consider this study’s objectives, we present below some discussions between the organization of urban space practices (Certeau, 1994), creativity, and emancipatory processes of resistance. As well as the main foundations of public policies in favor of a creative economy in cities of the global South (Sternberg, 2017).

3. THE PRACTICES OF SPACE IN THE CREATIVE CITY OF THE GLOBAL SOUTH

The city is defined as an organizational web formed by collectives that meet and live in a common time and space, continuously incorporating various processes. Furthermore, the city “reveals and conceals, seduces and repels, full of ambiguities, shadows, and lights” (Fischer, 1997, p. 75), actively guarding the problems and crises of the contexts in which it is inserted. Since the city is unique in its history and identity, its use as an object of research can permeate various approaches and avenues of discussion.

The critical urban studies approach (Brenner, 2016; Roy, 2015) proposed a debate on spatial organization based on the perspective of cities in the global South (Miraftab & Kudva, 2015). They presented alternative critical discussions that problematized the organization of urban spaces, interpreted from their margins (Das & Poole, 2004). In urban studies literature, the margins of cities are understood as spaces situated outside a pre-existing totality, enabling reflection on new processes of spatial organization (Ren, 2021; Robles, Rodrıguez, & Dattwyler, 2021).

In Latin America, the discussion of margins has been applied in works such as those by Barbalho and Barreto (2020), Cerqueira (2018), C. C. O. Lacerda et al. (2023), and Velázquez (2007), who used the concept to recognize the production of unique specialties through the study of urban space according to its social, cultural, political, and historical content.

Considering the practices approach, we highlight that the organization of the city forms a texture that is performed daily in a way that is neither linear nor visible, but reflects an intricate and complex mixed network, constituting the social whole (Certeau, 1994; Gherardi, 2009). Along these lines, Certeau (1994) and Leite (2010) problematized the idea of everyday life in the contemporary urban experience, arguing about a fluid, ambiguous, unanticipated organization in contrast to normative conduct. For the authors, certain recurring ruptures that occur in the interstices of public life do not jeopardize everyday life, although they do challenge it. On the contrary, they guarantee the dynamics necessary for social practices that generate contestation and change (Leite, 2010, p. 738).

This study considers the organization of the city on a relational basis through a set of practices, reflecting a constitutive mutuality (Certeau, 1994; Ward, 2001). This understanding is based on the dynamic between practices and space, in which practices are a mode of action of everyday creativity, through which subjects, actors of spaces, construct and (re)appropriate the place organized by institutionalized forces (Certeau, 1994; Dosse, 2004).

According to Certeau (1994), pedestrian walks generate walking rhetoric that refers to the ways of being and doing of the city’s inhabitants, performing the practices of space. Thus, these practices are organized by actions and discourses in which their “users reappropriate the space organized by the techniques of socio-cultural production” (Certeau, 1994, p. 41). The relationship between practitioners, what is practiced, and how this process occurs is sometimes subversive. The actors draw in the spaces “the cunning of other interests and desires that are neither determined nor captured by the systems in which they develop” (Certeau, 1994, p. 45).

In these processes, studies of everyday practices are the demonstration of space in the relationship between producer and consumer instances. In this way, the practices of space in a city occur as if through a kind of blindness, giving rise to a metaphorical city that insinuates itself beyond the visible planned city (Certeau, 1994, p. 159).

City spaces as organized places are established through a process that combines, on the one hand, differentiation, and redistribution of the functional parts of the city and, on the other, marginalization of what is not managed by the functionalist administration (Certeau, 1994). The functionalist organization of the city, by privileging “progress (time), makes us forget its condition of possibility, space itself, which becomes the non-thought of a scientific and political technology,” and thus “the concept city works” (Certeau, 1994, pp. 160-161). At the same time, the ways of being and doing in the city exercised by ordinary people are constituted as “practices of space” through which these actors articulate and reappropriate this organized space based on tactical logic (Certeau, 1994).

These different ways of living and/or frequenting a place in the city reveal specific forms of tactical operations that organize another spatiality. These ways of being and doing things, when articulated with the organized spaces instituted through tenacious and creative activity, actions undertaken by groups that don’t have a space of their own, constitute resistance to the law of the place, as they undo a network of forces and established legitimacies (Certeau, 1994; Dosse, 2004; Ward, 2001).

In this way, the places and spaces of the city are daily (re)organized by a set of practices that try to balance the tension between rationalized actions and those that evoke processes of resistance. The practices of space have to do with this politicized articulation of practices, of the tactical type, acting as “organizers of places” (Certeau, 1994, p. 183). These issues consider that practices are flexible and in constant (re)organization movements. In these places, space is practiced to circumscribe knowledge, which is sometimes unclear but loaded with meaning and symbolism (Certeau, 1994). This logic places city space beyond an arena of disputes and resistance, presenting it as an organization that results from a constant process of practice perpetrated by the actors who participate in it (Dosse, 2004).

Certeau (1994, p. 43) suggests that understanding this other spatiality must focus on the context of a majority’s marginality. To do so, it is necessary to scrutinize the micro-operations, those cunning, tactical ways of proceeding that emerge and alter the functioning of technocratic structures, being articulated by the dispersed and inventive creativity of groups of people who inhabit the city (Certeau, 1994).

It is necessary to identify these types of operations, distinguish the ways of doing things, and uncover the indicators of creativity in these practices of appropriation as they play with “events to transform them into occasions” (Certeau, 1994, p. 46). Capturing these occasions occurs through the art of blows, moves, a pleasure of altering the rules of an oppressive space. It’s a matter of tactical dexterity and the joy of technicality, with unforeseen effects on the organization of space (Certeau, 1994, pp. 74-75).

In this discussion, the practices of space play a leading role in enabling practitioners to do “other things with the same thing and to go beyond the limits that the determinations of the object set for its use” (Certeau, 1994, p. 178). The actors organize the urban space based on their ways of being and doing, eventually transforming the place into something discontinuous, displacing it through this use. In this way, the practitioner “transforms each spatial signifier into something else” (Certeau, 1994, p. 178).

Along these lines, Leite (2002, p. 116) discussed the role of uses and counter-uses. He argued that, although the current urban regeneration has a segregating and aseptic character, the uses and counter-uses that are structured contribute, inversely, to their reactivation as public spaces. The author problematizes a double meaning of public space: the sphere of communication and participation and the physical space of access and use (Leite, 2008).

We should also mention Grodach (2017), who, when critically revisiting the history behind creative city practices, reflected on these ideas through two emerging movements: the concept of making (creative placemaking) and the manufacturing movement (urban maker). For the author, these movements reshape previous creative city concepts to produce a more progressive political discourse around cultural production and community development. However, proponents must face significant challenges to achieve the results they aspire to.

In this urban context, where pedestrian walks generate walking rhetoric, performing the practices of space (Certeau, 1994), the creative city emerges as a space charged with a synesthetic sensory aura, conferring an organization in constant transformation (A. C. F. Reis & Kageyama, 2011, p. 24). This makes creativity a significant critical force for urban organization, including through a marginal urban ennoblement (Mendes, 2012).

In the creative city, practice therefore, assumes a critical organizing power exercised through a heterogeneous network established by the interaction between different actors, materials, and resources, which helps us to build an understanding of a world that is also marginal (Mendes, 2012; Wittmann, 2019).

4. METHODOLOGY

The research, which is qualitative in nature, is based on exploratory, descriptive, documentary, and bibliographic approaches (Bauer & Gaskell, 2002). Certeau’s proposition about the multiplicity of methods for investigating practices was also considered. Among them, the author suggests that the starting point should be to select an observant and engaged practice (Certeau, 1994, p. 20) in a place in the city to be studied and to determine its whole. To this end, the primary contexts chosen were the spaces where the Poço da Draga community is located, between the margins of the urban perimeter where Fortaleza’s creative design district is located (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Urban spaces in the creative design district and community of Poço da Draga

For the data collection and the constitution of the research corpus (Bauer & Gaskell, 2002), we used a combination of documents, literature, and interviews, accompanied by observation procedures of the city spaces under study. The documentary research was conducted in several collections: the archives linked to the UNESCO Fortaleza Creative City of Design Project and the archives relating to the organization of the creative district, produced by the city council and other municipal institutions, such as the Fortaleza Planning Institute (Instituto de Planejamento de Fortaleza [Iplanfor]).

This documentary corpus was complemented by specific bibliographical research into academic studies on the Poço da Draga community, as well as studies produced on the history and formation of the neighborhoods involved in the organization of the creative design district, including the contiguous spaces between the Praia de Iracema and Centro neighborhoods. To this end, the following databases were searched: Capes, Catalog of Theses and Dissertations, and Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations considering the descriptors “Poço da Draga” and “Praia de Iracema.” The period from 2008 to 2019 was observed, and fourteen studies were identified, including four books, four articles, four dissertations, and two theses. Both the archival documents and the surveys compose the collection of this research.

In addition, six people were interviewed (Interviewees A, B, C, D, E, and F). Of these, interviewees A and B were city hall and Iplanfor project managers involved in organizing Fortaleza’s creative district. The other interviewees (C, D, E, and F) were residents and project leaders from Poço da Draga. For each category, we applied specific scripts organized in a semi-structured way, guided by the objective of the research. Data were collected between April 2020 and December 2021. Due to the conditions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, contacts were made via Instagram. Interviews were then conducted via Google Meet and WhatsApp.

Initially, the observation procedures (Angrosino, 2009) were planned to cover the totality of urban spaces involving the entire urban perimeter (Figure 1), including the boundaries of the Poço da Draga community and the creative design district. However, these procedures could not be widely practiced due to health requirements. Under these circumstances, a set of observation visits was carried out only during December 2021. Complementing this procedure, we prepared field diaries with systematic and organized notes on the urban daily life under observation.

This corpus was analyzed using thematic analysis (Bauer & Gaskell, 2002), which is one of the techniques of the content analysis approach (Bardin, 2004). Guided by the dimensions determined by the objective of this study, the thematic analysis was based on identifying a set of relevant themes. These included the social, historical, and cultural contextualization of the city’s spaces, in addition to the UNESCO seal; the organization of the creative design district and the actions of its players; and, finally, urban public policies in favor of the creative city.

These relevant themes were selected by different coding units cut out across the board, by phrases limited by punctuation marks (Bardin, 2004, p. 73) contained in the materials that comprised the research corpus. To help organize the information generated in the corpus, some Atlas TI features were used.

This action of cutting out the coding units considered the “frequency of the themes extracted from the discourse as a whole” (Bardin, 2004, p. 168). As will be presented below, the inferential and interpretative analyses chose two central thematic units for the presentation of the results: the community of Poço da Draga and the Creative District of the City of Fortaleza, as well as the creative economy space of a city in the global South.

5. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

5.1. The community of Poço da Draga and the Creative District of the City of Fortaleza

Through a project led by the city government, in July 2019, Fortaleza was recognized by UNESCO as a creative city in the design category and is committed to developing a set of actions related to stimulating the creative economy in favor of a creative city (Arantes, 2006; Leite, 2015; Mendes, 2012; Scarpato et al., 2021; Wittmann, 2019). Among these projects is the organization of a creative district (Figure 1), involving an urban perimeter of 2.9 km² with a population of 15,286 inhabitants (Fortaleza Criativa, 2020; Silveira, 2019).

The urban spaces under study that make up the creative district are located between the contiguous neighborhoods of Praia de Iracema and Centro. As specified in Figure 1, between the banks to the west are Poço da Draga and two other small communities: Morro do Ouro and Graviola. These contiguous marginal spaces (Das & Poole, 2004) are part of the Special Zone of Social Interest (Zeis), established by the city government (Fortaleza Criativa, 2020), whose strategies contribute to the objectives of the creative design district organization, seeking to “combine creative entrepreneurship with social inclusion, innovation, and sustainability” (Leitão, 2018, p. 18).

Poço da Draga is a community with 114 years of history. Its spaces were occupied in the 1900s by artisanal fishermen and their families, as well as other workers, such as dockworkers from the port that used to be in these marginal areas of the city. Since the port was moved to the east side of the city, these spaces have been the target of countless requalification projects implemented by the city government in favor of tourism and entertainment, causing constant threats of removal of the inhabitants of Poço da Draga by a management based on intense real estate speculation in these spaces of the city. Today, Poço da Draga has 34,502 km² of territory and around 1,026 people living in precarious settlements (Iplanfor, 2021).

At the end of the 1980s, the Praia de Iracema neighborhood, which borders the Poço da Draga community, with its houses, bars, and restaurants, was given a new meaning based on a bohemian and tourist vocation, as well as being recognized as a historical heritage site, triggering new redevelopment processes. Its territory, when qualified by the city council as Zeis, created a set of restrictive rules and guidelines, including for real estate speculation (Costa, 2005).

In these questions, we can see the tensions that emerge in the processes of re-signification that requalification practices bring with them, both in the context of the public sphere, communication, and participation and in the physical space of access and public use of spaces (Leite, 2008).

In the interviews, however, it became clear that, over the years, these urban requalification and re-signification practices put in place by the municipal government proved to be misguided, while the inhabitants of the marginalized surrounding communities were forgotten (Ren, 2021; Robles et al., 2021). A large part of the public policies aimed at urban requalification processes in marginalized urban spaces have been based on projects developed with a functionalist logic, which have often failed to respect the historical, cultural, and political uses, as well as the vocations of the places (Barbalho & Barreto, 2020; Cerqueira, 2018; C. C. O. Lacerda et al., 2023; Oliveira, 2018; Velázquez, 2007).

According to the themes analyzed, the resilient persistence of the inhabitants of the Poço da Draga community to remain in their place, despite the urban interventions of the public authorities and the demands of the private sector, connects with the discussions proposed by Certeau (1994) on the ways of being and doing that are articulated with the instituted spaces. The daily life and urban experience of the inhabitants of Poço da Draga, despite being contingent in terms of normativity, rehearsed unpredictable actions in routinization, and organizing practices in opposition to norms (Leite, 2010). These processes, characterized by a resistance to the law of the place, acted to transform the community of Poço da Draga into a space, a place practiced by its inhabitants, integrating it differently into the city’s creative district (Dosse, 2004; Ward, 2001).

In this context, we wonder how the organization of these spaces in the city, suggested by the city council, based on the policies of requalification and re-signification in favor of a creative economy, have considered these persistent practices of resistance put into action by the inhabitants who live in these territories that permeate the urban margins where the spaces of the creative design district are delimited. These reflections will be further explored in the next section.

5.2. The organizing of spatial practices and the creative economy of a Global South city

The community of Poço da Draga suffers from several problems that are characteristic of territories located on the margins (Barbalho & Barreto, 2020; Cerqueira, 2018; Oliveira, 2018; Velázquez, 2007), typical of cities in the global South (C. C. O. Lacerda et al., 2023; Miraftab & Kudva, 2015; Sternberg, 2017), arising from various factors, such as low-income levels, high unemployment rates, lack of basic sanitation, among other issues, intensified by the scarcity of public policies (Das & Poole, 2004; Oliveira, 2018). According to Gondim (2008, p. 102), the historical omission of public authorities regarding the Poço da Draga community has taken on the appearance of malign neglect.

On the other hand, during the process of organizing the application dossier for the UNESCO seal, the Territorial Action Plan (Plano de Ação Territorial, 2018) document explains a set of strategic practices (Certeau, 1994) aimed at transforming the capital of Ceará into a creative city, connected to the other creative cities in the UCCN network, recognized for the sustainability, innovation and cultural diversity of its goods and services, as well as the productive inclusion of its population, especially its youth.

The Integrated Land Regularization Plan (Pirf) for Poço da Draga, created in 2020, involves a set of actions that the city council should carry out in conjunction with various institutions, including residents. This document emphasizes urban public policy formulations for the construction of the Zeis, as well as other issues related to the right to the city (Frúgoli, 2018) and to the territory of Poço da Draga (Iplanfor, 2021).

The thematic units selected from this documentary base reflected the views of Serra and Fernandez (2014) when they suggested the need to combine public policies for the creative economy with different urban policies. In addition, Emmendoerfer et al. (2016) discussed the need for policies for the creative economy in Brazil to propose different communication actions based on the organization of dialogic spaces at territorial scales, integrating marginalized spaces (Das & Poole, 2004).

According to these two documentary studies, two interviews were conducted with city hall managers (Interviewees A and B) who were involved in organizing the creative design district in the city of Fortaleza. According to interviewee A, the territory of the Poço da Draga community was not originally included in the versions of the dossiers sent to obtain UNESCO’s seal of approval because these versions dealt with a “broader project involving the entire city of Fortaleza and not a specific space”. Nevertheless, after the dossier was sent, Interviewee B. clarified:

A number of meetings were held with community leaders, including listening to the residents’ council of Praia de Iracema, where the community is located. The aim was to access local needs. Through this council, we began to have contact with the leaders, who are great representatives of Poço, and they began to discuss the creative district project with us.

The second manager interviewed emphasized that Poço da Draga “was one of the inspirations for the creation of the creative district” in that space (Interviewee A). She stressed that there were residents of Poço da Draga trained in sectors of the creative economy, such as audiovisual and gastronomy: “This was one of the many justifications and triggers to start thinking about the creative district” (Interviewee A).

Interviewee B was asked what projects were aimed at the community. She explained that, at first, she didn’t know the specific situation regarding projects for these community spaces. However, as was shown earlier in the documentary analysis:

Subsequently, the Integrated Land Regularization Plans, the Pirfs, were built. One of them was for the Zeis where Poço da Draga is located, which involves issues related to work and productive inclusion, where the creative district was also mentioned.

These thematic units selected from the interviews with the managers are in line with what some authors have said when they report that, in Brazil, the creative economy approach has been discussed based on the organizing approach (Czarniawska, 2008), with this process being understood from a collective action (Menezes & Ipiranga, 2022), emphasizing, among other points, the role of different leaders (Muzzio & Barbosa, 2018). There are also reports of the need to train people in sectors that include processes, ideas, and ventures that use creativity (Bendassolli et al., 2009; Stern & Seifert, 2008; UNCTAD, 2018).

In addition to the interviews mentioned above (Interviewees A and B), four interviews were conducted (Interviewees C, D, E, and F) with residents of the Poço da Draga community who held leadership positions in the projects analyzed.

The first was with the community leader and founding partner of an organization that operates in Poço da Draga: Coletivo Fundo da Caixa (CFC), which was founded in 2015 to promote art and socio-cultural activities. In his statement, when asked about the organization of the creative design district, which refers to the ways of being and doing that perform the practices of space (Certeau, 1994), he replied that he was unaware of it, expressing surprise at the UNESCO-accredited project: “I never knew it existed” (Interviewee C).

Other interviews with the community leader and founding member of the Composta Poço project, which organizes sustainable space practices in the management of organic waste composting, said that he had heard about the creative district through contact with a representative of the city council, confirming the documentary analysis that, “at the time of the Zeis management council, she encouraged us to do training and courses. There were several meetings, but things didn’t get off the ground” (Interviewee D). When asked which projects were mentioned by the representative from the town hall, he replied that a project was mentioned that aimed to organize an observatory in the community, but “in the end, they didn’t go into much detail, and to this day this project hasn’t been implemented” (Interviewee D).

A third interview took place with a community leader (Interviewee E) and coordinator of the NGO Velaumar, whose social media reaffirms the strength of the people of the sea through the resistance of coastal communities, reporting on its mission to promote actions of social transformation in communities in Fortaleza, with an emphasis on Poço da Draga. The interviewee reported that she didn’t know much about the city’s creative design district:

There were a few meetings in 2019, but I don’t really know what this creative district is about. The people who contacted us were from the Observatory [referring to Iplanfor’s Observatory of the City of Fortaleza], which happened during the meetings about the ZEIS. [...] we talked about this district, [...] but I don’t really know what the creative district means.

Another interview was conducted with a member of the Zeis council, who is also one of the community leaders involved in managing three different projects: Expresso 110, Movimento Pró-Poço, and the aforementioned Composta Poço. Expresso 110 is a project based on an ambulant rhetoric (Certeau, 1994) that refers to ways of being and doing, seeking to form groups of visitors to Poço da Draga, with the proposal that they take a walking tour of the community’s spaces, accompanied by a guide, a resident of the community, to learn about the history and actions of resistance promoted by Poço da Draga.

The Movimento Pró-Poço project carries out a range of diverse activities, such as the exhibition “Poço 115: traces of the City”, held in 2021 at the Museum of Contemporary Art of Ceará, which presented a collection of photographs by residents of Poço da Draga, bringing back the memory of the place’s 115 years and weaving a walking rhetoric (Certeau, 1994) about the city’s relationship with the beach, amateur soccer, childhood, old age and the struggles of this population to remain in their territory. Interviewee F emphasized:

I’ve known about this project since 2016. I was even invited by a representative of the city council to take part in the construction of an observatory within the Poço da Draga community. All of this was to be included in this creative district.

Despite the evidence that public policies aimed at organizing the creative design district are capable of deepening the links between culture, the economy and the territories involved (Boccella & Salerno, 2016; Mendes, 2012; Stern & Seifert, 2008), some interviews units showed divergent themes of meaning (Bardin, 2004), presupposing a tension between the practices of the creative city and the inclusive city in the formulation of these policies (Alsayel et al., 2022).

Some practices related to public policies seem to emphasize institutional objectives more and what belongs to the collective - in short, the people who live in the community - less (A. C. F. Reis, 2012). If these dialogical actions focused on the context of the marginalization of a majority, it would make it possible to organize another spatiality by facilitating the reappropriation of the spaces practiced by the community’s inhabitants (Certeau, 1994; S. M. F. Teixeira et al., 2018; Ward, 2001).

As mentioned by the previous interviewees, as well as recorded in the field diaries during the observations of the walking rhetoric promoted by the inhabitants of the Poço da Draga community, these processes are organizing various creative, educational, sustainable, historical, cultural, and identity, audiovisual, tourist and festive practices, demonstrating that the community is not a passive actor, resisting and rebelling against the practices of an institutionalized strategy. The community is acting to circumvent an established order, putting into practice a set of tactical actions, still hidden, surreptitious, but of an emancipatory nature, to overcome the overlapping institutional system (Certeau, 1994; Dosse, 2004; Ward, 2001).

None of these space practices organized by the inhabitants of Poço da Draga, however, are included in the institutional documents analyzed. They include the ArteVistas project, which brings together a group that carries out various cultural activities; Bloco Cai no Poço, which organizes festive practices related to the Poço carnival block; Coletivo Fundo da Caixa, which brings together independent artists aiming to promote artistic and cultural practices; Composta Poço, aimed at sustainable solid waste composting practices; Dragaleria, aimed at producing photographs to safeguard the community’s memory; Expresso 110, which organizes a walking route, promoting spatial practices; Movimento Pró-Poço, made up of residents who organize themselves for the cause of belonging to the community; and Poço de Cultura and Velaumar, which aim to develop artistic and cultural training practices, as well as socio-educational activities for the population of Poço da Draga.

This set of spatial practices takes on a leading role in enabling a reorganization of Poço da Draga based on the ways of being and doing of its inhabitants, transforming, based on walking rhetoric, places of the creative design district through these uses (Certeau, 1994). These practices of space compete inversely as counter-uses with the uses of institutional practices, reactivating public spaces as places of access, communication, and participation (Leite, 2002, 2008). The inhabitants of Poço da Draga, by acting as creative placemaking, trigger an urban maker movement, producing a political discourse around cultural production, which reverberates in the organization of community spaces, integrating them into the spaces of the city’s creative district (Grodach, 2017).

These creative projects form a set of insurgent space practices with an emancipatory content, as they are led and exercised by the inhabitants of the Poço da Draga community, revealing processes of resistance, and producing unforeseen effects in the organization of the marginal spaces of the city’s creative district (Certeau, 1994; Miraftab & Kudva, 2015; Sternberg, 2017; Barbalho & Barreto, 2020; C. C. O. Lacerda et al., 2023).

6. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The results of this research revealed that urban spaces focused on the creative economy, when organized in marginalized areas, favor the connection between different arrangements of tactical space practices produced based on ambulant rhetoric, based on local resistance, insurgent, and emancipatory initiatives. Thus, in the creative city of the global South, practices of space assume a critical organizing power, exercised through a heterogeneous network established by the interaction between different actors, materials, and resources, which help us to build an understanding of a world that is also marginal.

Nonetheless, the research also highlighted as a contribution to the discussion that participating in networks of creative cities and producing public policies aimed at fostering the creative economy adds new risks and opportunities for building more democratic urban practices by stressing the organization that involves the practices of the creative city and the practices of space for an inclusive city. It was assumed that the organization of creative urban spaces, especially those located on the margins of cities in the global South, is based on an arrangement of practices mutually constructed by power relations, disputes and resistance, limits, and emancipatory insurgencies, created or hindered by the practitioners themselves.

These ways of being and doing that have been organized as creative space practices seem to guarantee a daily (re)appropriation of the spaces that (re)emerge as places practiced by the inhabitants of Poço da Draga. This set of tactical actions, by articulating a politicization of everyday practices in the context of Poço da Draga, has been organizing itself together with the creative district, endorsed by UNESCO, in a movement that moves between resistance, insurgency, and emancipation.

Based on these analyses, it is possible to state that the urban rationality that still seems to prevail in public policy strategies related to the organization of the creative design district does not establish clear communication between what is happening in the city and the concept that is being proposed for the various layers of these collectives.

In particular, the organization of the creative district that is being planned doesn’t seem to recognize the plurality of creative space practices that are being organized daily by the inhabitants of the Poço da Draga community, who resist and insist on communicating in an emancipatory way with the instituted processes. However, this creative organization that the community puts into action remains invisible when it crosses beyond the spatial limits of Poço da Draga. What is done, said, and perceived there does not pass its limits. Beyond its surroundings, the city is unaware of these beings and their actions that resist and rise.

These results call for a broader understanding of the workings of these practices of space through urban cultural policies that organize spaces outside a pre-existing totality, going beyond the spaces involved in the creative district accredited by UNESCO, integrating those on the margins of the city.

The main limitation of this work is the COVID-19 pandemic, which made it impossible to expand the methodological procedures of on-site observation of city hall projects, as well as those promoted by the inhabitants of Poço da Draga. This limitation also made it difficult for the researchers, the authors of this article, to engage in rhetoric.

Finally, as a suggestion for future studies, it is recommended that further research be carried out in different community contexts and/or in other Brazilian creative cities accredited by UNESCO, to map, from a critical point of view, through urban ethnographies, the ways in which the creative economy is organized in cities of the global South.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We want to express our gratitude to CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) and CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) for the master’s scholarship awarded to Vanessa Pereira Pinheiro, which made it possible to complete her master’s thesis and the subsequent publication of the article.

REFERÊNCIAS

• Almeida, A. S., Teixeira, R. M., & Luft, M. C. M. S. (2014). Mapeando a produção científica sobre economia criativa em periódicos nacionais e internacionais de 2000 a 2013. Revista Pensamento Contemporâneo em Administração, 8(4), 23-47. Recuperado de https://periodicos.uff.br/pca/article/view/11190
  » https://periodicos.uff.br/pca/article/view/11190
• Almeida, E. L., & Dias, P. K. (2021). Revisão bibliométrica sobre economia criativa em periódicos nacionais entre 2008 a 2018. Revista Ciências Administrativas, 27(3), 10412. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.5020/2318-0722.2021.27.3.10412
  » https://doi.org/10.5020/2318-0722.2021.27.3.10412
• Alsayel, A., Jong, M., & Fransen, J. (2022). Can creative cities be inclusive too? How do Dubai, Amsterdam and Toronto navigate the tensions between creativity and inclusiveness in their adoption of city brands and policy initiatives? Cities, 128, 103786. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103786
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103786
• Angrosino, M. (2009). Etnografia e observação participante Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed.
• Arantes, A. A. (2006). O patrimônio cultural e seus usos: a dimensão urbana. Revista Habitus, 4(1), 425-435. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.18224/hab.v4.1.2006.425-435
  » https://doi.org/10.18224/hab.v4.1.2006.425-435
• Ashton, M. S. G., Haubert, B., Prodanov, L., Schreiber, D., & Nunes, M. F. (2016). Cidade criativa do design da Rede Unesco: evidências e percepções dos turistas em Montreal. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 14(36), 352-377. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2016.36.352-377
  » https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2016.36.352-377
• Barbalho, A., & Barreto, M. (2020). Retratos do Ceará moderno: emergência de um padrão de modernização cultural nas margens Fortaleza, CE: EdUECE.
• Barcellos, E. E. I., Botura, G. Jr., & Ramirez, C. M. S. (2016). The creative economy on the environmental of the technological parks and incubators. International Journal of Innovation, 4(2), 140-154. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v4i2.52
  » https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v4i2.52
• Bardin, L. (2004). Análise de conteúdo Lisboa, Portugal: Edições 70.
• Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2002). Pesquisa qualitativa com texto, imagem e som Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
• Bendassolli, P. F., Wood, T, Jr., Kirschbaum, C., & Cunha, M. P. (2009). Indústrias criativas: definição, limites e possibilidades. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 49(1), 10-18. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902009000100003
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75902009000100003
• Beyes, T., & Steyaert, C. (2012). Spacing organization: non-representational theory and performing organizational space. Organization, 19(1), 45-61. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411401946
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411401946
• Bezerra, R. G. (2008). O bairro Praia de Iracema entre o “adeus” e a “boemia”: usos, apropriações e representações de um espaço urbano (Tese de Doutorado). Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE.
• Boccella, N., & Salerno, I.(2016). Creative economy, cultural industries and local development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 223, 291-296. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.370
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.370
• Brenner, N. (2016). Critique of urbanization: selected essays Boston, MA: Birkhäuser.
• Cerqueira, E. V. (2018). Faut-il renouveler le regard sur les franges peripheriques des villes du Sud? Le cas des peripheries bresiliennes. Confins, 36 Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.4000/confins.14043
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/confins.14043
• Certeau, M. (1994). A invenção do cotidiano Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
• Closs, L., & Rocha-de-Oliveira, S. (2017). Economia criativa e territórios usados: um debate baseado nas contribuições de Milton Santos. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 15(2), 349-363. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395152437
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395152437
• Coelho, T. (1997). Dicionário crítico de política cultural São Paulo, SP: Fapesp/Iluminuras.
• Costa, S. S. F. (2005). Praia de Iracema e a revitalização de seu patrimônio histórico. Pós FAUUSP, 18, 48-59. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2317-2762.v0i18p48-59
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2317-2762.v0i18p48-59
• Czarniawska, B. (2008). A theory of organizing London, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
• Das, V., & Poole, D. (2004). Anthropology in the margins of the State Santa Fe, New Mexico: School of American Research Press.
• Depiné, A., Medeiros, D., Bonetti, G., & Vanzin, T. (2018). Cidades criativas e o componente cultural no desenvolvimento urbano. In A. Depiné, & C. Teixeira (Org.), Habitats de inovação: conceito e prática(Vol. 1, pp. 67-86). São Paulo, SP: Perse.
• Dosse, F. (2004). O espaço habitado segundo Michel de Certeau. ArtCultura, 6(9), 81-92. Recuperado de https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/artcultura/article/view/1373
  » https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/artcultura/article/view/1373
• Emmendoerfer, M. L., Fioravante, A. S. A., & Cezar, L. C. (2016). Planejamento governamental e comunicação organizacional para a política pública de economia criativa no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas e Internacionais, 1(1), 137-151. Recuperado de https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/rppi/article/view/28261
  » https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/rppi/article/view/28261
• Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Ceará. (2021). Estratégias para o desenvolvimento dos clusters do Ceará: distrito criativo Recuperado de https://www.fortalezacriativa.com/dossie-arquivos
  » https://www.fortalezacriativa.com/dossie-arquivos
• Federação das Indústrias do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. (2022). Mapeamento da indústria criativa no Brasil Recuperado de https://www.firjan.com.br/economiacriativa/downloads/MapeamentoIndustriaCriativa2022.pdf
  » https://www.firjan.com.br/economiacriativa/downloads/MapeamentoIndustriaCriativa2022.pdf
• Fischer, T. (1997). A cidade como teia organizacional: inovações, continuidades e ressonâncias culturais Salvador, BA, cidade puzzle Revista de Administração Pública, 31(3), 74-88. Recuperado de https://periodicos.fgv.br/rap/article/view/7906
• Fortaleza Criativa. (2020). Fortaleza Criativa Recuperado de https://www.fortalezacriativa.com
• Frúgoli, H. Jr. (2018). Ativismos em São Paulo. Cadernos CRH, 31(82), 75-86. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-49792018000100005
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-49792018000100005
• Furtado, C. (1984). Cultura e desenvolvimento em época de crise Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Paz e Terra.
• Gherardi, S. (2009). Practice? It’s a matter of taste. Management Learning, 40(5), 535-550. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507609340812
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507609340812
• Gondim, L. M. P. (2008). A favela depois do estatuto da cidade: novos e velhos dilemas à luz do caso do Poço da Draga. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Urbanos e Regionais, 10(2), 97-114. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.22296/2317-1529.2008v10n2p97
  » https://doi.org/10.22296/2317-1529.2008v10n2p97
• Grodach, C. (2017). Urban cultural policy and creative city making, 68, 82-91. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.015
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.015
• Haubrich, G. F., Bessi, V. G., Bohnenberger, M. C., & Freitas, E. C. (2020). Reflexões sobre o trabalho no contexto contemporâneo da economia criativa. Organizações & Sociedade, 27(93), 255-267. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9270935
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9270935
• Honorato, B. E. F., & Saraiva, L. A. S. (2016). Cidade, população em situação de rua e estudos organizacionais. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 14(36), 158-186. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2016.36.158-186
  » https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2016.36.158-186
• Hoston, J. (2008). Insurgent citizenship: disjunctions of democracy and modernity in Brazil Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Ipiranga, A. S. R. (2010). A cultura da cidade e os seus espaços intermediários: os bares e os restaurantes. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 11(1), 65-91. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712010000100004
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712010000100004
• Instituto de Planejamento de Fortaleza. (2021). Poço da Draga: Pirfs prioritárias Recuperado de https://zonasespeciais.fortaleza.ce.gov.br/zeisp/3
  » https://zonasespeciais.fortaleza.ce.gov.br/zeisp/3
• Kornberger, M., & Clegg, S. R. (2004). Bringing space back in organizing the generative building. Organization Studies, 25(7), 1095-1114. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604046312
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604046312
• Lacerda, C. C. O., Ipiranga, A. S. R., & Thoene, U. (2023). A critical organizational history of city margins in the Global South. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 18(1), 22-45. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-05-2022-2335
  » https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-05-2022-2335
• Landry, C. (2013). Origens e futuros da cidade criativa São Paulo, SP: Sesi.
• Landry, C., & Bianchini, F. (1995). The creative city London, UK: Demos.
• Leitão, C. (2016). Ter ou não ter o direito à criatividade, eis a questão: sobre os desafios, os impasses e as perspectivas de um Brasil criativo. In C. Leitão, & A. F. Machado (Org.), Por um Brasil criativo: significados, desafios e perspectiva da economia criativa brasileira (pp. 309-380). Belo Horizonte, MG: Código.
• Leitão, C. (2018, fevereiro 26). Fortaleza e o seu primeiro distrito criativo. O Povo Recuperado de https://mais.opovo.com.br/jornal/opiniao/2018/02/fortaleza-e-o-seu-primeiro-distrito-criativo.html
  » https://mais.opovo.com.br/jornal/opiniao/2018/02/fortaleza-e-o-seu-primeiro-distrito-criativo.html
• Leite, R. P. (2002). Contrausos e espaço público: notas sobre a construção social dos lugares na Manguetown Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 17(49), 115-172. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-69092002000200008
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-69092002000200008
• Leite, R. P. (2008). Localizando o espaço público: gentrification e cultura urbana. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 83, 35-54. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.436
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.436
• Leite, R. P. (2010). A inversão do cotidiano: práticas sociais e rupturas na vida urbana contemporânea. Dados, 53(3), 737-756. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0011-52582010000300007
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0011-52582010000300007
• Leite, R. P. (2015). Cities and gentrification in contemporary Brazil. Current Urban Studies, 3(3), 175-186. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/cus.2015.33015
  » https://doi.org/10.4236/cus.2015.33015
• Lima, J. G. B., Morais, I. A. L., & Souza, L. R. C. (2021). O impacto da pandemia covid-19 no turismo em três cidades criativas do Mercosul. Rosa dos Ventos, 13(4), 1-26. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.18226/21789061.v13i4p27
  » https://doi.org/10.18226/21789061.v13i4p27
• Mac-Allister, M. (2004). A cidade no campo dos estudos organizacionais. Organizações & Sociedade, 11(Especial), 171-181. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9110012
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9110012
• Mendes, L. (2012). Nobilitação urbana marginal enquanto prática emancipatória: alternativa ao discurso hegemônico da cidade criativa? Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 99, 51-72. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.5112
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/rccs.5112
• Menezes, R. A. G., & Ipiranga, A. S. R. (2022). An inclusive organizing through creative economy: the case of a creative city from Brazil. In Proceedings of the 39º European Group for Organizational Studies Colloquium, Vienna, Austria.
• Miraftab, F., & Kudva, N. (2015). Cities of the Global South reader: urban reader series London, UK: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Muzzio, H. (2019). Estética e arte urbana: flagrantes da construção de cidades criativas. Revista Interdisciplinar de Gestão Social, 8(2), 15-28. Recuperado de https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/rigs/article/view/29592
  » https://periodicos.ufba.br/index.php/rigs/article/view/29592
• Muzzio, H., & Barbosa, F. C. (2018). No caminho para uma gestão criativa: a percepção dos gestores da economia criativa sobre suas experiências. Revista de Administração da Unimep, 16(3), 108-131. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.15600/rau.v16i3.1179
  » https://doi.org/10.15600/rau.v16i3.1179
• Nogueira, A. M. A. (2019). Possibilidades e desafios de práticas insurgentes: o caso da comunidade Poço da Draga (Dissertação de Mestrado). Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE.
• Oliveira, B. L. F. L. (2018). Histórias da terra e do mar: narrativas sobre resistência na comunidade Poço da Draga (Dissertação de Mestrado). Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE.
• Plano de Ação Territorial. (2018). Distritos e cidades criativas Recuperado de https://mapacultural.secult.ce.gov.br
  » https://mapacultural.secult.ce.gov.br
• Reis, A. C. F. (2012). Cidades criativas: da teoria à prática São Paulo, SP: Sesi .
• Reis, A. C. F., & Kageyama, P. (2011). Cidades criativas: perspectivas São Paulo, SP: Garimpo de Soluções.
• Reis, J. M. D., & Zille, L. P. (2020). Empreendedorismo cultural e economia criativa: a companhia de teatro “Grupo Galpão”. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas, 9(2), 97-122. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.14211/regepe.v9i2.1576
  » https://doi.org/10.14211/regepe.v9i2.1576
• Ren, X. (2021). The peripheral turn in global urban studies: theory, evidence, sites. South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 26, 1-8. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.4000/samaj.7413
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/samaj.7413
• Richards, G. (2018). Tourism, an underestimated driving force for the creative economy. Revista Turismo em Análise, 29(3), 387-395. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1984-4867.v29i3p387-395
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1984-4867.v29i3p387-395
• Robles, M., Rodrıguez, N., & Dattwyler, R. (2021). De la periferia y el periurbano al margen: comprendiendo el espacio de expansión de la ciudad latinoamericana. Atelier Geográfico, 15(2), 6-26. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.5216/ag.v15i2.69949
  » https://doi.org/10.5216/ag.v15i2.69949
• Roy, A. (2015). What is urban about critical urban theory? Urban Geography, 37(6), 810-823. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1105485
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1105485
• Santos, E. C. D., & Silva, C. M. (2020). Feiras colaborativas e economia criativa em Caruaru, Pernambuco. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 18(52), 286-307. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2020.52.286-307
  » https://doi.org/10.21527/2237-6453.2020.52.286-307
• Saraiva, L. A. S., & Carrieri, A. P. (2012). Organização-cidade: proposta de avanço conceitual a partir da análise de um caso. Revista de Administração Pública, 46(2), 547-576. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122012000200010
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122012000200010
• Saraiva, L. A. S., & Ipiranga, A. S. R. (2020). História, práticas sociais e gestão das/nas cidades Ituiutaba, MG: Barlavento.
• Sassen, S. (2016). Expulsões: brutalidade e complexidade na economia global Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Paz e Terra.
• Scarpato, L. E. L., Ashton, M. S. G., & Schreiber, D. (2021). Elementos para uma cidade criativa: uma análise de Kortrijk, Bélgica. Rosa dos Ventos, 13(1), 109-122. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.18226/21789061.v13i1p109
  » https://doi.org/10.18226/21789061.v13i1p109
• Serra, N., & Fernandez, R. S. (2014). Economia criativa: da discussão do conceito à formulação de políticas públicas. Revista de Administração e Inovação, 11(4), 355-372. Recuperado de https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/110253
  » https://www.revistas.usp.br/rai/article/view/110253
• Silva, I. D., Dias, P. K., & Santos, E. C. D. (2021). Organizing e gestão ordinária na economia criativa local. Administração Pública e Gestão Social, 13(3), 1-22. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.21118/apgs.v13i3.10159
  » https://doi.org/10.21118/apgs.v13i3.10159
• Silveira, E. D. (2019). Dossiê Unesco Fortaleza cidade criativa: políticas públicas para cidades. Cadernos do Observatório, 7(7), 19-27. Recuperado de https://observatoriodefortaleza.fortaleza.ce.gov.br/revista/article/7/3
  » https://observatoriodefortaleza.fortaleza.ce.gov.br/revista/article/7/3
• Stern, M. J., & Seifert, S. C. (2008). From creative economy to creative society Philadelphia, PA: The Reinvestment Fund.
• Teixeira, S. M. F., Subirats, J., Lacerda, D. S., & Blanco, I. (2018). Políticas públicas e a cidade: produzindo espaços urbanos inclusivos. Revista de Administração Pública, 52(6), 1007-1014. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220180306
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220180306
• United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2018). Creative economy outlook: trends in international trade in creative industries (2002-2015) Recuperado de https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ditcted2018d3_en.pdf
  » https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ditcted2018d3_en.pdf
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2020). Why creativity? Why cities?Recuperado de https://en.unesco.org/creative-cities/content/why-creativity-why-cities
  » https://en.unesco.org/creative-cities/content/why-creativity-why-cities
• Valiati, L., & Moller, G. (2016). Economia criativa, cultura e políticas públicas Porto Alegre, RS: Ed. UFRGS.
• Vasconcellos, S. L., Monticelli, J. M., Calixto, C. V., & Garrido, I. L. (2017). Prospecting theoretical approaches to understand internationalization of creative economy firms. Revista Eletrônica de Negócios Internacionais, 12(3), 77-92. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.18568/1980-4865.12377-92
  » https://doi.org/10.18568/1980-4865.12377-92
• Velázquez, B. R. R. (2007). Del suburbio y la periferia al borde: el modelo de crecimiento de la Zona Metropolitana del Valle de México (ZMVM). L’Ordinaire des Ameriques, 207, 69-89. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.4000/orda.3350
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/orda.3350
• Ward, G. (2001). Michel de Certeau’s “spiritual spaces”. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 100(2), 501-517. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-100-2-501
  » https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-100-2-501
• Wittmann, T. (2019, abril). Cidades criativas: ativos intangíveis como recurso central de criação de valor. Via Revista, 4(6), 5-10. Recuperado de https://via.ufsc.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/revistaVIA-6-ed.pdf
  » https://via.ufsc.br/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/revistaVIA-6-ed.pdf

• Foremost, we would like to express our deep gratitude to CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel) and CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) for the scholarship awarded to Vanessa Pereira Pinheiro. This grant made it possible to complete her master’s thesis and, consequently, to publish the article resulting from this work. We would like to thank these institutions for their essential support in the advancement of research and academic development, contributing to the growth of knowledge in our country.

• DATA AVAILABILITY

  Finally, all the data supporting the results of this study has been published in the article itself.

• 18
  [Translated version] Note: All quotes in English translated by this article’s translator.

Reviewers:

• 21
  Fernando Manuel Rocha da Cruz (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal / RN - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1254-5601
• 0
  Lucio Bittencourt (Universidade Federal do ABC, São Paulo / SP - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8380-3017
• 22
  Estela Najberg (Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia / GO - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2852-4442

• 23
  Peer review report: the peer review report is available at this URL. https://periodicos.fgv.br/rap/article/view/90372/84847

Edited by

Alketa Peci (Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0488-1744

Gabriela Spanghero Lotta (Fundação Getulio Vargas, São Paulo / SP - Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2801-1628

Data availability

Finally, all the data supporting the results of this study has been published in the article itself.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  05 Jan 2024
• Date of issue
  Nov-Dec 2023

History

• Received
  30 Dec 2022
• Accepted
  10 July 2023