Public Space in Flux: A Contextual Typology for Pre-War Greater Khartoum

Abstract

This study presents a typological framework for public spaces in pre-war Greater Khartoum, Sudan, addressing the lack of localized classification systems for Sudanese and African urban contexts. Through an analysis of 64 public spaces, integrating insights from literature, field surveys, and interviews, the research identifies four key typologies: formal public spaces, informal and insurgent public spaces, privately owned civic spaces, and public–private spaces. This framework captures the complex interplay of historical, cultural, social, and economic factors shaping Khartoum’s public realm. It highlights the coexistence of colonial-era planned spaces with emergent informal and contested areas, reflecting the city’s dynamic urban landscape. The study contributes to the debates on public space in African cities by offering a contextually sensitive approach beyond Western-centric models. It provides valuable insights for urban planning and policy development in Khartoum and similar rapidly urbanizing African contexts, emphasizing the need for inclusive, adaptive, and culturally responsive public space management strategies.

1. Introduction

Public spaces (PSs) foster social cohesion, facilitate socio-cultural interactions, and support democratic engagement [1]. They reinforce the broader urban fabric and play a fundamental role in promoting citizens’ well-being [2]. This importance is especially pronounced in African contexts such as Greater Khartoum, where public spaces possess significant historical and cultural resonance.

Yet, public space concepts, typologies, and functions are undergoing profound transformations [3]. In pre-war Khartoum, rapid urbanization, colonial legacies, shifting political landscapes, and evolving social structures converged to reshape traditional public space typologies into modern forms within a century [4]. Existing classification systems, however, often remain tethered to Western models [5], present overly simplistic categories [6], or are entirely lacking [6,7,8]. Such limitations obscure the city’s distinct socio-cultural realities.

The emergence of novel and multifaceted forms of PS highlights the inadequacy of current conceptual frameworks, accentuating the need for a systematic re-evaluation of PS typologies. Addressing this gap requires a comprehensive understanding of the social, cultural, economic, technological, and political forces driving public space transformations [9]. Such insight is vital for creating and managing urban environments that are equitable, inclusive, and attuned to local needs.

Accordingly, this study advocates rethinking PS typologies, proposing a framework encompassing both historical underpinnings and contemporary urban exigencies. It aims to contribute to a broader understanding of African urban contexts by examining how public spaces have evolved. A robust classification system is presented here, grounded in social, cultural, economic, technological, and political dynamics. This system not only addresses questions of equity and accessibility but also provides a practical tool for cultivating inclusive, sustainable, and responsive urban environments.

2. Literature Review

This literature review explores the multifaceted nature of PS typologies within African urban contexts, focusing on Greater Khartoum. It aims to:

1.

Examine the diversity of PS typologies in African cities, emphasizing Greater Khartoum.

2.

Analyze the historical, cultural, environmental, and political influences that have shaped these typologies, particularly in the pre-war period.

3.

Identify methodological approaches that effectively capture the complexities of PS typologies.

To answer these questions, we adopted a layered literature review strategy—beginning with global models to account for Sudan’s colonial urban planning legacy and its alignment with Western paradigms, followed by an exploration of African urban theories, and culminating in a focused analysis of Sudanese planning contexts.

This review draws from academic databases (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) and local repositories (e.g., Khartoum Space, SUST Dspace), combining open-access sources with gray literature such as government reports and theses. Departing from rigid systematic review protocols, we adopted a conventional qualitative review approach to incorporate locally grounded and non-indexed materials often absent in global citation networks [8,10].

This method enabled the inclusion of historical texts and local narratives, providing broader contextual insights [11]. Particularly in evolving fields, such as the typologies of public space in pre-war Greater Khartoum, this flexible approach allows for the inclusion of novel, context-specific knowledge that systematic reviews may overlook due to their exclusionary criteria.

2.1. Global Public Space Typologies: Foundations and Limitations

Traditional public space typologies have predominantly emerged from Euro-American urban planning paradigms. Classical theorists like Sitte focused on public squares’ aesthetic and morphological aspects [12]. At the same time, later scholars such as Carr et al. [13] and Gehl and Gemzøe [14] emphasized functional diversity and human-centric design.

Carmona [15] explored how public spaces facilitate social interaction by examining representational and institutional public forms that mirror societal values and power dynamics. Hou [16] introduced the concept of “insurgent public spaces,” which arise through grassroots, informal, or spontaneous actions that challenge dominant planning norms.

The global literature offers typologies categorized by morphological, functional, social, and political perspectives [9,15,16]. However, these models face valid critiques, such as the complexity of Sitte’s form-based approach [15], and often neglect spatial scale, catchment hierarchy, and the growing impact of neoliberal restructuring on public spaces [17]. Additionally, Mitchell critiques the increasing securitization and exclusion of marginalized populations from public space, arguing that neoliberal urban policies have transformed public spaces into mechanisms of control [3]. Davis expands on this with his concept of “fortress urbanism”, showing how architecture and policing are used to regulate public behavior in ways that often criminalize poverty [18].

The previous classifications reflect assumptions about order, formality, and state-led planning that misalign with the fluid, adaptive nature of public spaces in the Global South. While Hou’s insurgent typology serves as a counterpoint, it often captures episodic resistance rather than the normalized informality characteristic of cities like Khartoum. As such, it opens the door for deeper engagements with African urban theories that foreground informality not as resistance, but as the normative mode of spatial production.

To this end, scholars like Watson [19] and Roy [20] argue for the development of more inclusive and flexible typologies that accommodate emerging spatial trends and diverse cultural contexts, particularly in African cities.

2.2. Southern Urbanism and Postcolonial Perspectives

Southern urbanism challenges the universal applicability of Northern urban theories [21], emphasizing approaches that reflect the lived experiences of Global South residents [19,22]. It foregrounds informality, hybridity, and everyday spatial negotiation as central to urban life. Robinson rejects the binary between developed and developing cities and instead calls for analytical frameworks that view all cities as equally valid and complex [22].

Postcolonial urban theory interrogates how colonial planning ideologies shape contemporary governance and spatial organization. Scholars like Myers and Njoh emphasize the persistence of segregationist legacies, particularly in African cities [21,23]. Planning instruments such as green belts, parks, and zoning reinforced colonial power through spatial order and exclusion.

Roy proposes that informality should not be seen as a failure of planning, but rather as an integral part of how cities function in the Global South [20]. She highlights the state’s role in producing informality, primarily through selective regulation. Schindler complements this by outlining a paradigm of Southern urbanism where urban logics emerge from discontinuous, contested, and dynamic interactions between residents, space, and governance [24].

These frameworks collectively call for the decolonization of urban theory and a reorientation toward indigenous knowledge and spatial practices that respond to African socio-political contexts.

2.3. Temporality and Informality in Urban Public Spaces

Public spaces in African cities are frequently shaped by informal and temporary uses. La Varra’s “Post-it City” concept describes spaces appropriated temporarily for informal activities [25]. Bishop and Williams advocate for temporary urbanism as a strategy for revitalizing underused spaces and increasing adaptability [26].

Simone and Pieterse argue that informality and temporality are not marginal but constitute central features of African urbanism, serving as systems of resilience, economy, and social cohesion [27,28]. These authors emphasize that temporality is a productive force in African urbanization, facilitating spontaneous organization, collective practices, and adaptation in unstable political and economic climates. This temporality creates multifunctional and layered urban spaces that challenge formalist zoning and single-use typologies that often exist in formal planning practices in Greater Khartoum.

2.4. Public Space Dynamics in African Urban Contexts

African public spaces are multifunctional and socially embedded. Roji and Bahreldin highlight their capacity to accommodate religious rituals, commerce, recreation, and protest, often within a single site [29,30]. These spaces are socially produced, shaped through everyday interactions rather than master plans.

While Hou’s concept of insurgent space helps analyze spatial resistance, Simone and Schindler argue that informality is not merely a response to power, but a fundamental structure of urban life [24,27]. In this sense, African cities must be understood through their logics of spatial production, rather than through imported frameworks.

Recent critiques from Watson warn of African cities being restructured through elite-led urban visions—satellite cities, securitized zones, and exclusionary zoning—which threaten the vitality and inclusivity of public spaces [31]. These “urban fantasies” often ignore the embedded functions of informality and temporality in everyday urban life.

Concerns about privatization, commodification, and securitization are increasingly relevant. Mitchell and Watson caution against neoliberal agendas undermining access and publicness [3,31]. These critiques reinforce the need for typologies that reflect the hybrid, contested, and relational nature of public space in African cities.

2.5. Public Space in the Pre-War Sudanese Context

A complex interplay of colonial legacy, state planning, and informal appropriation shapes public spaces in Sudan. Marina describes how British urban policy introduced spatial segregation and rigid typologies. Postcolonial planning retains many of these structures, though often inconsistently applied [32].

Local communities, however, have adapted spaces for informal trade, religious gatherings, social interaction, and civic action [32,33]. The 2019 sit-in in Khartoum, documented by Bahreldin, redefined a central traffic junction into a site of political expression and collective identity [30].

In terms of PS typologies, Sudanese planning guidelines, such as the 2017 Public Services Planning Guideline, attempt to classify spaces like fsḥẗ, mīdān, and sāḥāt by size, spatial scale, and function [34]. However, their definition is unclear, and implementation is inconsistent [7]. Practitioners use generic terms like “O.S.” (open space), and planning schemes apply the same term (e.g., mīdān) to different spatial scales and functions.

This Guideline distinguishes between open spaces (al-mnāṭq al-mftūḥẗ) and recreational areas (al-mnāṭq al-trfīhīẗ), primarily based on ownership and development controls. The Guideline presented a hierarchical typological structure of “open space.” The smallest is the “fsḥẗ” in the residential group, followed by the “mīdān” in the neighborhood, and the largest is the “sāḥẗ” at the residential quarter or district level [34]. The Guideline also includes other open spaces: (1) public parks and gardens, (2) playing fields and sports playfields (mīdān), (3) green belts, and (4) natural areas.

Badawi [35] categorizes public spaces into religious, ceremonial, and recreational types but overlooks temporality and multifunctionality. Bahreldin adds that under the Inqaz regime, privatization and commercialization contributed to the enclosure of formerly public lands, limiting civic access [36].

This literature highlights the ambiguity of the definition of “PS” in Sudanese literature and practice [7]. Existing classifications often neglect critical aspects like trading, socializing, and cultural exchanges, which were essential for PS in pre-war Greater Khartoum. Additionally, the literature suggests that Sudanese public space remains under-theorized. A grounded, context-sensitive typology must integrate informal practices, temporality, and spatial justice.

2.6. Conclusion of the Literature Review

This review sought to examine how public space typologies vary in African urban contexts, understand the contextual factors shaping these typologies in Greater Khartoum, and assess appropriate methodological approaches to study them. Several key insights emerged through a layered engagement with global, African, and Sudanese literature.

First, while global public space theory provides foundational models, it often relies on Eurocentric assumptions of formality, order, and planned governance. These models, though influential, tend to underplay temporality, informality, and political appropriation—traits central to the experience of public space in African cities [3,18,19]. The critique of neoliberal urbanism further reveals how commodification, surveillance, and exclusion increasingly shape the form and function of public space globally [3].

Second, the review highlighted the need for contextual, grounded frameworks that reflect African urbanism’s specific socio-political and historical realities. Southern urban theory, postcolonial critiques, and concepts such as “people as infrastructure” [27] and “insurgent space” [16] offer alternative paradigms better suited to dynamic and hybrid spatial practices. In Greater Khartoum, public spaces have evolved through state-led planning and community-based appropriation, with typologies shaped by colonial legacies, informal adaptation, and political activism [30,32].

Third, the literature supports a qualitative, context-sensitive methodological approach incorporating spatial, temporal, and socio-political dimensions. Methodologies drawing from grounded theory, ethnographic observation, and archival mapping are best suited to capturing the layered nature of public space in Khartoum, especially where formal classifications and policy documents fall short [10,20,22].

In sum, this literature review calls for a revised conceptualization of public space in Greater Khartoum—one that bridges global theory with local realities. Such an approach must integrate informality, temporality, and socio-political contestation as intrinsic dimensions, rather than deviations, of urban public space in the postcolonial African context.

3. Objectives, Methodology, and Data

This study aims to document, identify, and understand the various public spaces in pre-war Greater Khartoum by analyzing the historical, cultural, social, technological, legal, political, and planning factors influencing their evolution. The ultimate goal is to develop a context-sensitive typological framework tailored to Sudan’s unique urban realities.

“Context-sensitive” in this framework refers to classifications that reflect the local socio-spatial dynamics by accounting for historical urban morphologies, religious practices, informal adaptations, and both colonial and postcolonial planning regimes. In doing so, this typology seeks to be both locally grounded and analytically robust, addressing gaps in dominant Eurocentric PS models.

The study focuses on pre-war Greater Khartoum, which includes Khartoum, Omdurman, and Khartoum North (Figure 1). To ensure typological diversity, no spatial restrictions were applied. The sample consists of formal, informal, temporary, ceremonial, religious, civic, and insurgent spaces, ranging in age from the early 20th century to post-2005 developments.

A snowball sampling strategy was employed to identify 64 public spaces (Figure 2). This began with a core set of historically significant or socially active sites derived from a literature review, archival sources, and consultations with local experts. It expanded through iterative referrals and participatory student workshops (

Table A2. List of the public spaces, locations, ownership, management, and associated typology.

ID	Space Name	Location	Ownership	Management	Dominant Regulation Type	Main Function	Accessibility	Typology	Notes
1	The Midan of the Ministry of Finance	Central Khartoum	Public	State	Formal	Ceremonial	Moderate	Formal	Colonial planning heritage
2	Al-Shuhada Park	Central Khartoum	Public	Municipal	Formal	Recreational	Moderate	Formal	Urban green space
3	Ateni Square	Central Khartoum	Private	NGO	Hybrid	Cultural exchange	Mixed	Public–private	Civic use with private ownership
4	Al-Waha Mall	Khartoum	Private	Private	Controlled	Commercial	Restricted	POCS	Consumer-oriented space
5	Midan Abwinzyr	Central Khartoum	Public	State	Formal	Cultural exchange	Restricted	Formal	Site of the 1985 intifada, colonial space
6	Midan Jakswn	Central Khartoum	Public	state	Formal	Transport	open	Formal/informal	Colonial space
7	Al-Sunnut Forest	Khartoum	Public	State	Hybrid	Recreational	Open	Informal	Urban forest, bird sanctuary
8	Al-Shuhada (6 of April) Park	Central Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal	Historical value as a space of resistance, now managed by a private company
9	Al-Mugran Park	Central Khartoum	NGO	NGO	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal	Uniqe space as descibed by Schultz
10	Corniche and Tuti Bridges	Tuti Island	Public	Community	Informal	Recreational	Open	Informal
11	Tuti Island Beach	Tuti Island	Communal	Community	Informal	Recreational	Open	Informal/insurgent	Popular informal riverfront
12	Khartoum sit-in space	Khartoum	Public	Community	Informal	Political	Open	Informal/insurgent	Temporal space that was dispersed in 2019
13	Linear Park	Khartoum	Public	State	Hybrid	Recreational	Open/restricted	Informal/insurgent
14	Burry Giroof (floodplain)	Khartoum	Public	Community	Informal	Recreational	Open	Informal/insurgent	The Env. Law prohibited giroof ownership in Sudan.
15	Telcom Tower Corniche	Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational	Moderate	Formal
16	Midan al-Mansheiya	Khartoum	Public	Private	Hybrid	Sport/social	Open	Formal
17	The Family Park	Khartoum	N.A	Private	Controlled	Recreational/social	Restricted	Formal	Managed by the private sector
18	Al-Gurashi Family Park	Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational/social	Restricted	Formal	Managed by the private sector
19	Ahmed Khair Square (Ozone Café)	Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational/social	Restricted	Formal	Rented open space
20	Midan Almwid	Central Omdurman	Public	State	Controlled	Sport/cultural	Mixed	Formal/informal	Historical value
21	Al-saht A-sh’ebyh	Bahri	Public	Private	Controlled	Sport/cultural	Mixed	Formal	It was a hybrid space before facing and regulating.
22	Al-nilin Cenima	Bahri	Public	Private	Controlled	Commercial/cultural	Restricted	Formal	Not functioning
23	Al-Souk Al-Shaabi	Khartoum	Public	State	Hybrid	Retail/cultural	Open	Formal/informal
24	Al-saht alkhdra’	Khartoum	Public	State	Controlled	Recreational/ceremonial	Restricted	Formal	Very symbolic role
25	Afraa Mall	Khartoum	Private	Private	Controlled	Retail/social	Mixed	POCS
26	Janbat Al-Amarat	Khartoum	Private	Private	Controlled	Third place	Open	Formal
27	Al-Riyadh Family Park	Khartoum	Public	NGO	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal	Managed by an NGO
28	Neighborhood Park in Al-Amarat	Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational/social	Restricted	Public–private	Negotiated with the state
29	Government-reserved land	Khartoum	Public	Community	Informal		Open	Informal/insurgent	Considered vacant by local residents
30	City Plaza Mall	Khartoum	Private	Private	Controlled	Retail/social	Moderate	POCS	Neoliberal public space
31	Gabra Park (Hadeega)	Khartoum	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal
32	Khartoum Bus Station	Khartoum	N.A	Private	Controlled	Transport	Restricted	Formal
33	Rama Park (Hadeega)	Omdurman	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal
34	The Sport City	Khartoum	Public	State	Controlled	Sport	Restricted	Formal	Since 2018, it has been a military base for the Rapid Support Forces.
35	Street intersection	Khartoum	Public	Municipal	Informal	Commercial	Open	Informal/insurgent
36	Neighborhood Park in Al-Mugahdeen	Khartoum	Public	Community	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Public–private
37	Bashair Park (Hadeega)	Omdurman	Public	State	Controlled	Recreational	Open	Formal
38	Al-Faiha Playfields	Omdurman	Public	Private	Hybrid	Sport	Open	Formal/informal	It also acts as a social space hosting wedding activities
39	Souk Sitta	Bahri	Public	State	Hybrid	Commercial/social	Open	Formal/informal	Started as an informal space
40	Midan almsar’eh (wrestling)	Bahri	Public	State	Hybrid	Sport/cultural Exchange	Restricted	Formal	Was not restricted until modernization
41	Kouber Playfields	Bahri	Public	Municipal	Controlled	Sport/social	Restricted	Formal
42	Al-Amlak Linear Park	Bahri	Public	Municipal	Informal	Recreational	Open	Informal
43	Aboud Family Park	Bahri	Public	Private	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal	Has historical significance
44	Bahri Train Station	Bahri	Public	State	Controlled	Transport	Moderate	Formal
45	Midan al-Tahrir	Bahri	Public	Municipal	Hybrid	Recreational/social	Moderate	Formal/informal
46	Sheikh Khogali Cemetery	Bahri	Private	Private	Hybrid	Cultural exchange	Open	Informal/insurgent	Connected to Sufism
47	Al-Sababi Park	Bahri	Public	Municipal	Hybrid	Sport/social	Moderate	Formal
48	Shambat Bridge	Bahri	Public	State	Hybrid	Recreational/cultural	Open	Informal
49	Midan al-Shuhada (Omdurman)	Omdurman	Public	Municipal	Informal	Commercial	Open	Informal/insurgent/formal	Informal activities dominate the formal
50	Souk Omdurman	Omdurman	Public	Municipal	Hybrid	Commercial/cultural	Open	Formal/informal
51	Midan al-Posta (post office)	Omdurman	Public	State	Controlled	N.A.	Restricted	N.A.
52	Midan al-Khalifa	Omdurman	Public	Municipal	Hybrid	Cultural exchange	Moderate	Formal/informal	Has historical significance
53	The Mahdi fortification	Omdurman	Public	State	Hybrid	Cultural exchange	Open	Formal
54	Abd-Al-Qayoom Gate	Omdurman	Public	State	Hybrid	Cultural exchange	Open	Formal	Historical
55	Al-Mahadi Tomb	Omdurman	Private	State	Controlled	Cultural exchange	Open	Formal	Historical
56	Al-Mourada Park	Omdurman	Public	State	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal
57	Abu Anja Creek	Omdurman	Public	State	Informal	Recreational	Open	Informal/insurgent	Seasonal activities
58	Souk Ghandahar	Omdurman	Public	Municipal	Informal	Commercial	Open	Formal/informal
59	Linear park in Omdurman	Omdurman	Public	Municipal	Informal	Recreational	Moderate	Informal/insurgent
60	Al-Fetehab Beach	Omdurman	Public	State	Informal	Recreational/work	Open	Informal/insurgent
61	Kalakla Family Park	Khartoum	Public	Municipal	Controlled	Recreational	Restricted	Formal
62	Hag Yousif Nasdi Al Mushahada	Bahri	Private	Private	Informal	Third place	Open	POCS	Licence by traditional leaders
63	Kalakla Nadi Mushahada	Khartoum	Private	Private	Informal	Third place	Open	POCS
64	Jamhoriyah streetfront	Khartoum	Public	Municipal	Hybrid	Commercial	Open	Public–private	Often named Al Souk al Afrangi

). This approach was particularly effective for accessing under-documented, community-valued spaces in a context where official records are fragmented or absent. While snowball sampling can introduce bias, this was mitigated by prioritizing variation in location, function, and degree of formality, and by triangulating recommendations from academic, community, and practitioner sources.

Primary data collection involved:

1.

On-site observations, including field notes on spatial usage, accessibility, material conditions, and user groups.

2.

Unstructured interviews with six informants, including urban planners, neighborhood leaders, and long-time residents.

3.

In-class participatory analysis conducted in two University of Khartoum courses—URP 4101 (bachelor’s level) and URP 703 (M.Sc. level)—which contributed to iterative validation of space typologies. These student-led explorations were supervised, methodologically structured, and served as a form of participatory action research.

4.

Archival and policy document review, supporting historical contextualization and terminology analysis.

A grounded theory approach informed the development of the typology, allowing space categories to emerge inductively from empirical material rather than be imposed from pre-existing frameworks [37].

Typology construction was based on an iterative analytic process in which spaces were grouped according to shared patterns of use, symbolism, governance, and temporality. Specifically, the following criteria guided this categorization:

• Ownership and management (state, private, or communal)
• Degree of regulation (formal policies, informal norms, or negotiated rules)
• Spatial characteristics (location, formality of design, integration)
• Social functions and accessibility (intended vs. actual uses, inclusion/exclusion)
• Historical and political embeddedness (colonial/postcolonial legacies, insurgent occupation, civic symbolism)

Overlapping categories (e.g., informal markets serving ceremonial functions) were retained to reflect spatial hybridity, acknowledging that rigid classifications may obscure the lived complexity of urban space.

Basic descriptive statistics—such as number of spaces by function, historical period, and degree of formality—were used to support typology formation. These help clarify sampling saturation and coverage but were not used to generalize findings statistically. Given the study’s exploratory and interpretive nature, the objective was not statistical generalization but rather conceptual and typological insight. The methodological emphasis is thus on depth, contextual embeddedness, and narrative richness rather than on scale or quantification.

Limitations include potential sampling bias due to the snowball method, the subjective framing of observations, and the absence of geospatial analysis tools. The lack of spatial modeling limits precision in identifying locational patterns, clustering, or accessibility gradients. However, the research prioritizes locally meaningful classification and qualitative interpretation, laying the foundation for future studies that could integrate spatial analytics and broader surveys.

Reflexivity: As a Sudanese urban researcher and educator embedded in Khartoum’s planning and academic contexts, the author’s positionality afforded access to localized knowledge and interpretive depth. This proximity supports a grounded interpretation of public space, while also requiring critical reflection on biases and assumptions brought into the field.

Preliminary Typology Insights

The typological analysis of 64 public spaces in Khartoum, shown in Table A2, reveals a predominantly public ownership structure (79.7%). Yet, a significant portion of these spaces are managed by private entities (32.8%), indicating a complex governance landscape. Regulation types are largely non-formal, with controlled and hybrid forms representing 71.9% of the dataset, reflecting a trend toward negotiated or restricted access rather than strictly institutional frameworks. While recreational functions are most common (31.3%), the multiplicity of overlapping uses, ranging from cultural exchange to commerce, highlights the multifunctional nature of urban spaces. Accessibility remains uneven: only 43.8% of spaces are fully open, while 34.4% are restricted, limiting inclusive public engagement. Typologically, formal spaces are prevalent (46.9%), though informal, hybrid, and insurgent typologies emphasize the fluid and contested production of public space in Khartoum. These findings point to a shifting urban morphology where institutional, private, and community actors co-construct access, function, and control. However, given the study’s exploratory nature and the methodological limitations discussed earlier, these insights should be understood as indicative rather than statistically generalizable.

4. Reframing Public Space: A Grounded Typology for Greater Khartoum

The typology presented in this section comprises four interrelated categories developed from observed spatial practices and interview insights. Rather than mutually exclusive classes, these categories reflect dominant functions and spatial modalities that often overlap in the lived experience of public space in Greater Khartoum.

Nearly half served multifunctional roles, often blending social, economic, and spiritual uses. This empirical diversity shaped the development of a four-part typology. Each category captures a recurring spatial production and appropriation mode within the Khartoum context.

4.1. Formal Public Space Typology

4.1.1. Definition, Characteristics, and Spatial Role

Formal public spaces in pre-war Greater Khartoum were deliberately designed and managed by state or municipal authorities. Typically situated in high-profile urban zones, they are embedded with symbolic, ceremonial, or administrative functions. Characterized by fixed spatial configurations, routine maintenance, and visible regulation, such as fencing, surveillance, and designated usage, they often serve to express national identity or institutional aesthetics. While prioritizing order and formality, these spaces may limit everyday accessibility and often reflect top-down planning priorities over lived urban needs.

Formal public spaces form a core component of Greater Khartoum’s spatial structure, primarily shaped by its colonial past. The original city plans, such as Mclean’s 1910 vision, incorporated principles from the “City Beautiful” and “Garden City” movements [38], prioritizing expansive open spaces, large public squares, wide boulevards, and roundabouts [39]. These spatial features remain visible in Khartoum’s formal urban zones, where historical and administrative symbolism converge.

The colonial spatial legacy continues to influence contemporary planning, with PSs like the racecourse and statues preserving historical planning ideals. Greater Khartoum’s formal public spaces are traditionally organized into four key types: mīdān (plural mayadin), fesahat, sehat, and parks. Yet, additional formal space types have emerged, including street-side green strips, pocket parks, street-side parks, structured marketplaces, and managed natural environments such as Al-Sunt Forest.

4.1.2. Empirical Examples

The Mīdān and Squares (Āl-Saha)

The mīdān, a term widely used to refer to an open square, has colonial origins in Sudanese urbanism and did not feature in pre-colonial settlement structures [40]. It gained prominence through colonial planning, as seen in the 1910 city layout and the establishment of Mīdān Abbas. Key examples like Mīdān El-Khalifa in Omdurman and Mīdān El-al-mulid in Khartoum reflect layered influences from religion, politics, and cultural memory [41].

The mīdān has historically served as a public arena for protests, celebrations, and civic identity formation (Figure 3). Notable examples include Mīdān Abu Ginzeer, central to the 1985 intifada [36], and Mīdān al-Qiyada, a hub during the 2018 revolution [30]. These spaces often double as sites for monuments and memorials (Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5), reinforcing their symbolic value.

Despite their historic prominence, mayadin are increasingly marginalized in new developments [41]. The lack of a consistent legal or planning definition [7]—sometimes equating them with sports fields—has contributed to their decline. Although the 1994 SPLD Act distinguishes between mayadin and recreational playgrounds [42], planning practice tends to collapse these distinctions under the vague term “open space” (O.S.).

The Urban Parks and Green Spaces

Khartoum’s green spaces—locally referred to as al-matanzeh or al-hadiqa—support social cohesion, health, and ecological functions [43,44]. Khartoum, renowned for its unique spirit of place, embodies a “genius loci” where the Nile, verdant landscapes, and the encroaching desert converge to shape its urban identity [45]. Like Rome and Prague—cities Christian Norberg-Schulz identified as possessing a distinct genius locus—Khartoum’s green spaces have evolved through colonialism [46], modernization [36], and urbanization [38,44].

Their origins trace back to British beautification strategies [47], with postcolonial governments continuing the trend, albeit with declining commitment [36,38]. Urban expansion and political instability since the 1970s have contributed to a steady deterioration in green infrastructure [36,48].

In recent years, a trend toward privatization has emerged. Parks once open to the public are now operated by private companies such as Aboud Park (Figure 6), leading to increased aesthetic appeal but reduced access for low-income residents [49]. This tension echoes the paradox identified in public space literature, where historical ideals of green equity—such as Olmsted’s vision of parks as democratic commons—stand in contrast to contemporary practices of exclusion through privatization, fencing, and fee-based access [3,50]. This reflects broader debates about the privatization of public space in Sudanese cities.

Streets as Public Corridors

Comprising at least 27% of the city’s surface [51], Khartoum’s streets are multifunctional public spaces. They serve as sites of mobility, informal commerce [40] (Figure 7), cultural expression [52], and protest [33,36]. Social events such as weddings [44] and youth gatherings also occur here.

Streets have been both symbols of state authority [30] and platforms for resistance [36]—particularly during the 2018 uprising (Figure 8). However, infrastructural shortcomings—like a lack of lighting, sidewalks, and public amenities—limit accessibility and trigger safety concerns, especially for women and vulnerable groups. Moreover, informal vendors face conflict with formal businesses and authorities, reflecting fragmented governance. An example is the Thursday mobile market in front of the City Plaza Shopping Mall in Al-Sahafa.

Social and cultural perceptions challenge the recognition of streets as public spaces. Post 2018 uprising, heightened security concerns have led to streets being viewed as sources of disorder or crime [48]. Additionally, streets are often seen as male-dominated, excluding women and children [53]. Addressing these issues necessitates recognizing the value of streets in Sudanese cities and fostering inclusive and participatory governance and management approaches.

Marketplaces (Souks)

The souk, a central feature of Sudanese cities, is an economic and social hub for various groups. Cities such as Al Obeid, Shendi, Berber, and Dongola are structured around such markets, with Khartoum structured into zones including Hakim-dariya, the Market, and the deims by the 1800s [32,39]. A souk usually consists of a large open area with makeshift stalls serving multiple purposes [39].

In Greater Khartoum today, formal and informal markets coexist, serving as commercial spaces and venues for social interaction and cultural expression [54]. These markets promote public engagement, cultural exchange, and knowledge sharing.

Souk Mayo and Souk Sitta maintain traditional configurations [55] while adapting to economic shifts. Souk Sitta also hosts Midan al-Masar’eh, a unique wrestling arena (Figure 9), while also hosting various religious debates (Figure 10). Temporary markets like Souk “Um-duwirwir” (a mobile market shifting between villages) remain active, responding to inflation and food scarcity [54]. However, malls, the functional reclassification of urban streets for commercial use between 2007 and 2018, and roadside retail increasingly challenge their spatial and social role, especially at the neighborhood level [55].

Linear Open Space

Defined by their elongated form and continuous movement, linear public spaces include promenades, boulevards, riverfronts, and corridors along infrastructure (bridges, railways). In Khartoum, notable examples include the Blue, White, and Nile riversides (Figure 11), and the roadside promenades over the Tuti and Shambat Bridges.

Major roads such as Obeid Khatim Street and Africa Street —particularly those parallel to rail corridors—have developed into semi-formal linear parks, offering recreation amid the urban fabric. These spaces often blend movement with rest, play, and informal gatherings.

Monuments, Historical Sites, and Sports Venues

Khartoum’s monuments and historical sites function as collective memory anchors and civic gathering spots. Examples like the Mahdi fortifications (Figure 12) and Abd-Al-Qayoom Gate (Figure 13) have been repurposed for civic ceremonies and protests [56]. These spaces act as informal educational sites while serving symbolic roles in the urban narrative.

Sports venues, from large stadiums to local fields, play similar roles, offering multi-use platforms for community life. However, many face threats from privatization and land encroachment, as with the case of Sports City in southern Khartoum.

Equally, monuments and historical sites face challenges such as inadequate legal frameworks for heritage preservation [57], weak enforcement of regulations, and insufficient infrastructure, making them vulnerable to destruction, as seen in the case of the Mahdi fortifications. Rapid social and cultural changes further distance younger generations from these sites, reducing appreciation and connection [56].

Formal Natural Systems

Khartoum’s natural systems form an underappreciated yet significant public space typology. Managed by forestry rather than planning authorities, forests like al-Sunut and the Green Belt (al-Hizzam al-Akhdhar) offer recreation, biodiversity, and ecological value. Al-Sunut Forest supports activities from picnicking and birdwatching to informal dating and weddings (Figure 14).

Blue infrastructure, such as Abu Anja Creek, serves diverse uses seasonally—providing recreation, irrigation, and temporary livestock pasture (Figure 15). Yet, despite their value, these spaces face threats from urban expansion and private development, such as the 1991 dismantling of the Khartoum Green Belt and proposed luxury developments within al-Sunut Forest [58].

Public Urban Facilities

Public urban facilities in Greater Khartoum represent a category of formal public spaces that serve essential civic, cultural, and infrastructural functions. These include libraries, sports stadiums, cultural centers, exhibition halls, transit stations, and health clinics—typically developed and maintained by municipal authorities or national agencies. They are often embedded in planning schemes and aligned with state-led visions of public service provision, thus reflecting formal design, visibility, and regulation.

These spaces provide structured environments for education, mobility, recreation, and cultural exchange. For example, public libraries and museums (such as the Sudan National Museum) serve as repositories of collective memory, while sports venues and youth centers offer controlled environments for leisure and physical activity. Likewise, bus terminals and transit nodes—such as Souk al-Shaabi station—function not only as mobility hubs but also as informal markets and gathering spaces, merging the formal and informal realms.

While many of these facilities were built as part of state modernization projects in the 20th century, their relevance and accessibility have fluctuated due to political instability, underfunding, and shifts in governance. Some have been well maintained or repurposed through donor-funded rehabilitation programs, while others suffer from neglect or restricted access due to militarization, privatization, or deterioration.

4.1.3. Analytical Note

This typology reveals the multi-scalar and historically layered nature of formal public spaces in Khartoum. From colonial squares to riverfront parks, these spaces articulate both planned order and contested usage. Drawing on Mitchell’s critique of public space as increasingly managed and controlled [3], many of Khartoum’s formal spaces, while symbolically central, have become sites of selective access and aesthetic regulation. Their transformation under privatization aligns with Carmona’s idea of institutionalized publicness [2], where formal governance often restricts everyday spontaneity and grassroots use.

Moreover, the fading prominence of mīdān typologies in contemporary planning practices reflects broader dynamics, as noted by Watson and Roy [19,20], who argue that Global South cities are often subject to formalist planning models disconnected from local spatial practices. In Khartoum, these top-down models marginalize hybrid, multifunctional uses in favor of rigid classifications, undermining the lived social value of spaces like traditional markets and neighborhood squares.

The visible tension between formal marketplaces and the adaptive logic of informal souks further illustrates this disconnect, where rigid spatial hierarchies often fail to accommodate the embeddedness of informality in daily urban life [27]. In many cases, informal market practices are not just tolerated but also essential to economic survival—yet are increasingly threatened by regulation, gentrification, and commercial displacement. Additionally, souks operate at the intersection of formal structure and informal activity, like bus terminals and health facilities, which are formally planned but often informally adapted. This alignment highlights how state-designed spaces—whether for commerce, mobility, or public service—frequently evolve into hybrid zones of use, shaped by everyday urban practices and contested access.

As urban pressures intensify—through political instability, climate shocks, and speculative development—maintaining the “publicness” of these formal spaces becomes increasingly complex. Their future depends not only on design but also on participatory governance and spatial justice approaches that acknowledge their diverse functions and cultural meanings [21,28,59].

4.2. Informal and Insurgent Public Space Typology

4.2.1. Definition, Characteristics, and Spatial Role

Informal and insurgent public spaces in Greater Khartoum encompass various community-appropriated environments that operate outside formal planning logic. These spaces arise in response to social, political, and economic exclusions from officially sanctioned urban systems. These spaces are formed through informal occupation, resistance, and cultural expression. Often driven by necessity and creativity, these spaces include neglected land, riverfronts, spiritual landscapes, and even virtual realms.

4.2.2. Empirical Examples

Insurgent Urban Occupations

Public spaces are termed insurgent when their use diverges from formal mechanisms [16,60]. In Khartoum, poor public space conditions have led people to create informal “guerrilla” spaces to meet their needs and avoid restrictions. Some insurgent spaces originated from social movements that occupied and repurposed existing spaces by eliminating official controls. For instance, artists and vendors transformed the Khartoum sit-in during December 2018 uprising to amplify the campaign (Figure 16).

The Natural Landscape and Riverfronts

Khartoum’s natural landscapes—including its extensive waterfronts and urban forests—offer spontaneous and multifunctional public experiences. Schulz [45] noted that visitors would be captivated by the barren desert and the beautiful Nile upon arrival.

While many riverfronts have been converted into commercial land through regeneration projects [36], others, such as the beach east of Tuti Island and the “giroof” (riverside farm), continue to support youth gatherings and informal festivities (Figure 17). These natural sites are accessible and flexible, resisting formal transformation.

Neglected and Undefined Urban Spaces

Khartoum’s rapid urbanization, driven by conflict, economic shifts, and policy failures, has created large swaths of neglected space [61]. Consequently, poorly planned neighborhoods and informal settlements have emerged, creating undefined urban spaces. The lack of economic and professional resources for urban planning and infrastructure development has left many planned spaces unusable and poorly defined [62,63], potentially being used as undefined urban space.

These include vacant lots, unpaved roads, government-reserved (G.R.) lands, under-bridge spaces, and alleys, which often lack infrastructure or formal designation [62,63]. Despite their neglect, such areas are repurposed by communities into public venues for commerce, art, sport, and shelter (Figure 18). These sites embody the city’s informal spatial resilience.

Informal Spiritual and Sacred Spaces

Khartoum’s public spaces reflect a strong spiritual dimension, deeply influenced by Islamic traditions and Sufi practices [64,65]. Religions have influenced many Sudanese cities’ spatial, functional, and morphological aspects. Orthodox Islam emphasizes mosques and daily prayers, whereas popular Islam is drawn to Islamic teachings and the veneration of shuyikh, especially at their burial sites [65]. Consequently, Sufism is closely linked to shuyikh tombs or qubab, prominent monuments in numerous Sudanese cities.

Sacred sites like shuyikh tombs (qubab) serve as centers for mourning, oral traditions, healing, and religious festivals like El-Mulid [56] (Figure 19). Decorated with cultural expressions, with events like Darawish Dhikr—a form of communal chanting, singing, and dancing rooted in Sudanese spiritual traditions—these spaces blur the boundaries between religious, cultural, and civic functions, offering inclusive alternatives to Khartoum’s more regulated public venues.

Several tombs and theological public spaces are found in Omdurman, Hillat Hamad, Hillat Khojali, and Aylafiinat, east of Khartoum North. The cemetery’s theological significance is evident in its surrounding areas, which have also become tourist attractions with weekly celebrations in a small open space in front of the Shuyikh graveyards (Figure 19). Some view this as a way to bypass the exclusivity of Khartoum’s public spaces for spiritual activities [40], while others see it as spiritual. However, they face resistance from some elites and rival religious groups, leading to socio-spatial displacement. A pivotal point to consider is that some practices of the Sufi sect require “Khalwa,” or privacy, which leads them to relocate these practices to spaces of lesser significance.

Digital Public Space

Advancements in telecommunications have transformed digital platforms into crucial public arenas. By 2021, Facebook alone accounted for nearly 83.89% of social media use in Sudan [66]. During Sudan’s 2018 uprising, online tools helped coordinate resistance, earning it the nickname “Facebook Uprising” (Figure 20 and Figure 21) [36]. These virtual spaces enable civic discourse and activism, particularly under regimes of censorship. Yet, they remain fragile due to poor infrastructure [67], affordability issues, and government blackouts [67,68]. Moreover, physical spaces remain indispensable for cultural events and democratic engagement.

4.2.3. Analytical Note

This typology reveals the adaptive and contested geographies of Khartoum’s urban life, where informal and insurgent practices reconfigure public space beyond state planning. The emergence of sit-in spaces, repurposed riverbanks, and spiritual sites affirms Simone’s concept of people as infrastructure—urban life shaped by human agency in the absence of formal systems [27]. Similarly, Hou’s notion of insurgent public spaces finds deep resonance in Khartoum, where the production of space is frequently bottom-up, collective, and temporal [16].

The overlap between formal neglect and informal activation challenges binary distinctions of legal vs. illegal, planned vs. spontaneous. As observed by Parnell and Pieterse, urban informality is not peripheral but foundational to how African cities function [59]. In this light, even spiritual and digital spaces act as platforms for publicness, where rituals, expressions, and resistance intersect. However, these spaces are increasingly vulnerable to co-optation, securitization, or erasure.

The case of digital public space in particular reveals how insurgency is no longer confined to physical geographies. In contexts of repression and limited civic infrastructure, digital platforms become extensions of urban space, hosting collective action, political discourse, and cultural resistance [41]. Sudan’s “Facebook Uprising” exemplifies this convergence, where social media provided a networked public sphere that transcended physical barriers. Yet, the fragility of this space, due to internet shutdowns, surveillance, and infrastructural inequality, highlights its dependence on broader political conditions and infrastructural justice [69].

Addressing these dynamics requires a rethinking of what constitutes public space. Rather than privileging fixed typologies, planners must recognize Khartoum’s informal geographies’ fluidity and socio-cultural embeddedness. In doing so, urban policy can move closer to the spatial justice that Myers, Njoh, and Watson envision for postcolonial cities [19,21,23].

4.3. Privately Owned Civic Spaces (POCSs)

4.3.1. Definition, Characteristics, and Spatial Role

Privately owned civic spaces (POCSs) are areas owned and maintained by private or non-governmental entities but open to public use. Inspired by concepts like privately owned public spaces (POPSs) in the U.S. [70], POCSs in Khartoum are often shaped by development agreements [36], lacking formal regulatory frameworks.

Khartoum’s POCSs, unlike their counterparts in neoliberal cities, are often operated by NGOs, families, or religious groups and include both enclosed and open-air spaces. Their proliferation in recent decades has paralleled political shifts, land commodification, and the decline in state-managed public infrastructure. Despite their diverse functions, many POCSs selectively cater to middle- and upper-class urban residents, reflecting broader socio-spatial inequalities.

The number of POCSs in Khartoum is uncertain due to potential gaps in local authorities’ records and officials’ and beneficiaries’ reluctance to reveal tenure and public access details. Nonetheless, POCSs in Khartoum exhibit diverse forms and functions, including indoor spaces like shopping malls and privately owned outdoor areas.

4.3.2. Empirical Examples

Shopping Malls

Shopping malls have grown in number since the 1990s under neoliberal economic policies and the Al-Bashir regime’s oil-fueled urban development [30]. Developments like City Plaza, Affra Mall (Figure 22), and Al-Waha Mall appear public but are controlled, regulated spaces that serve specific consumer classes [36].

They offer comfort, security, and climate control, making them especially attractive to youth and women, particularly when laws like the Public Order Act (1996) limited their freedom in public [71]. However, these spaces are exclusionary to the urban poor—46% of Khartoum’s population lives in poverty [72]—and prioritize consumption over civic life. They highlight the limitations of privatized areas in functioning as genuine public forums, prioritizing economic activity over inclusivity and public discourse.

Privately-Owned Open Spaces

Examples such as Atanei Square and Mīdān al-Khalifa exemplify outdoor civic spaces initially managed by families, religious groups, or NGOs. Atanei Square hosted the “Mefroosh” secondhand book bazaar, turning a small space into a cultural node for youth and creatives (Figure 23) [73]. Mīdān al-Khalifa (Omdurman’s largest square), once privately owned by the al-Mahdi family, was appropriated by the state in 1973 but remains a center for religious gatherings and cultural expression (Figure 24) [41], hosting various events such as Eid prayers and El-Mulid [41].

While technically private, these spaces perform key civic and cultural roles and illustrate how ownership and publicness can be negotiated through historical and social practice.

Privately Managed Public Spaces

Privatizing management, rather than ownership, has transformed several public spaces into semi-exclusive zones. Following South Sudan’s secession and the economic crisis, private interests increasingly invaded public spaces like riverfronts, parks, squares, and streets [30]. As a result, the 1994 Local Government Act allowed municipalities to invest in and lease public land to private investors, resulting in long-term concessions like Ozone Café (Figure 25), Al-Gurashi Family Park, and Al-Riyadh Park.

In affluent areas like Al-Amarat and Khartoum 2, some public parks have been fenced and upgraded by residents, but with restricted access [56]. A more radical form of privatization is when public space ownership or management shifts to a government entity for revenue generation, which aligns with neoliberal agendas. Organizations like Al-Shaheed (the martyr) managed large public parks during the Al-Bashir era, reinforcing state-aligned commercial control under the guise of public management by managing Al-Mugran Family Park, Al-Riyadh Family Park, and Aboud Family Park in Khartoum North. Such practices highlight the tension between public ownership and the increasing privatization of urban spaces.

Third Places

Ray Oldenburg’s “third place” concept [74] offers a valuable lens for interpreting hybrid civic spaces in Khartoum. These include both formal (cafés, gyms, libraries) and informal (tea stalls, shisha bars, viewing clubs) venues that serve as everyday gathering sites. Some of these spaces are tied to colonial and postcolonial narratives, such as cafés, cinemas, theaters, libraries, and beauty salons. At the same time, many informal spaces are emerging from recent socio-economic changes, like Sitat Al-shai, al-janbat (shisha bars), Nawadi al-mushahada (viewing clubs), and domestic women’s meeting spaces.

Cafés like Eisis Coffeeshop host jazz concerts, cultural discussions, and book clubs, making them suitable for leisure and productivity. Meanwhile, “Sitat al-shai”—informal tea stalls run by women—remain vital to social life [75] despite periodic bans [76]. They provide evening gathering spaces near parks, markets, and public events, especially for working-class communities (Figure 26).

In contrast, al-janbat (shisha lounges) cater predominantly to male middle-class clients, while Nawadi al-mushahada (viewing clubs) serve poorer districts like Mayo and Al-Ushara by offering cheap entertainment, albeit often in legally precarious forms [77].

Khartoum’s informal third place is strongly shaped by displacement and conflict. The 2003 Darfur conflict caused significant displacement, increasing informality in Khartoum and creating informal third places like Sitat al-Shai, al-janbat, and Nawadi al-mushahada. By 2014, Khartoum had around 13,000 such makeshift cafés, often near public spaces [78], or attached to events like football matches or Sufi rituals [79]. These cafés, typically under trees or beside buildings, become active in the evening when the city cools.

In contrast, Al-janbat are licensed shisha bars organized in indoor venues. Despite authorities’ attempts to ban public shisha use, al-janbat thrive, especially in neighborhoods like Al-Riyadh, which has over 60 establishments [80].

These third places reveal how privatized or informal civic spaces foster belonging, sociability, and political consciousness, especially under constraints on formal assembly.

4.3.3. Analytical Note

This typology captures the increasing hybridity of Khartoum’s public realm, where civic life unfolds in spaces that blur the boundaries between public access and private control. In contrast to the rigid dichotomies of traditional urbanism, POCSs reflect the logic of negotiated urbanism common to Southern cities, where legality, formality, and spatial rights are fluid and contested [19,27].

While these spaces offer platforms for interaction, their accessibility is shaped by socio-economic stratification. Shopping malls, NGO-run parks, and repurposed cultural sites exemplify what Iveson calls “the privatization of visibility,” where the right to be seen and to participate is conditioned by class and consumer identity [81]. These spaces may appear inclusive, but their management regimes often prioritize surveillance, order, and commercial viability over spontaneity or dissent—echoing critiques by Mitchell and Carmona of spatial regulation disguised as publicness [3,15].

Importantly, Khartoum’s POCSs are also shaped by broader historical and political forces. Conflict and displacement have driven marginalized groups to adapt private or semi-public spaces for communal purposes. Here, rather than Simone’s “people as infrastructure” serving solely as a metaphor of resilience [27], it reflects deeper politics of spatial negotiation, where displaced communities actively reconstruct civic belonging through informal venues such as Sitat al-Shai gatherings and Nawadi al-Mushahada.

These spaces embody Watson’s call for planning grounded in Southern urban realities, challenging formal definitions of publicness and asserting claims to the city through presence, ritual, and resilience [19]. Recognizing such practices is essential for advancing spatial justice in postcolonial urban contexts like Khartoum. Not just access but also power, symbolism, and economic drivers shape who gets to use public space—and under what terms.

4.4. Public “Private” Space

4.4.1. Definition, Characteristics, and Spatial Role

Public “private” spaces are those that appear open and accessible to the general public but are, in practice, governed by private interests or restricted by informal social norms. These spaces occupy a grey area—public in appearance, but private in control or function. In Greater Khartoum, such spaces often include privately owned land that functions as communal areas, informal buffer zones between residential or commercial uses, or places controlled by specific user groups through social codes or soft surveillance.

These spaces reflect the informal governance of urban life, where state withdrawal and the absence of formal planning create openings for individuals or communities to define access, use, and meaning. They are shaped not only by ownership structures but also by social hierarchies, class boundaries, and everyday negotiations. As such, public “private” spaces often reveal deep tensions around exclusion, appropriation, and contested claims to the urban commons.

4.4.2. Empirical Examples

Religious Compounds and Some Mosque Courtyards

While ostensibly open to the public, many mosque courtyards or religious compounds in Khartoum are effectively regulated by religious leadership, local customs, or gendered expectations. These spaces may host religious events, festivals, or community gatherings, but often restrict access to specific social groups, demographics, or times of day.

Private Building Frontages and Semi-Public Courtyards

In commercial areas and older neighborhoods like Khartoum 1 and Omdurman Market, shopfronts, colonnades, and shaded building entrances often function as de facto public spaces. Despite being privately owned, they serve as gathering points for street vendors, passersby, and social interaction, until owners reclaim or repurpose them, highlighting the precariousness of access. Additionally, some large infrastructure and service buildings utilize their frontages to generate buffer spaces that act sometimes as public spaces. A good example is the green space at the public interface of Africa International University, south of Khartoum (Figure 27).

Institution-Managed Spaces

Universities, schools, or cultural institutions offer spaces for public programming (Figure 28), yet access is often mediated by class, language, or institutional affiliation. These venues host debates, shows, or exhibitions with limited community outreach. These spaces overlap with the POCs typology discussed in Section 4.3, many of which are also considered “public–private” in terms of their function and patterns of access.

4.4.3. Analytical Note

While this typology is conceptually distinct from privately owned civic spaces (POCSs), the two often overlap in practice. Many POCSs in Khartoum—such as privately managed parks, community-operated spaces, or cultural centers—operate as public “private” spaces due to their informal governance, selective access, or hybrid ownership structures. These spaces exemplify how civic accessibility can coexist with private control, challenging binary definitions of what constitutes truly public space. Thus, the public “private” category is a broader umbrella that captures exclusive commercial venues and semi-inclusive civic arenas.

This typology also illustrates the ambiguities and negotiated boundaries of publicness in Khartoum’s urban landscape. These spaces challenge binary distinctions between public and private by revealing how access is socially mediated, temporally variable, and often dependent on informal norms or class-based expectations. Drawing on Carmona’s framing of “controlled public spaces” and Mitchell’s critique of spatial regulation, these environments highlight the extent to which invisible thresholds and governance shape public life through restriction [3,15].

Such spaces often emerge from broader structural forces, such as the state’s retreat, economic liberalization, and conflict-induced urban strain. As formal public spaces shrink or become securitized, public “private” zones such as semi-gated plazas, partially privatized green areas, and NGO-activated lots become sites of improvisation and contestation. However, their informality also exposes them to enclosure, gentrification, or erasure, reinforcing the fragility of spatial rights in a city marked by economic precarity and legal ambiguity.

Here, Margaret Crawford’s “everyday urbanism” provides a valuable lens for understanding how these spaces function less through formal design and more through routine acts of occupation, adaptation, and informal negotiation [82]. From sidewalk cafés and shaded roadside meeting spots to informally repurposed NGO properties, public “private” spaces often become embedded in the lived rhythms of the city, not by plan, but by presence.

Recognizing these hybrid spaces is essential for planners and policymakers seeking to foster equitable urban access. As Watson reminds us, Southern urbanism is defined as much by its informal negotiations as by formal planning codes [19]. Public “private” spaces thus offer insight into how urban life in Khartoum is maintained through everyday acts of accommodation, control, and spatial improvisation.

5. Discussion

Public spaces in Khartoum reflect a dynamic and fragmented urban landscape shaped by overlapping histories, social norms, governance regimes, and everyday practices. The proposed typology (shown in

Table 1. Typologies of public spaces in Greater Khartoum that are identified in this research (developed by the author).

Space Type	Defining Character	Examples	Intended Users	Space Function	Notes
Formal public spaces	Movement spaces (spaces that are planned for mobility and movement)	The street, the passageways, pedestrian zones, boulevards, avenues	Public	Mobility/multi-use public spaces
	Civic public spaces (These open spaces are found in the city’s center or near significant buildings. They operate as hubs for festivities, social gatherings, and public events.)	The mīdān, al-saha, and the square	Public	Ceremonial/social/recreational/
	Green civic public spaces (Parks provide green and recreational spaces for residents to relax, exercise, and socialize. They can be found in various sizes, ranging from small neighborhood parks to large urban parks or botanical gardens.)	Gardens, parks	Public with some access restrictions, such as ticketing and dress code
	Representative spaces	Plaza, roundabouts	Generally public, but some are inaccessible	Representational
		Linear open spaces	Public	Recreational
	Public urban facilities	Trade and economic spaces (These are the publicly owned spaces where people come to buy and sell goods, socialize, and exchange information.)	Public	Economic/cultural and social
		Public playgrounds, public clubs	Public	Recreational/entertainment
		Cultural and religious (sacred) space Places of worship, such as mosques and churches, as well as cultural institutions, like museums, galleries, and theaters, and burial spaces such as graveyards or tombs (gubab)	Public	Cultural/social/representational
		Civic public buildings (town halls, service centers)	Public	Services
		Interchange and transit spaces (bus/train stops and regional transit stations)		Service
		The formal natural system (registered urban forest and designated recreational waterfront)		Recreational
Informal and insurgent public space	Natural/semi-natural landscape (These spaces have not been formally designated as public spaces but are used by the community for social interactions and various activities.)	Giroof/informal waterfront and beaches	Public	Recreational Cultural Social Economical
	The neglected space (spaces in the city with ambiguous purposes)	Linear open space	Generally public, but some are inaccessible, symbolic green space
		Vacant lots and street nodes	There are no intended users, but the space is reclaimed and appropriated as an insurgent space.
	G.R.Lands spaces are planned to serve specific functions when the area is about to reach its population threshold, but they remain currently vacant and unutilized.	Government-reserved lands as part of local master plans	There are no intended users, but the space is reclaimed and appropriated as an insurgent space.	Cultural/social
	Sacred spaces	Graveyards and tombs	Public	Cultural/social/economic
	The digital space	Internet and social media	Public, with some restrictions	Social/cultural Economic/political
Privately owned civic spaces (POCSs)	Privately owned public spaces	Gated streets, private open spaces, private sports, and cultural clubs	Private, serving a certain public
	Private consumption spaces	Shopping malls	Public, but in the role of consumerism	Economic/recreational
		Private markets
	Private third places	Cultural cafés, libraries, reading spaces	Public, but in the role of consumerism
		Nawadi al-mushahada	Public, but in the role of consumerism
		Al-janbat	Public, but in the role of consumerism
	Domestic private space	Women’s meeting spaces
Public “private” spaces	Interface space	Sitat al-shai	Public, but in the role of consumerism	Social/economic
		Street corner meeting spaces
		Neighborhood’s janbat
	Specific users’ public spaces	University campuses, public institutions’ spaces	Serves a certain public
	Privately managed public space	Dedicated parking lots	Private, serving a specific public
		Private parks and recreation areas

and Figure 29) challenges rigid binaries between formal and informal, public and private, secular and sacred by foregrounding hybrid spatial arrangements that emerge through contestation, negotiation, and adaptation. Rather than applying abstract or Eurocentric classifications, this study offers a grounded, context-sensitive framework that reflects Khartoum’s urban complexities.

Drawing on four primary typologies—formal public spaces, insurgent and informal spaces, privately owned civic spaces (POCSs), and public “private” spaces—the typology illustrates how public space in Khartoum is produced and reproduced through multiple logics of control, resistance, and everyday use. These categories reflect different configurations of accessibility, ownership, regulation, and social meaning, revealing both planned intentions and grassroots appropriation. As shown across the cases, these spaces do not conform neatly to a spatial hierarchy but instead reflect flexible, sometimes contradictory, use patterns, function, and governance.

This typology diverges from traditional models by explicitly integrating informal and insurgent public spaces such as tea stalls (Sitat al-Shai), viewing clubs (Nawadi al-Mushaha), informal waterfronts, and government-reserved lands. Often excluded from planning literature, these spaces serve critical social, economic, and cultural roles in everyday urban life. In contrast to formal mayadin or recreational parks, which are frequently regulated, these informal and undefined areas foster inclusion, especially among marginalized groups, despite lacking institutional recognition. Their prominence in the typology reflects a deliberate effort to de-center state-centric notions of publicness. This aligns with Southern urban theory [19,20], which calls for planning models grounded in the lived realities of cities in the Global South.

Second, the typology foregrounds the socio-political and historical dimensions shaping Khartoum’s public spaces. Colonial legacies, neoliberal reforms, and authoritarian governance have all left spatial imprints, from ceremonial squares like Mīdān Abbas to privatized malls that function more as consumer enclaves than civic forums. These patterns resonate with broader critiques of urban spatial production in the Global South, where formality and exclusion often converge [22]. For example, while formal public spaces like Mīdān al-Qeyada carry symbolic weight, they may be functionally inaccessible due to legal, cultural, or security constraints. Meanwhile, informal markets, religious gatherings, and mobile vendors populate the streets, reclaiming publicness in ways that challenge dominant planning paradigms and reflect Simone’s idea of people as infrastructure [27].

Third, the typology captures how privatization and displacement reconfigure access to public space. Shopping malls, gated cafés, and privately managed parks increasingly shape urban experience, reflecting a shift toward controlled and commercialized environments. These dynamics mirror critiques by Mitchell on the neoliberal restructuring of urban space, wherein publicness is reduced to consumer access [3]. In parallel, displacement—due to conflict, land speculation, or state redevelopment—has catalyzed the emergence of new informal public realms. The rise of informal third places (e.g., Sitat al-Shai and al-janbat) illustrates how communities improvise social infrastructure without formal provision. These grassroots practices embody what Bayat terms the “quiet encroachment of the ordinary [83].”

While the typology aligns with frameworks by Carr et al. and Carmona in acknowledging multifunctionality and design [3,15], it departs by foregrounding political economy, informality, and socio-cultural embeddedness. In doing so, it bridges theoretical debates on spatial justice, governance, and Southern urbanism. The inclusion of digital public space further expands this discourse by recognizing hybrid modes of engagement beyond physical space. As explored in the typology reflections, Khartoum’s digital platforms—especially during moments of political upheaval—have functioned as insurgent arenas of civic expression, aligning with Parkinson’s arguments on mediated publicness [84], especially under authoritarian restrictions.

Notably, the typology reveals that publicness is not a static property of space but rather a negotiated and relational process. In doing so, the proposed framework also diverges from dominant public space models that emphasize formality, legibility, and morphological order (e.g., Sitte, Carr, Gehl). While such frameworks remain influential in global urbanism, they often fail to accommodate the fluid, hybrid, and informally governed spaces prevalent in postcolonial contexts. This study, instead, emphasizes spatial ambiguity, socio-political contestation, and the embeddedness of everyday life, positioning Khartoum’s public realm not as an exception, but as a site for rethinking universalizing assumptions in public space theory. Ownership, regulation, and materiality matter—but so do visibility, social norms, and collective practices.

Although the typologies were constructed for analytical clarity, spatial overlaps were preserved where appropriate, acknowledging that many public spaces in Khartoum exhibit multifunctionality, fluid regulation, and temporally shifting roles.

Nevertheless, the typology is foundational, not exhaustive. The reliance on snowball sampling—while effective for identifying under-recognized spaces—may have introduced selection bias and excluded less visible or politically sensitive sites. Additionally, the absence of spatial mapping and statistical analysis limits the generalizability of findings across Greater Khartoum’s socio-spatial fabric. These methodological choices, shaped by access, security, and institutional data constraints, emphasize the need for complementary quantitative and participatory research. Its construction relies on snowball sampling, which may omit lesser-known or marginalized spaces. Furthermore, the typology focuses on Khartoum’s metropolitan context, leaving out peri-urban and rural dynamics where traditional governance and social institutions play larger roles. The lack of a coherent public space policy framework in Sudan further complicates classification, contributing to institutional ambiguity and contested claims over space.

Future research should build on this typology through participatory methods, spatial analysis, and intersectional lenses to explore how gender, class, age, and displacement shape access to and experiences of public space. Such work can enhance urban policy, inform post-conflict reconstruction, and promote spatial justice in cities undergoing social and political transformation.

Ultimately, the proposed framework contributes to rethinking public space in African urbanism—not as static categories imposed from above, but as evolving, contested terrains that reflect the plurality and precarity of everyday urban life in Khartoum and beyond.

6. Conclusions

The study has examined the evolving landscape of public space in pre-war Greater Khartoum by developing a grounded and context-sensitive typological framework. Drawing from layered literature—spanning global, African, and Sudanese contexts—and empirical observations, it responds to the need for more nuanced and locally informed understandings of urban public space in postcolonial African cities.

The proposed typology captures the coexistence of formal spaces inherited from colonial planning and emergent, informal, and insurgent spaces shaped by social need, resistance, and adaptive reuse. It identifies four interrelated categories—formal public spaces, informal and insurgent spaces, privately owned civic spaces (POCSs), and public “private” spaces—and highlights their overlap, ambiguity, and hybrid functions. These typologies reflect how state-led planning, informal spatial practices, socio-political upheaval, and privatization collectively shape Khartoum’s urban public realm.

Crucially, the framework challenges conventional binaries between formal/informal and public/private by foregrounding the role of everyday practices, temporary uses, and digital platforms in constituting urban publicness. It also situates Khartoum’s typologies within broader theoretical debates, including Southern urbanism, postcolonial urban theory, and spatial justice, pushing against universalizing models that overlook local specificity.

While rooted in Sudan’s unique socio-political and environmental conditions, the insights from this study echo broader urban dynamics across the Global South. The findings highlight the significance of undervalued, ephemeral, and contested public spaces—such as informal marketplaces, sacred sites, tea stalls, and digital forums—as vital components of everyday urban life. Although the proposed typology is grounded in pre-war observations, it must be understood as historically contingent. The 2023 outbreak of war, marked by widespread displacement, militarization, and institutional collapse, has already begun to reshape the spatial fabric of Sudanese cities. Traditional public spaces may have been disrupted, appropriated, or rendered obsolete. This transformation not only reveals the fragility of publicness under conflict but also highlights the urgent need for post-war urban research to trace how new spatial practices and typologies are being constituted amid crisis and uncertainty.

Finally, the typology offers both an analytical tool and a planning lens for scholars and practitioners seeking to understand and engage with the diverse, layered, and dynamic character of public space in African cities. It calls for urban policy and design approaches that are not only participatory and inclusive but also attuned to the everyday realities and spatial imaginaries of those who inhabit and shape the city.