Fontainhas, Goa
Fontainhas is a unique case where boundaries between private and public are blurred due to various spatial and social factors. Accredited as a UNESCO Heritage Zone in 1984, the area is known for its colourful Indo-Portuguese houses, narrow lanes, and pedestrian-friendly scale that evoke a ‘slice of European charm in India’. Fontainhas’ charm lies not only in its architectural quality but also in its scale and rhythm of everyday life. What used to be a quaint residential area with 4-5 tourists strolling reflectively is now crowded with 25-40 people at once. Tourists have increased significantly in recent years, transforming the everyday spatial interactions of the area. This contrast of everyday lived-in experience with a curated heritage image for tourism is transforming the area’s public and private boundaries.
Whether privately or publicly owned, spaces tied to heritage hold public significance, but scholars such as Kohn (2004) and Madanipour (2003) challenge this rigid binary of public and private space, suggesting instead a spectrum, where quasi-public spaces emerge1. This is defined as a privately owned area that is designed and managed to function like a public space. Streets and pathways are open and publicly accessible, yet deeply embedded in the private lives of residents. The hidden layers – stepped pathways, sloping alleys, and informal routes known only to residents add to the space’s charm. Small hawkers selling fruits and ice cream crowd the touristy lanes as residents walk to their everyday tasks. This shared use adds to the complexity of the space. According to MoHUA, in a heritage precinct, the legal status of private property can be transformed by designation, effectively making private spaces accessible to the public or subject to public oversight and regulations2.
Tourists in Fontainhas do not engage with private homes directly but through visual means by photographing thresholds and facades, and spatially by loitering outside Balcãos and doorways. The ‘public’ and ‘private’ here become extremely hard to define, but at its core, it’s different user groups’ demand for inclusion in the same space. It becomes necessary to regulate heritage areas towards harmonious and sustainable development3. What is everyday spatial interaction for residents becomes a tourist attraction through its shared but distinct use, transforming private facades into public spectacles. The everyday practices of some residents, like maintaining outdoor gardens and pathways, become an integral part that adds to the publicness of the area. While the public enjoys the aesthetic of the space, the burden of upkeep and inconveniences, such as blocked roads or loss of privacy, falls solely on residents. No incentives are provided to the owners of the heritage houses for maintenance and repairs4. This poses a larger question of who benefits from the heritage. If private spaces are put to public use without public rights and freedom, is it still a public space?
As heritage increasingly narrows its focus on tourism, space risks being frozen in time. This raises critical questions: Who is this heritage for? How does heritage blur the boundary between public and private spaces? The case of Fontainhas highlights the complex interplay of public and private realms. As urban heritage continues to expand, the balance between preservation, public enjoyment, and private life demands thoughtful governance. One that responds both to the rights of residents while acknowledging the cultural value these spaces offer to the wider public. What we need is people-first, adaptive heritage thinking5. We must advocate against freezing places in time. This means recognising that heritage values and contemporary needs are not in conflict, and in the blurring of public and private, it’s the people who make the space.
– Written by Ashmita Gupta, Senior Fellow
Footnotes:
- Li, Juan, et al. “Defining the Ideal Public Space: A Perspective from the Publicness.” Journal of Urban Management, vol. 11, no. 4, Sept. 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2022.08.005. ↩︎
- Chapter-8 Conservation of heritage sites including heritage buildings, heritage precincts and natural feature areas. ↩︎
- Conservation of Heritage Areas in the City of Panaji: A Case Study of Fontainhas Area by Shaikh Ali Ahmed, Dr. B. Shankar, IJMER, vol. 2, no. 2, Apr 2012 pp-442-446
↩︎ - The Goa (Regulation of Land Development and Building Construction) Act, and The Goa Land Development and Building Construction Regulation, 2010
↩︎ - Conservation and the Indian city: Bridging the Gap, edited by Poonam V. Mascarenhas & Vinayak Bharne
↩︎
Photo credits : Ashmita Gupta