Introduction
Processes of social polarization have increasingly reshaped urban public spaces through systemic inequalities, restrictive policies, and uncontrolled development. Mechanisms such as hostile architecture, unequal spatial distribution of amenities, technological dominance, and reductionist planning have profoundly altered the meaning and function of public space, intensifying spatial alienation. The legacy of these tactics is a diminished public sphere, fading symbolic value, and erosion of the collective urban spirit—conditions that perpetuate a self-reinforcing cycle of exclusion and detachment. A genealogical reading of this history reveals how successive intellectual and structural currents have chipped away at social capital and undermined the activist role of public spaces. Ignoring the escalating dynamics of spatial inequality is no longer possible; understanding them is essential for reclaiming inclusive urban commons.
Methodology
To trace and contextualize the genealogy of spatial alienation, this study employs a systematic literature review aligned with the PRISMA  protocol and a scientometric analysis using VOSviewer. Three authoritative databases—Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar—were queried for the period 1867 – 2025 with Boolean search strings that paired ‘spatial alienation’ with terms such as ‘urban exclusion,’ ‘public space commodification,’ and ‘right to the city.’ After duplicate removal and abstract screening, full-text eligibility was assessed against peer-review status and thematic relevance. Bibliometric indicators (co-authorship networks, citation counts, and keyword co-occurrences) were then visualized to reveal prevailing research clusters and conceptual lineages. Complementary qualitative coding captured theoretical inflections—from early structuralist explanations through critical and post-modern turns—allowing a layered interpretation of how discourses on power, space, and inequality have evolved.
Result and discussion
‏The findings demonstrate that spatial alienation emerges as a complex and multidimensional phenomenon deeply embedded in macroeconomic, social, and spatial mechanisms. It reflects entrenched power relations, uneven resource distribution, and exclusionary spatial production processes within urban contexts. The systematic literature review and scientometric analysis reveal that dominant theoretical frameworks—primarily rooted in Western structuralist and critical theories, as developed by Lefebvre, Harvey, Foucault, and Bourdieu—have shaped much of the discourse on spatial alienation. These frameworks effectively expose power dynamics, spatial inequality, and social exclusion yet often marginalize local lived experiences and contextual specificities.
Moreover, the scientometric analysis highlights a concentration of knowledge production within a limited network of institutions and scholars, which narrows the diversity of perspectives and overlooks critical local narratives. This centralization of research limits the inclusion of varied geographic and cultural contexts, especially those from the Global South, where the manifestations of spatial alienation may differ significantly due to unique socio-economic and cultural factors.
The results emphasize expanding analytical approaches by integrating interdisciplinary and cross-cultural perspectives. Incorporating diverse epistemologies and acknowledging local experiences can enhance spatial alienation studies' theoretical robustness and practical relevance.
From a policy and planning perspective, the study underlines the imperative for equity-focused urban strategies that systematically address spatial alienation's economic, social, cultural, and physical dimensions. Such methods require revisiting spatial organization, promoting equitable resource redistribution, and fostering social cohesion through participatory and culturally sensitive governance. Effective interventions must simultaneously interrogate urban form, power relations, and dominant discourses to disrupt cycles of alienation and revive the social vitality of public spaces.
In conclusion, confronting spatial alienation demands a comprehensive, multi-level approach capable of intervening at individual, institutional, and structural scales. Beyond physical infrastructure, policies must address social, cultural, and psychological dimensions to facilitate meaningful social interaction, identity formation, and inclusivity in urban environments. Continuous reflexivity and adaptability in urban policy are essential to respond to ongoing economic and spatial transformations, ensuring resilient and just urban futures.
Conclusion
 ‏Spatial alienation is neither an inevitable by-product of urban growth nor a purely technological challenge; it is the cumulative outcome of structural inequalities, disciplinary practices, and the commodification of space. Reversing this trajectory demands a paradigm shift toward justice-centered, community-led planning that treats public space as a collective right rather than a market commodity. Only through such integrated, multi-scalar interventions can cities break the cycle of alienation, restore the social vitality of public realms, and realize the inclusive promise of the "right to the city.