Urban exploration, or ‘Urbex’ for short, is the practice of visiting places that have been built and then abandoned or set aside by man. One of its aims is to capture an artistic setting to showcase these neglected places. The sites are not meant to be degraded, the objects are not to be touched, and their locations are not to be divulged. The practice of Urbex is illegal and carries the risk of death. Don't do it at home. Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
As well as being an adventure and a way of enhancing the aesthetic value of derelict buildings, urbex highlights the societal and political problems associated with buildings that have reached the end of their useful life or are no longer used by society. Most buildings fall into disrepair very quickly after they come to the end of their useful life (after a year, the need for renovation increases) and pollute their environment (the fauna, flora and humans around them). There are all kinds of problems: asbestos, gradual deterioration of building materials, collapse, etc. Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
Why aren't we capable of deconstructing, rehabilitating, maintaining or transforming these buildings? Why don't we allow the inhabitants and the surrounding natural environment to use these places for the common good? Beyond the ethics, why is it not compulsory to think about the end of life or the flexibility of the use of these past anthropic traces? Is it really so economically unviable to work on these areas in order to generate positive spin-offs?
Urbexers have shown that none of these places are safe (or completely safe), leading to numerous accidents involving young people or enthusiasts looking for a few thrills. In the north of France, the ‘Stébane Urbex’ association, set up after 14-year-old Stébane Bail died during an urbex session, is campaigning to raise awareness among young people of the risks of urbex and parkour (the practice of climbing over urban obstacles), but ‘their fight (also) includes reviewing the existence of wastelands in towns and cities and getting them removed ’*. After a few years of disuse, it should be compulsory for the owner or the city to impose a solution.
The reappropriation of these places by artists-photographers and amateurs is not necessarily intended as a political struggle, but it does illustrate a preference on the part of institutions for not taking these places into consideration, the main reason being to save money, to the detriment of environmental and social causes.
Imposing a deconstruction or rehabilitation plan during the construction phase, property taxation to set up a fund to support the end-of-life of buildings, a national plan to secure and rehabilitate brownfield sites... A whole host of solutions are on the table, all that remains is to have political ambition at local and national level, while linking these solutions to a world in transition that aims to use less carbon-based energy before the end of the century.
Urbex and the failure of deconstruction policies