Suchergebnisse

International audience ; La loi Borloo de 2003 aurait marqué un tournant majeur dans les politiques publiques sur les territoires dits « sensibles ». Une enquête sur l'École de la rénovation urbaine, créée deux ans plus tard pour former les professionnels à cette politique, conduit à nuancer ce constat. La formation qu'elle dispense relève plutôt d'un hybride idéologique, qui accueille aussi bien les héritages de la politique de la ville des années 1980 que la gestion managériale aujourd'hui mise en avant. La loi Borloo de 2003 sur la rénovation urbaine est souvent présentée comme un moment charnière dans l'histoire récente des modes d'intervention publique dans les territoires dits sensibles. La rénovation urbaine aurait remisé au placard une politique de la ville essoufflée, incertaine (Jaillet 2000), bureaucratisée, sans projet et sans dynamique, en fermant le dossier brûlant des 751 Zones Urbaines Sensibles ouvert depuis plus de vingt ans. Le discours des décideurs politiques et des experts d'alors aurait rayé d'un trait de plume une politique jugée « molle » et « inefficace », fondée sur le principe « erroné » d'une réparation sociale et bâtie des territoires. « Difficilement évaluable », celle-ci aurait peiné à enrayer efficacement les violences et les pauvretés endémiques des quartiers. Serait donc venu le temps d'une ambitieuse rénovation urbaine, « enrayant les errements passés », orchestrée par une nouvelle agence de l'État (l'Agence nationale pour la rénovation urbaine ou ANRU), dispensant avec l'aide du 1 % patronal une aide efficace pour de « vrais projets », matériellement visibles sur le terrain : la destruction des « barres » et « tours » et la reconstruction de quartiers mixtes en termes de peuplement 2. Quelques années après le lancement du programme de la rénovation urbaine, on peut toutefois nuancer cette lecture de la rupture idéologique. Une enquête sur les réseaux d'acteurs gravitant autour de l'École de la rénovation urbaine et des savoirs qui y sont transmis conduit en effet à infléchir ...

Cet article étudie une opération de rénovation urbaine donnant lieu à la démolition d'une tour d'habitation et au relogement des populations dans le cadre d'une opération de rénovation urbaine menée dans le 17 e arrondissement de Paris. Il s'intéresse plus particulièrement aux acteurs institutionnels en charge de promouvoir ce projet de transformation du quartier, plutôt qu'aux habitants directement. Comment leur action fondée sur le développement des ressources et des capacités locales s'exerce-t-elle ? Comment les différents acteurs institutionnels correspondant à différentes scènes d'action développent-ils l'articulation entre communication sur le projet et travail de proximité ? Comment tentent-ils de couper les fils qui constituaient l'attachement des habitants à leur lieu de vie ? Quelles sont leurs méthodes et les difficultés auxquelles ils se heurtent ? Que nous apprennent leurs difficultés sur le rapport des classes populaires aux nouvelles méthodes managériales et à la transformation de leur lieu de vie ?

International audience ; Le quartier de la Goutte d'Or fait face à des changements sociaux impulsés par les politiques publiques et les dynamiques immobilières

International audience ; Le quartier de la Goutte d'Or fait face à des changements sociaux impulsés par les politiques publiques et les dynamiques immobilières

International audience ; Le quartier de la Goutte d'Or fait face à des changements sociaux impulsés par les politiques publiques et les dynamiques immobilières

International audience ; Le quartier de la Goutte d'Or fait face à des changements sociaux impulsés par les politiques publiques et les dynamiques immobilières

International audience ; Since the 1980s, the issue of social mix has become a public policy category in France. Enshrined in legislation, yet remaining controversial, it represents a major premise on which housing policies have been reconfigured. The concept of social mix is essentially based on who lives where, but it is also evoked in the context of urban renewal schemes for social housing estates, as well as in relation to new-build developments. A study of the bases of social mix policies conducted in Paris since 2001 in the context of the embourgeoisement of the capital shows the fundamental role of social housing stock. The City Council has become involved in policy decisions about both the location and the allocation of social housing. Particular attention has been paid to the middle classes in the name of the principle of 'balancing the population'. In order to measure the effects of the policy, this article relies on an analysis of two City of Paris schemes that have the stated intent of creating social mix. One of these schemes consists of redeveloping a working-class neighbourhood, Goutte d'Or, while the other involves the new acquisition of social housing in various more affluent neighbourhoods in the capital. This comparative study of the population shows that, whether in a neighbourhood poised for gentrification or in a more affluent neighbourhood, this policy has major effects on forms of local social cohesion, setting in motion individual trajectories and reshaping social and/or ethnic identities.

International audience ; Since the 1980s, the issue of social mix has become a public policy category in France. Enshrined in legislation, yet remaining controversial, it represents a major premise on which housing policies have been reconfigured. The concept of social mix is essentially based on who lives where, but it is also evoked in the context of urban renewal schemes for social housing estates, as well as in relation to new-build developments. A study of the bases of social mix policies conducted in Paris since 2001 in the context of the embourgeoisement of the capital shows the fundamental role of social housing stock. The City Council has become involved in policy decisions about both the location and the allocation of social housing. Particular attention has been paid to the middle classes in the name of the principle of 'balancing the population'. In order to measure the effects of the policy, this article relies on an analysis of two City of Paris schemes that have the stated intent of creating social mix. One of these schemes consists of redeveloping a working-class neighbourhood, Goutte d'Or, while the other involves the new acquisition of social housing in various more affluent neighbourhoods in the capital. This comparative study of the population shows that, whether in a neighbourhood poised for gentrification or in a more affluent neighbourhood, this policy has major effects on forms of local social cohesion, setting in motion individual trajectories and reshaping social and/or ethnic identities.

International audience ; Since the 1980s, the issue of social mix has become a public policy category in France. Enshrined in legislation, yet remaining controversial, it represents a major premise on which housing policies have been reconfigured. The concept of social mix is essentially based on who lives where, but it is also evoked in the context of urban renewal schemes for social housing estates, as well as in relation to new-build developments. A study of the bases of social mix policies conducted in Paris since 2001 in the context of the embourgeoisement of the capital shows the fundamental role of social housing stock. The City Council has become involved in policy decisions about both the location and the allocation of social housing. Particular attention has been paid to the middle classes in the name of the principle of 'balancing the population'. In order to measure the effects of the policy, this article relies on an analysis of two City of Paris schemes that have the stated intent of creating social mix. One of these schemes consists of redeveloping a working-class neighbourhood, Goutte d'Or, while the other involves the new acquisition of social housing in various more affluent neighbourhoods in the capital. This comparative study of the population shows that, whether in a neighbourhood poised for gentrification or in a more affluent neighbourhood, this policy has major effects on forms of local social cohesion, setting in motion individual trajectories and reshaping social and/or ethnic identities.

International audience ; Since the 1980s, the issue of social mix has become a public policy category in France. Enshrined in legislation, yet remaining controversial, it represents a major premise on which housing policies have been reconfigured. The concept of social mix is essentially based on who lives where, but it is also evoked in the context of urban renewal schemes for social housing estates, as well as in relation to new-build developments. A study of the bases of social mix policies conducted in Paris since 2001 in the context of the embourgeoisement of the capital shows the fundamental role of social housing stock. The City Council has become involved in policy decisions about both the location and the allocation of social housing. Particular attention has been paid to the middle classes in the name of the principle of 'balancing the population'. In order to measure the effects of the policy, this article relies on an analysis of two City of Paris schemes that have the stated intent of creating social mix. One of these schemes consists of redeveloping a working-class neighbourhood, Goutte d'Or, while the other involves the new acquisition of social housing in various more affluent neighbourhoods in the capital. This comparative study of the population shows that, whether in a neighbourhood poised for gentrification or in a more affluent neighbourhood, this policy has major effects on forms of local social cohesion, setting in motion individual trajectories and reshaping social and/or ethnic identities.