Suchergebnisse

This chapter argues that: (1) urban inequalities and injustices associated with creative urbanism, for example in terms of employment, income, or housing, are not always visible in the way typically associated with global cities and therefore require nuanced analysis; (2) the "creative cities" paradigm (as well as the contestatory right to the city framework or the just city debate) offers a powerful explanatory device for global neoliberal urbanism, including examples of "creativity orthodoxy" and the capitalist city in Amsterdam, and (3) Groningen in the northern region of The Netherlands provides a compelling case of hidden inequalities and the politics of urban development in what Gabe et al. (2012) and van Winden et al. (Urban Studies 44 (3): 525-549, 2007) would term a "knowledge pearl" city.

AbstractWhat are the theoretical tools at our disposal for helping explain local participatory processes in the context of the governance of social and ethnic diversity in cities? Conventional wisdom within urban scholarship often has it that new modes of governance are, by definition, more conducive to participatory practice in cities. In this article we take issue with this assumption with reference to political process derived from Habermas and Mouffe as well as detailed case material on participation in the Delfshaven district of Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and in the Antwerp‐North district (Belgium). While we are sympathetic with the ideals of Habermas given the highly fragmented, individualized and conflictive politics observed in Antwerp, we equally do not see the alternative in the bureaucratic form of rationality we see in Rotterdam. We therefore argue for a radicalized communicative rationality, combining a Habermas‐inspired ideal speech situation with more organic, grassroots and bottom‐up processes in line with Mouffe. Our 'hybridized' conception of participation transcends the pervasive tendency to treat Habermas and Mouffe, among others, as epistemologically distinct and concerned with incommensurable conceptions of social power. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of our argument for theorizing governance and participation in cities.Résumé Quels sont les outils théoriques dont nous disposons pour expliquer les processus participatifs locaux dans le cadre de la gouvernance d'une diversité sociale et ethnique dans les villes ? On pense généralement chez les experts urbains que les nouveaux modes de gouvernance sont, par définition, plus favorables à la démarche participative dans les villes. L'article s'oppose à ce postulat en se référant au processus politique selon Habermas et Mouffe, et en partant d'informations précises sur la participation dans les cas de l'arrondissement de Delfshaven à Rotterdam (Pays‐Bas) et du quartier d'Anvers‐Nord (Belgique). Si nous rejoignons les idéaux de Habermas par rapport aux politiques particulièrement fragmentées, individualisées et conflictuelles observées à Anvers, nous ne trouvons pas l'alternative dans la forme bureaucratique de rationalité constatée à Rotterdam. En conséquence, nous défendons une rationalité communicative radicalisée qui associe une situation de discours idéal inspirée par Habermas et des processus plus organiques, basiques et de bas en haut, cohérents avec Mouffe. Cette conception 'hybride' de la participation transcende la tendance systématique à considérer Habermas et Mouffe, entre autres, comme étant distincts sur le plan épistémologique et s'intéressant à des concepts du pouvoir social incommensurables. Pour finir, sont analysées les implications de notre argumentation pour la théorisation de la gouvernance et de la participation dans les grandes villes.

AbstractIn recent years there has been a growing interest in new participatory forms of urban governance. This introduction provides readers with a basic review of current debates in the literature and a summary of the articles presented in the symposium. The introduction highlights two major tensions in the literature. First, many scholars operate under an assumption that plural actors can achieve a lasting and rational consensus on certain issues. Others believe that where there is consensus, there is also a silenced margin. For these critics, rather than focusing on building power‐laden consensus, it is better to recognize and respect conflict and difference as normal parts of the governance process. Second, the introduction considers some of the possibilities for cross‐national comparisons of participatory governance regimes. Scholars should not limit their analyses to institutional designs across countries but assess the importance of particular sociopolitical contexts in giving formal institutions their actual meanings and functions.Résumé Dernièrement, les nouvelles formes participatives de gouvernance urbaine ont fait l'objet d'un intérêt accru. Ce texte introductif présente un bilan rapide des débats qui animent la littérature actuelle, ainsi qu'une synthèse des articles proposés pour le symposium. On trouve deux lignes d'opposition principales dans les publications. En premier lieu, de nombreux chercheurs partent du principe qu'une pluralité d'acteurs peut atteindre un consensus durable et rationnel sur certains sujets. D'autres sont convaincus que s'il y a consensus, une minorité est également réduite au silence ; selon eux, au lieu de se consacrer à bâtir un consensus dans un rapport de force, il vaut mieux admettre et respecter conflit et différence comme des composantes normales du processus de gouvernance. En second lieu, cette introduction envisage certaines possibilités de comparaisons transnationales de systèmes de gouvernance participative; les spécialistes ne devraient pas limiter leurs analyses aux concepts institutionnels internationaux, mais évaluer plutôt l'importance des contextes sociopolitiques particuliers lorsqu'il s'agit de donner aux institutions formelles leur sens et fonctions réels.

This timely book explores the role played by faith-based organisations (FBOs), which are growing in importance in the provision of social services in the European context.

Preface, David Ley -- Introduction: Rise of the Post Secular City, Justin Beaumont and Christopher Baker -- Part I: Mapping the Theoretical Terrain -- 1. Postsecular Cities and Radical Critique: A Philosophical Sea-change? Gregor McLennan -- Part II: Competing Experiences of Postsecular Cities -- 2 Postcolonialism and Religion: New Spaces of 'Belonging and Becoming' in the Postsecular City, Christopher Baker and Justin Beaumont -- 3. Market Theory, Market Theology: The Business of the Church in the City, Robbie B. H. Goh -- 4.Nonsecular Cities? Visual and Sound Representations of the Religious-Secular Right to the City in Jerusalem, Tovi Fenster -- 5. Spirituality, Urban Life and Urban Professions, Leonie Sandercock and Maged Senbel -- 6. A Feminist Critique of the Postsecular City: God and Gender, Clara Greed -- 7. Sanctuaries of Urban Sociability: learning from Edo-Tokyo, Anni Greve -- Part III: Postsecular Policies and Praxis -- 8. From Race to Religion: Multiculturalism and Contested Urban Space, John Eade -- 9 Public Pasts in Plural Societies: Models for Management in the Postsecular City, Greg Ashworth -- 10. Understanding Faith Based Engagement and Volunteering in the Postsecular Society: Motivations, Reationales and Translation, Rachael Chapman and Leila Hamaleinen -- 11. Exploring the Postsecular State: The Case of Amsterdam, Nynke de Witte -- Part IV: Theological and Secular Interpretations -- 12. On Christianity as Truly Public, Angus Paddison -- 13. Inhabiting the Good City: The Politics of Hate and the Urbanisms of Hope, Elaine Graham and Andrew Davey -- 14. Emerging Postsecular Rapprochement in the Contemporary City, Paul Cloke -- Postsecular Cities: Afterword, Christopher Baker and Justin Beaumont -- Index.