Remaking the American dream: the informal and formal transformation of single-family housing cities
In: Urban and industrial environments
22 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Urban and industrial environments
In: King's SOAS studies in development geography
In: International journal of urban and regional research, Band 29, Heft 4, S. 972-983
ISSN: 1468-2427
The focus of this essay is success in collective action. It is based on a critical review and synthesis of the literature on collective action and property rights. I make three key arguments in the essay. First, contrary to the narrow conventional wisdom, self‐interested behavior can lead to successful collective action in both commonly managed resources and open‐access situations. The literature documents and explains a number of examples of success. Second, and nonetheless, collective action can be problematic and may require institutional responses, but privatization is not a panacea. Paradoxically, privatism can be a key source of the problems in collective action. And third, since the conventionally postulated, simple one‐to‐one relationship between a private property rights regime and an efficient outcome is not true, and given planners' institutional interests, they should take a leading role in publicly advocating the potential viability of common property and collective action. Another important objective of the essay is to introduce to the readers a vast body of non‐traditional literature that has relevance for urban studies and planning practice. I include the literature on private property rights, 'the tragedy of the commons', 'the inverse commons', 'the comedy of the commons', and 'the tragedy of the anticommons'.Cet essai s'intéresse au succès de l'action collective. Il s'appuie sur une critique et une synthèse des références sur l'action collective et les droits de propriété. Trois arguments sont exposés. D'abord, a contrario d'un avis étroit et conventionnel, l'intérêt personnel peut conduire à une action collective réussie tant pour des ressources gérées en commun que pour des situations en accès libre; des documents retracent et expliquent bon nombre de cas de succès. Ensuite, et néanmoins, une action collective peut poser problème et exiger des réponses institutionnelles, quoique la privatisation ne soit pas la panacée; paradoxalement, le 'privatisme' peut se révéler une source essentielle de difficultés en cas d'action collective. Enfin, comme le principe classique de relation simple, un pour un, entre un régime de droits de propriété privée et un résultat efficace n'est pas vérifié, et compte tenu des intérêts institutionnels des urbanistes, ceux‐ci devraient prendre un rôle moteur en défendant publiquement la viabilité de la propriété commune et de l'action collective. L'essai a comme autre objectif important de présenter aux lecteurs un vaste corpus de textes non traditionnels pertinent pour les études urbaines et la pratique de l'urbanisme. La conclusion inclut des références sur les droits de la propriété privée, 'la tragédie des biens communs', 'les communs inversés', 'la comédie des communs' et 'la tragédie des anti‐communs'.
In: International journal of urban and regional research: IJURR, Band 29, Heft 4, S. 972-983
ISSN: 0309-1317
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 26, Heft 3, S. 287-304
ISSN: 1478-3401
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 26, Heft 3, S. 287-304
ISSN: 1474-6743
In: Habitat international: a journal for the study of human settlements, Band 26, Heft 4, S. 553-570
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 24, Heft 2, S. 161-176
ISSN: 1478-3401
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 24, Heft 2, S. 161-176
ISSN: 1474-6743
In: International journal of urban and regional research, Band 31, Heft 2, S. 475-488
ISSN: 1468-2427
Abstract'Colonias' in the United States are a relatively recent phenomenon for planning practitioners and scholars. Most of the focus of policy and literature has been on the unregulated, substandard settlements in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. Past studies of colonias in the three states have criticized policy efficacy and questioned whether colonias are appropriately or adequately defined. Our objective in this essay is complementary. We draw from the literature, and our research in California, to explain and share our concerns with the policy practice of naming settlements with poor infrastructure and living conditions as colonias, a Spanish‐language name. We argue that the name can be misleading, prejudiced and risks being detrimental. We discuss our misgivings about federal public policy using a non‐English title for labeling substandard settlements, and suggest that scholars and policymakers need to revisit the terminology.RésuméLes colonias constituent un phénomène relativement récent aux Etats‐Unis pour les acteurs et chercheurs en aménagement. La plupart des politiques et publications se sont intéressées aux implantations sauvages de qualité déplorable apparues au Texas, au Nouveau Mexique et en Arizona. Les études existantes sur les colonias de ces trois Etats ont remis en cause l'efficacité de la politique publique et la pertinence de la définition donnée au terme colonias. Cet essai vise à les compléter. A partir des publications et de nos recherches en Californie, il explique et expose notre inquiétude de voir la pratique politique désigner par colonias, un nom espagnol, des implantations aux infrastructures et conditions de vie médiocres. A notre avis, cette appellation peut être trompeuse, porteuse de préjugés et potentiellement néfaste. L'article soumet nos interrogations vis‐à‐vis d'une politique publique fédérale qui emploie une désignation en langue étrangère pour cataloguer des implantations d'habitats de qualité inférieure, et invite chercheurs et décideurs politiques à revisiter cette terminologie.
In: International journal of urban and regional research: IJURR, Band 31, Heft 2, S. 475-488
ISSN: 0309-1317
Most local governments' off-street parking requirements promote quantity over quality, focusing on ensuring an ample supply of parking. This has undesirable consequences for the built environment. Parking lots and parking structures routinely overwhelm the architecture and urban design of even the best buildings and neighborhoods. We argue that planners should worry less about the quantity of parking, and pay more attention to its quality. Through examples of zoning reforms adopted by some cities, we show how regulating the quality of parking has the potential to improve urban design.
BASE
In: Housing policy debate, Band 17, Heft 4, S. 755-780
ISSN: 2152-050X
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 29, Heft 12, S. 2043-2057
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 29, Heft 12, S. 2043-2057
ISSN: 0305-750X
This paper demonstrates how institutional pluralism in the delivery of housing can evoke major disagreements and ultimately conflict between different stakeholders. The case study focuses on a case of slum redevelopment in Mumbai and shows how a major nongovernment organization (NGO) became involved in conflicts with the other stakeholders, including private market actors, government agencies and even the community group. But, these conflicts did not necessarily have only negative impacts, under certain conditions, such as when property values were booming in Mumbai, communities can actually benefit from such conflicts. (DSE/DÜI)
World Affairs Online