info@rc21.org            
  • Croquis

    Download

     

  • We are happy to propose four organised tours to conference participants. Registration to these tours will be open as of Wednesday July 20 at 15h, directly on the conference site, the Colegio de México.

    • Tour 1: Centro histórico / Historical center

      Saturday July 23, 16h

      Meeting point: El Colegio de Mexico

      Two guides will meet the group directly at the Colegio de Mexico and begin their explanations and stories directly in the bus that will bring the group to the historical center. The centro historico is a very lively place where pre-Hispanic and post-Hispanic cultures meet; a place where various social classes mix and mingle. Saturday afternoon, in particular, is an interesting time to visit. The tour will begin with a visit of the Templo Mayor, the core of the pre-Hispanic city. Then you will spend time in the Zocalo, the large open plaza surrounded by the Palacio nacional and the cathedral. You will also visit the statue in front of the city government building. The tour will pursue in the surrounding streets. The tour will be in English, and in French if someone is interested.

      Duration: 2 hours and 45 minutes approximately.

      Cost: $180 MXN per person (Cash only)

      Maximum number of participants: 50

      Note: Tour reservations closes on july 21th at 12:00 p.m.

       

    • Tour 2: La merced market

      Saturday July 23, 16h

      Meeting point: El Colegio de Mexico

      The Merced market is a lively place where one can find everything, ranging from textiles to invitation cards, from crafts to healing herbs, from religious artefacts to party supplies. The visit will describe the history of this market and the neighbourhood, also known for its sex workers. The visit will begin with the Casa de la Talavera, to pursue with the Museum of textile and music. You will then visit the Embarcadero de Roldan where merchandise was delivered through the elaborate canal system that existed until the 19th century, and its alhondiga where corn was exchanged. The tour will continue with the Merced convent and the Manzanares chapel. It will end at the Plaza La Aguilita, a dynamic place in the neighbourhood known for its local radio. The tour will be in English.

      Duration: 2 hours and 30 minutes approximately

      Cost: $150 MXN per person (Cash only)

      Maximum number of participants: 30

      Note: Tour reservations closes on july 21th at 12:00 p.m.

    • Tour 3: Tepito

      Sunday July 24, 9h

      Meeting point: Hotel Diplomatico

      You will be transported from the hotel to the neighbourhood of Tepito in a small van. During this journey, Juan Gómez, your guide, will begin talking about Tepito’s intense and dynamic history. Tepito is a very well-known neighbourhood just north of the historical center. After colonisation, indigenous villages grew to house poor migrants arriving from the countryside. Famous for its vecindades (housing), one of them studied by Oscar Lewis in The Children of Sanchez, the neighbourhood is now one of the largest street vending concentrations in Latin America. It is also where many famous boxers and wrestlers come from. The tour will begin at the Lagunilla flea market and will pass through the José Maria Velasco Gallery, the Tepito market, the Maracana boxing and sports center. The tour will be in English.

      Duration: 2 hours and 45 minutes approximately.

      Cost: $255 MXN per person (Cash only)

      Maximum number of participants: 17

      Note: Tour reservations closes on july 21th at 12:00 p.m.

    • Tour 4: Ciudad Nezahualcoyotl

      Sunday July 24, 9h00

      Meeting point: Hotel El Diplomatico

      The van will depart from the hotel at 9h00. It will make a first stop at the Central de abastos, where all fresh produce, meet, and fish arrive in the city before being redistributed throughout the market and street vending system. The van will then stop at the Cabeza de Juarez, a museum dedicated to muralism, and communist muralists in particular. The spectacular building, adorned with a gigantic sculpture of the head of Benito Juarez, was recently reopened to the public. You will then pursue your journey to the periphery of Mexico City, first with a visit of the Palacio municipal de Ciudad Nezahuatcoyotl, then a visit through the colonia Virgenes, a neighbourhood of this peripheral municipality. The tour will end with a visit at the Universidad Lasalle, a local university. The tour will be in Spanish with English translation.

      Duration: 2 hours approximately.

      Cost: $180 MXN per person (Cash only)

      Maximum number of participants: 17

      Note: Tour reservations closes on july 21th at 12:00 p.m.

    • Stream 1

      Informality, Transgression and Urban Governance

      Organised by Veronica Crossa (Colegio de Mexico), Vicente Ugalde (Colegio de Mexico), and Jill Wigle (Carleton University)

      + About Stream

      Recent work on urban governance has shown an interest in understanding both the instruments and practices of different actors in the experience of policies and their effects on the overall functioning of a city. Focusing on the daily practices of these actors within the context of particular urban spaces and policies, this work has highlighted the multiple ways in which practices articulate with – or not - formalized norms, regulations and policy instruments. In fact, many have argued that it is precisely these unregulated practices that facilitate the delivery and functioning of public services (like transportation, waste) and other urban policies, the use of public space (like street vending), and the provision of housing.

      This panel invites papers that seek to draw from and contribute to debates regarding these complex articulations of formality/informality and related practices and policy instruments. Rather than viewing them as residual practices or outliers within a formalized system of regulatory activities, we search for papers that can contribute to a broader understanding of urban governance processes of cities both within the global north and south. The panel proposes to explore urban governance through a comparative lens, with an emphasis on how informal practices are linked to the organization and negotiation of social relations, space and the exercise of power in cities. Rather than viewing informality as a kind of regulatory transgression confined to the practices of non-state actors, this panel seeks to expand this analysis by exploring comparative geographies of governance and informality in various sectors (e.g. housing, vending) and settings (e.g. Mexico City, Vancouver). We take as a starting point that informality reflects state-society relations in different political, economic and social contexts. Panelists are asked to explore the role of the state in producing and negotiating informality as part of everyday urban governance, that include state transgressions and community resistance. Some of the questions we seek to address in this panel are:

      • How can we theorize informality in cities, moving beyond definitions that confine such practices to particular places or specific people?
      • How does governance vary across different cities both within the so-called global north and south? Can we talk about a comparative geography of governance? Of informality?
      • What forms do (in)formal practices take within different urban contexts? Under what conditions (material and symbolic) do different practices of informality emerge?
      • How do informal practices help us understand the operation of urban public services (both from the side of public actors as well as the recipients of those services)?
      • Which sorts of practices come close to or diverge from the expectations of the policies, including their regulation and formalized instruments? Furthermore, do these practices vary significantly within different cities?
      • To what extent does a government´s performance and its policies depend on “less” formalized practices?

      Panel 1: Housing, Urban Space and Informality

      • Emily Kelling, Technical University Berlin.Housing informalities in London
        Abstract
      • Monika Grubbauer, HafenCity University. Negotiating informality in self-help building practices: Between adaptation and transgression in Mexico City
        Abstract
      • Christian Haid, Technical University Berlin. Urban governance's Janus face: State, informality and ambiguity in Berlin
      • Pablo Mendez, Carleton University. Municipal governance of housing informality in Vancouver, Canada
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Urban Services And Informality

      • Marcos Campos, Center For Metropolitan Studies, University of Sao Paulo. Instrumentation, illegal strategies and bus tickets in the urban governance of bus services in Sao Paulo
        Abstract
      • Chhavi Sharma, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay. Locating informality in the iconic taxi service of city of Mumbai: New transgressions and its challenges to the "national structure" of urban governance
        Abstract
      • Nipesh Palat Narayanan, University of Lausanne. Informal practices, power relations, and positionality in shaping everyday urban governance: The case of a slum in Delhi
        Abstract
      • Priscilla Connolly, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (Azcapotzalco). Shades of informal in transport provision: Unlawful, uncapitalist or just oppressed (alternatively, is uber informal?)
        Abstract

      Panel 3: Planning, community and informality

      • Yaneira Wilson Wetter, Université Paris. Nanterre From transgression to legitimation: David´s Tower example through images of spontaneous city and erratic policies
        Abstract
      • Sukanya Krishnamurthy and Shelagh McCartney, TU Eindhoven and Ryerson University. Neglected? Strengthening the morphological study of informal settlements
        Abstract
      • Hayley Henderson, University of Melbourne. Less-formalised planning for progressive social change: A comparative study of Melbourne, Australia and Buenos Airea, Argentina
      • Sonia Roitman, University of Queensland. Community practices and changes in the dynamics of urban governance: Analysis of Yogyakarta, Indonesia
        Abstract

      Panel 4: Urban governance and informality

      • Clément Barbier, Centre de Recherches Sociologiques et Politiques de Paris. Behind the facade of attractiveness policies: The key role of informal public-private negotiations in capital relocation
      • Telma Hoyler and Pedro Campos, Center for Metropolitan Studies, University of São Paulo. Backstage bureaucrat’s dilemmas and the informality within the State
        Abstract
      • Lissette Aliaga-Linares, University of Nebraska at Omaha From the culture of poverty to the culture of informality: An analysis of the rationale behind proactive policymaking towards street vending in Latin American Cities
        Abstract
      • Nancy Jimenez, Colegio de México. Solid waste as the product of a hybrid process: Formal and informal practices in waste governance in Mexico
        Abstract
      • Shahana Chattaraj, Oxford University. Governing Informality: "Jugaad Governance in Mumbai"
        Abstract
    • Stream 2

      What does the fight against terror do to cities? A comparative multidisciplinary proposal to reflect upon radicalization

      Organised by Valérie Amiraux (University of Montreal) and Frédérick Nadeau (INRS)

      + About Stream

      This proposal is based on a research we started in 2010 with a team of graduate students and professors that looks at radicalization as a micro-phenomenon taking place in the course of ordinary interactions within pluralistic societies (Amiraux, Araya-Moreno, 2014). The team mobilize various disciplinary lenses to draw attention to the multiple miscommunications that inevitably occur in pluralistic societies, leading, as we often see, to the development of a polarized discourse between minorities (most of our case studies look at religious minorities) and the dominant society, thus increasing the potential of a response in the form of both violent radicalization and/or securitization (Kundnani, 2014).

      In this proposal, we take on the recent tragic events that have affected a number of countries around the globe (Turkey, Lebanon, Kenya, France, and Mali, to name a few) to invite the submission of papers addressing the impact of such massive political violence and terror on the everyday experience of urban public spaces. More precisely, we would like to engage with ethnographic approaches (from sociology, anthropology, geography but also law, political science and history) that would help us to think about the empirical effects of the political management of “security” in the post-2001 context.

      Two lines of reflection will be given prominence in the selection of papers: first, we are interested in papers dealing with how concrete legal and political measures taken in the aftermath of such events (surveillance, anti-terror measures, state of emergency) affect the collective experience of the public space. How does the “shrinking” of the public space affect the political routine of ordinary urban experiences? How do extraordinary measures shape the local life of specific neighbourhoods? Second, we would like to invite submissions looking at the response to these State invasive policies: what do post-terrorist attacks policies produce in terms of engagement and political mobilizations? Who are the actors of these reactive movements? How do they invest in specific urban settings to build up their constituency?

      Panel

      • Marwan Mohamed (CCIF, France). Efficiency of anti-terrorism : a comparative approach
        Abstract
      • Aida Huerta Barrientos (National Autonomous Mexico University). Understanding the effects of global terrorist attacks on citizen's well-being and vice-versa
        Abstract
      • Narzanin Massoumin (University of Liverpool). Counter terrorism policy and the space for student democracy in UK universities
        Abstract
      • Oksana Zaporozhets (University Higher School of Economics, Moscow). Users’ everyday experiences and reactions to the policies and practices of securitization : An ethnography of Moscow subway
        Abstract
      • Arber Fetiu (University of Montreal). "Dangerous heterotopias”: vigilance politics and the emergence of distrust in the city
        Abstract
    • Stream 3

      State paradoxes and the politics of small things at the urban fringes

      Organised by Talja Blokland (Humbolt University), Gabriel Feltran (UFSCar/CMS ) and Agata Lisiak (Humbolt University)

      + About Stream

      Urban scholars’ interest in the everyday is widespread. While we acknowledge the importance of trying to make sense of the everyday in the city, as space is shaped by uneven power geometries (Massey 2012), a guiding question is: what is the actual power emerging from the mundane? The state impacts urban positions and locations in paradoxical way: encouraging through beneficial social policy interventions and the provision of public services, constraining through regulating behaviour in public space, and criminalizing certain forms of action or restricting access to institutions or places through categorical boundaries. States may reduce and sustain inequalities, or even produce new inequalities when trying to fix pre-existing ones. States hence contribute to an unequal landscape of institutions as they provide different areas with different amenities. Not just groups, but also classed, gendered and raced spaces – often discussed as embodied ‘neighbourhood effects’ – matter to inequalities. From various angles, different scholars from the Global North and South have suggested that institutions matter most for how neighbourhood effects (the spatial advantages or disadvantages of a match of position and location) come about. Urbanites may or may not have power to influence the possibilities and constraints of state interventions.

      The state acts more precisely, and strongly, in the positions and locations where things are not considered to be under control. Thus, as many scholars have recently pointed out, it is critical too look at and from peripheries, boundaries and margins of the state in order to understand the core of state-building. The dominant representation of those fringe positions – spaces and populations – is based on a presupposition that they are “excluded,” isolated from social life and politics. The “excluded” are seen as people who have lost their relations with the legitimate social spheres such as work, family, religion, law, social protection, dignity. But the more we do our fieldwork, the more is evident that they have relations in all of these realms and that is no "absence of state" in their lives; on the contrary: agents need to define their spaces of maneuver through mundane practices within the context of the state – they, too, through the ‘politics of small things’ (Goldfarb 2006), create power.

      The stream welcomes empirical or theoretical papers addressed to understand the paradoxical need of the state to map, count and categorize spaces, positions and groups on its fringes on the one hand and the politics of small things in which agents carve out space to get things done and develop positions of power, on the other.

      Panel 1

      • Hannah Hilbrandt (Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space), Everyday politics and the rules of co-existence in Berlin’s allotment gardens
      • Danielle Chevalier (University of Amsterdam), Playing It by the Rules
        Abstract
      • Cistina Cielo (Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales Ecuador), Common urban practices and state institutions
        Abstract
      • Encarnación Moya Recio, (Center for Metroplitan Studies, University of Sao Paulo), Survival and life improvement in everyday life
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Kitti Baracsi (University of Pecs), Limbo lives within and beyond states: Roma youth on the margins of Naples
        Abstract
      • Nanke Verloo (University of Amsterdam), Ignoring the politics of small things: a case study that unravels the paradox between state strategies and community tactics in the Dutch urban fringes
      • Martijn Hendrikx (City University of Hong Kong), Unlocking the educational dream: Access paths for chengzhongcun residents in Guangzhou
        Abstract
      • Javier Ruiz Tagle et al. (Institute of Urban and Territorial Studies), A theory of the institutional space of marginal neighborhoods
        Abstract

      Distributed paper: Emiliano Esposito (Gran Sasso Science Istitute), The Public Housing Emergency in Naples

    • Stream 4

      Approaching urban diversity: Between transgression and integration

      Organised by Stijn Oosterlynck (University of Antwerp), Nicolas Van Puymbroeck (University of Antwerp), and Mike Raco (University College London)

      + About Stream

      Immigrant integration has been one of the most intractable problems confronting cities in the global North in the last five decades. The London bombings in July 2005, the violent riots in the French banlieues in November 2005, the Ferguson unrests in 2014, the Baltimore protests in 2015 and the killings which took place in Paris this year have all been portrayed as direct attacks on dominant models of integration of migrants and ethnic minority groups in Global North cities. The German Chancellor Angela Merkel openly declared in October 2010 that attempts to build multicultural societies in Europe had ‘utterly failed’. The recent so-called ‘crisis’ of mass-migration from Syria into the EU or from Latin America into the US has further fueled a rising tide of resentment towards open migration policies with many countries adopting more aggressive integrationist policies. Especially since the aftermath of 9/11, political elites across the Global North have commonly distanced themselves from multiculturalism as an approach to address increasing ethnic and cultural heterogeneity. Amongst other reasons, multicultural policies were blamed for institutionalizing parallel societies and for legitimating the cultural oppression of women and LGBT within (Muslim) minority groups. In the wake of these wider trends, academic and policy writings have drawn on a variety of categories, such as ‘neo-assimilationism’, ‘post-multiculturalism’, ‘superdiversity’, ‘interculturalism’ and ‘diversity management’, to describe the core characteristics of integration policies arising during the last decade, including ‘citizenization’ programs, social mix strategies and neighborhood cohesion projects. Each of these categories implies a certain understanding of diversity and treats urban diversity and the societal dynamics it triggers either as a phenomenon to be domesticated, disciplined and governed or as a transgressive force challenging urban governing mechanisms and harboring the potential of urban transformation.

      This session invites empirical and theoretical proposals which examine the wide variety of contemporary approaches to urban ethnic and cultural diversity in cities, particularly from the perspective of how these approaches deal with the transgressive potential of ethnic and cultural diversity in cities. Although the call for this session is formulated from the perspective of Global North cities, we also welcome proposals analyzing approaches of diversity in cities in the Global South. We look for contributions that critically interrogate how ethnic and cultural diversity is named, signified and approached, how these names and labels function as ‘acts as technologies of social description' (to use Ahmed’ terms) and whose interests are being served by approaching diversity in this way. The following list of themes indicates some more detailed possible questions:

      • How is ethnic and cultural diversity named, signified and approached in specific cities? How did these names and approaches enter into integration politics and who has mobilized them?
      • What can count as a characteristic of diversity (race, ethnicity, religion, sexual preference, education, class) and why? What types of diversity are found in public policies and who decides how diversity is defined and with what ends?
      • Which actors position themselves as transgressive forces in the field of diversity politics? How do they do so and with what effect?
      • To what extent is ethnic and cultural diversity politicized or depoliticized in specific cities?
      • Which discourses on diversity are mobilized to that end? And with what effects?

      Panel 1

      • Leslie Kapo, INRS Muslim Youths, Transgression, and the Global City in an era of War of Terror
        Abstract
      • Janroj Keles (Middlesex University) and Stephen Syrett (Middlesex University) Diasporas, identity and enterprise: politicized ethnic entrepreneurship and urban governance
      • Fabio Quassoli (University of Milano-Bicocca) and Cecilia Nessi (University of Milano-Bicocca) Lesbians, Migrants, Women: which diversity matters? The negotiation of multiple intersecting identities in Milan and Brussels
      • Eric Charmes (École nationale des travaux publics de l’État, France) Poor Peripheral Whites against suburban migrants: a discussion of Christophe Guilluy’s work
        Abstract
      • Orly Clerge (Tufts University) The Black Ethnoburb: Theorizing Residential Mobility and Exclusion in the Global City

      Panel 2:

      • Emily Siverman, Hebrew University Can Transgressive community planning promote diversity in Jerusalem?
      • Walter Nicholls, University of California, Irvine Disruptive Integration: Pasadena Day Laborers and Their Conflicted Path to Incorporation
        Abstract
      • Roberta Marzorati University of Milano-Bicocca 1. Signifying Urban Diversity through an imported label: Mexico City as an intercultural city Eduardo Barberis Università di Urbino Carlo Bo Interculturalism as Conservative Multiculturalism? New generations from an immigrant background in Milan, Italy, and the challenge to categories and boundaries
        Abstract
      • Eduardo Barberis Università di Urbino Carlo Bo Interculturalism as Conservative Multiculturalism? New generations from an immigrant background in Milan, Italy, and the challenge to categories and boundaries
        Abstract
      • Luis Garzon (Universidad de Burgos) A decline in diversity? Migration in Burgos (Spain), During and After the Crisis
        Abstract
    • Stream 5

      Resistance, Creativity and Planning

      Organised by Silvano De la Llata, Concordia University and Walter Nicholls, UC, Irvine

      + About Stream

      "To resist is to create, to create is to resist", said Stephen Hessel (2010) in Indignez-Vous!, a book that inspired most of the uprisings in Europe and Latin America in 2011 and 2012. Resistance and creativity are not only linked but a condition of one and the other. In order to create something new, there is an implacable need to transgress the normative and break the rules. Innovation occurs through experimentation rather than through perpetuating order. This is true for the city as well. The city is one gigantic laboratory in which people create through transgression. These kinds of creativity do not only happen in controlled environments (i.e. architecture firms, planning departments, universities, government institutions, etc.) but rather "out there", whenever ordinary citizens turn a parking lot into a skate park, empty walls into a graffiti murals, abandoned buildings into squatted social centers, plazas into protest encampments, and empty lots into community gardens. Transgressiveness is where potential lies in the city. Nevertheless, these expressions exist only within the confines of a normative urban order.

      The proliferation, preponderance, diversity, reach, and cross-fertilization of transgressive activities suggest a need for theorizing these expressions beyond individual instances. We need to situate them in the context of broader conceptualizations of social movements and of forces that shape urban space in the 21st century. Therefore, the session aims to examine how how creative and transgressive acts grow out beyond their points of origin through the assemblage of complex and disruptive networks. Just as important, we want to explore how this process expands notions and practices of what is possible regarding the socially just city.

      This panel explores the links between transgression and creativity in city-making processes, and particularly focuses on expressions of resistance that result in creative citizen-driven projects. The objective is to understand the challenges and opportunities of resistance to plan a more citizen-responsive and just city. This includes, but is not limited to the following examples:

      • Direct-action and insurgent planning
      • New/old forms of social movement
      • Transgressive art collectives and projects
      • Community gardens and food justice movements
      • Squatted social centers
      • Spontaneous organization in the context of disaster
      • Solidarity movements in the context of refugee crisis
      • Self-organization in protest/refugee encampments

      Panel 1: The Right to the City: Politics of Urban Resistance

      • Stavros Stravides (National Technical University of Athens) Inventive appropriations of public space in contemporary Athens, a city in crisis: In search of new forms of urban communing
        Abstract
      • Nabil Kamel (Western Washington University) The age of drones, failed states and the specter of the city
      • Daniel Avila Caldeira (University of Sao Paulo) New urban activism in São Paulo: a city for (which) people?
        Abstract
      • Raffael Beier, Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, Shifting Urban Policies in Northern Africa after the ‘Arab Spring’: Urgent Reactions or Real Changes?
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Alternative Dwelling and Everyday Life as forms of resistance

      • Leila Khaldi, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Paris Val-de-Seine, Housing aesthetics and creativity in the informal areas of Tunis.
      • Renia Ehrenfeuct, University of New Mexico, Claiming the Street: Work and Consumption in the 21st Century Public Spaces
        Abstract
      • Evelin Santander Daza, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, The construction of symbolic city
        Abstract
      • Yaneira Wilson Wetter, Université Paris X Nanterre, Comprehension of the spontaneous occupations’ image in the XXI th century
        Abstract

      Panel 3: Community gardens and interstitial spaces as opportunities for resistance

      • Benjamin Ajuria Muñoz (Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico) The creative knowledge and alternative food networks in Mexican Cities
        Abstract
      • Janice Astbury (Durham University) Appropriating urban corridors: a transgressive opportunity in hiding
        Abstract
      • Liza Candidi (Gran Sasso Science Institute) Resisting the urban existing. Transgressive living in informal settlements and creative autonomous communities in the US West Coast.
        Abstract
      • Lucia Capanema Alvares (Universidad Federal Fluminense), Jorge Luis Barbosa (Universidad Federal Fluminense) and Andre L. Muniz Cavalcante (Secretaria Municipal de Habitacao) Resistance and Transgression in Rio de Janeiro: From favelas’ cultural movements to the 2013 Riots
        Abstract
    • Stream 6

      Challenges of Doing Comparisons: Theory and Evidence from the Global South

      Organised by Shubhra Gururani (York University) and Xuefei Ren (Michigan State University)

      + About Stream

      The extensive urbanization in China and India, and in the global south more generally, has provoked a great deal of interest and raised questions about the changing landscape of capital accumulation, dispossession, displacement, urban planning, and governance in the emerging spaces of urbanism. It has also spurred an energetic debate over the locus and reach of conventional urban theory, its limitations, and possibilities. With calls for planetary urbanization, comparative urbanisms, and new geographies of theory, it is clear that there is a need to develop new conceptual vocabulary that can transgress the dominant theoretical repertoire derived from post-industrial West and attend to the postcolonial urban conditions. In the context of these debates, we are interested in forging a conversation between scholars who can conceptually explore, and empirically investigate the politics of urban space and subject formation in cities in the global South, especially in the BRICs countries. We particularly welcome contributions that can demonstrate theoretical vantage points of doing comparisons, as well as works that reflect on the methodological challenges and possibilities of comparative research. Substantive focuses include, but are not limited to, politics of housing, land use planning, infrastructural investment, and environmental mobilizations.

      Panel 1

      • Alan Mabin (University of the Witwatersrand) “Divergent and convergent shifts in northern and southern city regions”
        Abstract
      • Luiz Cesar de Queiroz Ribeiro (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro) “Urban Transformations in Brazilian Metropolises: reflections and results of a networking comparative research”
        Abstract
      • Sascha Facius (Humboldt University Berlin) “Rethinking the scale of spatial comparison: does neighborhood comparison make sense?”
        Abstract
      • Gayatri A. Menon (Azim Premji University) “The City as a Place of Comparisons: Aspirations, Difference and Evictions in postcolonial Mumbai”
        Abstract
      • Mariana Fix (University of Campinas) “Mapping the housing system after the neoliberal turn: evidence from Brazil.”
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • David Sadoway (Nanyang Technological University) “Scalar Conundrums in urban research and theory building: Situating trans-local spatial studies within multiple Asia-s”
        Abstract
      • Shriya Anand and Neha Sami (Indian Institute for Human Settlements) “Apples and oranges: Inter-regional comparisons within India”
        Abstract
      • Bhuvaneswari Raman (Jindal Global University) “The politics of property: Fluid boundaries of space and identify in Indian cities”
        Abstract
      • Sudeshna Mitra (Indian Institute for Human Settlements) “Instructive Instruments: Land Records Modernization in Urban India”
        Abstract
      • Lalitha Kamath and Radhika Raj (Tata Institute of Social Science) “Examining states of exception in the periphery: land use planning, calculated informality and competing sovereignties in India”
        Abstract
    • Stream 7

      The governance of urban vulnerability and risk management

      Organised by Sergio Puente (Colegio de Mexico) and Hector Becerril (Autonomous University of Guerrero)

      + About Stream

      The development of cities across the globe is strongly related to natural and anthropogenic risks (i.e. earthquakes, floods, cyclones, global warming, climate change, environmental pollution, chemical and industrial risks, etc), and the transgression of laws, transgressive practices and transgressive conditions, as an expression of “Institutional Vulnerability” and “Governance”. This session will discuss the relations, intersections and influences among urban vulnerabilities and risk, transgressive practices, and governance patterns. It welcomes papers that consider the following questions:

      • How transgressions shape the governance of urban vulnerability and risk?
      • How transgressive practices increase or reduce urban vulnerability?
      • How transgressions influence urban vulnerability and how different types of transgressions generate different vulnerabilities?
      • Integrated risk management implies a set of rules, how it can be implemented in cities where transgression to laws and transgressive practices are the rule?
      • How risk management affect the vulnerable groups in the city?
      • How vulnerability influences the transgression of regulations and urban governance?
      • How and to what extent transgressive practices limit/foster the development of integrated risk management?

      Panel 1

      • Frédérick Nadeau - Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, Terror risk: The concept of “radicalization” as discursive device of political contention
        Abstract
      • Sophie L. Van Neste – Université de Montréal and Clark University, Risk management from the urban fringe: inconspicuous networks and transgressive forms of interactions built around a loss of “ontological security”
        Abstract
      • Marianna Musmeci – University of Milano-Bicocca, Risk, vulnerability and housing recovery after a natural disaster. The case of l´Aquila earthquake (Italy 209)
        Abstract
      • Maria Khristine Alvarez – University of the Philippines, Disaster-induced slum evictions and exclusionary urban imaginaries of resilience in Metro Manila
        Abstract
      • Margarethe Kusenbach – Department of Sociology, University of South Florida, Risk, vulnerability and urban marginality: understanding gaps in expert-public disaster perceptions
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Andrea Molteni, Fabio Quassoli (University of Milano-Bicocca) and Monica Colombo (University of Milano-Bicocca), Predictive policing: mapping risks, reducing crime, increasing inequalities
      • Naxhelli Ruiz Rivera – National Autonomous University of Mexico, “Planning regimes” for climate risk reduction in Mexico
        Abstract
      • Diego Arango López – Independent researcher, The risk of fire in the city. A socio-historical analysis of the 1889 and 1900 fires of Bogota
      • Kareem Buyana – Uganda Management Institute Department of Public Administration, Co-creating coastal adaptation plans: the case of Durban in South Africa
        Abstract
      • Mahditya Paramita – Housing Resources Centre Indonesia; Singgih Pintoko, Housing Resources Centre Indonesia, Synergizing top-down and bottom-up approach on emerging disaster resilience community

      Distributed paper: Patricia Avila-García – (UNAM Morelia), Social participation and urban-environmental sustainability in Latin American medium size city: the case of Morelia

    • Stream 8

      Spaces of transgressive maternal practices in the city

      Organised by Rosalina Babourkova, Berlin Institute of Technology and Alicia Yon, University of Melbourne

      + About Stream

      Despite certain advances in gender equality and new formulations and performances of femininities and masculinities, the experience of urban motherhood remains a highly gendered and spatialised position. In most of the urban world, women are mothering under conditions of great material deprivation and political uncertainty. And, space is found to articulate the interplay between motherhood as a social and cultural construct and motherhood as a lived experience (Hardy and Wiemer, 2005). Notwithstanding considerable changes to norms and practices of urban motherhood over the past century and the complex set of relations between the city, space and motherhood, the socio-spatial dimensions of motherhood – as one of the most challenging and perplexing of all social institutions, have not received sufficient attention in the study of the reproduction of the global city.

      Despite profound transformations in household and family structures driven by the forces of urbanisation, the spectre of the nuclear, two-parent family remains one of the hegemonic (but neglected in urban research) non-state forms of authority in the city, determining public norms and social values. Certain urban processes, such as suburbanisation and the privatisation of residential areas, have even been found to reinforce a return to a discursive patriarchalism that favours a nuclear family norm (Aitken, 2000). Additionally, the practice of mothering is bound up in powerful moral geographies that construct the meaning of what it means to be a good mother. Analyses of the intersections of race, class, marital status, immigrant status and sexuality illuminate women’s experiences and practices of motherhood through the continuation of patriarchy (Fenster, 2005). These experiences challenge the notion of the right to the city (Lefebvre, 1991). Also, gendered transgressive acts, such as open defecation in public spaces, baring oneself in public - for example scandalous breastfeeding (Young, 1990), and self-harm, are intricately tied to the intimate and the legal geographies of the city (Gandolfo, 2009; Datta, 2012). From the point of view of urban governance, such acts are transgressive as they challenge traditional conceptions about housing, welfare and childcare needs in the city and hence may shape the ‘ungovernability’ of the emerging global city.

      This panel attempts to understand the depth and range of the lived experiences of urban motherhood in the emerging global city. The main aim is to examine the ways in which urban spatial inequalities, produced by variegated forms of capitalism and cultural ideologies, reverberate in women’s maternal life practices, forcing women to engage in transgressive maternities in order to sustain themselves and their families. The panel invites contributions analysing the various socio-spatially transgressive manifestations of contemporary urban motherhood and its psychological, material, infrastructural, legal, racialised and other discriminatory dimensions. Contributions are invited to capture the urban-political as well as intimate-emotional dimensions of urban maternities, and in particular those that intersect to look at the relationships between different dimensions of transgressive urban motherhood and their cumulative effects, by addressing these questions:

      What kind of urban transgressions does the specific social position of motherhood produce? In what ways do issues of abuse, disability and other discriminatory factors within the family produce transgressive urban spatial practices of mothering? What are the socio-spatial implications of existing state support to materially deprived mothers across different urban contexts? How do right to the city violations socio-spatially affect maternal safety and safe mothering? How do deprived and marginalised mothers subvert technologies of government in order to sustain themselves? How can urban maternal struggles become a space for protest and enfranchisement? How are mothering practices affected by distinctly urban processes, such as renewal, gentrification or its antithesis, informalisation, illegalisation, marginalisation, or migration? What spaces of the city present particularly contested spaces of motherhood? What constitutes the 21st-century politics of motherhood (and fatherhood) in the emerging global city? How and to what extent are transgressive urban practices of motherhood oriented towards forms of ‘informal justice’?

      References

      Aitken, S. C. (2000) ‘Mothers, communities and the scale of difference’, Social & Cultural Geography, 1 (1), pp. 65-82.

      Datta, A. (2012) The Illegal City: Space, Law and Gender in a Delhi Squatter Settlement, Aldershot: Ashgate.

      Fenster, T. (2005) ‘The right to the gendered city: different formations of belonging in everyday life’, Journal of Gender Studies, 14(3), pp. 217–231.

      Gandolfo, D. (2009) The City at Its Limits: Taboo, Transgression and Urban Renewal in Lima, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

      Hardy, S. and Wiedmer, C. (eds.) (2005) Motherhood and Space: Configurations of the Maternal through Politics, Home and the Body, London: Palgrave.

      Lefebvre, H. (1991) Critique of Everyday Life, London: Verso.

      Ragoné, H. and Winddance Twine, F. (eds.) (2000) Ideologies and Technologies of Motherhood: Race, Class, Sexuality, Nationalism, New York and London: Routledge.

      Young, I.M. (1990) Throwing It Like A Girl And Other Essays In Feminist Philosophy and Social Theory, Bloomington: Indiana University Press

      Panel 1

      • Alexander Parker (Wits University), Yasmeen Dinath (Johanesburg Development Agency), and Margot Rubin (Wits University): “The Urban Muthahood: the spaces of mothers in the city of Johannesburg!
        Abstract
      • Clara Greed, University of West of England: “Women and toilets”
        Abstract
      • Sinem Atay, Ankara University: “Understanding the fight for the ‘right to the gendered city’: Ege Neighbourhood Example”
        Abstract
      • Gabriela Rodríguez Arancibia, University of Chile: “Gender, body and motherhood: Old dilemmas and new dissents”
        Abstract
      • Nihad El-Kayed, Humboldt University Berlin: “Experiencing Citizenship in Urban Motherhood”
        Abstract
    • Stream 9

      Protest and resistance in the contemporary metropolis: towards ‘super-diverse’ urban social mobilizations?

      Organised by Paola Briata (Politecnico di Milano) and Claire Colomb (University College London)

      + About Stream

      In this stream we would like to invite contributions to build a comparative perspective on the transformation of urban social mobilizations, and on emerging forms of urban political action, resistance and transgression in large, super-diverse metropolises. Specifically, we are looking for empirical and theoretically-informed investigations of how highly diverse, heterogeneous and disparate groups or individuals in the city have begun to create new coalitions, mobilizations and networks with others ‘unlike them’ - connecting actors and resources across space (Nicholls et al. 2013) - in response to the transformation of their neighbourhood (or city at large). The stream is embedded in two strands of contemporary debates in urban studies:

      • First, recent scholarly contributions on urban social movements and collective mobilizations in cities have highlighted a transformation of the scope, agendas and modes of action of such mobilizations in the face of particular forms of ‘neoliberal urbanism’ and ‘austerity politics’ (Leitner et al. 2006; Nicholls 2008; Mayer 2009; 2013). Notwithstanding the fact that urban social mobilizations are shaped by path-dependent trajectories of transformation influenced by time- and place-specific local opportunity structures and combinations of state-market-civil society relations, these scholars have identified the emergence across many locales of new types of movements and coalitions which bridge across apparently diverse and heterogeneous groups to challenge, inter alia, the consequences of the neoliberalization of policies in various fields (Leitner et al., 2006; Mayer, 2009). The US-based ‘Right to the City’ Alliance is one such example, or emerging coalitions between place- and worker-based social movements (Greenberg and Lewis, 2016).
      • Second, there have been growing debates about the implications of the increasing ‘super-diversity’ present in large contemporary metropolises (Vertovec 2007; 2010; Tasan-Kok et al. 2013). Such debates have, so far, mostly focused on the challenges arising from increasing forms of social, ethno-cultural and economic diversity and how urban policies, planning and governance mechanisms respond to them. Existing research has also focused on every day experiences of living in super-diverse urban contexts. But there seems to be a paucity of research on how highly ‘diverse’, heterogeneous social groups may start to work together (or not) in new forms of urban social mobilizations and collective action in a changing urban context. In some metropolises, for example, the housing crisis and gentrification pressures have intensified so much that this may trigger the emergence of new coalitions - cutting across class, lifestyle, ethnicity and occupation - between various groups who wish to ‘stay put’ and join forces to fight for their survival in the city. This would support the hypothesis made by Mayer (2013) that new coalitions bridging the gap between the ‘materially dispossessed’ and ‘culturally disenfranchised’ are emerging.

      We are thus interested in how (new) forms of collective action, networks of activism and resistance, and urban social mobilizations are built across heterogeneous socio-economic, ethnic and other groups in super-diverse metropolises. Which developments and processes trigger the development of such mobilizations? Which challenges and opportunities do the actors of such mobilizations face in seeking to bridge across heterogeneous and diverse groups? To what extent are they reaching out to groups beyond the ‘usual suspects’ often identified as playing a dominant role in social mobilizations (e.g. educated middle class or organised working class activists)? How and why do new actors previous not (or little) engaged in urban mobilizations come to play a new role - e.g. artists and cultural producers who contest the ‘creative city narrative’ (Novy and Colomb 2013)? Which old and new ‘repertoires of contention’, modes of action and transgression do they use to challenge, resist and change dominant modes of urban development and governance? Comparative studies across different urban contexts are particularly welcome.

      References

      Greenberg, M. and Lewis, P. (eds) (2016) The City is the Factory: Social Movements in the Age of Neoliberal Urbanism. Ithaca: Cornell University Cornell.

      Leitner, H., Peck, J., and Sheppard, E. S. (eds) (2006) Contesting neoliberalism. New York: Guilford Press.

      Mayer, M. (2009) The ‘Right to the City’ in the context of shifting mottos of urban social movements, City, 13(2): 362-74.

      Mayer, M. (2013) First world urban activism. Beyond austerity urbanism and creative city politics, City, 17(1): 5-19.

      Nicholls, W. (2008) The urban question revisited: the importance of cities for social movements, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(4): 841-59.

      Nicholls, W., Miller, B. and Beaumont, J. (eds) (2013) Spaces of Contention: Spatialities and Social Movements. Aldershot: Ashgate.

      Novy, J. and Colomb, C. (2013) Struggling for the right to the (creative) city in Berlin and Hamburg. New urban social movements, new spaces of hope?, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(5): 1816-38.

      Tasan-Kok, T., van Kempen, R., Raco, M. and Bolt, G. (2013) Report 1a Towards Hyper-Diversified European Cities: A Critical Literature Review. Brussels: European Commission. Online: http://www.urbandivercities.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/20140121_Towards_HyperDiversified_European_Cities.pdf

      Vertovec, S. (2007), Super-diversity and its implications, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(6): 1024-54.

      Vertovec, S. (2010) Towards post-multiculturalism? Changing communities, conditions and contexts of diversity, International Social Science Journal, 61(199): 83-95.

      Panel 1

      • Tom Slater (University of Edinburgh, UK) and Ernesto Lopez-Morales (University of Chile), The triple nexus of urban social mobilisations: comparing housing struggles in Chile and Scotland
        Abstract
      • Bianca Tavolari (University of São Paulo, Brazil), The right to the city as a unifier of diverse urban social mobilizations: the case of the Brazilian recent grassroots protests
        Abstract
      • Gözde Pelivan Cemgil (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands), Whatever happened to diversity in Gezi? Participant diversity and its transformation in an urban movement
      • Sophie Van Neste (University of Montréal, Canada and Clark University, USA), The opposition to pipelines: unlikely networks emerging from the urban fringes
        Abstract
      • Sanjeev Routray (Northeastern University, USA), Repertoires of political contestation: strategies of the urban poor and cultural idioms of resistance in Delhi
        Abstract

      Distributed paper: Sophie Gonick (New York University, USA), Autonomy, engagement, the street and the state: Explaining the success of Spain's housing movement

      Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Jennifer Candipan (University of Southern California, USA) Collective movement: Claiming space and contesting spatial inequalities through cycling in Los Angeles
        Abstract
      • Ulrike Hamann (Humboldt University Berlin, Germany) and Ceren Turkmen (Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany), The making of 'communities in struggle' - Contesting the class-racism complex in the neoliberal city
        Abstract
      • Anna Casaglia (University of Eastern Finland), Territories of struggle: social centres in Northern Italy opposing mega-events
        Abstract

      Distributed paper: Niccolò Cuppini (University of Bologna, Italy), New emerging social mobilisations within the transformations of contemporary city: the case of Bologna

      Abstract
    • Stream 10

      Urban refuge: Transgressive State and non-state responses to refugee migration in urban contexts

      Organised by Nihad El-Kayed (Humboldt University Berlin) and Tim Müller (Humboldt University Berlin)

      + About Stream

      We are currently witnessing one of the greatest migratory movements in current history: approximately 60 million people worldwide are currently on the move, seeking refuge (UNHCR 2014). With this, new challenges arise, particularly for the local contexts that serve as centres of reception. European and North American responses have been mixed: On the one hand there is a discourse that strongly emphasizes measures to prevent refugee migration and highlights the exclusionary potential of insider- and outsider configurations. On the other hand the new migration movement is seen as an opportunity to recruit a potential new labour force for societies that currently experience a demographic decline. Between these two polarized views, all societies are facing pragmatic questions related to the organizational challenges in providing housing, education, welfare and labour market opportunities to newly arriving refugee populations. As state actors are often overwhelmed with responding quickly to immediate and urgent demands, non-state actors such as NGOs, but also individual citizens, often fill vacuums and transgress into zones that are traditionally seen as state responsibilities: counselling in the asylum seeking process, provision of housing and shelter, volunteering as language teachers, etc. While European and North American states seem to be surprised by the „new“ migratory processes many regions around the world are used to hosting much higher shares of refugee populations – and this increasingly in cities instead of refugee camps (Hoffstaedter 2015).

      In this session we want to bring a wide range of approaches and perspectives into a fruitful conversation by focusing on local conditions of refuge – asking inter alia what North-American and European cities can learn from experiences of “Southern“ cities in providing resources for a growing refugee population. Thus we especially invite contributions that make comparisons across the so-called North-South divide (Robinson 2011). We want to bring perspectives on how different (non)urban contexts deal with arriving refugee populations that flee war, poverty, sexual or religious discrimination and other life-threatening situations in a conversation.

      One focus of the session will lie on the everyday experience of refugee migration. Questions in relation to this include: How does the refugee migrant experience differ across urban contexts? How do local structures such as housing markets, a (non)diverse population structure or local civic societies make a difference in providing a fertile ground to build a new life in refuge or not? How are refugees shaping and building cities around the globe? How do refugees resist state and nonstate violence in the course of seeking asylum and form political alliances with other local actors?

      Western policy makers are currently drawing heavily on the image of a profound crisis that challenges the former order of state tasks. This provokes questions like: In which ways is this kind of migration (un)governable and trangresses or stabilizes local state control? Which kind of state and non-state responses do the new challenges evoke that transgress earlier roles of state and nonstate actors in various dimensions?

      References

      Hoffstaedter, Gerhard (2015): Between a rock and a hard place. Urban refugees in a global context. In: Koizumi, Koichi /Hoffstaedter, Gerhard (eds): Urban Refugees. Challenges in protection, services and policy. London: Routledge, 1-10.

      Robinson, Jennifer (2011): Cities in a World of Cities: The Comparative Gesture. In: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 35(1), 1-23.

      UNHCR (2014): Global Trends. Forced Displacement 2014. Geneva: UNHCR

      Panel 1

      • Marianne Madoré (Sciences Po Paris): “The Peaceful Settlement of Syrian Refugees in the Eastern suburbs of Beirut: Understanding the causes of social stability”
        Abstract
      • Beril Sonmez (Yildiz Technical University) and Asuman Turkun (Yildiz Technical University): “Sharing and producing urban space with Syrian refugees: Contribution of NGOs and civic initiatives in the case of Istanbul, Turkey”
        Abstract
      • Quentin Batreau (Sciences Po Paris) and Leonie Tuitjer (Durham University): 1. “Assembling urban refugee mobility in Bangkok: What we can learn from Micro Politics”
        Abstract
      • Minke Hajer (Università degli studi di Milano) and Christian Bröer (Universiteit van Amsterdam): “The incremental citizenship of undocumented migrants”
        Abstract
      • Clara Inés Atehortua Arredondo (Universidad de Antioquia): “Characterization of interurban forced displacement”
        Abstract

      Distributed papers:

      René Kreichauf (Free University Berlin): René Kreichauf (Free University Berlin):

      Nadia Nur (Italian National Institute of Statistics): “Refugees and squatting movements in contemporary Rome”

      Abstract

      Helene Heuser (University of Hamburg): “Jaques Derrida and a Network of Refuge Cities”

      Abstract

      Ulrike Hamann (Humboldt University Berlin): ““Refugees welcome!” – Motifs and Challenges of urban networks of solidarity in Germany”

      Abstract
    • Stream 12

      Housing in the era of neoliberalism between adaption and transgression

      Organised by Monika Grubbauer (Hafen City University Hamburg) and Clara Salazar (Colegio de México)

      + About Stream

      The stream examines the diverse forms and practices through which the urban poor and middleclasses access and improve their housing in the countries of the Global South in the context of neoliberal hegemony. The past two decades have imposed new pressures on households in the globalizing cities of the Global South in securing basic living standards and, particularly, access to adequate housing. Self‐help builders, on the one hand, who engage in informal processes of autoconstruction are in various ways restricted in their actions, e.g. through exclusion from state subsidies, clientelist practices and environmental and property laws. The middle‐classes with access to mortgage finance and formal housing markets, on the other hand, encounter increasing challenges in obtaining affordable housing which satisfies their needs. Mass produced single‐family housing estates in peripheral locations have proved highly problematic, especially in Mexico, because of the poor building quality, long commuting distances and the lack of infrastructure. In both cases, households have to accept precarious housing conditions as legal property titles do not guarantee access to adequate housing. In the context of these market‐driven approaches to housing in which the state limits its interventions to the regulation of markets and households remain with the only option to act according to its rules, we wish to address the theme of transgression in two ways.

      First, considering transgression as violation or even collapse of norms we invite contributions addressing the following questions:

      • Which actions and practices allow poor and middle‐class households to confront the precarity of their housing situation with homes serving as sites and sources of multiple practices of construction, dwelling and income generation?
      • Which of these actions and practices can be regarded as transgressive and which have to be seen merely as a reaction in terms of adaption to the circumstances imposed on households?
      • Which of these actions and practices effectively achieve to revert conditions imposed on households and which institutional mechanisms can be seen to facilitate these kinds of transgressions?

      Second, considering transgression as violation of the rights of inhabitants, we invite contributions addressing the following questions:

      • Which constitutional frameworks exist in the countries of the Global South which provide legal rights to adequate housing and how are these rights violated through the commodification of housing production and provision?
      • Which actors involved in the regulation and production of housing can be regarded to transgress these rights under which circumstances and how can schemes be evaluated in terms of adaption/transgression which support self‐construction through state subsidies and housing microfinance?
      • Which institutional mechanisms exist to guarantee that the market provides adequate housing to those who have paid for it?

      Panel 1: Housing policies and finance

      • Alfonso Valenzuela-Aguilera, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos, Territories of transgression: the spatial effects of neoliberalism
        Abstract
      • Luciana de Oliveira Royer, Universidade de São Paulo, Severance Indemnity Fund and mortgage-backed securities: The Brazilian case
        Abstract
      • Paula Freire Santoro, Universidade de São Paulo, Mismatch: efforts to reorganize public governments to attract real state market to produce affordable housing versus small social housing production
      • Sila Demirors, University of London, The financialisation of the housing industry in Turkey, i.e., the integration of finance capital into housing as a general outcome of the neoliberal economic transformation
        Abstract
      • Aylin Şenturk and Hatice Aysun Özkan, Yıldız Technical University, How to legalize 'informal culture' and settlements: Government Acts and Social implementation in Turkey
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Mass-housing and rehousing

      • Gabriela Ibarra, University of Sheffield, The meaning of "social" in Mexican social housing
        Abstract
      • Renato Pequeno, Federal University of Ceará / Sara Vieira Rosa, University of São Paulo / Valèria Pinheiro, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Segregation, forced evictions and violation of the right to the city: the return of large housing estates
        Abstract
      • Manuel Dammert Guardia, Colegio de México, Evictions and housing in the Historic Center of Lima
        Abstract
      • Patricia Eugenia Olivera, Departamento de Geografía, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, UNAM, The social housing policy in the neoliberal era in Mexico City. Between the formal and informal transgression
        Abstract

      Panel 3: Agency and transgression

      • Ricardo Nurko / Enrique Ruiz Durazo / Juan Alberto González Rodríguez / Diego Riverman Molina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Morphology and kinship dynamics of Autoconstruction in Ciudad Nezahualcoyotl: From single family housing to multifamily compounds
        Abstract
      • Thaís Troncon Rosa, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Housing policies, housing displacements: the idea of neighborhood in socio-spatial disputes over the production of brazilian urban peripheries in the context of Programa Minha Casa Minha Vida
        Abstract
      • Stijn Oosterlynck / Jana Verstraete / Anika Depraetere / Joke Vandenabeele / Pascal DeDecker, University of Antwerp, Exploring collective housing solutions in a housing system geared towards individual housing: between transgression and integration
        Abstract
      • Alicia Gerscovich, Universidad de Buenos Aires / Judith Lehner, HafenCity University Hamburg, “In between Public Policies and Social Production of Habitat: A Special Case in Buenos Aires, Argentina
        Abstract
      • Alane Priscila Souza dos Santos, University of Fortaleza / Thais Oliveira Ponte, University of Pernambuco, Right to housing and neoliberalism: case study of the city of Fortaleza, Brazil
        Abstract

      Distributed papers:

      Milton Balestrini / Carolina Maria Pozzi Castro, Federal University of São Carlos, Urban regulations and the capitalist production of housing in the 2000's: The master plan, the construction regulations and the social housing "Minha Casa Minha Vida" programme case in the town of Araraquara, Brazil

      Abstract

      Marina Joseph, YUVA Urban, Creating Neo Liberal Squatter Settlements - Mass Rehousing in Mumbai

      Abstract

      Pernille Maria Baernheim, Copenhagen, Illusion of Inclusion

      Abstract

      Julia Giles Wünsch, researcher in the group urban economy and the right to housing of  Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Social isolation and gentrification in Porto Alegre (Brazil): a reflection of the production of urban space through the public housing policies from 2010 to 2014.

      Abstract
    • Stream 13

      Informal urban cultures: How informality becomes part of the formal system

      Organised by Aylin Senturk (TU Istanbul) and Melis Oguz (TU Istanbul)

      + About Stream

      In many cities of the global south, informality is product of a process of rapid uncontrolled urbanization, containing “inequality” in dealing with its citizens, and accompanied by the failing of government’s role in providing appropriate services. In cities, which have a pioneering role for the country in the global competition, informal urban systems such as Informal settlements and informal transportation mediums have been largely ignored by neo-liberal state regimes (Sims, 2011)3. These informal urban systems are overlooked intentionally as the resources of the local or central governments somehow are not sufficient to fill the gap between the formal supply and newly emerging demands. Being laggard in providing formal solutions, these informalities tend to become part of the formal system either by being continuously overlooked or integrating them into the urban legal and formal systems of service provision. As by nature informality is flexible, the role it plays on urban cultures is as a flexor. As informality becomes the urban culture, the governance of the formal system becomes also chaotic turning cities into transgressive organisms.

      It is striking, how many similarities can be found in the formation of informal urban systems in various world cities while studying the relation between culture and the urban development patterns. Yet, urban mismanagement in these cities affects daily life significantly in a negative way; new definitions of urban poverty arise, new ways of inequalities come to forth, and new traps of discrimination reveal. Lifestyle influences the organization of the city through whatever variables (race, ethnic, religion, class, and income) so that the city is a collection of different groups, and subcultures. Urban informality turned to be a “new” way of life (Al Sayyad, 2004)4 as also supported by Rapoport with his statement, that culture and space correlate in urban form (1977, 1990)5. Comparing and exploring the relation between the developments of informal urban cultures is the aim of this stream. This demands a critical reflection to the understanding of various disciplines such as urban planning, urban sociology, public administration and cultural anthropology as well as urban law. Theories about informality and imperfection6 are to be criticized by trying to develop a new way of looking at informal urban cultures. We believe that crossing through those theories could benefit the understanding of informality and imperfection gathering different case studies about various cities from all over the world. The main questions of the stream will be:

      • How the urban informal systems could be considered as the outcome of the interaction between cultural factors and the urban context within the struggle of global competition
      • How informalities become a taken-for-granted part of the formal urban systems?

      Informality taking different shapes in different geographies, bringing together different cases will be an eye-opener for revealing the taken-for-granted informalities. Understanding the relation between the formal and informal urban systems is essential, as any urban intervention process towards formalization should be able to grasp the underlying facts of informalities properly.

      Panel 1

      • Genet Alem, Technische Universität Dortmund, Informality as inherent character of urban development culture
        Abstract
      • Prashant Bansode, Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, The Recognition of “Slums” and challenges for formalising the informal in Pune
        Abstract
      • Elisabeth Kanini Wamuchiru, Technische Universität Darmstadt,(In)formal urban cultures: peri-urban water infrastructure and service provision in Nairobi, Kenya
      • Felipe de Alba, Centro de estudios sociales y opinión publica, Pueblos originarios», citizenship transgressive practices and water conflicts in the Mexico city-region: some paradoxes
        Abstract
      • Hassan El Mouelhi and Ayham Dalal, Technische Universität Berlin, Informal Settlements and Refugee Camps in the Middle East: Towards a Comparative Study

      Panel 2

      • Leila Khaldi (Centre de Recherche sur l’Habitat – LAVUE) Cultural references and aesthetics in the contemporary self-built housing in Tunis
        Abstract
      • Rita Lambert, University College London, From the periphery to the centre: making the architecture of formal/ informal planning visible through an interrogation of map production and circulation in Lima, Peru
        Abstract
      • Hideaki Sasajima (Osaka City University) The institutionalization of informal avant-garde arts and rise of the New York City as a global art center
      • Ahmad Borham (Independent Researcher) Urban Governance from Change Control to Adaptation
    • Stream 14

      Counter-narratives: imagining, inventing, creating urban life

      Organised by Junia Mortimer, Federal University of Bahia

      + About Stream

      To speak of political action is to speak of operations that may affect ideas or conventions. When a sensitive experience, that is to say, an aesthetic experience displaces our preconceived notions of the world, it promotes an experience of political nature, as it tends to affect how we perform within society and the way we construct our presence to others. Our ability to disseminate and receive, to experience and understand such displacements and reconfigurations in society can thus refer to our political engagement.

      This stream proposes to congregate researchers interested in artistic interventions that approach contemporary urban space and built environment so as to problematize urban processes, which most large cities undergo today (gentrification, real state, demolitions, expulsion of low income communities from areas of economic interest). The idea is promote a place where to discuss new modes of sensitive presentation and new ways of enunciation, by exploring innovative relations between “appearance and reality, singular and common, visible and signification”.

      How do art interventions affect reconstructing a new imagination for what living in the cities may be? What images can we think of as instances of resistance to the hegemonic imagery that tends to annihilate the emancipation of the spectator? What types of counter narratives can we identify and what are their specific contexts? What kinds of experience of urban space, what new ways of approaching the built environment do these aesthetic experiences propose? How can they affect hegemonic imagery, through what kinds of procedures? Which methods artists have used so far in general to actualize ideas of city that is distinct of the hegemonic one? Towards which directions, towards which experiences of city does this new imagery lead us today?

      These are some of the questions this stream wishes to explore. By proposing this stream, we aim to assemble people throughout the world interested in exploring examples of contemporary art interventions that somehow resist to the approach of urban space as an instance controlled exclusively by economic parameters of progress and development. We thus hope to meet researchers interested in exploring aesthetic experiences as alternatives to the hegemonic models of strategic urban planning based on the commercialization of the urban experience through spectacular architectural insertions.

      Panel

      • Meric Kirmizi (Osaka City University, Japan), Whose Culture is promoted by the creative city policies? A case of neighbourhood change in Osaka
        Abstract
      • Felipe Nunes Coelho Magalhães (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil), Culture and right to the city politics in post-2010 Belo Horizonte: baixo centro in dispute
        Abstract
      • Sahera Bleibleh (United Arab Emirates University, UAB) Urban Violence and Commemorating Spatial Memories in the Old Town of Nablus, Palestine
        Abstract
      • Milene Migliano Gonzaga (Federal University of Bahia, Brazil) How to invent a beach in a square
        Abstract
    • Stream 15

      Citizens' aspirations and political structure: The limits of governance

      Organised by Hector Tejera Gaona (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, México), Silvia Gomez-Tagle (Colegio de México), and Emanuel Rodriguez Dominguez (Universidad de Guanajuato)

      + About Stream

      Megalopolis cities such as Mexico City generate various problems related to the forms and effectiveness of governance, fostered by distancing people from politics. The magnitude and complexity of the urban world, especially in a city like this, one of the largest in the world, is opposed to the limitations of the daily life of its inhabitants, creating difficulty relating to the extensive network of institutions, officials, and policymakers to develop legislative and government work; tasks that determine the quality of life of every citizen. This affects both the likelihood that public policies can be implemented based on agreements and consensus, to the public indifference to politics; but also face resistance from groups that are not in the government's response to exercise their demands and needs which, in turn, deepens urbanites problems.

      The political system itself has created obstacles for effective exercise of governance, both by the action of groups and sectors of economic and political interests that often impose their interests in antagonism with the majority, and its resistance to participation fearing "empower" citizens. Consequently it had generated a dead end, where political groups with influence in the government and public policy, seek to prevent, minimize or channel to other directions the citizen participation while at the same time, governance conditions deteriorate to the indifference or resistance of the inhabitants, with public policies that often serve the interests of specific groups rooted in public administration. In narrower localities or municipalities, citizens are informed about their government representatives; and can determine the interests that bind them to different groups. In this way, even though when the responsibilities and roles to be played by legislators or governments at the municipal level or entity are ignored, the citizens know about the political field and how to influence their government decisions.

      This panel will explore different forms of political participation in cities, from spontaneous social movements, to institutional political processes, through neighborhood organizations, social networking policy, labor movements and their relationship with the political structure, which clarifies the content of relations or conflicts between society and government.

      Panel

      • Nadia Nur (Roma Tre University) Say it Loud! Urban practices for better policies in Rome
      • Rodrigo Caimanque (University College London) Entangled governance: Social actors’ contribution in the process of urban regeneration in Valparaiso, Chile
        Abstract
      • Thomas Watkin (Université de Nîmes) When the community gets professionalized: observing political rituals of community development corporations in Boston
        Abstract
      • Iolanda Bianchi, IUAV- University of Architecture of Venice, The postpolitical use of the concept of the commons: the regulation of the urban commons in Bologna
        Abstract

      Distributed papers:

      Jen-Shin Yang, University of York, Participatory or manipulative? Civil participation in event-led regeneration in the London 2012 and the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games

      Abstract

      Geambazu Serin, Ion Mincu University, Dimensions of urban waterfront regeneration: Case study of Halic / The Golden Horn - an assessment of obstacles and opportunities for inclusiveness

      Abstract
    • Stream 16

      Urban resilience and climate change adaptation strategies in South East Asia

      Organised by Sonia Roitman, University of Queensland

      + About Stream

      Climate change is threatening development in relation to four main areas (UNDP, 2007):

      • Livelihoods (affecting agriculture and fisheries and impacting harder on poor groups)
      • Health issues (flooding and heavy rain impact on sanitation, and may expose people to diseases such as cholera, diarrhoea, malaria and dengue)
      • Food security (some regions will suffer from lack of primary resources)
      • Water (a reduction of water available for irrigation and consumption).

      South East Asia is one of the most vulnerable regions to the impacts of climate change. For the most part, current interventions deal with mitigation and adaptation policies at the national level (Lassa and Nugraha, 2014). However, some of the most vulnerable environments are cities. The vulnerability of cities to the effects of climate change emphasises their importance as complex agents that can design and implement measures to become more resilient. One of the main questions is then how cities can build their resilience in order to adapt to climate change. The panel will explore governance structures and the need to establish adaptive institutional arrangements as essential aspects of urban resilience. In addition to examining strategies carried out at the city level, the panel also seeks to explore new, innovative and ‘transgressive’ strategies that can help cities to become more resilient to climate change. By focusing on a particular region, the panel aims at a deeper understanding of the current situation in that region, and also how diverse urban experiences in the region can be compared and applicable to other scenarios.

      Vulnerability and poverty are intertwined. In some countries, like Indonesia, climate change threatens to undermine recent progress to reduce poverty and improve poor people’s quality of life (UNDP, 2007). Poor people are more vulnerable to climate change events and their livelihoods are likely to suffer since agriculture, fisheries, coastal and urban areas are strongly transformed by climate change.

      This panel seeks to discuss the following questions:

      • What are the current social, economic, political and environmental challenges of climate change on cities in South East Asia?
      • What are the impacts of climate change on urban livelihoods and the opportunities of poor communities to improve their living conditions?
      • What adaptation strategies can be developed in urban areas to mitigate the effects of climate change? How can local knowledge contribute in the elaboration of new adaptation strategies?
      • What types of governance structures are required to create resilient cities? What are the relationships among stakeholders? What agency is possible on the part of civil society?
      • What methods, instruments and strategies can be put in place by governments (or other stakeholders) to address climate change adaptation needs?
      • What lessons can be learned and be replicated to other cities in the region in building resilient cities? What are the challenges when comparing the cities in South East Asia in relation to urban resilience strategies?

      References

      Lassa, J. and Nugraha, E. (2014) From shared learning to shared action in building resilience in the city of Bandar Lampung, Indonesia, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 27 (1), 161-180.

      UNDP (2007), ‘The other half of climate change. Why Indonesia must adapt to protect its poorest people’, UNDP Indonesia, Jakarta

      Panel 1

      • Lee Wilson, University of Queensland. “Without Rules things will never work”: Community resilience and the demand for good governance in Jakarta
      • John Haba, Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI). Urban Resilience and Climate Change Adaptation Strategies in Southeast Asia
        Abstract
      • Kosuke Hishiyama (Kagoshima University) Sadahisa Katon (Ibaraki University). Changing Roles of Urban Street Garden : From Case Studies of Telajakan in Bali, Indonesia
        Abstract
      • Sneha Krishnan, University College London. Challenges in disaster recovery and water and sanitation development in Northeastern India
        Abstract
    • Stream 17

      Transgressional mobilities: strategies, resistance, possibilities

      Organised by Guénola Capron (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco) and Priscilla Connolly (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco)

      + About Stream

      In recent years, one derivation of the “spatial turn” in social sciences is the increasing attention to the centrality of mobility -movement through time and space- in our everyday lives. The construction of our identities, the ways we relate to each other, our success or failure in a competitive world, our inclusion or exclusion in the benefits of development and our position relative to the power apparatus: all these social facts seem to be determined by the way we move. At the same time, the “Right to the City” movement includes access to means of mobility in the list of benefits a city should offer its citizens, while governments all over the world have re-packaged “public transport” as “mobility policy”, as a vital part of policies goals of ensuring sustainable, efficient and competitive cities. Successful participation in a rapidly globalizing world is depicted in terms of faster and more frequent travel by airplanes and helicopter, state-of-the art ultra-velocity trains and urban transit, private cars and smartphone-summoned taxis.

      Yet many cities, and not only in the Global South, cannot provide their inhabitants with clean, fast, comfortable and cheap mobility. Only a minority may have access to private cars, and those that do face long hours driving in heavy traffic. Public transport not cheap or fast, let alone clean or comfortable, while it is often unhealthy and dangerous. Many people have difficulties in accessing any means of mobility. In spite of this, many cities move ten, twenty, thirty million people daily by diverse strategies both on the part of traveller and transport providers working both within or outside the institutionally regulated public and private systems, or somewhere in between.

      This stream proposal invites proposals from researchers who have studied the production and consumption of the social spaces of daily mobility within cities, including, the following: personal and family mobility strategies and “tactics”, effects of lack of mobility (immobility being sometimes a strategy), informal transport provision, mobility as a dimension of habitat, among other topics.

      Some of the main questions that we hope to able to discuss include:

      • How do so-called “anarchic” or “chaotic” means of transport reproduce de facto urban governance?
      • To what extent can the individual and collective strategies and “tactics” employed by the population in moving round the city be considered subversive, with potential for significant social outcomes?
      • Do similar transport policies deployed in different cities have the same social effects?
      • Can conflicts over transport and mobility have productive outcomes?

      Panel 1

      • Julie Gamble Almeida, UC Berkeley, Transgressing the street through fun: the Carishinas Races in Quito, Ecuador
        Abstract
      • Prajna Rao, University of British Columbia, BC Skywalks, to stop and stare (Mumbai)
        Abstract
      • Andrés Cárdenas (University of Texas) and Daryl Meador (New School for Public Engagement), Aburrido! Cycling on the US-Mexico Border in Matamoros, Tamaulipas
        Abstract
      • Marie Mundler (University of Lausanne), Mobility capital and empowerment : impacts of bicycle lessons for migrants in cities of Western Switzerland
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Arturo Alvarado, El Colegio de México Urban mobility, Gender inequality and limits to the exercise of rights in the modern world. Transgressions produced by Sexual harassment against women in the urban transportation system (Mexico City)
        Abstract
      • Tamara Shefer (University of the Western Cape), Anna Strebel (University of the Western Cape), Cheryl Potgieter (University of KwaZulu-Natal), Claire Wagner (University of Pretoria), Taxi queens’ in mobile transgression: Practices of transactional sex in the taxi industry in the Western Cape, South Africa
        Abstract
      • Coline Ferrant, OSC – Sciences Po, Hash, Fish, and Fresh: Food Lifestyles and Strategic Uses of Space in a Paris Neighborhood
        Abstract
      • Paul Goodship, University College London, Two cable-cars and one city. A socio-spatial comparison between Medellin’s two cable-car lines, from Meso to Micro
        Abstract
      • Oscar Sosa (UC Berkeley) and Sergio Montero (Universidad de Los Andes), Expert-citizens: producing and contesting the “sustainable urban mobility” paradigm in Mexico
        Abstract
    • Stream 18

      Right to Memory/Right to the City

      Organised by Grégory Busquet (University Paris Ouest) and Sophie Didier (Université Paris 13)

      + About Stream

      The proposed stream wishes to explore the relationship between urban social movements articulated around the Right to the city and the issue of memory, understood here as a potential means of legitimizing urban citizens' place in the city, practices, and access to decision making processes. Within a global context of memory inflation mentioned by Henri Rousso, the specific dimension of memory-making at city and neighborhood scales, seemingly increasingly disconnected to national state-centric narratives and celebrations with their implied demonstrations of power, appears as a new register of action for urban struggles and deserves careful critical assessment. Collective memory claims can thus weave together the building of local cultural identities and justice, with the intervention of very different stakeholders. Yet, the ambivalence of memory-making should also be taken into consideration, especially when the operation takes place in contexts of social and ethnic diversity such as happens in large metropolises around the globe (for instance, the link between indigeneity and memory, or the issue of migration and alternative memory-making, should be questioned in the stream).

      The stream is open to several theoretical positions with regards the issue of memory, which can be fused with a diversity of scalar approaches:

      • Proposals can probe the link between individual and collective memory : following the work of Maurice Halbwachs, they will interrogate the creation, the formalization and the mobilisation of neighborhood memory in emancipatory movements, paying particular attention to the agents and the media creating and operating within the memory-making field. In the developing urban world for instance, the role of NGOs and international cultural institutions in this process could be interrogated.
      • Proposals can also probe the link between collective memory and historical (i.e. "official") memory, following Pierre Nora's classic work. In a context of "memory wars" (such as the discussions and conflicts around slavery which took place in France in the late 2000s), different means of contesting and promoting the idea of alternative memories to that celebrated by the State are now a given, in various political contexts (see for instance for African states: Fouéré, 2010). Yet, how these alternative memories are articulated and transmitted meaningfully at city and neighborhood level, and how they can be remobilized in the service of urban emancipatory projects is a totally different issue which needs probing.
      • Finally, proposals can focus on the issue of forgetting (Connerton, 2011), as a necessary exercise in the process of collective remembering: what is kept silent in these processes of memory making could be understood as a means to build forms of consensus at neighborhood level for instance, illustrating the selection process at hand in memory-making processes and their capacity to help build coalitions at other organizational levels.

      Paul CONNERTON (2011) The spirit of mourning. History, memory and the body, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

      Marie-Aude FOUÉRÉ (2010) "La mémoire au prisme du politique", Cahiers d'Études Africaines, 1 (197), pp.5-24.

      Maurice HALBWACHS (1925) Les cadres sociaux de la mémoire, Paris : Alcan.

      Pierre NORA (ed) (1984–1992) Les lieux de mémoire, vol. I-III, Paris : Gallimard.

      Henri ROUSSO (2007) “Vers une mondialisation de la mémoire”, Vingtième Siècle. Revue d'Histoire, 2(94), pp. 3-10.

      Panel 1:

      • Adriano Castorino, Cássia Queren, Clara Thaisa Carvalho, Karol Rosa, Instituto Tocantinense Presidente Antônio Carlos – ITPAC/Universidade Federal do Tocantins – UFT, Conflict between official memory and collective memory in Porto Nacional, Tocantins, Brasil
        Abstract
      • Simon Ridley, University Paris Ouest, Transgressive Universities: collective memories of student movements on the Berkeley and Nanterre campuses
        Abstract
      • Veronica Martinez Solares, International Organization for victim assistance, Mexico, Breaking the silence : The reconstruction the physical and symbolic spaces in the midst of violence
      • Adilson Roberto Siqueira and Márcia Saeko Hirata, Universidade Federal de São João del-Rei, Memory and resistance in São João del-Rei space appropriation
        Abstract
      • Cansu, Curgen and Gozde Sarlak, İstanbul Bilgi University, Reconstructing Memory through Toponymic Commemoration: The Case of İstanbul’s Hayırsız Islands
        Abstract

      Distributed papers:

      Lesslie Astrid Herrera Quiroz, ( École Politechnique Fedérale de Lausanne), Swiss, Resistance of Collective Memory and its Spatialization

      Dimitra Kanelloupoulou, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Walking in Athens’s historical center: Experiencing memories in public space.

      Abstract

      Jude Al Issa ZADA, Germany Place Attachment of Different Influx Groups in West Amman, Jordan: The Case of Palestinians and Iraqis.

      Abstract
    • Stream 19

      Learning from urban conflict

      Organised by Nanke Verloo (University of Amsterdam) and Diane E. Davis (Harvard University)

      + About Stream

      Conflicts around land use, urban design, neighborhood regeneration, ethnic diversity, access to public goods, and a range of socio-spatial “rights to the city” can directly challenge urban governance. Such conflicts can play out among citizens, between citizens and governments, or between governments and other institutions. They may involve violence, or they can be more routinely advanced through other means, including the ‘weapons of the weak’. The transgressive value of conflict is that it can help citizens mobilize around an oppositional goal; at the same time, it is in the very moment of contestation that the legitimacy of government is revealed or undermined. Conflict can therefore be understood as a negotiation of authority, even as it provides a unique lens to question what is governable or ungovernable, and from whose vantage point. All this raises the question of what we can learn from urban conflicts. What insights do conflicts provide as we seek to understand both the theory and the practice of governance, the struggles of everyday urban life, and how they affect the form, nature, and experience of cities?

      This stream invites papers that focus on processes or outcomes of urban conflict in cities of the Global North and South. Urban conflicts can take place at a variety of scales: from the street-level, to the neighborhood, to the city at large, or even the regional level. Depending on the scale, protagonists may hold different capacities or advance unique strategies to contest the governance, meaning, and livability of the city. Whether emanating from the experiences of in- or exclusion, unequal living conditions, imbalanced power dynamics, marginalization from local decision-making, or other conditions, conflict can reveal the logic of urban governance, help make sense of difference and belonging, or contribute to a rethinking of urban planning processes and city design goals. We seek papers that use a multiplicity of methodologies and perspectives to examine conflict as lens for generating knowledge about the contested reality of cities and how they are governed.

      Panel 1: The role of conflict in city building

      • Antonin Margier, University of Lille, Homeless people in public spaces: from urban conflict to exclusion.
        Abstract
      • Samuel Barton, University College London, Claiming Brixton, Reclaiming Brixton
        Abstract
      • Hajer Awatta, The American University in Cairo, Whose downtown is it anyway? The urban transformation of downtown Cairo between state and non-state actors.
        Abstract
      • Dicle Kizildere, The Gran Sasso Science Institute, L’aquila, and Zeynep Günay, Istanbul Technical University, Hate gentrification, love the gentrifier: conservative resistance in Tophane.
        Abstract
      • Gabriella Punziano, Gran Sasso Science Institute, L’aquila, Naples: experiences of urban renewal and social regeneration.
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Conflicting logics of governance

      • Patrick Le Gales, Sciences Po, Transport conflicts in Paris
        Abstract
      • Caroline Stamm, University of Chile, Urban conflicts, private actors and organized citizens: what can we learn from a movement against a highway project in Santiago, Chile?
        Abstract
      • Daniel Aldana Cohen, New York University, Saving the sustainable city from itself: carbon, collective consumption struggles, and 21st century urbanization
        Abstract
      • Anthony W. Fontes, University of Wisconsin, Exorted life: protection rackets and urban governance in Guatamala City
        Abstract
      • Evelyn M. Perry, Rhodes College, Battles on the block: what neighborhood conflicts tell us about urban diversity
        Abstract
    • Stream 20

      Urban youths ‘doing politics’ : transgression, resistance, and emerging forms of urban political action

      Organised by Angela Stienen (University of Education, Berne), Kathrin Oester (University of Education, Berne), and Omar Alonso Urán Arenas (Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín)

      + About Stream

      Young people are particularly affected by the current transformation of urban environments into contexts of consumption, surveillance, and control. Although youths stress that their opinions about the future development of cities is seldom recognized and that indexes and city rankings barely include a youth perspective, city governments and the private sector increasingly seek to maximize the potential of youths as consumers and producers in cities. This efforts meet young urbanites own various and often contradictory self-definitions and ways of (re)imagining and (re)building urban space and place. Those activities generate shared cultural spaces and lifestyles and thus, urban learning environments. Such emerging urban learning environments also include illegal activities and extremist (religious, right or left wing etc.) local, national or transnational communities.

      Scholars stress that today’s urban youth is disinterested in formal, institutional politics and thus politically apathetic. A closer look at youth everyday life, however, gives evidence of lively political activity beyond the formal political institutions. Due to networking technologies and migration, urban youths’ political activity often exceeds administrative boundaries, and, triggered by new technologies, their ways of networking are changing at an accelerated speed. This development questions the assumption of a politically apathetic youth, and challenges research that primarily focuses on youth's participation in formal political institutions. Though research on digital media and social movements has boomed in the wake of the Arab Spring, ethnographic studies on youths’ political activities in everyday life – on- as well as offline – are still rare. We invite contributions that challenge traditional approaches on youths' institutional political participation and focus on urban youths’ ways of doing politics by exploring what young people themselves understand by the political, by political practices, dissent and resistance. We also invite contributions which investigate youths' networking and building of (not formalised) ‘learning-communities’.

      Main questions

      • What are the forms and goals of youth’ political action in different socio-political urban environments?
      • By which (technical) means do youths express themselves, build communities, develop agency and realize their goals on- and offline?
      • Does material space and place still matter? Why and how?
      • Do gender, class and ethnic belonging matter as mobilising differences? Why and how?

      Panel 1

      • Lalitha Kamath and Radhika Raj, Tata Institute of Social Sciences ‘Deleting’ Dirty Politics: New Modes of Youth-Politics on the Urban Periphery
        Abstract
      • Ruth Segers, KULeuvenBuilding a Haven in the Public Sphere of Molenbeek (Brussels)
        Abstract
      • Lucia Capanema Alvares, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Jorge Luiz Barbosa, Universidade Federal Fluminense Cultural resistance and transgression: the youth movements in Rio de Janeiro’s favelas and during the 2013 riots
        Abstract
      • Mathieu Labrie, Institut national de la recherche scientifique Urbanity and Collective Action in a Changing Metropolis: a Spatial View of Montreal’s Student Movement
        Abstract
      • Leslie Parraguez Sanchez, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile The Chilean Student Movement and the Crisis of Equity in Large Cities: A Socio-Spatial Approach to the Formation of Resistance in a Post-Dictatorial Country
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Humberto Jesus Cubides Cipagauta, Universidad Central Bogotá, Modes, political and educative-communicative practices of urban youths
        Abstract
      • María Maula González, Hander Andrés Henao, Luz Adriana Osorio, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín Youth Clubs in Medellín: From youth as thread to youth as hope
        Abstract
      • Edinson Brand, Ana Maria Osorio and Sara Montoya, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Training impact on citizen participation: configuration and reconfiguration space of social networks in adolescent and young population
        Abstract
      • Rocío González Ramírez, National Autonomous University of Medellin, Youth participation in an environment of harassment. The case of Mexico City

      Distributed papers:

      Madhura Lohokare, Syracuse University, Claiming Manhood, Claiming the City: Local Politics and Young Men in Urban India

    • Stream 21

      Governing through networks: Entrepreneurship and social capital in urban and regional development

      Organised by Alberta Andreotti (University of Milan-Bicocca) and Valentina Pacetti (University of Milan-Bicocca)

      + About Stream

      Besides State and Market, Networks have been considered an autonomous form of (social and) economic organization and regulation with their distinctive features. Scholars agreed that network regulation refers to long term (horizontal) relationships, reiterated exchanges, cooperation and that they are based on reciprocity, reputation, trust, they are rather flexible as well as open-ended. The spatial dimension and in particular spatial proximity and agglomeration were considered key features to understand network regulation.

      The importance of networks (and of their structure) was stressed by a rich literature on urban and regional development during the Eighties of the last century, and again during the beginning of the new Millennium. Empirical studies, even from different perspectives, highlighted strong informal collaborations and cooperation among small and medium-sized enterprises, companies, and professionals located in the same territory, being it the industrial district (the Third Italy and the Silicon Valley as the most famous examples), the urban or metropolitan region or the city. The process of globalization and mobility have deeply challenged most of the traditional features originally related to the network regulation.

      The city represents the most significant place where networks originate and develop, where actors meet, and they find the resources to connect with people, organizations, institutions inside and outside the urban region.

      More recently, networks as a way of organization and regulation have been revitalised by the spread of the so called “sharing economy” (collaborative practices in the consumption as well as the production system made possible by a virtual space: internet) that has its highest diffusion and consequences within the urban/metropolitan contexts. Collaborative practices (organized through networks) are mainly based on reputational mechanisms, horizontal relations (peer to peer), trust, reciprocity, and can have different degrees of openness (Blablacar, Uber, AirBnB, couchsurfing, co-working, wikipedia…). These practices challenge the distinction between the traditional forms of organization/regulation (State, Market, Networks) as they mix elements of all of them. Furthermore, they challenge the territorial scale levels of organisation/regulation as they mix the global (through internet) and the very urban dimension with very concrete consequences at the city level. There is therefore the important question of political regulation (State) of these practices, and the different consequences for the different populations.

      We aim at exploring the importance of these networks and the way by which they are playing a role for the governance of regions and cities. Their role may involve the development of local economies as well as the relationships with the institutional and political system, as another forms of authority making cities and regions work beyond (or together with) the State. In particular, this session is oriented to analyse and discuss in comparative perspective the following issues:

      • Urban regulation through formal and informal networks: people’s networks in and through the organizations in the social/economic/political metropolitan environment;
      • Old and new networks: the transition from traditional models (“industrial districts”, “flexible specialization”, “diversified quality production”, “world of production”, etc.) to new forms of clustering centred in the city;
      • The role of the city in structuring networks of firms and network of people; relations inside the networks: hierarchical rather than horizontal interactions; formal rather than informal ones; longer rather than shorter relations;
      • The formal and informal regulation (or non-regulation) of sharing economy practices in the city. What kind of regulation and what consequences for the population(s) and for the different social groups within the city.

      Panel 1

      • Magaly Marques Pulhez (Center for Metroplitan Studies, University of Sao Paulo ) Consulting firms and professionals: from project to management, the network of outsourced agents who manage housing policy in São Paulo
        Abstract
      • Serafino Negrelli (University of Milan-Bicocca) New forms of regional networking for small business in Italy:  flexible practices of social capital for innovation and competitiveness
        Abstract
      • Savamala (Civic District in Belgrade) and Marija Cvetinovic (UNESCO Chair in Technologies for Development, Lausanne) Is the Economy of Social Exchange in Service of Bottom-up Urban Development?
      • Luis Lozano Paredes (Centro de Estudios del Transporte del Area Metropolitana, Buenos Aires) A Urbanism of Complexity, Transgression in Mobility: Cali, Colombia
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Eduardo Marques (University of San Paolo) The network of decision makers in the local government of São Paulo, 1985-2012
        Abstract
      • Eduardo Barberis (University of Urbino) Whose network? Globalization, downscaling and immigration in Italian Industrial Districts
        Abstract
      • Cansu Civelek (University of Vienna) Who Makes the Plans? Promises and Planning Processes of Urban Renewal Projects in Turkey
        Abstract
      • Emanuele Polizzi and Matteo Bassoli (University E-Campus, Italy) Two models of fostering collaborative practices
      • Alejandro Mercado (Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Cuajimalpa) Networks and Music Scenes. The case of México City Metropolitan Area
        Abstract
    • Stream 22

      Gender, sexualities and transgressive cities

      Organised by Alan Mabin (University of the Witwatersrand), Bradley Rink (University of the Western Cape) and Tamara Shefer (University of the Western Cape)

      + About Stream

      In myriad forms, everyday as well as long term gendered practices and transgressive sexualities challenge both urban governmental regulation and our understandings of city space and change. At RC21 2016, we propose to create space to reflect across multiple sites on how reconfigurations of gender and sexualities challenge social norms and regulatory forms in the city. We imagine consideration of how boundaries of undesirability with respect to sexualities and genders are shifting; and implications of such shifts for city configurations in the future. Through careful and sensitive examination of hidden spaces and practices, as well as public performances and de/reterritorialisation, we envisage learning from inversions and subversions of the normative.

      We invite contributions that engage with widespread intellectual and political contest around gender and sexualities in the city. From radically different approaches to sex work, emphasizing connection and boundary making, through practices of regulation (cf. Caviglia 2013), through recompositions and quarterings of urban space (Rink 2015), to examinations of mobilities and diverse perceptions of cities through prisms of gender and sexuality (cf Nash & Gorman-Murray 2014) and beyond, we anticipate vigorous debate on past, present and future cities and their malleable social forms.

      There is of course much space for addressing oppressions and violences associated with sexualities and gender in the transgressive city, yet at the same time we are interested to attract contributions that explore dimensions of agency, pleasure and alternate opportunities, in order to challenge regulation, control, violence and oppressive urban practices as well as to open new ways of being in the city through transgression, thereby exploring how such practices create new landscapes of city experience and ways of moving through the city (for example Shefer et. al. 2011).

      We anticipate contributions that raise questions of what it means to transgress, what that means for the city, what that means in terms of new gendered roles and perhaps new sexualities, across diverse cities in the world, collectively engaging and opening discussion. Diverse conceptual approaches, stretching at least from Chicago School studies of sexualities (cf. Heap 2003) through materialist, materialist feminist and other current conceptualisations such as the affective turn and posthumanism, will be welcome.

      References

      Caviglia, Lisa 2013 Sex [at] work in Kathmandu: discourses around sexuality, self perception and society, Doctoral dissertation, University of Heidelberg, Germany

      Heap, Chad 2003 The City as a Sexual Laboratory: The Queer Heritage of the Chicago School Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 26, No. 4, Winter

      Nash, C. J., & Gorman‐Murray, A. 2014. LGBT neighbourhoods and ‘new mobilities’: Towards understanding transformations in sexual and gendered urban landscapes. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38 (3), 756-772.

      Rink, Bradley 2015 Quartering the City in Discourse and Bricks: Articulating Urban Change in a South African Enclave Urban Forum DOI 10.1007/s12132-015-9270-8 (November)

      Shefer, Tamara; Anna Strebel, Cheryl Potgieter & Claire Wagner 2011 ‘Sometimes taxi men are rough..’: Young women’s experiences of the risks of being a ‘taxi queen’, African Safety Promotion Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1-24

      Panel 1: Habitus – gender and sexuality in the city

      • Virginia Negro, UNAM, Mexico. Tactics of living: The Social Production of the hábitat as a daily strategy to build a new urban citizenship.
      • Lisa Dillon (Université de Montréal), Mathieu Labrie (Université INRS), and Robert Jennings (Université INRS). From transgression to normalcy: the evolving figure of the ‘working girl’ making her own home in Canadian cities in the 1920s. Damaris Rose (Université INRS).
        Abstract
      • Gleys Ially Ramos dos Santos (Universidade Federal do Tocantins) and Rubenilson Tavares Araújo (Universidade Federal do Tocantins) The Secret World Capital and Evidence Of Urban And Social Violence [against] Women.
      • Christine Knott (Memorial University Newfoundland) and John Phyne (St. Francis Xavier University) Rehousing Good Citizens: Gender, Class and Family ideals in The St. John’s Housing Authority Survey of the Inner City of St. John’s, 1951 and 1952.
      • Marco La Rocca (Gran Sasso Science Institute (GSSI) L.G.B.T.Q. Landscapes of Gentrification Building up in Turin: the Quadrilatero.
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Transgressive lives and work and un/safety in the city

      • Andrés Salcedo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia Moral economy and undesirable workers.
        Abstract
      • Eric Wright (Georgia State University) and Brittany Taylor (Georgia State University) Sexual And Gender Fluidity Among Homeless Youth In Atlanta.
        Abstract
      • Ayesha Luddick. University of the Western Cape Sex work in the surburbs: Narratives of sex workers navigating the dangers of sexual and geographical transgression in a suburb in Cape Town.
        Abstract
      • Domila do Prado Pazzini (Universidade Estadual de Campinas) The sex market conducted in the squares: a study of two cities into São Paulo state, Brazil.
        Abstract
      • Jen Roberton (University of British Columbia) LGBTQ2+ Experiences of Public Safety in the Urban Form: Bringing Queer and Trans Voices into Creating Safe Inclusive Communities.

      Panel 3: Performing transgressive sexualities and gender in the city

      • Sian Maseko (NGO, Zimbabwe) ‘Don’t put me in a box - I won’t fit!’: Gender expression, urban spaces and the end of conformity.
      • Cabanillas Natalia (Universidade de Brasília) Claiming the public and normalizing black lesbian existence: Notes about black LGTBI activism in Cape Town.
      • Laurence Charton (INRS) and Julie-Anne Boudreau (INRS) Romantic Couples in Public Spaces in Hanoi: Transgressive Acts or Transgressive Visibility?
        Abstract
      • Jessica Reye Sánchez (Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados de Instituto Politécnico Nacional- CINVESTAV) Sexual Encounters In Public Space: Pleasure And Transgression In Mexico City.
    • Stream 23

      Ethnographic explorations of urban policy-making and implementation processes

      Organised by Aidan Mosselson (Gauteng City Region Observatory and University of Johannesburg) and Cansu Civelek (University of Vienna)

      + About Stream

      In myriad forms, everyday as well as long term gendered practices and transgressive sexualities challenge both urban governmental regulation and our understandings of city space and change. At RC21 2016, we propose to create space to reflect across multiple sites on how reconfigurations of gender and sexualities challenge social norms and regulatory forms in the city. We imagine consideration of how boundaries of undesirability with respect to sexualities and genders are shifting; and implications of such shifts for city configurations in the future. Through careful and sensitive examination of hidden spaces and practices, as well as public performances and de/reterritorialisation, we envisage learning from inversions and subversions of the normative.

      We invite contributions that engage with widespread intellectual and political contest around gender and sexualities in the city. From radically different approaches to sex work, emphasizing connection and boundary making, through practices of regulation (cf. Caviglia 2013), through recompositions and quarterings of urban space (Rink 2015), to examinations of mobilities and diverse perceptions of cities through prisms of gender and sexuality (cf Nash & Gorman-Murray 2014) and beyond, we anticipate vigorous debate on past, present and future cities and their malleable social forms.

      There is of course much space for addressing oppressions and violences associated with sexualities and gender in the transgressive city, yet at the same time we are interested to attract contributions that explore dimensions of agency, pleasure and alternate opportunities, in order to challenge regulation, control, violence and oppressive urban practices as well as to open new ways of being in the city through transgression, thereby exploring how such practices create new landscapes of city experience and ways of moving through the city (for example Shefer et. al. 2011).

      We anticipate contributions that raise questions of what it means to transgress, what that means for the city, what that means in terms of new gendered roles and perhaps new sexualities, across diverse cities in the world, collectively engaging and opening discussion. Diverse conceptual approaches, stretching at least from Chicago School studies of sexualities (cf. Heap 2003) through materialist, materialist feminist and other current conceptualisations such as the affective turn and posthumanism, will be welcome.

      References

      Caviglia, Lisa 2013 Sex [at] work in Kathmandu: discourses around sexuality, self perception and society, Doctoral dissertation, University of Heidelberg, Germany

      Heap, Chad 2003 The City as a Sexual Laboratory: The Queer Heritage of the Chicago School Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 26, No. 4, Winter

      Nash, C. J., & Gorman‐Murray, A. 2014. LGBT neighbourhoods and ‘new mobilities’: Towards understanding transformations in sexual and gendered urban landscapes. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38 (3), 756-772.

      Rink, Bradley 2015 Quartering the City in Discourse and Bricks: Articulating Urban Change in a South African Enclave Urban Forum DOI 10.1007/s12132-015-9270-8 (November)

      Shefer, Tamara; Anna Strebel, Cheryl Potgieter & Claire Wagner 2011 ‘Sometimes taxi men are rough..’: Young women’s experiences of the risks of being a ‘taxi queen’, African Safety Promotion Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1-24

      Panel 1: Ethnographies of state and bureaucratic practices, local politics and policy formation

      • Aidan Mosselson, Gauteng City Region Observatory and University of Johannesburg and Cansu Civelek, University of Vienna, Ethnographic explorations of urban policy-making and implementation processes: An introduction
      • Sangeeta Banerji, Department of Geography, Rutgers University, Locating the Ontological Politics of the State in Bureaucratic Practices of Mumbai Municipal Corporation
      • Hector Becerril Miranda, CONACYT Research Fellow – UAGRO, Favelas’ urbanization in Rio de Janeiro: tracing the making and breaking of a policy
        Abstract
      • Darlington Mushongera, Gauteng City Region Observatory, University of the Witwatersrand, Contracting-out of water services: Bureaucratic experiences in the City of Johannesburg and Mogale City municipalities
        Abstract
      • Ma Huidi, Chinese National Academy of Arts, The Pains of Chinese Cities: On the Power of Capital
        Abstract

      Panel 2: Everyday experiences of urban policies, service delivery and citizen participation

      • Pascale Hofmann, The Bartlett, Development Planning Unit, University College London, The dialectics of urban water poverty: Exploring urban policy and planning through everyday trajectories
        Abstract
      • Susana Neves-Alves, Department of Geography, University College London, Creole water governance in urban areas: ethnographic explorations of water policy-making and implementation in a West African secondary city
        Abstract
      • Hlengiwe Patricia Ndlovu, Department of Sociology, University of the Witwatersrand, Patronage politics, clientelism and fractured citizenship in post-apartheid South Africa.
      • Elizabeth Strom, School of Public Affairs, University of South Florida, Without a helping hand: Experiences with mortgage foreclosure mitigation strategies in US sunbelt cities
        Abstract

      Panel 3: Ethnographic accounts of urban regeneration projects, public space and prospects for inclusion

      • Ester Cois, University of Cagliari, "From the Paradigm of Regeneration of Urban Outskirts to the Construction of the Social Quality of Places. The Case-study of St. Elia Neighborhood in Cagliari (Sardinia, Italy)."
        Abstract
      • Serin Geambazu, Ion Mincu University or Architecture and Urban Planning, Dimensions of urban waterfront regeneration: case study of Halic/the Golden Horn - an assessment of obstacles and opportunities for inclusiveness
      • Erich Hellmer, University of Glasgow, Three dimensional public space: planning, participation and governance in Bogota, Colombia
        Abstract
      • Maura McGee, City University of New York, Diversification' of an African neighbourhood in Paris: local responses to city-led commercial change
    • Stream 24

      "Importing and Exporting Worldly Urbanism"

      Organised by David Sadoway (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore) and Anthony Levenda (Portland State University)

      + About Stream

      Our session seeks to analyze, scrutinize and theorize the importation, exportation and appropriation of circulating urban ideas, projects and the practices of actors that make these ʻpolicy mobilitiesʼ (McCann and Ward 2012) possible. As cities examine and opt for a plethora of policies, model projects and programming from across the globe, various groups – including city governments, developers, consultancies, civil society and universities – are offering services such as thinktanking, thought leadership, urban branding, standards and metric-making, rankings, rating systems, best practices and models-in-the-making. These circulating urban policy, planning and design ideas, and coupled imaginaries, provide rich insights into questions about knowledge, power and place-making.

      It appears to have become standard practice for cities to engage in what urban scholar Eugene McCann refers to as ʻextrospectionʼ— a mode of policy transfer that is characterized not only by the constant allure to look elsewhere, but by the desire to attract external mobile capital (i.e. financial, social or intellectual capital). Conversely too, cities, businesses, consultancies and civic groups are (hyper)actively engaging in exporting memes, schemes and dreams about urbanism. This mode of import-export urban policy development is wrapped up in the complexities of world-making and cosmopolitan ʻworldingʼ of cities (Ong and Roy 2011).

      What worlds collide or what worlds are displaced when urban neighbourhoods are ʻworldedʼ or ʻworld classedʼ? What are the impacts of ʻworldly modelsʼ that touch down in cities or are ʻtested beddedʼ as place-making endeavors? What powers, knowledges, technologies, infrastructures and everyday practices make urban policies, ideas and ideals mobile and worldly? With the critical understanding that policies, projects, and urban imaginaries are both territorial and relational, these are the types of questions we seek to explore in examining the exportation/importation of urban planning memes, schemes and dreams. Our RC21 stream session invites papers, short videos, research notes, or reports on projects in-the-works, which focus on the challenges of comparative urbanism in a world awash with circulating models, best practices and more. We invite works that engage with these themes in any geographical or spatial context, but especially those that transcend and transgress across socio-economic, socio-technical, ecological and political milieus, including, those examining:

      • The practices and technologies of exporting urban design, planning, and management ideas: thinktanking, branding, best practices, ranking, test bedding, model-making, etc.
      • Worlding and its impacts on the urban commons, civic life and governmentality, etc.
      • Worlding and world-making (Ong and Roy 2011) within and amongst cities.
      • Policy mobilities (McCann 2011) and how they touch down in city-regions.
      • Planning ideas that travel (Healey 2009) and their import (or export).
      • Comparative or translocal urbanism (Robinson 2011, McFarlane 2013, Ward 2011, Peck 2015) as studies within, amongst and between cities.
      • Comparative global urban strategizing, networking and coalition-building, etc..
      • G/local urban knowledge networks/systems and assemblage urbanisms.
      • Role model cities, consulting urbanism, fast urbanism, enclave urbanism and ʻsmart citiesʼ.

      Panel 1

      • Alvaro Luis dos Santos Pereira, Universidade de São Paulo The staging of globalized urban enclaves in a peripheral metropolis
        Abstract
      • Nathan McClintock (Portland State University), Christiana Miewald (Simon Fraser University), and Eugene McCann (Simon Fraser University) Cultivating and countering sustainability capital in Portland and Vancouver: Urban agriculture governance, mobilities, and contestation
        Abstract
      • Sudeshna Mitra, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur Periurban narratives of land value: From investments to compensation
        Abstract
      • Gerhard Hatz, University of Vienna Worldly Vienna – the city with the highest quality of living worldwide
        Abstract

      Panel 2

      • Gabriel Silverstre, University College London Circulating ideas and policymaking: The mobilization of strategic planning from Barcelona to Rio de Janeiro
        Abstract
      • Catalina Ortiz University College London Medellin in motion: Governmental technologies of city-model making
        Abstract
      • Hila Bar-ner, The Hebrew University Place-making Jerusalem: How Place-making is finding a place in complex and contested urban environments
        Abstract
      • Maude Cournoyer-Gendron (INRS), Sandra Breux (INRS), Pierre J. Hamel (INRS), Claire Poitras (INRS) and Gilles Sénécal (INRS) The transit oriented development model in Montréal (Canada): Mobilizing a concept and negotiating urban development at the local and metropolitan scale
        Abstract

      Panel 3

      • Zachary Hyde, University of British Columbia Policy mobility, inter-urban exchange and neighbourhood processes: Evidence from a study of one development company operating in two Canadian cities
        Abstract
      • David Wachsmuth, McGill University Governing by comparison: Competitive upscaling and the global city imaginary
        Abstract
      • Alberto Vanolo (Università degli Studi di Torino) and Ugo Rossi (Università di Torino, Italy) Urban development models and the changing configurations of fast policy revisited: Of the city-capitalism nexus
        Abstract
      • Noga Keidar (University of Toronto) Making Jerusalem “cooler” creative script, diversity, youth flight
        Abstract
      • Dominik Bartmanski and Prof. Dr. Martina Löw Technische Universität Berlin Examining The ’Bilbao Effect’: Sociological Impact of ’Star Architecture’ on Small Cities
        Abstract
    • Stream 25

      Segregation and Spatial Inequality - a comparative discussion North-South

      Organised by Eduardo Marques, Center for Metropolitan Studies, University of Sao Paulo

      + About Stream

      The study of segregation and social inequalities is a classical theme in urban sociology, mobilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods. However, the absence of reliable data has limited these studies to cities of Western industrial countries, as well as to qualitative investigations on Southern cities. More recently, the development of new data sources and the diffusion of methods of spatial analysis are making it possible to study trends in spatial inequality in a wider range of cities than in the past. As a consequence, a series of new studies in recent years have focused the structures of urban segregation and the inequality patterns of large cities of the South. This session takes pro fit of this new tendency to produce a dialogue between studies of segregation, urban inequalities, neighbourhood change and informal housing, as well as the growing enclaves of affluent residents in both Northern and Southern cities.

      We invite studies above segregation structure, favelas, irregular settlements and detailed spatial analysis of the organization of neighbourhood inequality, linking information about who lives where to information about the conditions of life and collective resources in those areas, and seeking theoretical explanations for these patterns. We believe that increasing the knowledge base about individual cities in specific countries will lead to a better comparative theory of urbanization processes.

      Panel 1:

      • Stephan Treuke, Federal University of Bahia, Brazil The Impact of Neighborhood Effects on the Economic Mobility of the Inhabitants of Three Segregated Communities in Salvador (Brazil)
        Abstract
      • Eduardo Barberis, University of Urbino, Italy Is there segregation outside metropolitan areas? Hypotheses and evidence from small-town conurbations in the Global North
      • Luisa Rodríguez Cortés, Instituto Mora, Mexico Urban segregation at a small scale. The negative consequences of living in a social and economic mixed area in Mexico City
        Abstract
      • Nihad El-Kayed, Humboldt University, Germany Mixed Methods in Research of Spatial Inequalities
        Abstract
      • Tim Müller, Humboldt University, Germany Segregation measurement and decomposition using multilevel analysis - an application to residential segregation in Stockholm and Mexico City

      Distributed paper:

      Michele Vianello, International Balkan University, Macedonia Community-led data collection in Old Topaana in Skopje, Macedonia: a way forward for South Eastern European informal settlements

      Panel 2:

      • Omar Pereyra, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Peru, Peru Changing Dynamics of Residential Segregation in Lima 1993 - 2007: Increasing Levels, Durability, but Mixed Effects on Life-Chances
        Abstract
      • Danilo Veiga, Universidad de la Repúblic, Uruguay Urban segregation and spatial inequalities in Montevideo
        Abstract
      • Gerhard Hatz, University of Vienna, Austria Cohesive Vienna? Features and dynamics of socio-spatial segregation in Vienna
        Abstract
      • Patrick Heller, Brown University, USA Politics, Institutions and Inequality in an Indian City
        Abstract
      • Nadia Nur, Roma Tre University, Italy Legalize it? Spatial inequality and policies toward informality: a comparison between Istanbul and Buenos Aires
        Abstract

      Distributed paper:

      Mika Hyötyläinen, University of Helsinki Uneven development and social housing residualization: The structural dynamics of territorial stigmatization in Helsinki

    • Stream 26

      Social protection, public action and territories: new arrangements and new challenges in the implementation of social policies in urban space

      Organised by Arnaldo Lanzara (Universidade Federal Fluminense), Renata Bichir (Center for MEtropolitan Studies, University of São Paulo ), and Ursula Peres (University of São Paulo)

      + About Stream

      Social policies are facing changes and challenges all over the world, due to durable (and more complex) patterns of inequalities, new social demands, diversity of publics, new decision-making and implementation arrangements, which go side by side with financial constraints and political disputes. Some countries in the developed world have shrunken their welfare systems in the last decades, whereas some developing countries have extended their social protection systems, but especially through policies targeted at the poorest.

      The social policy production is increasingly complex, encompassing diversity of demands and issues, new decision-making forums, new implementation arrangements, and complex networks of state and non-state actors. Considering these new governance arrangements and the fact that public policy production does not concern only the State, some authors stress the relevance of the concept of “public action”, instead of the “state-centric” notion of “public policies”.

      The public action takes place in a multi-level governance system (national, regional and local), in which local matters: even when decision-making processes take place at higher levels, there is a multitude of local disputes and constraints, local institutions, and territorial demands on the part of different social groups which shape the public action in multiple directions. Besides, implementation is not only a matter of “execution”, but it is, itself, a process full of decisions and transformations, with contingent results.

      In this sense, this section aims at discussing the role cities play in the multi-level governance of social policies, focusing on the implementation of different types of policies in the territory. We invite contributions discussing the following topics:

      • Formal and informal arrangements to implement social policies in the cities, with a discussion on how these arrangements constitute forms of transgression;
      • Instruments of public policy: how regulations, legislation, statistics and different resources are designed to “manveronica age” different policies and territories? How these instruments may be employed by transgressive forces in urban space?;
      • Modes of coordination between state and non-state actors in the city;
      • Institutional and actors capacities, modes of action and repertoires for the promotion of social rights in the urban space.

      Comparative analyses, multidisciplinary perspectives and mixed-methods approaches are especially welcome.

      Panel 1:

      • Lavinia Bifulco (University of Milano-Bicocca) The inclusive city and social innovation: an Innovative (local) State?
      • Jill Wigle (Carleton University) Social Policy and Spatial Regulation in Mexico City
        Abstract
      • Matthew F Gebhardt (Portland State) University Making it local: local innovation and implementation of the new US Social Housing Finance
      • María Cecilia Jaramillo Minchel (UNAM) and Mario Pavel Díaz Román (Colegio de Mexico), The crime prevention policies in Latin America, the centrality of local government and governance, "the Green Line and Convive Happy" an example of these experiences
        Abstract
      • Basilio Verduzco (Universidad de Guadalajara) and Basilia Valenzuela (Universidad de Guadalajara), The geopolitics of crime prevention and city planning in an international context
        Abstract

      Distributed papers:

      Greisse Quintino Leal (Universidade de São Paulo) Sanitary sewage as a social right: challenges to clean up the urban space of the São Paulo Metropolitan Region of /Brazil

      Deeksha Chaudhary; Aravind Unni Tata Institute of Social Sciences The neoliberal State, Graduated Citizenships and the Urban Homeless in Mumbai