14 October, 2021

Ein neuer Mobilitätsplan für die Hauptstadt 

Mit einer öffentlichen Informationsveranstaltung im Studio des städtischen Theaters hat die Stadt Luxemburg am 13. Oktober den Startschuss für einen auf ca. 15 Monate angelegten Prozess gesetzt, der zur Erarbeitung eines neuen Mobilitätsplans führen soll. An der Versammlung haben neben der Bürgermeisterin sowie Mitgliedern des Schöffenrats auch Mitarbeiter der kommunalen Administration sowie ein externer Gutachter teilgenommen. Der Prozess ist, so wie es heute als gute Praxis gilt, mehrstufig aufgebaut und enthält neben einer Analyse der bestehenden Situation auch eine umfangreiche Beteiligung der Öffentlichkeit; auch lässt sich die Stadt durch ein Begleitgremium beraten, in dem Zivilgesellschaft sowie Vertreterinnen und Vertreter wichtiger Interessengruppen mitarbeiten. Vier fachlich orientierte Büros aus Deutschland und Luxemburg sind zur Unterstützung engagiert.


    












    


    Der Prozess fällt in eine Zeit, in der die urbane Mobilität auch in Luxemburg-Stadt lebhafter denn je diskutiert und hinterfragt wird. Seit Corona wird verstärkt gefordert, die unübersehbare Dominanz des Kfz-Verkehrs zu brechen und, beispielsweise, dem Radverkehr mehr Platz einzuräumen. Solche Anliegen wurden anfangs noch mit dem eher kuriosen Verweis auf die Historie der Stadt als Festung erwidert, deren Platz nun einmal begrenzt sei. Auch wurden einige temporäre Infrastrukturen (vulgo Pop-up Radwege) zum Ende der Sommerpause wieder entfernt; mit weitergehenden, strukturellen Lösungen tut man sich offensichtlich schwer. Dass die ‚Stad‘ auf diesem Gebiet glaubwürdig eine Vorreiterrolle einnehmen würde („Ville avant gardiste“), wie in ihren einschlägigen Publikationen bereits zu lesen war, wird wohl niemand ernsthaft behaupten können.
    Immerhin arbeitet man nun an einer Strategie, die es so bisher nicht gab. Damit holt die Hauptstadt eine Entwicklung nach, die in den Nachbarländern bereits vor dreißig Jahren eingesetzt hatte. Das ist im Licht des hiesigen Problemdrucks, einerseits, zweifellos zu begrüßen. Andererseits trügt die Hoffnung, dass man mit guten Absichten, sektoraler Politik und einer Prise Demoskopie das hartnäckige Mobilitätsproblem würde lösen können. Denn die Lehren dieser Praxis aus den Nachbarländern sind u.a., dass Ansätze auf den Gebieten der Verkehrsorganisation und -infrastrukturpolitik an sich das Mobilitätsbild nur begrenzt neu formatieren können. Mobilität und Verkehr sind kein Ressortgegenstand. Sie sind auf vielfältige Weise mit Nachbarfeldern – etwa der Stadtplanung – verzahnt. Will man, so die Wortwahl der Stadt, tatsächlich „integriert“ vorgehen, kommt man nicht umhin, die Silos der ingenieurmäßigen Betrachtung tatsächlich aufzulösen. Mobilität muss im Kontext von Städtebau, Wohnen, Arbeiten oder Freizeitverhalten betrachtet werden.
    Diese horizontale Einbettung des Verkehrs in Raumentwicklung, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft ist das eine Grundproblem jeden Versuchs, den Verkehr neu zu gestalten. Die Messlatte hierfür liegt indes in Luxemburg außergewöhnlich hoch, höher als anderenorts – zum einen aufgrund der atemberaubenden Wachstumsraten des Sozialprodukts, die politisch aber sakrosankt sind, zum anderen durch Zufluss von außen durch die Grenzpendler. Zwar ist richtig, dass die Hauptstadt dieses Problem nicht allein lösen kann. Aber muss sie sich deshalb gleich für unzuständig erklären? Durch ihre Ansiedlungspolitik trägt sie ja selber massiv dazu bei, dass die Hauptstadt wie ein Schwamm im Wachstumsmeer fungiert. Wer mehr Arbeitsplätze ansiedelt, zieht auch mehr Verkehrsbewegungen an. Wäre es an dieser Stelle nicht sinnvoll, Telearbeit und digitale Vernetzung auf der Ebene der Großregion stärker zum Thema zu machen? Natürlich sind standortsuchende Unternehmen zunächst souverän in ihrem Handeln. Doch hat die Stadt das letzte Wort in der Verfügung und Nutzung von Grund und Boden – Entscheidungen über Art und Maß der baulichen Nutzung und damit zentrale Randbedingungen künftiger Verkehrsentwicklung werden dadurch gesetzt. Weitere große Verkehrserzeuger sind in Planung. Herrscht auch dort das Primat der Erschließung? Welche neuen Ansätze sind vom Mobilitätsplan diesbezüglich zu erwarten? Neben der Abstimmung unter den Agglomerationsgemeinden ist die gemeinsame Planung von Flächennutzung und Verkehr der Lackmustest für jeden integrierten Plan.
    Das zweite Kardinalproblem der Stadt- und Verkehrsplanung, an dem sich Fachplanerinnen und -planer abarbeiten, bündelt sich im Begriff des ‚scale‘. Damit ist das Maßstabsproblem in Raumentwicklung und Raumplanung gemeint, vor allem die Schwierigkeit, in miteinander eng verzahnten, gegenseitig voneinander abhängigen politisch-administrativen Systemen die richtige Entscheidungsstruktur zu finden. Die Hauptstadt ist hierfür paradigmatisch, denn sie ist Zentrum eines de facto-Stadtstaates, ohne dass sie die entsprechenden Steuerungsmöglichkeiten für seine räumliche Organisation besitzen würde. Dieses Problem ist nicht auf das Großherzogtum begrenzt, sondern zeigt sich im Grunde in allen Stadtregionen zwischen Zentrum und Umland. In einem Kleinstaat mit zwei-Ebenen-System wie Luxemburg ist das entsprechende Dilemma aber besonders ausgeprägt. Hinzu kommt, dass staatliche Organisationen (etwa der Straßen- und Brückenbau, die öffentlichen Bauten, die CFL, der Fonds Kirchberg) eine gewichtige Rolle in der Hauptstadt einnehmen, ohne dass sie jeweils automatisch auch die Ziele der Kommune teilen würden.
    Im Grunde kann ein neues Mobilitätskonzept der Hauptstadt ohne sehr enge Einbindung aller Agglomerationsgemeinden und des Staates nicht wirklich funktionieren. Die Frage danach wurde auch im Plenum gestellt. Als Antwort darauf wurde aber nicht mehr als ein lapidarer Verweis auf die eigene Nicht-Zuständigkeit gegeben. Dies gibt wenig Anlass zu Optimismus. Denn damit bliebe das Konzept von vornherein unter seinen Möglichkeiten -- es ist wenig plausibel, dass das Verkehrsbild in der Hauptstadt und in ihrem Einzugsbereich durch derart reaktive Strategien spürbar verändert werden kann. Dies wird jedoch verstärkt als eine ‚harte‘ Rahmenbedingung eingefordert, die vor 30 Jahren so noch nicht existierte: Klimapolitik erwartet besondere Beiträge zur Dekarbonisierung vom Verkehrssektor, die dieser bisher bei weitem schuldig geblieben ist. (Und selbst im Umgang mit dem Möglichen bleibt die Politik verzagt: was nützt die Tatsache, dass über 80 Prozent der Stadtstraßen als Tempo 30-Zone ausgewiesen sind, wenn nicht eine davon kontrolliert wird?).
    Den Antworten des Schöffenrates zufolge auf Fragen des Publikums – eine offene Diskussion war das noch nicht – stellt sich der Mobilitätsplan als proaktive Befragung des Publikums dar. Politik erscheint dann primär als Verwaltung des Möglichen, nicht als ambitioniertes Resultat kontroverser Abwägungen. Damit kommen wir zum dritten Wermutstropfen: der Beteiligung der Öffentlichkeit. Einerseits ist Partizipation der scheinbar heilige Gral des neuen Plans. Andererseits muss man im Licht vergangener Erfahrungen befürchten, dass Offenheit primär eine taktische Rolle spielt. Die Nagelprobe wird sein, wie genau eigentlich die Meinung der befragten Öffentlichkeit in die Entscheidungsfindung der Stadt einfließt. Dies ist auch dort, wo zuletzt partizipiert wurde, doch unklar geblieben. Je länger am 13. Oktober im Studio diskutiert wurde, umso weniger offen erschien die ganze Veranstaltung, hatte das Event eher den Charakter von Abschluss, nicht Auftakt. Aus einer Verteidigungshaltung heraus kann man aber nicht wirklich eine offene Debatte führen. Niemand wird auch erwarten (können), dass der Plan ein realiter hochkomplexes Problem umstandslos einer Lösung zuführt. Aber die Frage, ob es neben dem üblichen Allerlei von Bus & Tram, Vélo und Parking eine Vorstellung von Stadt(-Region) und urbanem Leben gibt, in der der motorisierte Straßenverkehr eine deutlich reduziertere Rolle spielt, ist bei dieser kontrollierten Versuchsanordnung nicht nur offen geblieben. Sie ist vielleicht gar nicht gestellt worden.

Markus Hesse

17 September, 2021

From Network Society to Platform Society

by Karinne Madron
 
As we grapple with the study of digital cities and the influence of large digital corporations (LDCs), it is useful to consider two books that have explored the relationship between technological innovation and society. The first one is Manuel Castells’ (1996) groundbreaking work The Rise of the Network Society. This book is the first volume in a trilogy titled The Information Age: Technology, Society and Culture. Castells’ work situates the technological revolution in its historical, economic and societal context. With remarkable foresight, he observed, at the turn of the millennium, trends that came to define today’s society. The second book is Van Dijck, Poell and De Waal’s (2018) The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World. This book analyses the ways in which platforms have permeated different sectors and transformed social relations.

Learning from Castells – How LDCs gain power by controlling networks
Castells’ (1996) analysis was made at a turning point in history that he describes as the beginning of a new age - the Information Age. He traces the rise of the network society to a number of related factors including historical events such as the end of the cold war, intensified globalization and most importantly an overhaul of the capitalist system (Castells 1996). In this restructured context where world economies were becoming more and more integrated and interdependent, the internet, ‘a new communication system, increasingly speaking a universal, digital language’ (Castells 1996, p. 2), became a tool of primary importance. Castells (1996) named the restructured capitalist system ‘Informational Capitalism’. He described it as a ‘capitalist economy based on innovation, globalization, and decentralized concentration’ where ‘networks are appropriate instruments’ (Castells 1996, p. 502). It is a ‘techno-economic’ system led by global networks of financial flows rather than a global capitalist class (Castells 1996). His analysis lead Castells to several insightful observations that were confirmed in the following decades as the network society matured. One of these observations was that ‘access to technological know-how is at the roots of productivity and competitiveness of global networks of capital, management and information’ (Castells 1996, p. 502). Indeed the pursuit of digital transformation is nowadays acknowledged as essential to the survival of nearly all sectors, private and public alike. The analysis also lead Castells (1996) to a key question concerning who the power holders in this new system are. To answer this question he introduces the concept of the ‘switchers,’ identified as those controlling network connections (Castells 1996). One could thus argue, based on Castells (1996) analysis, that the key position that LDCs have acquired in the constitution and control of networks is the basis of their rise to power over the past decades.

The platform society – The fulfilment of the network society
José van Dijck, Thomas Poell and Martijn de Waal (2018) addressed the question of the growing power of LDCs or ‘Big Tech’ in their book titled ‘The Platform Society: Public values in a Connective World’. In this volume, the authors analyze the ways in which digital platforms are transforming social interactions and institutions. According to the authors digital platforms acquire a dominant position because of their promise to offer personalized services with lower transaction costs by bypassing intermediaries and ‘legacy institutions’ such as news organizations (Van Dijck et al 2018, p. 2). Platform ecosystems which are ‘assemblages of networked platforms’ (Van Dijck et al 2018, p. 4) are largely dominated by the Big Five: Amazon, Alphabet (parent company of Google), Facebook, Microsoft and Apple. These companies form the infrastructure upon which other platforms are built. They are thus the ‘online gatekeepers through which data flows are managed, processed, stored, and channeled’ (Van Dijck et al 2018, p. 13). Van Dijck, Poell and de Waal (2018) also argued that ‘infrastructural platforms can obtain unprecedented power because they are uniquely able to connect and combine data streams and fuse information and intelligence’ (Van Dijck et al 2018, p. 16). The book focuses on various sectors namely news, urban transport, healthcare and education in which LDCs have extended their influence. Van Dijck, Poell and de Waal (2018) conclude by arguing in favuor of ‘a profound rethinking the world’s online ecosystems’ (Van Dijck et al 2018, p. 163) so that platforms adhere to public values such as security, accuracy and privacy. While Castells (1996) foresaw the power that would come from controlling networks in the Information Age, Van Dijck, Poell and de Waal (2018) analyze the different ways in which LDCs achieve their rise to power by controlling networks. The Platform Society could thus be seen as the ultimate fulfilment of the Network Society under the reign of LDCs.

Conclusion
Considered together these two books, written in two different periods of the Information Age and twenty-two years apart, contribute to an understanding of the dynamics that led to the ascension of large digital corporations. The restructuring of the capitalist system since the 1980s created favourable conditions for the rise of companies able to harness technological know-how and a small number of these created an ecosystem that most of the world is now connected to and dependent on in various ways. The concept of LDCs as ‘gatekeepers’ described by Van Dijck, Poell and de Waal (2018) echoes Castells’ (1996) concept of ‘switchers’. Both convey the notion of control over networks and information and how this control makes LDCs the ultimate power holders in the network and platform society.

References
Castells, M. 1996. The rise of network society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & De Waal, M. 2018. The Platform Society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Further Readings at Urbanization Unbound
Welcome Mafaz Syrus and Congratulations to Karinne Madron
Carr, 2021. DIGI-GOV Summary
Carr, Hesse, 2020. New publication in a special issue of Urban Planning (open access) on smart cities
Carr, 2019. It matters how smart cites are governed
Carr, Hesse, 2019. New Publication on Smart Cities in Forum für Politik Gesellschaft und Kultur
Hesse, 2018. 2HQ2 - Two new seats for the new Amazon.com Headquarters, not one

18 August, 2021

Welcome Mafaz Syrus and Congratulations to Karinne Madron

Ahmad Mafaz Syrus (but please call him Mafaz) joins the DIGI-GOV team this month as a Student Researcher in the penultimate semester of an LLM in Tax Law at the University of Luxembourg.
 
 
Prior to beginning his Masters in 2020, Mafaz was working as a legal assistant at a commodities trading firm in Turkey, following a short-lived stint at the United Nations High Commission on Refugees in Budapest. He completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland and interned at a selection of law firms and financial institutions in the UK and Pakistan.

Mafaz comes to DIGI-GOV hoping to offer a legal perspective in exploring the roles and actions of Large Digital Corporations (LDC’s) on Urban Governance. He enrolled in his Master’s program to learn and look into the effects a jurisdiction’s tax laws can have on its governance, how they affect accountability and sovereignty in a given place. Beyond fitting alongside his more academic interests, Mafaz comes to DIGI-GOV out of a love and reverence for cities. The son of a career diplomat, he has lived in a lot of places, but always in cities, some serving as many as 20,000,000 people and others as small as Luxembourg. As a lifelong city-zen, Mafaz hopes to help map the future of the “city” in the digital age.

An avid fan of mountains, Mafaz goes camping whenever he can. His favourite place to go is nearly anywhere in the Scottish Highlands, even when they’re infested with rain and midges. If he could do anything to a city to make it better, he would add more tennis courts and Mexican restaurants.

It is also a great pleasure to congratulate Karinne Madron who graduated from the Master in Architecture programme at the Department of Geography and Spatial Planning and began her PhD with DIGI-GOV this summer. The over all aim of her project with the working title, 'The multi-scalar spatial fixes of urban development led by large digital corporations (LDCs),' is to understand the unfolding bigger picture of urbanism under corporations like Google or Amazon. Her research involves a comparative analysis of Luxembourg and the Netherlands, two countries of interest because of their relationship to Google. The Netherlands hosts two of Google’s six data centres in Europe, while Luxembourg is projected to host Europe's seventh in the small municipality of Bissen. Both countries also have digitalization strategies and are aiming to position themselves at the forefront of Europe’s digital vanguard. Key here is the policy contexts of each and wider implications of LDC-led urbanism in terms of urban spatial fixes and post-politics as they steer urban development narratives on one hand and infrastructural development on the other.


 

10 August, 2021

'Obscured by Clouds' - real geographies of urban digitalization


Map by Desmond Bast

by
Desmond Bast, Constance Carr, Karinne Madron 

As large digital corporations (LDCs) such as Google and Amazon continue to steer the smart city agenda in terms of technological innovation and controlling prevailing narratives, there are two elements of their agenda that juxtapose one another. There is the production of visible representative places, on one hand -- places that are prominent in the media and promoted as flashy, state-of-the-art integrated urban planning, invoking a sense of awe among observers, perhaps even envy. Narratives often dish out pabulum messages of sustainability, social equality, vibrant economy. Further, they are characterized by a lack of debate or willingness to respond to tricky questions. On the opposing hand, there are the lesser visible, lesser sexy, digital infrastructures that are required to run both the representative places and the palate of digital services that LDCs offer. Spreading like mushrooms in a rainforest, these are the resource intensive data centers.

The project that Sidewalk Labs said they would build in Toronto, colloquially known as Quayside, is one such visible representational digital city that received remarkable attention. Even though the project was abandoned, the message was clear: They were going to build the most amazing digital city the world has ever seen. Furnished with digital sensors left and right, up and down, promoters of Quayside claimed that it would revolutionize city-living by collecting, analyzing, commodifying personal data about everything from energy production/consumption, water/waste management, above/below ground traffic flows, air pollution, housing, and then turning them into assets (Birch et. al 2020) for practices of rent-seeking (Artyushina, 2020). Marketed in pastel watercolours, the futuristic image was complete with national symbols of canoes and Canadian geese that would supposedly appeal to its future tenants.
 
Amazon.com’s HQs are another set of representational digital cities. Like Sidewalk Labs, these projects were also heavily propagated in the media awash with promises of sustainability and a revived economy. While ‘The Spheres’ in Seattle got hype for its architecture, the HQ2 generated attention through the urban competition that Amazon.com ignited, demanding cities across North America compete to host it--even though it was already clear who would win. Later too, strange deals were publicized indicating that Amazon.com paid far more for the properties than they were worth (Arlington County 2021; City of Seattle 2021).
 
Less often discussed in the media, and clouded by the flashy representational spaces, are the hyperscale data center infrastructures required to run the representational spaces and the products and services that they offer. 'Mile after mile, stone after stone' (Pink Floyd, 1972) the material, socioeconomic and political geographies of infrastructures of all sorts are thoroughly documented, while narratives of the ‘cloud’ convey an immateriality to the infrastructure needed to crunch increasing volumes of data. The storage and processing requirements of Alphabet Inc. and Amazon.com call for data centers built over several hectares which can use up as much land, electricity and water as a town (see map). These are anything but stratospheric.
 
While the extensive use of cloud services is an important part of the digital strategy of small and large enterprises alike, LDCs are particularly well placed to invest in state-of-the-art facilities, offering a wider palate of services that require efficient and cost-effective infrastructures. According to Synergy Research Group (2021), at the end of 2020 there were a total of 597 hyperscale data centers worldwide with a further 219 in planning or construction. 52 hyperscale data centers opened in 2020 alone. Half of these are operated by Amazon, Microsoft and Google.
 
The map above shows the data centers in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg as of June 2021. There has been a significant amount of controversy regarding the data center that Google wants to build. To this day, it is still not clear what will be built, who profited how much from this transaction, and who will shoulder the costs of knock-on effects or compensate those who have directly something to lose. As it currently stands, it is still not clear if it will be built at all. Google is hardly the only data center, however, in Luxembourg. Figure 1 shows the distribution of data centers across the Duchy and the energy they consume.
 
Data was gleaned from various websites, sometimes data center companies publish wattage information directly. Other times, information has to be cross-referenced with other online databases such as baxtel.com or datacenters.com. Sometimes no information is publicly available at all.

The range of services, platforms, technologies, and innovations offered by LDCs is increasing in both volume and centrality, as more and more public and private institutions, rely on these for their operations. But the increased dependency and involvement of LDCs is not without risks. The trajectories of urbanization that LDCs are steering have several sides – the products and services, the representational spaces (the real clouds!), and the hard resource intensive infrastructures needed to support them. Examined together, one unearths this new geography and derives a more comprehensive picture of what the smart city really entails.

References
Artyushina, A. 2020. Is civic data governance the key to democratic smart cities? The
role of the urban data trust in Sidewalk Toronto
. Telematics and Informatics Volume 55, December 2020, 101456

Birch, K., Chiappetta, M., & Artyushina, A. 2020. The problem of innovation in technoscientific capitalism: data rentiership and the policy implications of turning personal digital data into a private asset, Policy Studies, 41:5, 468-487, DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2020.1748264


Pink Floyd 1972. 'Wot's... Uh, the Deal?' Obscured by Clouds. Capitol Records

Synergy Research Group, 2021. Microsoft, Amazon and Google Account for Over Half of Today’s 600 Hyperscale Data Centers. Available at: <https://www.srgresearch.com/articles/microsoft-amazon-and-google-account-for-over-half-of-todays-600-hyperscale-data-centers> [Accessed 09 July 2021].

Further Readings at Urbanization Unbound
Carr, 2021. Two new Master Student Research Assistants for DIGI-GOV - Desmond Bast and Karinne Madron
Carr, 2021. Toronto versus Barcelona - Comparing smart city development at the University of Stavanger
Carr, 2021. DIGI-GOV Summary
Carr, Hesse 2020. New publication in a special issue of Urban Planning (open access) on smart cities
Carr, 2019. It matters how smart cites are governed
Carr, Hesse, 2019. New Publication on Smart Cities in Forum für Politik Gesellschaft und Kultur
Hesse, 2018. 2HQ2 - Two new seats for the new Amazon.com Headquarters, not one

10 June, 2021

The places and flows of labour: essential work, fragmented life-worlds, constrained mobilities

Call-for-contributions to an edited volume

Photo: Andrew Bulkeley, Berliner Zeitung, 10 June 2021, on Gorillas' employees strike/blockade.


At this year's AAG-Conference, Peter V. Hall, Nicolas Raimbault and I organised two sessions on the above subject matter. As a follow-up, we decided to plan for a book publication that puts together some of these and other contributions on how work and labour regimes are changing, due to the emergence of extended (im-)mobilities and the exploitation of human workforce -- with regards to COVID-19 and related frictions for the flow of people or commodities, concerning the notion of 'essential' work, and also in more general terms. See our announcement and details below. M.H.


    The COVID-19 pandemic has made more visible the importance of, as well as the difficulties faced by, so-called “essential workers” (Sparke & Anguelov, 2020, 3). The notion of essential work, which defies precise definition, covers a wide range of working conditions, from formal and full-time employment to temporary, contingent and precarious work, to self-employment. Alongside personal care, health and social service work, it includes manual work, mainly blue-collar, in processing activities (construction, manufacturing, food and agriculture) or in the physical distribution of goods (warehousing, transport, deliveries). Those doing work that is essential to the daily lives of others also include employees in direct consumer services (clerks, re-stockers).
    Typically, essential workers cannot perform tasks remotely from home, and so they must com-mute. Their workplaces are often scattered across space, from urban centres to suburban peripheries and beyond; in public and private locations; and in a huge variety of old industrial and new logistical lands. The pandemic has thus underlined the diversity and the fragmentation of contemporary working-class spaces (Rose-Redwood et al., 2020, 3).
    While the pandemic has revealed the tip of the essential worker iceberg, these jobs and employment conditions have been subject to significant change for a while now. From the decline of the manufacturing sector to the rise of the service sector and from casualization to the rise of the gig economy (Srnicek, 2017), which stand in clear and sharp contrast with the imaginaries and the political power once attributed to the Keynesian blue-collar middle-class (De Lara, 2018).
    This edited volume seeks to engage in conversations in geography and the social sciences more broadly on essential work and the new services precariat (Strauss, 2020). The book offers an opportunity to discuss the urban policy ramifications of these processes on the ongoing re-conversion of industrial lands, brownfield sites and waterfront areas which create spaces of affluence and exclusion, and on the related pressures on working-class peoples and communities, as well as public transport and transit-oriented development.
    In this context, we are seeking contributions that explore the changing geographies and mobilities of essential workers, urban-regional divisions of labour, as well as the organisation of work-places and its relation to spaces of social reproduction. We seek to explore life-worlds that have come under increasing pressure from contingent employment conditions and globally financialized housing markets. We aim to connect analyses of essential workers and working-class communities with an understanding of the production of the different spaces and localities in which they are embedded, given the fragmented nature of city regions. Contributions may address work that has specific commuting and other mobility requirements; work in mobile sectors (for example delivery and logistics); as well as the residential locations that can be afforded (or not) by working-class people.
    Here is a sampling of topics that might be addressed in chapter contributions, but please do not feel constrained to these examples:
- The transformations of working-class labour markets and workforces and the dynamics of the contingent employment.
- The nexus of precarious work, precarious livelihoods and mobility inequality.
- The implications of racialized and gendered identities and social relations at work, at home, in community and while mobile.
- The case of the delivery workers both linked to digital platforms (such as UBER, Deliveroo) and also in logistics and freight distribution (such as Amazon).
- The production of current workplaces, from mixed-used buildings in the context of ur-ban redevelopment projects to scattered warehouses or specialized industrial parks.
- The urban condition of working-class communities, considering residential as well as mobility inequalities, and the emergence of transit deserts.
- (De)Unionization dynamics and strategies, the engagement of working-class communities in urban politics, and the articulation of space and work in current urban and labour struggles.
    We are in touch with academic publishers. We are aware of the publication pressures facing early-career scholars, and so when finalizing the choice of publisher, we will ensure that single chapters are included in databases such as Scopus and can be tracked digitally (DOI), so the publication provides a visible and relevant outcome for contributors.

Our schedule is as follows:
- Submission of abstracts until 31st August 2021
- Notification of authors and submitting official book proposal by 30th September 2021
- Submission of 1st draft chapters by 28th February 2022
- Response to authors by 31st March 2022
- Submission of 2nd draft chapters by 31st May 2022.

Please send your abstracts of up to 250 words by 31st August 2021 to Peter V. Hall (pvhall@sfu.ca), Markus Hesse (markus.hesse@uni.lu) and Nicolas Raimbault (nicolas.raimbault@univ-nantes.fr). Feel free to ask any questions you might have.

References
De Lara, J. (2018). Inland shift: Race, space, and capital in Southern California. Los Angeles, University of California Press.
Korsu, E., & Wenglenski, S. (2010). Job accessibility, residential segregation and risk of long-term unemployment in the Paris region. Urban Studies, 47(11)
Sparke, M., & Anguelov, D. (2020). Contextualising coronavirus geographically. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. DOI: 10.1111/tran.12389
Srnicek N. (2017), Platform capitalism. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Strauss, K. (2020). Labour geography III: Precarity, racial capitalisms and infrastructure. Progress in Human Geography, 44(6), 1212-1224.
Rose-Redwood, R., Kitchin, R., Apostolopoulou, E., Rickards, L., Blackman, T., Crampton, J., ... & Buckley, M. (2020). Geographies of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dialogues in Human Geography, 10(2), 97-106.

15 May, 2021

The urban geographies of Luxembourg’s financial centre: Talking about the same subject in front of two different audiences

Early May I was invited to speak on the same topic to two rather different audiences: Luxembourg’s urban geography as a small-but-global artefact, determined by its journey in becoming one of the most important financial centres in Europe and among the top twenty across the globe. The talks were dealing with the urban implications of this status, and I also discussed how policy, planning and governance were, and still are, used to respond to the stunning economic growth rates. 
    One audience was global: “Fingeo”, the Regional Studies Association’s network of urban and regional scholars studying financial networks and their particular geographies. The other audience was local: the “Biergerkommitee Luxembourg 2050”, a group of citizens who accompany the government’s competitive process towards designing a future “Luxembourg in Transition”.


Similar stuff, different people

The main contentions of the two presentations were as follows: Firstly, as a small state being subject to rapid, small-but-global urbanization, Luxembourg faces huge challenges for urban development – simply due to its size, as it lacks sufficient space and hinterland to absorb the enormous development pressure of the country’s economy. De-synchronized velocities of development on the one hand, and inertia in the institutional responses of policy and planning on the other hand contribute to spatial mismatch and fragmentation.(1) Also, the rush to become a services capital has provided a huge globalisation dividend to local land owners, which goes at the cost of the society as a whole. This trend is increasing recently and tends to divide the previously consensus-oriented society. Both phenomena, economic growth and local property rents, have been driving the extraordinary degree of wealth in Luxembourg. This also makes the case rather distinct from other financial capitals studied within Fingeo so far, where the impression is that local property markets are becoming generally occupied by foreign capital, and much of the revenues may go somewhere else. 
     Secondly, the general agenda of the citizens’ committee and the government’s approach is to find ways to support the country’s transition to a post-fossil future. This concept is particularly driven by sustainability metrics: more precisely, the attempt to envisage an optimal or necessary level of carbon consumption through transforming the natural and the built environment, sustainable pathways for water, food, energy and mobility, and also niches for alternative economic practices. My talk began with the high level of resource consumption and carbon emissions in the Grand Duchy (13.2 tons per capita and year, see 2). This ‘first-order problem’ is understood as an immediate outcome of the state’s relational constitution as a global services exporter and resources and fossil fuels importer – the preferred economic model of the global financial capital thus being the ‘second-order problem’. The way institutions, state and communes have dealt with development and planning issues was considered the ‘third-order problem’. My argument was that the ecological transition that Luxembourg is required to meet over the next thirty years (down to 1.6 tons per capita and year, according to my colleagues’ calculations) would need to solve these inter-related dimensions of cause, problem and outcome. Otherwise it would be unlikely to be effective.

Comments made by the audiences

Both interventions had spurred a range of commentaries and questions, unfortunately the time for debate was limited in either case. Fingeo-colleagues were obviously interested in the foundation of city and country as a relational construct, the path-development of its making, and particularly the relations to its hinterland. This is not a hinterland in the classical sense of a gateway city, but a rather distinct case of transnational borderland, subject to a sort of global leapfrogging. Hence the geo-political field of how economic success and its implications for urban geography and planning create tension, and how this is balanced across borders, if at all, provoked the most interest among the audience. Another issue was the comparative view of Luxembourg: about specificity and uniqueness on the one hand, and universal patterns on the other hand. Such patterns can indeed be detected in a range of other cities as well, such as Frankfurt, Germany, or Dublin, Ireland. Somehow new to me was the term “governance capture”, raised by a colleague from the UK, pointing to how corporate interests have nested in Luxembourg’s government and (more broadly) governance arrangements that have ‘produced’ the financial market place. This straightforwardly appears to be the case in Luxembourg, evident not only in the terms of the liberal attitude with which this country is ruled. It also reflects the key role corporate strategy advice (for example by representatives of the ‘Big Four’) plays for policy formulation and implementation particularly at the national level.(3)
    The first issue discussed with the citizens’ committee was the role of informal practices in planning, contrasting the rather complex rules and regulations that are formally codified in the national planning laws and ordinances; a subject that we currently explore in more detail. During my talk, I didn’t say that informality would be a phenomenon exclusive to the Grand Duchy’s planning practice; this certainly happens everywhere and every day when plans are on their way to implementation (or even earlier, in the plan-making process). What makes the case of a small state indeed distinct from others is the high degree to which informality has become a usual practice at all levels and stages – and it may have flourished exactly in the shadow of overly dense formal regulation. Informal practice is probably enhanced by the fact that almost everybody knows everybody, via shortcuts to the officials in charge of political affairs, and by the habitual understanding of the nation as being independent and sovereign, a true seedbed of self-governance.
    The key role of investors in bringing urban projects to the fore was mentioned, and questioned, by committee members as well. This is a rather common phenomenon which nevertheless has only found recognition among the broader public recently. Ownership concentration, speculation and the power to steer the dynamics of development are main factors here. However, the question of why this group of players enjoys such a prominent role in planning and development (and sometimes with a certain gusto) remains unanswered; authorities may know the reason. The neglect of citizens’ voices when it comes to real planning was also a topic of concern. Several comments raised the question of why citizens have effectively little to say when it comes to urban projects. Even though there are indeed some promising cases of public participation currently ongoing in parts of the country, there seems to be a striking mismatch between official rhetoric and planning practice in this respect.
    According to one participant, a common experience would be that school teachers consider Luxembourg’s urban practice as pretty well organised, things are “tip-top” also when compared to others. Surprise, surprise, there are contrasting views available as well. In fact, there is a wide-spread perception that the country is paying a high price for wealth and growth when it comes to the built environment, particularly as concerns built heritage. This is also a matter of debate in the citizens’ committee. Without saying that related sentiments would already be representative of the city or the country as a whole, this seems to be the second mismatch between the public mind about the state of urbanism in the Grand Duchy on the one hand, and the praise and PR from members of the governing bodies on urban issues on the other. The latter still believe their practice is not only appropriate, but also consider ‘Made in Luxembourg’ a template for other cities or countries to follow. I have my doubts that we reached that particular zenith.

Conclusion

These were two extremely inspiring talks and debates – thanks to the organisers for setting them up. If variety is the spice of life, then switching between different audiences that listen to the researcher’s perspective on the same topic is enormously fruitful. It could also contribute to two particular commitments of science and research in the public domain: the first is making the interested public sensitive to the rich vocabulary and explanatory power of current theories and concepts in geography and spatial planning; the second would be confronting these concepts with robust empirical evidence, the real-world problems that are providing the food-for-thought for any underlying or overarching scientific problem. Theoria cum praxi, as it were.

Markus Hesse

1) See for a short overview: M. Hesse (2019), Metropolisierung oder die zweite Häutung der Stadt. forum 397, 29-31. The research paper with more background: Hesse, M. & Wong, C. (2020). Cities seen through a relational lens. Exploring niche-economic strategies and related urban development trajectories of Geneva (Switzerland), Luxembourg & Singapore. Geographische Zeitschrift (GZ), 105, 78-92.
2) Hertweck, F. et al. (2021), Luxembourg 2050 – Prospects for a Regenerative City-Landscape. Report Phase 1.
3) The role of Luxembourg as a place that suits for the hidden handling of financial resources (cf. Luxleaks, Panama Papers, recently Openlux) was not mentioned in our debate, but popped up in some chats among the participants. It is relevant here that there seems to be a direct link between the corporate headquarter function and tax evasion policies (see most recent research on the "Amazon Method").

19 April, 2021

Two new Master Student Research Assistants for DIGI-GOV - Desmond Bast and Karinne Madron

April 1st 2021 marked the official launch of DGEO's new FNR funded project, entitled, Digital urban development - How large digital corporations shape the field of urban governance (DIGI-GOV).  And to help kick it off, we are pleased to welcome two new master student researchers to the project.

Joining us as a student researcher in his final semester at the Master of Architecture, European Urbanisation and Globalisation [MArch] here at the University of Luxembourg is Desmond Bast, who is also VP of the Architecture Student Association. He carries forth a considerable catalogue of work, primarily comprised of experience in an architecture office, working on three mixed-use CLT mid-rise structures for social housing purposes in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. There, he implemented an array of building information modelling skills with in-depth technical liaising he had acquired during his bachelor studies in Architectural Engineering and Technology at Thompson Rivers, University in Kamloops.

Desmond brings a developed interest in spatial politics and socio-ecologic discourse, leading him to his current master studies, where he is actively honing new methods of expressing multi-scalar ideas through a combination of written prose, cartographic, and graphic projection. Desmond’s interests lie at the intersection of urban governance, technology, and the harmonious welfare of individuals and planet-earth alike.

Desmond also tells us that as someone originally from Victoria, British Columbia, he is an O.K. flatland skim-boarder, a mediocre vegan cook, and a veteran of the Canadian Junior Hockey League. Desmond also loves art, photography, string-instruments, and sampling the occasional craft-beer with friends.

Also joining us is Karinne Madron who is currently completing her Master in Architecture, European Urbanisation and Globalisation here at the University of Luxembourg. Prior to coming to Luxembourg in 2019, she worked in architecture for nearly 11 years in Mauritius where she is from. She holds a BA in Architectural Studies from Newcastle University and an MSc in Development Studies from the University of Mauritius. Her research interests include spatial justice, planetary urbanization, urban innovation, urban governance and participatory development among other subjects.

Having obtained a scholarship from the Government of Mauritius in 2004, Karinne moved to the UK to study architecture in Newcastle upon Tyne. She developed an early interest in the relationship between the built environment and social change and chose ‘the rise and fall of high-rise mass housing in the UK’ as the subject of her dissertation. Pursuing her interest in housing, she worked as a trainee architect for a housing association in Newcastle for about a year after completing her degree.

She returned to Mauritius in 2008 and had the opportunity to work with communities living in informal settlements on slum upgrading and social housing projects. Over the years, she also worked on a variety of other projects ranging from the renovation of the Bank of Mauritius to luxury gated communities. Her work experience in both social and luxury projects allowed her to develop her insight into the socio-political underpinnings of land use and inequality in the small island of Mauritius. Seeking to deepen her understanding of these issues she decided to do a Master in Development Studies in 2012. Her dissertation titled ‘an analysis of the relationship between inadequate housing and the intergenerational transmission of poverty in Mauritius’ gave her the opportunity to discuss with local authorities, civil society groups as well as inhabitants of informal settlements. Having again an opportunity to pursue her academic interests in 2019, she chose the University of Luxembourg for her Master in Architecture because of the interdisciplinary nature of the programme.

Karinne has otherwise had the opportunity to be a volunteer teacher most of her life. As a teenager she used to teach the children in her neighbourhood. She was also an assistant teacher in English classes given to refugees and asylum seekers in Newcastle. Back in Mauritius she helped with academic support to children from underprivileged families with non-governmental organisations. 

We are glad to welcome Karinne and Desmond and are really looking forward to their creative and critical contributions to DIGI-GOV!

15 April, 2021

Tech update for this blog - Feedburner will discontinue its service

If you are reading this post because you are registered on the Feedburner and thus receive email updates, please know that Feedburner is terminating this service in July.  Thereafter, you will not receive any email notifications that we have updated this blog.

I just received notice about this today, so I am only just beginning to figure out what to do about this.

(It is also a kind reminder that the platform services we depend on can be revoked at any moment.  I wouldn't be surprised if Google terminated blogger at some point...)

Cheers!

Connie



Toronto versus Barcelona - Comparing smart city development at the University of Stavanger

It was a great pleasure to meet Dr. Ramon Ribera Fumaz, Director of the Urban Transformation and Global Change Laboratory, (TURBA), and Dr. Anders Riel Müller & Professor Bettina Bluemling of the UiS Research Network for Smart Sustainable Cities, University of Stavanger last month to talk about Actually Existing Smart Cities: Alphabet Inc. (Google) In Toronto and Commoning the "Smart City" in Barcelona.


Comparing smart city development in Toronto versus that in Barcelona is such a great comparison. There is so much to explore, address and discuss concerning scale (of corporate size, of financial power, of targeted technological reach), centralization versus fragmentation, knowledge differentials across institutions in charge of urban development, and the visible/hidden agendas of those in charge. Fascinating directions at the nexus of an old triad urbanplanning, urbanpolitics and techinnovation. If you missed it, it can be found at the University of Stavanger YouTube channel for smart cities (see below).

Abstract for Ramon Ribera Fumaz's Commoning the ‘Smart City’ in Barcelona 
There is a well-established consensus amongst critical scholars, activists, and, increasingly by the general public, that the Smart City practices are generating a new spatial fix for (tech) capital and depoliticise urban redevelopment and environmental management. Against this backdrop, Barcelona has attempted in the last years to harness digital platform technologies to enhance participative democracy and its agenda to secure technological sovereignty and digital rights for its citizens. In doing so, it has aimed to build a tech ecosystem that does not respond to corporate digital capitalism needs. This strategy's central tool has been the multi-purpose platform Decidim, built on FOSS and transparent and inclusive ethical principles. This paper explores the Decidim ecosystem – the network of developers, research centres, maintainers, advocates and activists, and city administrators – in Barcelona and beyond to establish the long term connections, the affordance and limitations of such initiative concerning its replication and scalability elsewhere. Thus, reflecting on its potential in challenging mainstream strategies.

Abstract for Carr's Alphabet (Google) in Toronto – Technocratic joint ventures of politics and large digital corporations (LDC)
The arrival of large digital corporations (LDCs) on the urban development scene is a relatively recent phenomenon, which has sparked concerns around data privacy, surveillance, and the implications of new technologies shaping supposedly smart urbanity. In this entry, I will present research that examined what happens when an LDC entered the field of urban development. Specifically, the empirical focus was on Alphabet Inc.'s failed digital city plans for Toronto’s waterfront. It is clear that the arrival of LDCs hardly signifies the sole and simple arrival of new palates of technologies. Rather, LDCs are new players in the field endorsing post-political modes of urban development. 






08 April, 2021

New Publication: Background on Urban and Regional Planning

Carr wrote the introductory chapter on urban and regional planning in the upcoming Palgrave Handbook of Global Sustainability edited by Robert Brinkmann.

Abstract of Chapter
Sustainable development has been a subject of urban planning for three decades now. Planners and practitioners now have a wealth of materials, catalogues, readers, and textbooks at their disposal that discuss local problems and practices. The problem, however, is that sustainable development is a very broad and often contradictory concept that is difficult to implement, and has since become a vector for market-led, exclusionary, urban development and planning. Little progress has been achieved, especially in regard to social equality. At the time of this writing, the global pandemic was also unfolding, which demanded priorities in health care on one hand and opened up new questions about sustainable development on the other. If sustainability and post-pandemic planning (for sustainability) is to be taken seriously, it is imperative to identify, reassert, and re-center social injustices in the productive processes that generate urban and regional spaces. There is a risk that social polarization will widen further still and that it too will be market-led as governments struggle with the crisis. Practitioners need to be careful about how people are included and can benefit from planning practice. There is inspiration from planning theory. Knowledge of public interest, differing epistemologies and ontologies, problems of racism and class, and a revival of kindness in political democratic are some ideas that publicly funded urban and regional planning offices can promote and assert – in the interests of sustainability.

The full article is available here at Springer or here at the archive of the University of Luxembourg (orbilu).  Don't hesitate to request access if you have any problems.

01 February, 2021

Call-for-abstracts 

"Urbanisation, crisis and resilience: the multiple dimensions of urban transformation in Beirut, Lebanon"


Special issue of 'Urban Planning' (Cogitatio Press)




Beirut’s urban transformation is a subject of significant multi-disciplinary inquiry in the social sciences. Long considered as a crossroads between Asia, Africa and Europe, owing to its strategic location, Beirut gained prominence as a Levantine city in the mid-19th century. Since its independence (1943), the modern state finds itself subject to myriad external pressures which often have destabilising internal effects. The city’s traditional role as a maritime and commercial entrepôt and university city was widened to become a nascent financial centre in 1956 with the introduction of banking secrecy laws. Its subsequent international reputation as a diplomatic hub and tourist resort with various monikers such as the Switzerland or Paris of the Middle East coincided uneasily with growing geopolitical and migratory pressure flowing from the expulsion of Palestinians by Israel, and ended abruptly with the outbreak of civil war in 1975. 
    Periods of post-war reconstruction are the backdrop for new socio-economic and political dynamics. Reconstruction after the civil war had only limited success in achieving its ostensible aim of restoring the city’s former international status. Alongside the rise of centralised market-led urbanism, laissez-faire urban planning, the embedding of sectarian polarisation and neglect of basic infrastructure are all factors that raise questions about the model of urban regeneration implemented and arouse new socio-political tensions. Post-modern redevelopment of the inner-city as a site for speculative real-estate investment occurs alongside an intensive, unplanned urbanisation along the coastlines to the north and south, and in stark contrast to the ‘misery belt’ of informal sprawl on the periphery of the city.
    Recent crises not only comprise a long-standing concern about the state’s economic failure and clientelist political environment but were exacerbated by the outbreak of COVID-19 and also the 4th August blast in the port of Beirut. These events were seen by many as a crystallisation of Lebanon’s complex problems. However, these episodes do not supplant the rich historical setting both ancient and modern Lebanon represents for urban scholars. Beirut’s cultural and geographical liminality, and enduring role as a prominent urban confluence with multi-faceted geographic positionality, imbue it with an especially abundant empirical interest and topical relevance.
    This thematic issue has evolved from activities under the umbrella of the Urban Commission of the International Geographical Union (UGI-IGU), whose 2020 annual conference was supposed to take place in Beirut, Lebanon. It was eventually held as a digital conference, but already offered a first encounter of members of the Commission with a range of researchers from the Middle East, Lebanon and Beirut in particular, and discuss related topics of urban development, policy and research. The special issue offers a chance to shed some new light on Arab and Middle East urbanisms – not with respect to those places that received some attention in recent years (such as Dubai or Doha), but to focus on a place that enjoys both variety and rich history, while being subject to multiple political crises in recent times as well: Beirut, Lebanon.
    Currently the Urban Commission of the IGU-UGI plans to hold its 2021 Annual Conference in Beirut as an on-site event, to take place on 23-27 August 2021. Hoping that this will work out, the conference could offer a proper environment for discussing some of the issues that would fit here as well.
    Urban Planning (ISSN: 2183-7635) is an international peer-reviewed journal of urban studies aimed at advancing understandings and ideas of humankind’s habitatsUrban Planning is an open access journal (free for readers) with an article processing charge of EUR 900 per accepted manuscript. Please note that a certain budget is preserved for allowing up to seven papers be financed via the editors of this Special Issue.

Keywords:
Mediterranean/Middle East urbanism; Beirut, Lebanon; urban development; urban planning; resilience; urban geo-politics; post-colonial perspectives.

Academic Editors:
Buccianti Bakarat, Liliane, Professor, Université St. Joseph, Département de géographie, Email: liliane.barakat@usj.edu.lb; www.usj.edu.lb
Hesse, Markus, Professor, University of Luxembourg, Dept. of Geography & Spatial Planning, Email: markus.hesse@uni.luwww.humanities.uni.lu

Timeline:
Submission of Abstracts: 1-15 March 2021
Submission of Full Papers: 15-31 July 2021
Publication of the Issue: January/March 2022

Instructions for Authors:
Authors interested in submitting a paper for this issue are asked to consult the journal's instructions for authors and submit their abstracts (maximum of 250 words, with a tentative title) through the abstracts system (here). When submitting their abstracts, authors are also asked to confirm that they are aware that Urban Planning is an open access journal with a publishing fee if the article is accepted for publication after peer-review (corresponding authors affiliated with our institutional members do not incur this fee). Please also see the above condition for funding.

28 January, 2021

Fully funded PhD position available for DIGI-GOV

Applicants must apply online at: http://emea3.mrted.ly/2mgfn

***We are aiming for a start date in the spring or summer 2021. The deadline for application is March 10. If you are interested in this position, applicants must apply online but do not hesitate to inform me via email (constance.carr@uni.lu).***

The Urban Studies Group at the Department of Geography & Spatial Planning (DGEO), Faculty of Humanities, Education & Social Sciences (FHSE), University of Luxembourg (UL) invites applications for a Doctoral candidate (PhD student) to work on the research project entitled, “Digital Urban Development — How large digital corporations shape the field of urban governance (DIGI-GOV)”  

Project Summary is available for download here:

Area  Urban studies, urban governance, human geography or related field.

Your Role

  • Complete a dissertation in urban geography on a topic the fits the framework of DIGI-GOV, and submit it for defense inside of 4 years. 
  • Join the DGEO’s Urban Studies group and meet regularly with primary supervisor. 
  • Enroll in the UL Doctoral School in Humanities and Social Sciences (DSHSS) — and join the activities of the Geography PhD Seminar
  • Achieve 20 ECTS awarded through participation in the DSHSS. 
  • Assist the PI with in organising of conferences and meetings in the framework of DIGI-GOV
  • Organize meetings with her/his international advisory board throughout the programme

Your Profile

  • Master or Diploma in Geography or Spatial Planning, Urban Planning or related field, linked to geographical issues of urban development, policy and planning, including experience in interdisciplinary work and qualitative methodology
  • Excellent command of written and spoken English is required. Knowledge of either Luxembourgish, French, German, or Dutch would be considered an asset

We offer
DGEO is a 45-person strong international group of Professors, post-doctoral and senior researchers, and PhD students. Research follows different trajectories of human geography and spatial planning, notably institutional and actor-centred approaches, theories in the context of chains, flows and networks, and also approaches that are related to the cultural and spatial turn. Major fields of research include environmental economic geography, urban studies and metropolitan governance, spatial statistics and modelling, and architecture.

The UL offers the opportunity to participate in the development of a newly created university, an exciting international and multi-lingual environment, well-equipped research facilities, competitive salaries, and is an equal opportunity employer.

In Short
Contract Type: Fixed Term Contract 36 Month - extendable up to 48 months if required
Work Hours: Full Time 40.0 Hours per Week
Location: Belval
Internal Title: Doctoral Researcher
Employee and student status
Job Reference: UOL03910

Further Information
Applications should be submitted online and include:

  • CV and copies of diploma;
  • Motivation Letter;
  • Support letter from at least one recent scientific advisor/professor (preferably three);
  • A PhD proposal that fits the objectives of DIGI-GOV (max. 2 pages, single spaced, 11 pt font) including: 1) Introduction and literature review; 2) Research objectives and expected contribution to the field; 3) Methodology; 4) Work plan and expected timetable; 5) Bibliography.

Early application is highly encouraged, as the applications will be processed upon reception. Please apply ONLINE formally through the HR system. Applications by email will not be considered.

The University of Luxembourg embraces inclusion and diversity as key values. We are fully committed to removing any discriminatory barrier related to gender, and not only, in recruitment and career progression of our staff.  

Questions? Don't hesitate to contact Dr. Constance Carr, constance.carr@uni.lu

27 January, 2021

DIGI-GOV Project Summary available for download



Project Summary available for download here

Abstract DIGI-GOV is a research project that aims to understand (I) the role of large digital corporations (LDCs) in digital urban development, (II) how the presence of LDCs in urban planning practice challenge pre-existing modes urban governance, and (III) how LDC-led urban development constitutes a new relational geography of digital cities. DIGI-GOV is thus a chance to call attention to this critical shift in the ways that contemporary digital cities are constructed, planned, mediated and governed. DIGI-GOV expands on prior research that examined Alphabet Inc.’s digital city project in Toronto that raised a number of important issues for urban planners, development practitioners, and urban studies scholars – even if this particular digital city project was ultimately unsuccessful. DIGI-GOV expands this research because the range of services that LDCs provide has increased in both volume and centrality; more and more public and private institutions rely on LDCs for essential digital infrastructures. There is an urgent need to study the trajectories of urbanization that are rolled out under the leadership of LDCs and the tensions in urban governance that are unleashed. DIGI-GOV will shed light on four further cities in addition to Toronto, which have been challenged by the presence of LDCs—namely, Seattle, Washington DC, Bissen, and Eemshaven. The selected cities are some of the few exemplary cases available where LDCs have secured their position in the local urban field. Through qualitative methodological approaches, DIGI-GOV will tease out how these cities are relationally connected through LDC-led urban development, and what scholars and practitioners can learn from these experiences. Examined together, one can scratch at the surface of, and unearth, this new emerging relational geography. 



05 January, 2021

Hiring: Two Master Student Assistants

Department of Geography & Spatial Planning (DGEO), Faculty of Humanities, Education & Social Sciences (FHSE), University of Luxembourg (UL) invites applications for two Master Student Assistants on a Fixed-term contract, renewable up to 36 months, part-time (10h/week). 

Research Project: Digital Urban Development — How large digital corporations shape the field of urban governance DIGI-GOV

The DIGI-GOV research team is searching two motivated graduate students to join the team as assist with carrying out a variety of tasks associated with the project.

Your Role:

  • To provide on-going project management support assist the DIGI-GOV team (see urbanunbound.blogspot.com).To assist with Office Management, (e.g. web blog management, translations, database management)
  • Assist in organizing conferences and meetings related to the project (administration of registrations, reception, advertising)
  • Be professional and act as a liaison between the project team and outside bodies.

Your Profile:

  • You are currently enrolled full-time as a Master student at the University of Luxembourg and have a Bachelor degree in Humanities/Social Sciences
  • You are knowledgeable of online dissemination methods
  • You are interested in building a long-term team, and focusing on qualitative social scientific research methods
  • You have excellent command of written and spoken English and knowledge of either French/German/Luxembourgish.
  • Be inspired by the potential societal impact of DIGI-GOV

Applications must include the following:

  • CV and copies of Degree Certificates;
  • Motivation Letter;
  • 1-3 Reference Letters of previous employers or academic supervisors

For more information about DIGI-GOV visit urbanunbound.blogspot.com. Interested candidates should send a CV (in EN, DE or FR) to Dr. Constance Carr, constance.carr@uni.lu no later than May 1, 2021.

17 November, 2020

BIVEC-GIBET Transport Research Days 2021 (TRD 2021).

CALL-FOR-EXTENDED ABSTRACTS


The Benelux Association of Transport Researchers (BIVEC-GIBET) invites you to submit extended abstracts for the next 'Transport Research Day' 2021, which will be held online only.


Because of COVID-19, several scientific meetings have already been cancelled or postponed during the past year. The safety measures currently applied in the Netherlands and at TU Delft do not allow the organization of any physical meeting. It is also unclear what the future holds. In order to create any clarity for TRD participants, we have therefore decided to continue with the TRD on 27-28 May 2021, but we will switch to an online conference. The registration fees have been adjusted accordingly. If the safety measures in May 2021 allow us to organize a physical event again, then there may still be a hybrid form of the conference (partly online for those who prefer not to travel to Delft, partly on-site but subject to compliance with the safety measure in place at that time). This will be communicated in due time.

 

In addition, the deadline for submitting 'extended abstracts' has been extended to 15 December 2020. You can submit your abstract on https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf_3PwgBwIo1JCj3bBN74f8HBuop5t-dxPgjP0JrcZsvdT3Jg/viewform. This allows everyone to consider participating in the TRD in a safe way. 


The TRD are an ideal moment to get an overview of the state-of-the-art of mobility and transport research in the Benelux. Moreover, you can get to know colleagues at universities and research institutes just across the border in an easily accessible way.

 

We hope to ‘see’ you all at the Transport Research Days 2021.

 

Best regards,

Veronique Van Acker, secretary of BIVEC-GIBET

E-mail: Veronique.VanAcker@liser.lu