we are on twitter

Don't forget too that we are on twitter.  You can follow us @sustaingov

It was fun teaching this week!

This slide was the cause of much discussion in class this week. I had long discussions with architects and planners over this at the Formation continue en aménagement du territoire, and also with our 1st semester Master students at the Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning who arrived this month.

I argue that it is market-led, integrative planning, in suburban Luxembourg.  Is it the best that can be done?

Royal Geographical Society - Institute of British Geographers - Session Follow-up, entry from Dr. Kirsty Blackstock

We had a great session at the annual conference of the Royal Geographical Society with Institute of British Geographers in London earlier this month with presentations from Tom Becker/Rob Krueger, Kirsty Blackstock, Susannah Bunce, and Olivia Bina (see earlier blog entry for details). Thank you to everyone who attended!
Over the next weeks we will post some follow-ups to give our readers more detail. First, in this series of follow-ups is an entry from Dr. Kirsty Blackstock of the James Hutton Institute.

Quantitative Story Telling at the European Commission: new method, same challenges for nexus policy studies
by Dr. Kirsty Blackstock
Social, Economic and Geographical Sciences
James Hutton Institute

Recently, I participated in an session organised by Constance Carr and Markus Hesse entitled, “Be constructive! Situating sustainability research at the nexus of positivism and reflective positionality” during the RGS-IBG 2016 conference on ‘Nexus Thinking’. During this session, I told a story about telling a story. My story was about how quantitative methods and data are used in processes of understanding and making sense of our world, about the role of stories and numbers in the processes of knowledge production (and reproduction). Neatly following the provocative paper about how to avoid the essentialism of science-policy interfaces, I talked about a new project that I’m embarking on with colleagues from around Europe and beyond. The project is called MAGIC (Moving Towards Adaptive Governance in Complexity: Informing Nexus Security). MAGIC uses the idea of ‘Quantitative Story Telling’ (QST). 

The idea of QST draws attention to the dynamic processes and relationships involved in the full modelling cycle, from the very initial framing and definition of the problem to model, through which variables to combine, the generation of quantitative results and how these are legitimated, interpreted and used (or not used) in decision making processes. We plan to apply this approach to case studies of water, energy and food nexus across different scales, looking at European Union Policy implementation and innovations developed to respond to nexus challenges. At the heart of the QST is the bio-economic accounting approach called MuSIASEM. This framework draws attention to the role of material flows and funds in the ways in which we configure our societies, and the environmental, social and economic impacts of these configurations. QST asks us to explicitly stop and critically reflect on the stories we tell about living in our worlds, both our current situation and the futures that we seek. The approach follows the principles of ‘post-normal science’, to be used when ‘facts are uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent’ (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993). Thus, QST recognises the role of values and perceptions in framing the problem to model and interpreting results of the model. It draws attention to production and use of scientific evidence and argues for an ‘extended peer review’ of the quality of modelling through engaging non-academic stakeholders who have their own expertise to bring to each stage of the QST process. As such, the approach should not really be considered as ‘new’ given the legacy of critical quantitative and spatial methodologies from 1960’s and 1970’s, but unfortunately, post-normal approaches seem still to be rare. We offer our application of QST to challenge dominant discourses about the water, energy and food nexus. We also seek to go beyond the standard technological responses suggested as solutions to these challenges, given that such responses tend to be rooted in the neo-liberal discourses of efficiency and ecological modernism. However, our challenge is to offer a more progressive alternative that recognises the constraining and creative drivers of history, context, pluralistic motivations and multiple perspectives on success. 

MAGIC is funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 689669. James Hutton Institute is partly funded by funded by the Rural & Environment Science & Analytical Services Division of the Scottish Government. The work reflects only the author's view and the above funders not responsible for any use that may be made of the information this blog contains.

Prof. Saskia Sassen speaks at Luxembourg Center for Architecture LUCA

Saskia Sassen, sociologue, professeure à Columbia University Date de l'événement : samedi, 10 septembre 2016, 18:30 - 20:00 Lieu : Luxembourg Center for Architecture LUCA 1, rue de l’Aciérie L – 1112 Luxembourg Dans le cadre de l’académie d’été sur l’architecture et la migration, l’Université du Luxembourg et le Luxembourg Center for Architecture LUCA accueillent comme keynote speaker Saskia Sassen, sociologue, professeure à Columbia University et auteure de The Global City. Sa conférence sera précédée d’une présentation publique des travaux d’étudiants de l’académie d’été et suivie d’un cocktail. Programme : 14:00 Présentation publique des travaux des étudiants 18:00 Mot de bienvenue de Georg Mein, Doyen de la Faculté des sciences humaines, UniLu 18:10 Introduction par Florian Hertweck, Professeur d’architecture à l’Université du Luxembourg 18:30 Keynote lecture, Saskia Sassen, sociologue, Professeure à Columbia University 19:30 Cocktail Contact :Christelle Karleskind Tél. : +352 / 46 66 44 95 10 www.schengensummerschool.uni.lu www.luca.lu The Schengen Summer School of Luxemburg University and the LUCA are pleased to nvite you on Saturday September 10, for a keynote with Saskia Sassen, renown Dutch-American sociologist. She aims to uncover the broader systemic logic behind novel forms of migratory flows. Tracing them within the multiscalar and often extreme contexts that generate them, they can be interpreted as social, economic and ecological expulsions connected to often lengthy structural transformations resulting from new forms of advanced capitalist development. Migratory flows are thus interwoven not only with intensifying processes of financialization, but also with new forms of primitive accumulation that lead to a global loss of habitat. Within this context, and while these conditions are operating, at the global, regional and urban geopolitical level, the role of cities as frontiers of diversity and inclusion, is especially challenged. The Schengen Summer School of Luxemburg University will look into the issue of the impact that the various forms of migration might have on urban planning and architecture and how architects and city planners can get involved in approaches to integrate migrants and refugees. September 10, 18:00 Carré, 1 rue de l'Aciérie, L-1112 Luxembourg Hollerich Free entrance www.schengensummerschool.uni.lu www.luca.lu

Invitation MARS workshop : Ecosystem Integrity and Policy coherence for Development

The Multidisciplinary Area of Research on Sustainability (MARS) invites you to the workshop :

Ecosystem Integrity and Policy Coherence for Development: Tools Aimed at Achieving Balance as the Basis for Transformative Development In response to criticisms of the Millennium Development Goals, the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda has focused more on development relationships than on development indicators. The SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) aim to establish development strategies that are transformative and universal in nature. While observers applaud the ambition of these goals, many development actors have questioned how they can be implemented. This presentation examines “balanced” development as a framework for transformative and universal strategies. Specifically, the discussion will examine the relationship between science and policy and by examining two concepts that have emerged as part of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda: Ecosystem Integrity and Policy Coherence for Development.

Speakers: Prof. Miguel Equihua (INECOL, Mexico), Prof. Octavio Pérez-Maqueo (INECOL, Mexico), Prof. Carmen Maganda (INECOL, Mexico) and Prof. Harlan Koff (University of Luxembourg)

Moderator: Prof. Conchita D'Ambrosio (University of Luxembourg)

Monday, 5 September 2016
12:00 – 14:00
University of Luxembourg – BELVAL Campus
MSH Building, Room Black Box (Ground Floor)
11 Porte des Sciences
4366 Esch-sur Alzette

The workshop will be held in English and sandwiches/drinks will be served.

Please register by e-mailing: irsei@uni.lu
http://mars.uni.lu

Sabine DEMAZY
Project Coordinator
PEARL Institute for Research on Socio-Economic Inequality
Research Unit INSIDE
University of Luxembourg

Uni Lu Geographers at the Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) RGS-IBG

Just arrived in London and looking forward to a week of sessions a the Royal Geographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers! Find uni.lu geographers at the following sessions. (Dates and times are left out because last minute scheduling changes are possible. One should refer to the RGS-IBG website directly):



Markus Hesse and Gerald Taylor-Aiken, "Teaching Geographical Writing: from techniques and mechanisms to habits and routines, practice and strategy" HERG

Tom Becker (PhD student), Dr. Constance Carr, Prof. Markus Hesse, and Prof. Rob Krueger in the session entitled, "Be Constructive! Situating sustainability research at the nexus of positivism and reflective positionality"

Jan-Tobias Doerr (PhD student) in the session entitled, "Transitions to a low-carbon future: The human factor in the energy system"

Evan McDonough (PhD student) in the two-part session entitled, "Current and emerging research in transport: Active travel, governance and simulations"

Benedikt Schmid (PhD student) in the two-part session entitled, "On demand: Cultural economies of access and ownership"

Prof. Christian Schulz in the session entitled, "Smart specialisation and regional policy in the EU: Fresh thinking or old wine in new bottles?" together with former colleagues of the UL, Dr. Julia Affolderbach of Hull University and Dr. Fabian Faller of Kiel University.

Congratulations to Wachsmuth, Cohen and Angelo on their publication in Nature, August 25th Issue!

Congratulations to Wachsmuth, Cohen and Angelo on their publication in Nature and bringing much needed debates forward concerning urban sustainability, that we feel have been missing until now in this journal (see  our blog entry from June 20th).

Read a background to the piece at David Wachsmuth's website, here.

The article is freely available here, Nature's website, August 25th Issue.

Making Sense of Open Access Journals - a Beginning

Every now and again, I encounter discussions with scholars about open access journals.  Publishing in open access journals seems a rather appealing option, in the face of current trends in scientifically publishing, where science is effectively locked up in the giant publishing houses with limited public reach. Open access seems like a possible means to get peer-reviewed papers published and made available to a wider readership. The issue, however, isn't quite so simple. This entry attempts to start a road map through this growing and actually rather messy field. This entry is only a beginning, a scratch at the surface, and thoroughly incomplete.  It is  just a start towards finding high-quality outlets to publish in, and identifying about some implications to consider.

Look our for this good stuff!
First off, a really nice list is curated, too, by Simon Batterbury on the topic of geography, political ecology, and social science. This is a good starting point. The following links below are a sampling of journals that have run across my desk in the past. If you have any that you would like to add, please just let me know! I can easily update this list. These are all journals that practice double-blind peer-reviewing before bringing articles to publication. In no particular order:

• ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies  The ACME Collective focuses on  critical geographical scholarship "about space and place in the social sciences — including anarchist, anti-racist, autonomist, decolonial, environmentalist, feminist, Marxist, non-representational, postcolonial, poststructuralist, queer, situationist, and socialist perspectives" Out of political conviction, they refuse all requests to be included on impact factor indexing or ranking platforms, despite a yearly readership of over 600,000.

• Sub\urban Zeitschrift für kritische stadtforschung- a journal that focuses on interdisciplinary debates in critical urban studies.  It is primarily German speaking but orients to state-of-the-art international discussions.

• Planung neu Denken - a German language journal addressing planning issue.

• Interface: A journal for and about social movements  (an independently run, multi-lingual, journal about social movements in the first instance, and interesting to social geographers)

•  Thirdspace: A Journal of Feminist Theory & Culture - a journal publishing works in English and French that presents top quality scholarship on feminist theory and culture - and interesting to feminist geographers.

• Articulo - Journal of Urban Research - an independent, and voluntarily run journal based in Europe and addressing urban and regional issues. Articles are published in French or English.

Hybrid Open Access
This is a rather loose term that has emerged that could actually cover a whole variety of journals from small independent publishers, like Spaces and Flows to the big publishing houses like Taylor and Francis or Wiley that often offer a hand full of articles for free. Editorials to to special issues, for example, are often freely accessible while the articles are not.

Political economic dimensions
There is also a growing spectrum of new journals offering open access, but also charging authors to publish with them. Of course, someone has to pay for the publishing process, and the high cost of publishing has caused some old standing journals to fall into financial straits requiring financial contributions from authors, following a quasi co-operative financial structure. Die Erde comes to mind here.Still, I see several problems with this model:

• The sums being charged are not small (I've seen upwards of 900€ per article - sorry, I can't remember where)
• The publishers make no differentiation between students, precarious workers (usually early career post-docs and adjuncts), established researchers/professors, and institutions.  The financial ability differs according to one stage in career, and not all institutions are equal (compare salaries across the EU). A 900€ paper can be more than a professor's monthly salary.  Furthermore, those lower on the mobility latter have a higher publication pressure, as the publication record is the single most important feature of a given cv.  In this regard, it is necessary to recall that these journals are demanding this amount for a single article in a journal no one has ever heard of. So, these journals make no attempt to redistribute the costs. A solidarity system of publishing charges might be worth considering here. Given this unevenness, this system of publication ultimately fosters the scholarly voices of those not necessarily doing founded research but those who are simply well financed.  I find this dangerously close to buying a career.
• Payment doesn't come along with any membership rights. That is, the journals often make no attempt to democratize the editorial or administrative system.

Questionable Stuff
And of course, there is Beall's List a website that collects questionable and possibly predatory open access publishers. If you get an email out of the blue from someone apparently praising your work, and stroking your ego by wanting to publish it: first, read it again and see if you can detect whether it is a form letter; second, you might want to cross-reference the journal against Beall's List before going ahead and clicking the enticing hyper-link.

Are “Cities” really “The Future”?

“Materially, practically and conceptually, the figure of a
neatly bounded city space has long proven illusory.”
Rickards et al. 2016, p. 1539

Publishing is the 'Do or Die' issue in academia and research, and we all know that the more one publishes in high ranking outlets of one's discipline, the better it will be for one's career path. In urban geography, these publishing venues are, for example,  Progress, Proceedings or Transactions, but actual best venues will also, of course, vary with discipline. The highest possible achievement is probably a publication in Nature and Science, something that only a few may ever achieve, and if it ever occurs, it will be good for an extra press release published by the author's university communications office. And, of course, it will also help to secure further funding, as Nature and Science  are among the most prestigious outlets of science and research: Google-scholar has ranked them first and third of all scientific journals; Science Watch lists them first to third in a variety of fields.

These journals focus primarily on the hard sciences, only rarely dealing with the social sciences or humanities. However, from time to time, both Nature and Science will dabble in these fields, and this includes urban studies. A few years ago, Nature addressed urban issues, commenting that recent trends in urbanisation were, literally (!), an outcome of an “urban equation” (Anonymus 2010). Both the tone and content of this phrase embody the law-bound view of how humans aggregate in certain places – a perspective that reminds us of both new and old ‘space-cadets’ (thank you, Rob) in geography and planning. It is an essentialist conception of place, space, and territory that is rather  out of date. 

Science followed earlier this spring, publishing a theme issue that pontificated popular claims about the “Urban Planet” or “Cities are the Future” (Wigginton et al. 2016), before coming to terms with issues such as demographics, attitudes and lifestyles, health and the environment and so on. As these headers suggested, the overarching idea or leitmotif  was the idea that the planet is becoming fully urbanized – a narrative that was not only conceptualized, and published, in urban studies already over 45 years ago (Lefebvre 1970), but has also received critical scrutiny since over the course of on-going debates and controversies around what is called planetary urbanization (see Angelo & Wachsmuth 2015; Brenner 2014; Brenner & Schmid 2014; Brenner & Schmid 2016; Catterall 2014; Rickards/Gleeson/Boyle/O’Callaghan 2016; Walker 2016). As mentioned in these and other sources, the causes and consequences of urbanization tend to get confused in these sort of triumphant city or urban discourses, where the city is no longer considered a product of society (cf. David Harvey), but in turn, society tends to evolve and change in an urban context as such.

None of these debates were taken into account or even mentioned (!) by any of the contributions in the themed issue of Science. OK, in fairness, folks in the natural sciences may never have heard of colleagues like Henri Lefebvre, or come across debates and developments in urban studies. And, they may prefer instead to stick to their own of field of studies, pondering what hard (real) sciences think about these issues. However, given that these journals rank third, second or first of all scientific journals, and given that their reach is so wide, wouldn’t it be fair to expect that these articles pay minimal justice to the enormous body of research that has already been published on the subject matter? Don’t we tell our students that whatever we do, nothing starts right at zero – but always and unavoidably builds upon the work that others have been doing before?

It is not necessarily the missing reference to particular classical pieces of literature (like Lefebvre’s “Urban Revolution”) that is the focus here, but more the fact that a lively debate in the urban studies community is entirely absent, if not outright ignored. And, this is only one among several blunders that might surprise its readership, given that we are writing, here, about a top-notch scientific journal. It is worth noting, too, that we are not the first to notice the discrepancies: In a recent posting at undark.org, Humphries (2016) criticized the equating of “cities” with “urban”, and that the special issue of Science did not take into account the current realities that characterize urbanity today. In what follows, we would like to identify some more shortcomings.

One problem was the glaring absence of basic research. The introduction to the theme issue was titled, “The Rise of the City,” and the main point of this two-pager was to inform the reader that the world is half urban. However, there were no sources provided (at all), which was a rather bold move given the controversial character of this statement. The authors provided neither an indication about where their numbers came from, nor did they name or reference their „forecasters“. Much of their data circulated somehow randomly around the dates of 1950, 1990, 2014, and 2015, with no explanation, claims that could easily be debunked by cursory research (which they apparently forgot to do). In fact, it wasn't clear if the the writers were even aware that the United Nations predicted a half-urban planet by the year 2000, and that the half-urban planet was already (supposedly) reached in 2006 – a claim that has been repeatedly critiqued in urban studies (see Satterthwaite 2005, 2016). A particular purchase of Satterthwaite’s research, btw, was that he also brought back the myth of the city-debate to its origins in the developmental context, and he did this so much earlier than the recent discussion of planetary urbanism.

Another problem with the themed issue, that an urban scholar would notice, was the absence of politics. According to Science, manifestations of human behaviour (the city) were void of sociopolitical or economic arrangements, a tenor that was clear when the special issue attempted to take the reader on a journey about where urbanity came from. Apparently, it can be explained by evolution – a natural phenomenon.  Indeed, one can trace back the origins of human (or anthropo-) geography, and find that there were indeed geo-determinist assumptions around for some time that were still hegemonic in the first half of the 20th century. The same applies to bio-determinist thinking that gained, and partly still has, prominence in other scientific disciplines. The odd thing here is that the Science theme-issue section on the “urban mind” and chose to interview an anthropologist who isn’t even recognized in his own field (page 909), and this scientist explains urbanity through the size of the neocortex (page 909).

The lack of socio-political explanation, or even relevance, is seen again in the issue when urban development in China and Vancouver are explored. Good cities are washed, well-dressed, and walkable. Apparently, these best and desirable practices can be implemented everywhere (should we extrapolate, too, that this could be anywhere where people have large neo-cortexes?). The rules, regulations, norms, structures, value-chains, social and political practices that mediate these developments are evidently not relevant. Equally irrelevant were sociopolitical externalities. Instead of perceiving how cities constitute each other or how they relate to one another, the message was simply that cities that are dirty, crowded, loud, chaotic and sprawling simply have to catch-up – a notion that, again, has been repeatedly deconstructed in postcolonial urban studies (McFarlane, 2006; Roy 2005, 2009; Robinson 2003a, 2003b, 2005). Of course, the notion that the key to the future is simply to build, densify, innovate, modernize, and prioritize technology and infrastructure has also been refuted. In the cases of green development in Vancouver and China, Hall and Stern (2014) and Chang/Leitner/Sheppard (2016), respectively, are good starting points.

A final point that should not go uncommented is the imagery and juxtapositions conveyed throughout the 'zine. Throughout the issue, the good, the white (and green), wealthy, healthy, classy, glassy modern city, is juxtaposed with the poor, barefoot, ill, deprived, slum, and rural. The city is potentially dark and dangerous, we learn, and our urban savior will be bright and right. Here is an experiment that you can try at home: Open up the journal to page 91, „A Plague of Rats“ and ask your children/roommates/friends to quickly name the first two objects they see on the page. I did this with two young teenagers. First, they identified and read the title, which is bold and rather easy to see. Then, a look of disgust was cast across their face because the second object that they identified was… well, let’s just keep the suspense and suffice it to say that it was not the object in the cage. Next, flip through the pages until you find the images of experts, and note the colour of skin. The associations that can be made in these pages, of course, have nothing to with the content. The association remains, however, clear as day, and it is either a result of sloppy layout design (at best), or malicious reporting and editing (at worst).

This is not simply a minor political issue as, sadly, many would deem it. There is no shortage of social science examining social/sociospatial stratification, inequality, and exclusion, for starters. But, the way we see/represent/portray the world also plays role in the scientific method in terms of problem definition, data interpretation, dissemination, and this ultimately becomes institutionalized through further promotion and funding. Porter (2004: 104) confessed such struggles in what she called “unlearning privilege,” recognizing that, “our perceptions are powerfully embedded in [our] research design.” Upon critical reflection of her own work, she realized that her well-intended “quaint lefty ideas about inclusion,” (p. 104), as an example, resulted in asking the wrong questions. There is thus a multi-dimensional scientific and ethical responsibility to examine and self-examine this. If the editors of Science are not convinced, perhaps they could engage with (among others) Ta-Nehisi Coates (2015: 10), who reminds us that social polarization and exclusion is also “a visceral experience, that it dislodges brains, blocks airways, rips muscle, extracts organs, cracks bones, breaks teeth.”

It is difficult to know what to make of this special issue. While academia today functions along the tenants of  Publish or Perish, and unfolds with intense pressure to accrue third party funding, is it really acceptable that one of the most cited scientific journals provides little more than journalism, or mediocre science writing? How is it possible that authors of one of the most cited scientific journals don’t, in fact, have to apply the scientific method or be expert scholars in the field? Professional urban scholars might perceive a shining light as they could be happy that the topic was addressed at all. This could even have real positive consequences now that more funding agencies will understand urban studies as a legitimate field of science. However, in this optimism, we should not forget that in producing this Special Issue (that will reach and impact a vast audience), the editors of Science also set the tone concerning what matters in the field of urban studies -- and this, in turn, affects those actually doing the scholarly work, not to mention those inhabiting those spaces. According to the editors of Science, central in the tune of urban studies are certain sets of priorities: build, densify, innovate, modernize, and prioritize technology and infrastructure over socio-political matters (which are not relevant at all).  Urban geographers will immediately recognise this rather one-sided view, that is hardly state-of-the-art. Given this and the above mentioned problems, it does kind of make one wonder what their intentions were or why they bothered.

****Update!! from August 25th.  Our congratulations go to  Wachsmuth, Cohen and Angelo who successfully brought some of these debates in a later issue of Nature. The article is freely available here, the August 25th Issue, and addresses issues of urban sustainability. Read a background to the piece at David Wachsmuth's website, here.

Constance Carr, Markus Hesse

References
Angelo, H. & D. Wachsmuth (2015). Urbanizing urban political ecology: A critique of methodological cityism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 39(1), 16-27.

Anonymus (2010). The Urban Equation. Nature 467, 899.

Brenner, N. (2014). Implosions/Explosions: Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization. Berlin: Jovis

Brenner N. & C. Schmid C. (2014). The ‘urban age’ in question. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38(3) 731-755

Brenner N. & C. Schmid (2016). Combat, Caricature & Critique in the Study of Planetary Urbanization. http://www.soziologie.arch.ethz.ch/_DATA/90/BrennerSchmid2.pdf

Catterall B. (2014). Towards the Great Transformation: Where/what is culture in ‘Planetary Urbanisation? Towards a new paradigm. City 18(3) 368-379.

Chang, I.C., Leitner, H. & E. Sheppard (2016). A Green Leap Forward? Eco-State Restructuring and the Tianjin-Binhai Eco-City Model. Regional Studies 50(6), 929-943.

Coates, T. (2015). Between the World and Me. Penguin-Random House, New York.

Hall, P.V. & P.R. Stern (2014). Implicating waterfronts in regional sustainability. Local Envrionment 19 (6) 591-604.

Humphries, C. (2016). “Cities are not as big a deal as you think” Undark – Truth, Beauty, Science. http://undark.org/article/cities-suburbs-urban-social-environmental/ retrieved June 20 2016

Lefebvre, H. (1970). La Révolution urbaine. Gallimard: Paris

McFarlane, C. (2006). Crossing borders : development, learning and the North-South divide. Third World Quarterly 27(8), 1413-1437.

Porter, L. (2004). Unlearning one's privilege: reflections on cross‐cultural research with indigenous peoples in South‐East Australia. Planning Theory and Practice 5(1) 104-109.

Rickards, L, Gleeson, B, Bozle, M, O’Callaghan, C, (2016) Urban studies after the age of the city. Urban Studies 53(8) 1523-1541.

Robinson, J. (2003a). Postcolonialising Geography: Tactics and Pitfalls. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 24(3) 273-289.

Robinson, J. (2003b). Political geography in postcolonial context. Political Geography 22, 647-651.

J Robinson, (2005). Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development, London: Routledge.

Roy, A., (2006). Urban Informality: Toward an Epistemology of Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 71(2), 147-158

Roy, A., (2009). The 21st-Century Metropolis: New Geographies of Theory. Regional Studies 43(6), 819-830.

Satterthwaite, D. (2005) The scale of urban change world-wide 1950-2000 and its underpinnngs. IIED, London

Satterthwaite, D. (2016). The 10 and 1/2 Myths that may distort the Urban Policies of Governments and International Agencies http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/21st_Century/mainframe.html

Walker, R. (2015). Building a better theory of the urban: A response to ‘Towards a new epistemology of the urban?’ City 19(2-3), 183-191.

Wigginton, N.S., Fahrenkamp-Uppenbrink, J., Wible, B. & D. Malakoff (2016). Cities are the Future. Rapid urbanization is overtaxing the planet, but it may not have to. Science 352 Issue 6288, 904-05.

Announcement of 12 PhD Positions at TU Darmstadt

 Dear colleagues,

Please find attached our posting of 12 PhD positions in the field of cities and critical infrastructures at TU Darmstadt funded by the German Research Council (below also potential research areas in my group). It is a new interdisciplinary program looking at the social construction, vulnerability/resilience and protection/securitization of critical infrastructures from the perspective of STS and urban studies.

May I ask you to forward it to potential candidates who might be interested?

Best wishes,

Jochen

The newly formed interdisciplinary Research Training Group

Critical Infrastructures: Construction, Functional Failures, and Protection in Cities

at the Darmstadt University of Technology, Germany (close to Frankfurt), announces twelve PhD positions (3 years) scheduled to begin 1 October 2016. The Research Training Group is funded by the German Research Council, and analyzes critical infrastructures in cities—the networked systems which supply urban conglomerations with energy, water, communication facilities, and transportation services, and which treat and dispose of waste- and stormwater. Those infrastructures have become the nervous systems of modern cities, and their failure can trigger dramatic crises. In recent years, the growing vulnerability that seem to accompany the increased dependency on infrastructural networks has been a controversial topic. That controversy is due not only to multiple external threats such as natural disasters, terrorist and cyber attacks, but also to the growing complexity and increasing interdependencies of infrastructure systems.

The basic assumption of the Research Training Group is that critical infrastructures are highly context dependent both in temporal and spatial terms, and that they also manifest multiple spatial and temporal relations. The group’s aim is to understand and to explain these complex systems in their spatiality and temporality, and to explore urban practices of planning, of preventing interruptions and of preparing for them. Its research is inspired by urban studies and science and technology studies and takes place in three specific areas:

1.  First, we intend to identify the critical aspects of constructing technical infrastructures in light of their historical and spatial contexts, and we attempt to uncover those infrastructures’ social and political aspects, in addition to their technical and functional needs.
2. Second, we assume that complex spatial and temporal arrangements are particularly visible in cases of infrastructural dysfunction. We investigate failures and functional crises of urban infrastructures, including the spatially and temporally complex conditions of those infrastructures’ vulnerability and resilience.
3. Third, we ask how prevention of and preparedness for urban infrastructure failures are, or can be, organized and which spatial and temporal aspects play a role in the protection of critical infrastructures.

The Research Training Group is truly interdisciplinary and is made up of representatives of the following subjects: Spatial and Infrastructure Planning, Modern History, History of Technology, Medieval History, Philosophy of Technology and Technoscience, Comparative Analysis of Political Systems, Ubiquitous Knowledge Processing, Design and Urban Development, Rail Systems, and Informatics in Construction Science. More information about the scientific program, the professors participating and about exemplary dissertation topics can be found at: www.kritis.tu-darmstadt.de. Before submitting your application, we recommend to contact one of the professors for advice on possible research topics/ designs or for any other questions you might have, and to request the summary of the research program.

Within this program we are currently inviting applications for two Ph.D. positions (full-time) in the field of Spatial and Infrastructure Planning (www.raumplanung.tu-darmstadt.de). Candidates applying in this field of are expected to examine the governance of urban vulnerability/resilience and critical infrastructures in an international perspective. Especially welcome are PhD proposals with a focus on the interconnectivity and coordination of various infrastructure sectors, spatial dimensions of cascading infrastructure failures and the challenges in the governance of urban crisis prevention and management. Sample thesis topics include:

• Networked Vulnerabilities? Smart Infrastructures in Urban Crisis Prevention and Management
• The Governance of Urban Resilience: Preparedness and Prevention Strategies through Utilities, Technical Agencies, and Local Civil Protection
• The Making of Urban Security? Urban Infrastructure Governance and the War on Terrorism
• Territoriality and Networked Space: New Geographies in the Protection of Critical Infrastructures
• Planning for Daily Interruptions: The Making of Urban and Infrastructural Resilience in Africa

These are just sample themes—you are encouraged to develop your own. Please contact Professor Jochen Monstadt (monstadt@kritis.tu-darmstadt.de) for advice on possible research topics/designs.

Tasks: the Graduate Fellows must complete a dissertation within three years in their respective fields with a focus on one (or more) of the above-mentioned three research areas. The rationale of the Research Training Group is to support interdisciplinary cooperation among the Fellows, and all members are expected to participate in mandatory seminars, symposia, and workshops. Since course work and seminars are carried out in both German and English, it is expected that applicants are willing to participate in German courses offered by the university and to learn to read and understand spoken German. Fellows are also expected to work together in our common office downtown Darmstadt and thus need to take up their residence in the city or in the Frankfurt/Rhine-Main region.

Terms and conditions: The Research Training Group offers an excellent research infrastructure for PhD candidates who would like to complete their dissertations in an innovative, internationally networked program. The Fellows will work in common areas with dedicated office space, will have the support of participating professors, and can use all university facilities to support their work. The special opportunities of this structured training program include the possibility of working together with renowned colleagues for several months at one of our four collaborating European universities. We also are working with various partners in private companies and civil services offering internships to our Fellows.

Salaries depend on each Fellow’s qualifications and experience, and will be calculated according to the collective agreement of TU Darmstadt (TV-TU Darmstadt). The positions are limited to three years and include, depending on the Fellow’s home faculty, a salary at 65%–100% of full-time employment (monthly salaries range from ca. € 1,500 to € 2,100 after tax and include health insurance and social security). Half-time employment is also possible.

Your application: TU Darmstadt intends to increase the number of women scientists and encourages them to apply. Candidates who have a degree of disability of at least 50% are given preferred treatment if equally qualified. Please submit your application by 10 July 2016 in English or German to info@ kritis.tu-darmstadt.de (as one pdf file, max. 6 MB). You must enclose (1) a CV with information on academic qualifications, language skills and international experience, (2) scanned copies of academic credentials, and (3) a dissertation proposal of up to five pages.

We look forward to your application!

Call for Papers - Swiss Mobility Conference – 20th & 21st of October 2016 – University of Lausanne

Call for papers/ Appel à communications

 

The Swiss Mobility Conference (SMC) is the result of collaboration between the urban sociology chairs (EPFL) and geography of mobilities (UNIL). The objective of SMC is to provide a place for discussion and debate for researchers in humanities and social sciences working on various forms of mobility. Presentations will address the mobilities in their diversity, they can register in the following research areas:

• theoretical debates (and in particular the contributions of social theories to the study of mobilities)
• methodological innovations (using mobile methods)
• public policy and decision making in mobility
• regulation of mobility and its tools
• the actors and their logics of action (residential choice, modal practices, multilocal living, etc.)
• the norms and values underlying mobility and social inequality
• temporality and spatiality of mobility
• mobility prospective

 

Abstracts of 3000 signs, must be sent by August 15, 2016 at the following address:

mobility.conference@unil.ch

 

For more information: http://www.unil.ch/igd/mobility-conference

Organizers:

• Prof. Vincent Kaufmann, Laboratoire de sociologie urbaine, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne 
• Prof. Patrick Rérat, Institut de géographie et durabilité, Université de Lausanne

 

Scientific committee:

• Thomas Buhler, Université de Franche-Comté
• Yves Delacrétaz, Haute Ecole d'Ingénierie et de Gestion du Canton de Vaud
• Frédéric Dobruszkes, Université libre de Bruxelles
• Cédric Duchene-Lacroix, Universität Basel
• Maxime Huré, Université Lyon 2
• Timo Ohnmacht, Hochschule Luzern
• Mathis Stock, Université de Lausanne
• Jean Varlet, Université de Savoie
• Gebhard Wulfhorst, Technische Universität München 

***

La Swiss Mobility Conference (SMC) est le résultat des collaborations entre les chaires de sociologie urbaine (EPFL) et de géographie des mobilités (UNIL). L’objectif de la SMC est de proposer un lieu de discussion et de débat pour les chercheur·e·s en sciences humaines et sociales qui travaillent sur les différentes formes de mobilité.

Les présentations aborderont les mobilités dans leur diversité, elles peuvent s’inscrire dans les domaines de recherche suivants :

• les débats théoriques (et notamment les apports des théories sociales à l’étude des mobilités)
• les innovations méthodologiques (utilisation des mobiles methods)
• l’action publique et les processus de décision en matière de mobilité
• la régulation de la mobilité et ses outils
• les acteurs et leurs logiques d’action (choix résidentiel, pratiques modales, multirésidentialité, etc.)
• les normes et valeurs sous-tendant les mobilités et les inégalités sociales
• les temporalités et spatialités des mobilités
• la prospective de la mobilité

 

Les abstracts, de 3000 signes, doivent être envoyés pour le 15 août 2016 à l’adresse suivante: mobility.conference@unil.ch

 

Pour plus d’informations: http://www.unil.ch/igd/mobility-conference

Organisateurs:

• Prof. Vincent Kaufmann, Laboratoire de sociologie urbaine, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne 
• Prof. Patrick Rérat, Institut de géographie et durabilité, Université de Lausanne

 

Comité scientifique:

• Thomas Buhler, Université de Franche-Comté
• Yves Delacrétaz, Haute Ecole d'Ingénierie et de Gestion du Canton de Vaud
• Frédéric Dobruszkes, Université libre de Bruxelles
• Cédric Duchene-Lacroix, Universität Basel
• Maxime Huré, Université Lyon 2
• Timo Ohnmacht, Hochschule Luzern
• Mathis Stock, Université de Lausanne
• Jean Varlet, Université de Savoie
• Gebhard Wulfhorst, Technische Universität München 

 

New Publication

Integrative planning of post-suburban growth in the Glatt Valley
Constance Carr & Evan McDonough
forthcoming in Raumforschung und Raumordnung (ISSN 0034-0111).

Abstract
This paper addresses conditions of post-suburban urbanisation. Our empirical base is drawn from observations of integration initiatives in the region of the Glatt Valley, a rather undefined area extending from the City of Zurich towards the airport and spreading over a number of small municipalities. Under growth pressure, municipalities are coordinating housing, transportation, and economic activity, and this is generating new post-suburban forms. To understand these processes, qualitative methods were used, surveying relevant documents, and conducting conversational interviews with actors in the area. Observed was a process of infrastructure consolidation towards integrating functional pathways and optimising capital accumulation, attracting and taking care of business development, and high-income earners. To date, the region reveals itself to be diverse and dynamic, while also furthering certain modes of fragmentation and social stratification. The results reveal post-suburban forms that are place-specific and path dependent insofar as they are driven by certain arrangements of governance that emphasise a certain mode of integrative planning. This form of post-suburban growth is also producing new forms of fragmentation.
Keywords

Post-suburban, Switzerland, Zurich, Glatt Valley, integrative planning, governance

Kurzfassung
Dieser Beitrag befasst sich mit Bedingungen der post-suburbanen Entwicklung in der Schweiz. Die empirische Basis bilden Beobachtungen von Raumplanungs- und Governancepraktiken im Glattal, einem nicht klar abzugrenzenden Gebiet, welches sich von der Stadt Zürich bis jenseits des Flughafens erstreckt und viele kleine Gemeinden umfasst. Unter Wachstumsdruck koordinieren die Gemeinden den Wohnungsbau, die Verkehrsplanung und die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Somit entstehen neue post-suburbanen Räume. Auf Basis qualitativer Methoden wurden die Urbanisierungsprozesse in der Region analysiert. Relevante Dokumente wurden ausgewertet, und Interviews mit Akteuren der Region wurden durchgeführt. Beobachtet wurde ein Prozess der Konsolidierung von Infrastrukturen zur Optimierung der Kapitalakkumulation. Dieser fördert die Anziehung von Betrieben, pflegt die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und die Ansiedlung einkommensstarker Haushalte. Bis dato entfaltet sich die Region vielfältig und dynamisch, fördert aber auch Formen der Fragmentierung und der sozialen Schichtung. Die Ergebnisse zeigen ebenso post-suburbane Formen, die ortsspezifisch sind und welche sich durch historisch gegebene Governancestrukturen und damit verbundene spezifische Modelle der integrativen Raumplanung ergeben. Diese Form von post-suburbanem Wachstum produziert neue Muster der Fragmentierung.


Author pre-print available here

New Publication

Wachstum vs. Ausgleich – Zur Rekonstruktion des jüngeren Leitbildwandels in der deutschen Raumentwicklungspolitik

          

Markus Hesse, Annick Leick (Hrsg.)

          
                                   

Wachstum vs. Ausgleich – Zur Rekonstruktion des jüngeren Leitbildwandels in der deutschen Raumentwicklungspolitik

Die „Neuen Leitbilder und Handlungsstrategien der Raumentwicklung in Deutschland“ wurden Anfang der 2000er Jahre entworfen und 2006 von der Ministerkonferenz für Raumordnung (MKRO) als offizielle Leitlinie der deutschen Raumordnungspolitik verabschiedet. Sie wurden begründet mit der notwendigen Anpassung der Raumordnungspolitik an veränderte sozio-ökonomische und politische Rahmenbedingungen, vor allem mit einem veränderten Wettbewerbsumfeld für Städte und Stadtregionen. Das Leitbild 1 und darin das Konzept der Metropolregionen haben in diesem Prozess die mit Abstand größte Resonanz erfahren. Metropolregionen galten als Ankerpunkte der Globalisierung, als Motoren wirtschaftlichen Wachstums und Mittelpunkte einer zukunftsfähigen Raumentwicklung, sowohl national wie regional.

Die vorliegende Veröffentlichung dokumentiert ein Forschungsvorhaben im Auftrag der ARL, das zwischen 2011 und 2012 bearbeitet wurde. Es hatte zum Ziel, den Leitbildwandel hin zur wachstumsorientierten Raumordnungspolitik und ihrem Schwerpunkt auf Metropolregionen zu rekonstruieren und kritisch zu hinterfragen. Beide Gegenstände – die neuen Leitbilder der Raumentwicklung sowie das Konzept der Metropolregionen – wurden aus der Perspektive der Diskursanalyse untersucht. Das heißt, die thematische Neuorientierung wird mit Blick auf sprachliche Praktiken und kommunikative Konstruktionen analysiert, unter Berücksichtigung der ideologischen Kontexte, in denen Politiken formuliert bzw. „gerahmt“ werden. Insofern geht es hier um den Begründungszusammenhang dieses Politikwechsels, nicht um eine Ex-post-Analyse seiner Wirksamkeit. Im Ergebnis wird das Konzept der neuen Leitbilder sowie der „politisch designierten“ Metropolregionen als theoretisch widersprüchlich, empirisch uneindeutig und konzeptionell fragil eingeschätzt. Die im Kern wachstumszentrierte Zielvorstellung wird als einseitig wahrgenommen. Daraus wird die Konsequenz einer stärkeren Pluralisierung der Diskussion über zukünftige Leitideen und Strategien abgeleitet. Diese Überlegungen sind auch als Beitrag zur Weiterentwicklung von Leitideen, Theorien und damit des Selbstverständnisses von Raumordnung an sich zu verstehen

Growth vs. Compensation – Reconstructing the Recent Modernisation of Spatial Development Guidelines in Germany

The “New Guiding Principles and Action Strategies of Spatial Development in Germany” were drawn up at the beginning of the 2000s and passed by the Conference of Ministers for Spatial Planning as the official guidelines of German spatial policy in 2006. They were justified by the necessity to adapt spatial policy to the changed socio-ecological and political framework conditions, especially the changed competitive environment for cities and urban regions. In this process, by far the greatest response was caused by Guiding Principle 1 and the concept of metropolitan regions it outlines. Metropolitan regions were considered as anchor points of globalisation, as engines of economic growth and as the focus of sustainable spatial development, both in national and in regional terms.

This publication documents a research project commissioned by the ARL, which was conducted between 2011 and 2012. It aimed to reconstruct and to critically scrutinise the transformation of guiding principles towards promoting growth-oriented spatial planning policies with a focus on metropolitan regions. Both objects – the new guiding principles of spatial development and the concept of metropolitan regions – were investigated from the perspective of discourse analysis. This involved analysing the thematic reorientation in terms of language practices and communicative constructions, taking into account the ideological contexts in which policies are formulated or “framed”. The focus of interest is thus on the context of justification for this change of policy and not on an ex-post analysis of its effectiveness. Ultimately, the concept of the new guiding principles and the “politically designated” metropolitan regions are judged to be theoretically inconsistent, empirically ambiguous and conceptually fragile. The essentially growth-centred objective is perceived as one-sided. Consequently, a more strongly diversified discussion of future guiding principles and strategies is indicated. These deliberations are to be understood as a contribution towards further developing the guiding principles, theories and thus selfconception of spatial planning.