Rights in places: An analytical extension of the right to the city |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Geography, The Florida State University, 113 Collegiate Loop, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA;2. Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, 950 Main St, Worcester, MA 01910, USA;1. Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, 950 Main St., Worcester, MA 01610, USA;2. Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, 344 Crater Rim Drive, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, HI 96718, USA;3. Clark Labs, Clark University, 950 Main St., Worcester, MA 01610, USA;1. Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AC Wageningen, The Netherlands;2. Wageningen Environmental Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 3, 6708PB Wageningen, The Netherlands;3. Centre for Ecosystems, Society and Biosecurity, Forest Research, Northern Research Station, Roslin EH25 9SY, United Kingdom;4. Forest Research, c/o Forestry Commission, 620 Bristol Business Park, Coldharbour Lane, Bristol BS16 1EJ, United Kingdom;5. Landscape Architecture and Planning, University of Copenhagen. Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frb. Copenhagen, Denmark;6. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kräftriket, 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden;1. Technische Universität München (TUM), Ingenieurfakultät Bau Geo Umwelt, Lehrstuhl für Bodenordnung und Landentwicklung, Germany;2. University of Rwanda, College of Science and Technology, Centre for Geographic Information Systems and Remote Sensing (CGIS-UR), Rwanda;1. Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 01003, United States;2. Northern Research Station, United States Forest Service, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, United States;3. Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, MA, 01610, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Following recent scholarship on place and place-making, we identify key challenges for contemporary empirical research using the “Right to the City” as an analytic. We seek to distinguish between the aspirational “right” articulated as a political and conceptual call to arms on one hand, and the “actually existing rights” that are carved out through both formal and informal mechanisms (including political protest) in the everyday city on the other. Actually existing rights are defined not through fiat or via momentary revolutionary acts, but through the durability of relationships between multiple actors, including residents, citizens, states, and corporate agents. We re-articulate urban rights as actually contingent and agonistic properties of the relationships that citizens have with places. This paper uses the historic conflict over community gardens in New York as an illustration of how thinking of rights regimes as multiple, overlapping, and placed helps better illuminate potential political interventions. Thinking of rights and places as plural, overlapping, and contingent is analytically productive because it highlights (rather than overwriting) conflicts between competing articulations of rights and privileges in cities. |
| |
| Keywords: | Right to the city Urban rights Place-making Lefebvre Politics |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
