605 research outputs found
La ecologÃa polÃtica urbana. Grandes promesas, frenos… y ¿nuevos comienzos?
L’article parteix de la premissa que és de vital importà ncia reconèixer que el principal impulsor dels canvis ambientals ha estat el galopant procés d’urbanització mundial. De fet, la «sostenibilitat» de la vida urbana contemporà nia —entesa com la reproducció ampliada de la seva forma social i natural i del seu funcionament— és la responsable de l’ús del 80% dels recursos i de la generació de la major part dels residus mundials. Aquest article vol fer palès com aquestes arrels urbanes són habitualment ignorades per gran part de la teoria i la prà ctica urbanes, i com els febles intents tecnocrà tics per adoptar formes més «sostenibles » de vida urbana en realitat segueixen afavorint l’apocalipsi socioecològica combinada i
desigual que marca les dinà miques contemporà nies de la urbanització mundial. AixÃ, no es tracta tant d’analitzar la qüestió de la natura a la ciutat, sinó més aviat d’analitzar la urbanització de la natura (entesa com el procés a través del qual tot tipus de natures són socialment mobilitzades, econòmicament incorporades i fÃsicament metabolitzades/transformades per tal de donar suport al procés d’urbanització). En primer lloc, explicarem com les relacions entre les ciutats i el medi ambient han estat descrites i imaginades al llarg de l’últim segle. En segon lloc, indagarem com la qüestió ambiental va entrar en la teoria i en la prà ctica urbana durant el segle xx. Per acabar, esbrinarem com i per què, malgrat l’avenç del nostre coneixement sobre la relació entre el canvi ambiental i la urbanització i un consens focalitzat en la necessitat d’un desenvolupament urbà «sostenible», la incògnita del medi ambient i els problemes generalitzats que ocasiona no mostren cap senyal de disminuir. L’article conclou amb un breu esbós d’alguns dels reptes intel·lectuals i prà ctics que ens esperen.The paper starts from the premise that it is vitally important to recognize that the rapid rate of planetary urbanization is the main driver of environmental change. Indeed, the ‘sustainability’ of contemporary urban life (understood as the expanded reproduction of its socio-physical form and functions) is responsible for 80% of the world’s use of resources and most of the world’s waste. We wish to highlight how these urban origins are routinely ignored in urban theory and practice, and how feeble techno-managerial attempts to produce more ‘sustainable’ forms of urban living are actually heightening the combined and uneven socio-ecological apocalypse that marks the contemporary dynamics of planetary urbanization. This paper is, therefore, not so much concerned with the question of nature IN the city, as it is with the urbanization OF nature, understood as the process through which all forms of nature are socially mobilized, economically incorporated and physically metabolized/transformed in order to support the urbanization process. First, we shall chart the strange history of how the relationship between cities and environments has been scripted and imagined over the last century or so. Second, we shall suggest how the environmental question entered urban theory and practice in the late 20th century. And, finally, we shall explore how and why, despite our growing understanding of the relationship between environmental change and urbanization and a consensual focus on the need for ‘sustainable’ urban development, the environmental conundrum and the pervasive problems it engenders do not show any sign of abating. We shall conclude by briefly charting some of the key intellectual and practical challenges ahead.El artÃculo parte de la premisa de que es de vital importancia reconocer que el principal impulsor de los cambios ambientales ha sido el galopante proceso de urbanización mundial. De hecho, la «sostenibilidad» de la vida urbana contemporánea —entendida como la reproducción ampliada de su forma social y natural y de su funcionamiento— es la responsable del uso del 80% de los recursos y de la generación de la mayor parte de los residuos mundiales. Este artÃculo tiene por objetivo resaltar cómo estas raÃces urbanas son habitualmente ignoradas por gran parte de la teorÃa y la práctica urbanas, y cómo los débiles intentos tecnocráticos para adoptar formas más «sostenibles» de vida urbana en realidad siguen favoreciendo el apocalipsis
socioecológico combinado y desigual y que marca las dinámicas contemporáneas de la urbanización mundial. De ahà que no se trata tanto de analizar la cuestión de la naturaleza en la ciudad, sino más bien de analizar la urbanización de la naturaleza (entendida como el proceso a través del cual todo tipo de naturalezas son socialmente movilizadas, económicamente incorporadas y fÃsicamente metabolizadas/transformadas en beneficio del proceso de urbanización). En primer lugar, explicaremos cómo las relaciones entre las ciudades y el medio ambiente han sido descritas e imaginadas a lo largo del último siglo. En segundo lugar, indagaremos cómo la cuestión ambiental entró en la teorÃa y en la práctica urbana durante el siglo xx. Por último,
averiguaremos cómo y por qué, a pesar del avance de nuestro conocimiento sobre la relación entre el cambio ambiental y la urbanización y un consenso focalizado en la necesidad de un desarrollo urbano «sostenible», la incógnita del medio ambiente y los problemas generalizados que ocasiona no muestran ninguna señal de disminuir. El artÃculo concluye con una breve aproximación a algunos de los retos intelectuales y prácticos que nos esperan
Civic agriculture in review: Then, now, and future directions
Civic agriculture, a term first coined by rural sociologist Thomas Lyson, refers to forms of agriculture that occur on a local level, from production to consumption, and are linked to a community\u27s social and economic development. Sixteen years since its original articulation, the term civic agriculture has taken on greater significance in research, political activism, and community organizing. Grown from the roots of civic community theory, civic agriculture functions as a new branch of civic community theory that is ripe for theorization. In revisiting the foundations of the term, this review paper seeks to consolidate current and future research in the field of civic agriculture with a focus on its link to social welfare. This begins by reviewing the foundations of civic community theory and discussing how they influence research related to civic agriculture. As we report in this paper, there remain considerable gaps in understanding of how civic agriculture can be fomented by-or is related to-indicators such as demographics, concentration of power, community cohesion, and civic engagement. Consequently, the assumed links between local food systems and social welfare must continue to be studied to determine correlation and causality. This understanding is particularly important during this time of global pandemic, when the flaws and inequities of global supply chains are exposed and where, in many cases, civic agriculture met the increasing interest in local food. The COVID-19 pandemic has amply demonstrated the fragility and instability of global food supply chains, making the need for local food systems more significant and more relevant to communities across the world
Infrastructured bodies: Between violence and fugitivity
This article traces the trajectory of critical geographical scholarship on the body’s intertwinement with infrastructure systems. In doing so, it argues that although the body is not ontologically infrastructure, it can nevertheless enable infrastructure’s functioning – whether by being made into infrastructure of surplus value production or by suturing widening gaps in sub-optimal infrastructure systems. Analysing these dynamics, the article theorises the body as infrastructured – given over to the violence of capital and its infrastructures that subject specifically gendered, racialised, and classed bodies to surplus value extraction and/or abandonment; but also as simultaneously fleeting in its irreversible exposure to this violence
The spatialization of democratic politics: Insights from Indignant Squares
This article departs from accounts that either deify Indignant Squares as a model for 21st century political praxis or demonize them as apolitical/post-political crowd gatherings. By performing a closer ethnographic reading of the Indignants’ protests at Athens’ Syntagma Square, we depict the Indignant Squares as a consensual and deeply spatialized staging of dissent, which nevertheless harbours in its underbelly internally conflicting and often radically opposing political imaginaries. A closer reading of the organization, practice and discourses that evolved at Syntagma Square unearths the existence of not one, but two distinct Indignant Squares, both at Syntagma, each with its own topography (upper and lower square), and its own discursive and material practices. Although both squares staged dissent, they nevertheless generated different (opposing, even) political imaginaries. The ‘upper square’ often divulged nationalistic or xenophobic discourses; the ‘lower square’ centred around more organized efforts to stage inclusive politics of solidarity. The paper suggests that, rather than focusing on the homogenizing terms Indignants’ movement/Indignant Squares we should instead be trying to develop a more nuanced theoretical understanding and a more finely grained empirical analysis of the discursive and spatial choreographies of these events. This, we argue, would allow us to go beyond either celebrating them as new political imaginaries, or condemning them as expressions of a post-political era. Talking of ‘Indignant Squares’ in the plural helps one explore in more grounded ways both the limitations and the possibilities that these events offer for opening up (or closing down) democratic politics
- …