La ecología política urbana. Grandes promesas, frenos… y ¿nuevos comienzos?

L’article parteix de la premissa que és de vital importància reconèixer que el principal impulsor dels canvis ambientals ha estat el galopant procés d’urbanització mundial. De fet, la «sostenibilitat» de la vida urbana contemporània —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 pràctica urbanes, i com els febles intents tecnocràtics per adoptar formes més «sostenibles » de vida urbana en realitat segueixen afavorint l’apocalipsi socioecològica combinada i desigual que marca les dinàmiques contemporànies de la urbanització mundial. Així, 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 físicament 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 pràctica 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 pràctics 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 artículo 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 artículo tiene por objetivo resaltar cómo estas raíces urbanas son habitualmente ignoradas por gran parte de la teoría 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 ahí 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 físicamente 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 teoría 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 artículo concluye con una breve aproximación a algunos de los retos intelectuales y prácticos que nos esperan

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

Urban Political Ecology. Great Promises, Deadlock… and New Beginnings?

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

Housing Justice in Unequal Cities

Housing Justice in Unequal Cities is a global research network funded by the National Science Foundation (BCS 1758774) and housed at the Institute on Inequality and Democracy at UCLA Luskin. This open-access volume, co-edited by Ananya Roy and Hilary Malson, brings together movement-based and university-based scholars to build a shared field of inquiry focused on housing justice. Based on a convening that took place in Los Angeles in January 2019, at the LA Community Action Network and at the University of California, Los Angeles, the essays and interventions situate housing justice in the long struggle for freedom on stolen land. Embedded in the stark inequalities of Los Angeles, our work is necessarily global, connecting the city’s Skid Row to the indebted and evicted in Spain and Greece, to black women’s resistance in Brazil, to the rights asserted by squatters in India and South Africa. Learning from radical social movements, we argue that housing justice also requires a commitment to research justice. With this in mind, our effort to build a field of inquiry is also necessarily an endeavor to build epistemologies and methodologies that are accountable to communities that are on the frontlines of banishment and displacement

Star Architects, Urban Spectacles and Global Brands: Exploring the Case of the Tokyo Olympics 2020

Olympic stadia are often regarded as a political showcase involving a range of influences: the host nation’s international politics, the interests of transnational capitalism along with site-specific meanings and the power of iconic architecture. By examining the 2020 Tokyo Olympic main stadium as a case study, the paper analyzes the controversial Zaha Hadid’ stadium plan in relation to the Japanese nation branding initiative. In doing so, the paper argues that ‘branding’ should be seen as part of an economic and cultural system which seems to enhance the global value of iconic architects and their buildings. Yet, the power of brands can be understood as a contingent entity. This is because its ambivalenct nature entails a tension between exclusiveness and banality; additionally, it could be difficult for branded architects to work across the different regimes of global and local politics; and they are of course also constrained by the logic of neoliberal transnational capitalism. By investigating a major global branded architect, Zaha Hadid and her architecture plan, the paper considers why a new image of Japan could not be adequately created by Hadid’s aesthetics and narratives of the Olympic stadium which should be regarded as a national cultural legacy. The paper then discusses the contested processes of image-making and narrative creation in relation to the representation of Japan in contemporary Olympic culture. The paper concludes with an examination of Kengo Kuma’s architecture language in his 2020 Tokyo Olympics stadium design