Urban Political Geographies: A Global Perspective
Publication Year: 2012
How can we think about the urban within a political and geographical framework? This compelling new textbook scrutinizes urban politics through a theoretical and empirical lens to provide readers with a clear understanding of the relationship between political, spatial and economic issues on the urban environment.
Taking a truly global analysis, the book uses international comparative case studies from cities across the world including London, Beijing, Austin, and Vancouver. It draws on ideas and theories from human geography, politics, sociology, economics, and development.
Engaging in style and thorough in its coverage of the key issues, the book is essential reading for students and scholars looking for a book that deals with contemporary urban debates from a political, economic and geographical perspective.
- Front Matter
- Back Matter
- Subject Index
- Globalization and the Urban Experience
- The Triad of Urban Politics
- Overview of the Book's Structure
- Chapter 1: Urban Development and the Politics of Representation
- 1.1 Introduction: Towards a Political Economy of Representation
- 1.2 Governing the Image of the City
- 1.3 From Fordism to Post-Fordism: Reinventing Cities in a Context of Economic Transition
- 1.4 Postmodernizing the Capitalist City
- 1.5 Celebrating the Global City
- 1.6 The environmentalization of the Urban Experience
- 1.7 Concluding reflections: the Eurocentrism of Urban Scholarship
- Chapter 2: Making Culture Work: The Rise of the Creative City
- 2.1 Introduction: Urban Development in a Knowledge-Based Capitalism
- 2.2 Creative Cities: Economies of Diversity and Discursive Strategies in North America
- 2.3 Governmentalizing the Cultural City in Europe and Asia
- 2.4 Conclusion: Culture beyond Representation
Part Two: Politics as Government
- Chapter 3: Urban Neoliberalism: Ascent and Crisis
- 3.1 Introduction: the Irresistible Rise of Neoliberalism
- 3.2 At the Origins of Neoliberalism: The Urban Question in the 1970s
- 3.3 The ‘new Urban Politics’
- 3.4 The Practice of Urban Neoliberalism
- 3.5 Neoliberalizing Urban Economic Spaces
- 3.6 The Expected Unforeseen: The Housing Bubble and the Global Recession
- Chapter 4: Urban Geopolitics: Legitimate Violence, Terrorism, Urbicide
- 4.1 Introduction: The Governmentalization of the Urban Experience
- 4.2 The Politics of Fear
- 4.3 From Fear to Communitarian Self-Defence
- 4.4 The use of Force as a Threat: Terrorism, Urban Marginality and the Politics of Pre-Emption
- 4.5 Cities at War/The War against Cities
- 4.6 Conclusions: The Visible and the Invisible in Urban Geopolitics
Part Three: Politics as Contestation
- Chapter 5: Urban Justice: Struggles and Movements
- 5.1 Introduction: The Ethical Turn in Democratic Politics
- 5.2 Social Justice in Question: Equality, Recognition, Domination
- 5.3 Rights to the City
- 5.4 Justice Movements: Limits and Potentialities
- 5.5 Justice, Globalization and the Environment
- 5.6 Conclusion: The Encounter between Institutionalist and Marxist Perspectives
- Chapter 6: Urban Citizenship: Insurgencies and Recognition
- 6.1 Introduction: The Crisis of National Citizenship
- 6.2 The Promises of Urban Citizenship
- 6.3 The globalization of Migration and the Multiple Geographies of belonging
- 6.4 Dissidence or Normalization: The Quandaries of Sexual Citizenship
- 6.5 Conclusion: The ‘Common Place’ of Citizenship
The Natural Home[Page ii]
SAGE has been part of the global academic community since 1965, supporting high quality research and learning that transforms society and our understanding of individuals, groups, and cultures. SAGE is the independent, innovative, natural home for authors, editors and societies who share our commitment and passion for the social sciences.
Find out more at: http://www.sagepublications.com
© Ugo Rossi and Alberto Vanolo 2012
First published 2012
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form, or by any means, only with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction, in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers.
SAGE Publications Ltd
1 Oliver's Yard
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP
SAGE Publications Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area
Mathura Road, Post Bag 7
New Delhi 110 044
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd
33 Pekin Street #02-01
Far East Square
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011936975
British Library Cataloguing in Publication data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-0-85702-884-6 (pbk)
Typeset by C&M Digitals (P) Ltd, Chennai, India
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CRO 4YY
Printed on paper from sustainable resources
- I.1 Urban transformations in Beijing's Olympic Village 5
- I.2 The Guggenheim in Bilbao: an urban icon 6
- 1.1 Dubai's Palm Jumeirah 37
- 1.2 Berlin's Postdamer Platz 41
- 1.3 Sustainable housing in the Malmö Bo01 district (Sweden) 48
- 2.1 Shanghai's waterfront 60
- 2.2 Saadiyat – aerial shot 61
- 2.3 Glasgow's Clyde Waterfront 63
- 2.4 Graz's Island in the Mur (Austria) 66
- 3.1 Street economy: fruit stall in Boston 74
- 3.2 Anti-poll tax demonstration in London (1991) 80
- 3.3 City life and street vending in New Delhi 85
- 3.4 Semi-abandoned central railway station in Dakar (Senegal) 90
- 4.1 Anti-war protest in New York (August 2004) 107
- 4.2 The exhibition of police as a deterrent against criminality, São Paolo (Brazil) 111
- 4.3 Involvement of local population in terrorism prevention in United Kingdom 120
- 4.4 Israel's security fence in the Palestinian West Bank 125
- 4.5 The Porta Farm slum, Harare (Zimbabwe), before and after demolition (2002 and 2006) 127
- 5.1 Struggles against gentrification in Dalston, London 140
- 5.2 Homeless in an underground station, Tokyo 147
- 5.3 Protest against the privatization of municipal enterprises in Cali, Colombia (2004) 150
- 5.4 Unauthorized settlements hiding behind open-field disposal sites in St Louis, Senegal (2006) 153
- 6.1 Use of urban space for play in Santiago de Cuba 161
- 6.2 A Public Space in Brussels (Belgium) 162
- 6.3 Migrants at the border between Thailand and Myanmar (2009) 166
- 6.4 Italian government's campaign against homophobia (November 2009) 175
About the Authors
Foreword: The Athenian Symptom[Page ix]Institute de Géographie, Université de Neuchâtel (Switzerland),
On 20 June 2009, the museum hosting the archaeological treasures of the Acropolis and the Parthenon, designed by Swiss architect Bernard Tschumi, was inaugurated in Athens. The Greek government estimated that the museum, in which some 80 million euros were invested, would attract two million visitors a year, contributing to renewing the image of the city capital as well as to increasing the inflow of tourists in Athens. The project and its implementation sparked lively debates in Greece. The fact that a non-Greek architect was commissioned for a project touching the heart of the nation aroused strong criticism among the wider public, considering also that demolitions of Art Deco and neoclassical buildings were necessary in order to make way for the 25,000 square metre building.
The establishment of the new Acropolis Museum is evocative of at least three dimensions of contemporary city life: the urban-marketing campaigns, the growth-led strategies of urban development and their contestation. Urban Political Geographies is centred on the analysis of these interrelated but also conflicting dimensions. The book is conceived as an advanced textbook for students and urban practitioners (policymakers, planners, urban activists), but it is also aimed at a specialist audience, by offering a theoretically situated account of the politics of urban development in times of globalization and neoliberalism.
In recent years, Athens and Greece have been hit by an unprecedented financial and political turmoil. As a consequence of the sovereign debt crisis, but also of related financial speculations, Greece finds itself, as a member of the European Union, in an uncomfortable position similar to that experienced in previous decades by developing countries that had to deal with the structural adjustment programmes demanded by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as the conditionality for granting loans at reasonably low interest rates. In response to this situation, Greece has had to self-impose severe restrictions on government expenditure in order to receive the financial support it needs to achieve macro-economic stability and restore market confidence. Over the medium run, economic prospects for Greece and the city of Athens look dire. After having enjoyed a period of spectacular growth, driven by the huge investments linked to the 2004 Olympic [Page x]Games – a veritable ‘holy grail’ of urban entrepreneurialism – Athens has to reconsider and limit its ambitions.
The Greek crisis is to be viewed against the backdrop of the broader crisis of the world economy, which was triggered from 2008 onward by the collapse of the hyper-speculative subprime mortgage market and the subsequent financial crash, eventually leading to the global economic recession that has not yet come to an end three years later. The expansionary fiscal policy which encouraged property ownership (but led to a shrinkage in state budgets), the deregulation of the financial sector and the rise of cities and regions as relatively autonomous politico-economic agents are distinctive features of the neoliberal era analysed in the book. Athens' story, therefore, raises important questions about whether we are witnessing the coming of a post-neoliberal era of urban development; an era in which urban policies could be less centred on the imperative of representation through the mobilization of culture and creativity, while being more oriented towards – let's be optimistic! – the redistribution of wealth and public revenue.
The future is by definition unpredictable, but the crumbling of the certainties on which cities relied until a very recent past is evident. The recent and still ongoing economic crisis has had the effect of making the hegemonic economic-political pattern even more decipherable, once its underlying mechanisms have shown their weaknesses. Ugo Rossi and Alberto Vanolo take us on a journey around the ascent and crisis of urban liberalism, providing a clear and highly readable analysis of key issues and debates in the field of urban political geography at a time in which the neoliberal era seems to be unravelling.Representation/Government/Contestation
The book fundamentally builds on a political economy approach to the study of urban development issues. According to the authors, the rise of urban neoliberalism, with its relentless transformations, contradictions and dynamics of diffusion across the globe, is key to the understanding of the contemporary geographies of urban politics. The authors, therefore, draw on what has become a sort of new ‘grand narrative’ within English-language urban scholarship over the last two or three decades. However, their account of urban neoliberalism is not conventional, but it is problematized by using theoretical and conceptual sources that depart from the conventional political economy literature. In doing so, the book identifies the pillars of what is called the ‘triad of urban politics’: representation, government and contestation, each being understood by making reference to one key thinker.
In the first instance, the geographies of urban politics are presented by looking at the performative power of representations, referring to the images associated with strategies of urban branding, as well as to those arising from the realm of everyday life, both acting as frameworks (in the sense of Goffman's ‘framing’) for the rationalization [Page xi]of urban issues.1 Edward Said's Orientalism, which shows that the social and the political are constructed through cognitive processes, is an essential reference on the ‘politics of representation’. The second pillar supporting the triad is about ‘politics as government’, which is analysed in the book as a study of the practices of government, drawing on the Foucauldian notion of governmentality, rather than as a study of the models of governance.2 This approach allows an understanding of the long-term process of ‘governmentalization’ of urban life, which has evolved – as the authors point out using the work of Nikolas Rose – by making citizens and local communities increasingly responsible entities as regards the improvement of societal well-being. Last but not least, the third dimension of urban politics relates to acts of resistance and citizenship and is conceptually based on Jacques Rancière's distinction between ‘politics’ and ‘police’. The former takes the form of the techniques of ‘partition of the sensible’ by which the preservation of the extant political-economic order is pursued, while the latter is associated with the contentious processes and acts challenging the established order and its reproduction. By scrutinizing the potential of a wide range of contestation movements, Rossi and Vanolo succeed in highlighting different modes of insurgent action coexisting in contemporary urban environments.
Along with the clarity of its structure and the fluidity in the writing, the strength of the book lies therefore in the theoretical grounding of each chapter. Non-specialist readers of the book, such as students and urban practitioners, will have at their disposal a useful learning tool, dealing with issues that are central to contemporary urban scholarship, such as the entrepreneurialization of governance, the militarization of urban life, the cultural turn in urban planning and policy processes. In many parts of the book, the authors approach these important themes from unconventional perspectives. The globalization of gated communities, for instance, is dealt with against the backdrop of Zygmunt Bauman's reflections on the various forms of insecurity in postmodern societies (Chapter 4). This allows the authors to identify the selectivity of the public discourse on ‘security’, which is understood merely as the preservation of physical integrity, rather than as the pursuit of social wellness. The chapter focusing on urban struggles begins with a detailed and nuanced reconstruction of the philosophical debate on social justice. This discussion, which critically reviews John Rawls's foundational theory of distributive justice, Harvey's neo-materialist critique as well as Iris MarionYoung's neo-feminist insights, helps the reader conceptualize different types of social movements, such as those committed to identity-based claims and those transcending specific positionalities.
The representation/government/contestation triad is not intended to be inclusive of all dimensions of the contemporary geographies of urban politics. For instance, the book admittedly does not take account of the ‘more than human’ geographies exploring the implicitly political significance of the complex relations between humans, technologies, objects and non-human organisms. Equally, in the introduction to the book the authors admit that they have not drawn on the ‘more-than-representational’ geographies looking at the political implications of [Page xii]the feelings, emotions and body gestures inherent in the urban experience, while admiring this lively strand of research. Therefore, rather than a conventional textbook providing a comprehensive overview of the main strands of thinking and investigation currently available in the academic market, Urban Political Geographies offers an intentionally partial point of view on urban affairs. Paradoxically, thanks to this intentional incompleteness the authors find themselves in a convenient position to provide a clear view of the current state of urban affairs, being able to zoom in on specific regions of the urban political universe in unconventional ways. Time will tell us whether its publication coincides, as one might expect in view of recent upheavals and economic turbulences across the globe, with a turning-point in geographical research and urban studies.Notes
1. For example, consider the different ways in which poverty can be ‘framed’ either as a social justice issue or as a security issue.
2. According to Foucault, governmentality concerns ‘the conduct of conduct’, which includes a variety of practices ranging from techniques of ‘government at a distance’ to the self-regulation of individual behaviour. The study of governance, on the other hand, more conventionally consists of analysing different modes of coordination or conflict between private, public and civil-society actors.
Foreword: The Nine Lives of Neoliberalism[Page xiii]Department of Geography, University of British Columbia (Canada),
In February 2011, a report from the Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was issued in Washington, DC, barely causing a ripple. The brief of this arm's-length watchdog agency had been to review the performance of its parent organization, the IMF, in the run-up to the financial crisis of 2008 and the global recession that followed. Couched in characteristically restrained tones, the report's findings were nevertheless damning. It revealed how the IMF had maintained a dangerously sanguine outlook in the months preceding the crash, failing to warn of systemic risks in the global financial system, or to voice concerns about the reckless regulatory posture of the US and UK authorities, where the crisis was being fomented. (Unlike the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, this one could not so easily be blamed on ‘crony capitalism’.) For years, risks of contagion had been radically underestimated by the IMF, along with the possibility that those ‘advanced’ economies that were not only following but writing the neoliberal playbook might be vulnerable to self-inflicted financial failure. Instead, the IMF's ‘banner message was one of continued optimism’, right up to the moment that Wall Street tipped the world economy into a spiralling economic collapse, for which solutions would have to be improvised in a fog of political uncertainty, bordering on outright panic. The lemming economists at the IMF had jumped off the proverbial cliff, along with the financial elites of New York and London:[Page xiv]
The IMF's ability to correctly identify the mounting risks was hindered by a high degree of groupthink, intellectual capture, a general mindset that a major financial crisis in large advanced economies was unlikely, and inadequate analytical approaches. Weak internal governance, lack of incentives to work across units [or] raise contrarian views … also played an important role, while political constraints may have also had some impact … Looking forward, the IMF needs to … create an environment that encourages candor and considers dissenting views; [to strengthen] incentives to “speak truth to power;” to overcome [its] silo mentality and insular culture; [while delivering] a clear, consistent message on the global outlook and risks.1
Just a few days later, tens of thousands started taking to the streets in Madison, Wisconsin in an escalating series of protests against newly elected Republican Governor Scott Walker's draconian ‘budget’ plan. Having rushed through an emergency package of corporate tax cuts, Walker had proposed a budget that not only rolled back social benefits for most of the state's public-sector workers (with the notable exception of those police-service unions that had supported his campaign), but which sought unilaterally to remove collective-bargaining rights. Once a pioneer of public-sector unionization, back in the 1950s, Wisconsin had now become a test-case for what was already threatening to become a rolling, state-by-state programme of legislative deunionization. Walker evasively argued that his uncompromising budget package was a fiscal necessity. Yet even after unions accepted the need for wage and benefit clawbacks – as long as their bargaining rights were maintained-the Governor flatly refused to negotiate. His union-busting charter was eventually passed, using a procedural ruse, having been detached from those budget measures that had supposedly been its rationale. It was, apparently, a matter of principle.
These two episodes – the dramatic events in Wisconsin and the non-event in Washington, DC – call attention to some sobering political realities of these nominally post-crisis times in the United States, and indeed beyond. Certainly, the brief period of post-neoliberal optimism, during the early stages of the crisis, now seems little more than a distant memory, if not a dream. At the time, prominent figures from across the broad left – from Naomi Klein to Eric Hobsbawm and Joseph Stiglitz – had been quick to declare the death of neoliberalism, quite rightly pointing to the damning indictment of ‘the system’ manifest in the devastating convergence of predatory financialization, negligent regulation, and craven mismanagement. There were even a few mea culpas from the architects of the crisis, and plenty of earnest political promises that lessons had been learned and mistakes would never be repeated. This was promptly followed by a disorienting period in which both the world, and neoliberal principle, seemed to be turned upside down: the United States, the home of ‘free-market’ capitalism, would witness massive bank bailouts, corporate rescues on an industrial scale and an historic surge in pseudo-Keynesian ‘stimulus’ spending.
But almost in reflex, the summer of 2009 saw the birth of a kind of grassroots neoliberal uprising in local communities across the country, in the form of the stridently neoliberal tea-party movement. On the surface, this was fuelled by inchoate, and spontaneous, populist rage against the Obama administration's ‘socialist’ excesses, but less visibly, it was enabled by the same corporate bankrollers that for decades had been constructing an extra-governmental apparatus of conservative think tanks, lobby groups, and political-action committees. Among the more prominent financiers of this free-market counter-revolution are the billionaire Koch brothers, who had pumped significant sums into conservative and libertarian causes like the Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute, before establishing the front organization, Americans for Prosperity, in 2011 to channel funding to an ideologically approved slate of Republican candidates – including Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin.2[Page xv]The Koch brothers would later open a lobbying office in Madison, as the protest movement reached its peak, while running anti-union ads on Wisconsin TV.
As crisis conditions have been normalized across the United States, effectively (re) defining Obama's domestic programme, they provide an object lesson in the unforgiving politics of market rule. Despite its practical inadequacy, as a source of workable policy measures, new pages are continually being added to the neoliberal playbook. Analytically, this reveals some recurring truths about the nature of neo-liberalization, as it is practised at scales from the global to the local.
First, the extra-local ‘rules of the game’ continue to be structured according to selectively competitive principles, with most of the multilateral agencies still working actively to extend free-trade agreements, to restrain public expenditure, to further liberalize private investment flows and to deregulate the operating environments for corporations and banks. Save for that brief moment of bastard-Keynesianism, when the crisis was in its free-fall phase, there has been no sign of meaningful change in the pattern of free-market ‘groupthink’ in the finance ministries and international agencies. (It remains to be seen if and how those absent ‘dissenting views’ might be sought or accommodated in the halls of the IMF.) Deep in the neoliberal silos, the entrenched ideological preference for rolling deregulation has evidently become such that default setting politics involve riding successive waves of speculative expansion, never to seek to manage them. As Keynes once said of Hayek, the neoliberal prophet's fundamental problem was that he never knew ‘where to draw the line’ in terms of the containment of market forces and the regulatory roles of the state.3 Little seems to have changed. Today, the bonus culture is brazenly resurgent on Wall Street and in the City of London; regulatory reform has been timid at best; and political elites on both sides of the Atlantic have argued that the public should pay to refloat the system, by way of long-run fiscal austerity and social-state retrenchment. As if this were not bad enough, it is probably only a matter of time before the free-market lemmings are leaping blindly off the cliffs again.
Second, it follows that the neoliberal predisposition to crisis is not accidental, but immanent. Crisis conditions, however, tend to further animate and energize the neoliberalization process. Indeed, the pattern so far is that they have tended to spur reinventions of neoliberal governance, not its reversal. One of the many tragic ironies of the Wall Street crash of 2008, widely acknowledged to have been brought on by negligent regulatory surveillance and craven profiteering, is that its downstream political consequences have included a Republican revival on a scale sufficient to take back not only Congress, but to secure the control of 21 of the 50 states. Having chronically short-changed the states in the initial round of stimulus spending, the Obama administration must now bear witness to an orgy of righteous budget-slashing, entitlement rollbacks and union-busting across Republican-controlled statehouses (and, in muted form, in more than a few Democratic ones, too). Wisconsin, all sides acknowledge, represents a sign of things to come.
Malign devolution is, by now, a tried-and-tested neoliberal tactic. Yet again, the costs of financial overreach and corporate failure are being downloaded onto cities [Page xvi]and states, and onto the most socially vulnerable, in the form of new and apparently long-term programmes of public austerity. These dynamics are playing out all over the place, not only across the United States, but in Britain too, where David Cameron's coalition government has initiated cavalier public-spending cuts on a scale sufficient to threaten a rapid return to negative growth, while offering local governments the sparse consolation of budgetary flexibility in the administration of this unprecedented fiscal retrenchment. The equivalent of presenting local authorities with the knife, while inviting them to decide which fingers to amputate (‘in accordance with local priorities’), this is being sold in the euphemistic language of Cameron's ‘Big Society’ (conveniently enabled by yet-smaller government, of course).
It is through such means – of downloaded responsibilities and unfunded mandates; of deregulatory hand-offs to private enterprises, to community and third-sector organizations, and ultimately to households and individuals – that the bait-and-switch scale politics of neoliberalization are being prosecuted. And it is in this context that what we have come to understand as ‘neoliberal urbanism’ has been shaped, as a distinctive geohistorical form.4 Evolving through time, and variable over space, neoliberal urbanism nevertheless exhibits a series of recurrent features and enduring contradictions. Neoliberalized cities have come to fulfil fundamentally paradoxical roles. On the one hand, they are among the preeminent sites of experimentation in (and relay stations for) neoliberal reforms. On the other hand, cities have been the epicentres of struggles against these self-same incursions. The results of this dialectical process have been anything but uniform and singular, as Rossi and Vanolo powerfully demonstrate in the pages that follow, but they have nonetheless been far-reaching.
This geographically variegated face of neoliberalism represents, at the same time, a deeply consolidated and a crisis-driven form of market rule. Maybe it is still being guided, in some way or another, by Hayek's rusty old compass, trained on the unattainable (and stark) utopia of a free-market society, but the vanguard momentum of the ‘revolution from above’, such as the Reagan/Thatcher moment of unapologetic confrontation and ‘conviction politics’, has long since given way to alternating currents of opportunist attacks on the social state and social collectivities; to decentralized, trial-and-error experimentation and regulatory races to the bottom; and to increasingly networked forms of local resistance politics. The geographies of this process may be complex but they are far from chaotic. They involve a metastasizing fiscal crisis of the local state, not only in the US and the UK – the dubious ‘dividend’, presumably, of three decades of relentless neoliberalization – but much more broadly. They are triggering new forms of local resistance, the downstream consequences of which cannot be predicted.
It was clearly too soon, however, to read the last rites for neoliberalism as the global crisis took hold. Perhaps the tawdry ideology of neoliberal ‘market rule’ has lost another of its nine lives, but in adapted form it remains very much with us. Crises themselves need not be fatal for this mutable, mongrel model of governance, [Page xvii]for neoliberalism has always been a creature of crisis. As such, it has become increasingly mired in the unending challenge of managing its own contradictions, together with the socioeconomic fallout from previous deregulations and malinterventions – for all its reproductive tenacity. In these late-neoliberal times, however, one thing that has become clear is that the spatial and scalar transmission belts for crises are becoming ever more deeply interwoven and integrated. Globalizing rules of the interurban game are repeatedly redrawing the ideological and fiscal parameters of ‘local’ politics, while the reverberations of urban-scale experiments and social struggles continue to spiral unpredictably, both upward and outward. It is in the city trenches that the crises, contradictions, and counterpolitics of neoliberalization are finding some of their most vivid and consequential expressions, where new worlds are being imagined, made, and unmade. These real-time dynamics can be difficult to map. But in Urban Political Geographies, we have a timely and astute field guide to this unfolding process.Notes
1. Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund (2011) IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Crisis. Washington, DC: Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund.
2. E. Lipton (2011) Billionaire brothers' money plays role in Wisconsin dispute. New York Times, 22 February: A16.
3. See J. Peck (2010) Constructions of Neoliberal Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Chapter 2.
4. N. Theodore, J. Peck and N. Brenner (2011) Neoliberal urbanism: cities and the rule of markets. In G. Bridge and S. Watson (eds) The New Blackwell Companion to the City. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 15–25.
Foreword: Politics between the Lines[Page xviii]Department of Sociology, Goldsmiths College, University of London (UK),
This is an incisive and lucid account of contemporary urban politics, and envisions the terms through which it is possible to nurture a politics beyond neoliberal melancholia. As such, it is important to reaffirm the ways in which the solidarities, reciprocities and collaborations that are generated from the quotidian density of relationships and potentialities across city districts continue to exceed the frameworks through which residents are either accounted for or included in prevailing narratives of citizenship and economic efficacy. Take a young man logging transactional data for American Express credit cardholders in a Mumbai BPO (business process outsourcing) firm every night. He lives in a time zone 12 hours behind that of Mumbai but simultaneously engages in an intricate, everyday urban politics of redevelopment and neighbourhood upgrading to bring better services to his settlement. The efforts of ordinary citizens are closely tied to opportunities that are simultaneously enabled and foreclosed by the aggrandizement of urban space. While it is possible to discern clear trajectories of ‘development’ – as settlements like where the young man lives are replaced by ‘spatial products’ like the technopark where he works, there are also continuous oscillations of ascendancy and decline. Populations pushed to the periphery stretch urban ‘cores’ and develop new logics of dwelling and economy, while standardized development zones sometimes rapidly acquire new functions and designs, or even eventually fade from existence. The topologies of urban transformations are simultaneously clearly charted and opaque – a constant reworking of colonization and decolonization, innovation and exhaustion, recuperation and ruin.
Conventional strategies of urban development simultaneously promote an uneasy bundling together of heterogeneous spatial forms, forms of economic action and settlement histories with particular political nominations such as the ‘urban poor’. This results in puzzling patterns of political struggle, which engage collective economies and energies but require adjustments that always escape the rationalities of planned urban growth and the resulting calculations of the costs of displacement and resettlement. What, then, can serve as a basis for the conditions in which any consideration of rights to the city can be imagined and concretized outside of this mirroring framework in which rights are framed in reaction to a landscape of mega-projects and compensatory developments? In cities across the ‘majority [Page xix]world’, residues of colonial planning, post-colonial practices of ‘regularization’ and landed investments into maintaining economic heterogeneity are rapidly being erased and replaced by such landscapes of mega-development – a process this book thoroughly documents.
This continuous aggrandizement of urban space by large-scale property developments crowds out existing central city districts that intersect diverse income groups, settlement histories, built environments and local economies. Yet, caught within an analytic logic of poverty and residency rights, these districts simultaneously become invisible as incubators of potentialities that cannot be pinned down within normative logics of efficacy. As bounded spaces, these districts occupy a distinctive position vis-à-vis contemporary mega-development. In particular they proffer location advantages and bring with them the colonial residues of proximity to off-the-grid and exploited populations. In the efforts to dominate the narrative of urban change, as well as what can be seen and talked about across the urban landscape, such megadevelopments ironically run interference for a plurality of other urban domains that pose neither a clearly discernible threat – environmental or political – but yet continue to provide dwelling and livelihood for large numbers of urban residents.
Urban Political Geographies stretches questions of how to address cities beyond the conventional formulations concerning agency, civil society, governance, polarization, dispossession and accumulation, which have largely dictated the terms of how cities in the urban South are talked about. It raises the possibility that there are interstices – analytical, empirical – in which residents work out ways of putting together modalities of collective life that, even if compelled by accommodations to the agendas of powerful elites, still harbour materialized propositions of how urban space can be transformed. As such the book is not interested in appropriating particular kinds of urban residents – rich, poor, middle class – to exemplify theoretical imaginations about the city.
Of course politics – and its concomitant instruments of policy, mobilization and re-imagination – must address unequal access to resources, growing uncertainty in how everyday livelihood is attained, and the growing access to a larger world of information and experiences folded in to the most desperate of urban conditions. But there is also a need to recognize more provisional ensembles and associations that come together momentarily at the cusp of transformations and in the interstices of shifting spatial alignments, using specific instantiations of the strategic possibilities of urban life that change shape, durability and viability all of the time. Such collectivities are not consolidated into political vanguards. Nevertheless, they register an effect and gradually articulate different facets of the city, and different ways of life. In the past several decades, urban governance has emphasized decentralization, individual entrepreneurialism and enforced mobility, as if they are self-contained tools of change. But these interventions have also called attention to the extent to which unplanned intersections of highly discrepant walks of life actually manage to bring out new capacities amongst the proliferating fragments that make up a city and enable them to have something concrete to do with each other.[Page xx]
In part, issues concerning the social composition of cities and their impact on urban life in general have become challenges in relation to the political strategies and technical instruments that have predominated in the efforts to organize the urban poor since 1976 after the first international gathering to consider urban settlement issues (Habitat I, Vancouver). As such, policies geared towards accommodating swelling populations of the cities gravitated toward sites and services schemes where basic demarcations of plots and skeletal services were to be provided that would be ‘filled in’ over time through the initiatives and resources of the poor themselves.
The idea was to establish a basic, identifiable platform on which residents could establish a secure foothold in the city. This infrastructure also provided a basic political address for the urban poor, calling them into being as it were. By applying their own logics of spatial development, it was expected that the poor would also ‘domesticate’ the city in ways that would enable them to ‘recognize themselves’ within it. While such policies have been markedly contested all along, their implicit traction has been to defer difficult challenges about rights, inclusion and responsibilities to a future time. Everyone could then argue that development was under way, that a trajectory of progressive inclusion in urban life had been charted. Furthermore, these projects were framed as a response to the supposed failure of low-income populations to bring their practices of habitation into synch with the expectations materialized in state sponsored public housing projects. These lacks were to be addressed with various capacity building programmes centred on teaching the poor how to save and govern themselves.
Demands for citizenship rights were therefore coupled with discourses that valorized the capacities of the poor to manage their own lives and settlements. In order not to internalize the violence directed toward them – as manifested through forced removals and the harassment around livelihood activities – urban social movements emphasized the unyielding capacities of low-income residents to make the city their own regardless of efforts to exclude them. Thus when residents were to look upon dense, underserviced and insalubrious urban environments, they would also recognize specific abilities to be part of urban life, to have concretized their rights to the city. These efforts by local associations, made visible to a larger international audience through the efforts of organizations such as Habitat International, Shack/Slumdwellers International, the Asian Coalition on Housing Rights – to name a few, helped generate a broader interest by researchers, architects, and artists in various city-making practices ‘from below’.
As such, urban literature in recent years has been replete with examples of the efficacies of slums or the productivity of urban frisson. This proliferation in turn raises the question about representation and the politics of a subaltern urbanism. Here, a wide range of claims, from more modest ethnographic examinations of the toiling of the poor just managing to keep their heads above water to claims that the subaltern shows us what all cities ‘really are’ – a field of constant improvisation – turn the city into essentially destabilized, fluid assemblages of bodies, materials and affect.[Page xxi]
Whereas cities embody a critical inability to hold together stable relationships amongst such elements, it is another thing to insist that this notion of the city is ‘proved’ by its most vulnerable inhabitants – thus equating vulnerability and the exigencies of constant compensation and adjustment with some ‘essence’ of urbanity. The actions of the poor can certainly point to how the city is not all that it is ‘cracked up’ to be. Still, these fissures in the normative – i.e. the constituent gaps that enable urban governance and urban norms to consolidate themselves – do not become visible and useable by unveiling a prior and more ‘real’ version of the city. Rather, as Urban Political Geographies emphasizes, they become instrumental through the active disruption of municipal power and capitalist relations. It is in the fight of the poor to overcome the very conditions that supposedly embody the fractal character of urban life that concretizes its potentialities – not just in the game of ‘show and tell’.
The challenges posed by the exclusion or encampment of the urban poor are in part discursive problems that end up obscuring the question of the fundamental political and empirical challenges of describing an ‘urban majority’ and attributing to a population the status of a majority. In the practice of urban democracy, what then is to be made of a so-called ‘urban majority'? For in many cities, reference to a majority would entail talking about different ways of doing things, calculating chances and opportunities and using resources on the part of those who statistically might be grouped as similar in terms of length of urban residence, household income, educational background and so forth. If a critical advantage is to be accrued through engaging a majority as heterogeneously composed, what is to be gained by sustaining the notion of a ‘majority’? Is it simply to exclude them from the ‘pool’ of residents from which conclusions about urban dynamics are commonly made, and in this way maintain the majority as some kind of constituent exception? If so, is there a way to bring such a majority back in to analysis? And for what purpose would we do so?
Given these questions and challenges, Urban Political Geographies attempts to make sense of the heterogeneity of contemporary cities – their heterogeneity of housing situations, livelihoods, resource dispositions, settlement histories and social identities. As such it attempts to explore scales of city-making that go beyond the conventional identities, such as the poor, the slum, the gated community, or the mega-development. The question becomes how growing urban populations are employed, housed and fed in cities that ‘hitch’ themselves to imaginaries of urban vitality and economic growth which would seem to make irrelevant the backgrounds and capacities of the majority of the city's population. In such circumstances, discourses on efficient, democratic urban governance, sustainability and security seem to displace the political and economic practices that make urban life at least minimally viable for that majority. In light of the substantial growth of urban middle classes across the majority world or the so-called South – for which the discourses of civil society, accountability, transparency and good governance seem consonant – there is a need to reconsider the economic heterogeneity of cities as the very conditions in which any consideration of rights to the city can be imagined, let alone concretized.[Page xxii]
The seemingly wide divergences between contemporary economic spaces – between traditional wet markets and hypermarkets, shopping malls and streets full of small shops and stalls – pose many challenges to how lines of articulation and mutual implication can be drawn. Big projects cast long and ominous shadows over vast numbers of small enterprises and labour markets even as they promise to accelerate new job creation. Different temporalities are involved, and so the cost savings and efficiencies anticipated by expanded scale also tend to flatten the intricate gradations once available to residents in terms of how they balanced their management of shelter, education, mobility, proximity to work and social support, opportunistic chances and household consumption. They change how residents ‘paced’ themselves over time and calculated what kind of time that had to work with.
These gradations did not so much stand alone as class positions or characteristics of neighbourhoods, but were more provisional markers that provided clues for how households, associations and networks might collaborate, and how they would use available resources of all kinds. So the challenge is how to redraw the lines of connection. Here the day-to-day struggles of municipal politics and the attempts to remake ‘messy environments’ remain critical.
Such observations do not obviate the fact that conventional mobilizations and organizational politics are necessary. The fact remains that in many districts, claims to space, resources and life are made by those who have no right, or where claims to rights are simply based on a game that only involves seizing or being seized. In many districts today, eligibility, preparation, status and waiting – all elements that have conventionally been associated with the ability to attain certain positions or opportunities – are frequently pushed aside. This is being demonstrated by the often highly speculative acts of residents to collaborate with each other in ways that cut across formal attributions of identity and discernible organizations and movements.
Even when acts of speculation are undertaken as individual initiatives, they become a way to configure possibilities for residents of a district to be in a larger world together – in ways that do not assume a past solidity of affiliations, a specific destination nor an ultimate collective formation to come. It is a way of being together without recourse to being able to see, coordinate or command each other. If in each individual initiative, back and forth, here and there, is a proposition for how spaces across a city could be articulated, the question is how are these propositions amassed? Or, more importantly, how do they have traction with and imply each other? What kinds of openings – spatial and temporal – and what kinds of stories and practices of engagement are important for such ‘gatherings’ to take place, to find and seep through the interstices of urban promises and their ruins, of seamless and probabilistic control and the rampant uncertainties they also unfold?
Conclusion: Beyond Post-Neoliberal Melancholia[Page 179]
This book has explored the different, interrelated and conflicting at the same time, dimensions of urban politics in an era of globalization, postmodernity and neoliberalism. In doing so, it has tried to convey a multifaceted view of the ways in which cities have become places that are central to the understanding of the contemporary globalized, and still globalizing, world. Historically, cities have offered to politico-economic elites a wide range of opportunities for economic growth, but the last three decades have witnessed the rise of cities as relatively autonomous agents of economic development and competitiveness in a context of deeply restructured socio-spatial relations involving a variety of politico-geographical scales and related actors. The politics of urban growth, the capital accumulation strategies being devised at the urban level, the cultural-economic processes leading to the generation of geographical imaginaries and public discourses are crucial to the present age of globalization, one in which economic development endeavours have to combine with the ability to generate iconic consciousness through strategies of representation.
These processes have taken place in a world which is growingly interconnected, as the globalization rhetoric has put it for many years, but it appears also to be increasingly variegated in terms of hybridization of governance cultures and development pathways. The powerful ‘ideas from America’ dictating the politics of becoming in contemporary cities – from the global city to the creative city and to the resilient city – have travelled around the world, but in doing so they have also fused with local cultures of governance, entrepreneurship and the existing socio-spatial relationships of power, as contemporary politico-economic elites become reluctant to passively adopt policy recipes imported from elsewhere. Even though the success of neoliberalism lies in the fact of being a highly mobile and flexible governmental technology, its normative effects on the strategies of economic development are recurrent: the financialization of the housing sector, urban boosterism and the organization of hallmark events and mega-projects as a way of attracting public and private investments, the discursive emphasis on green and knowledge-based economies and on ‘creative’ industries as promised lands for economic growth and urban renaissance.
Today, while the world economy is dealing with a global economic recession originally triggered by the subprime mortgage crisis, China – the new frontier of urban entrepreneurialism in the year of the ambitious Shanghai Expo 2010 – is [Page 180]experiencing an unprecedented housing boom, which is leading real estate to become the engine of the national economy along with export-led manufacturing sectors. However, in April 2010 the national government had to introduce a series of measures aimed at reducing speculative demand for housing, by imposing restrictions on the supply of mortgages (Naughton, 2010); then, in October 2010, in the context of what international mass media have depicted as ‘currency wars’ between the world's economic superpowers (China and the United States above all), China's central bank announced an increase in the official rate of interest, a decision taken for the first time in the last three years, in order to avoid a property bubble like the one that hit capitalist economies in 2008–09, leading to the first worldwide recession of the globalization era. While China tries to moderate the potentially pernicious exuberance of the housing market, ‘ghost towns’, abandoned construction sites, unsold houses and shop closures have already proliferated in cities across the advanced capitalist world in times of global recession, after years of prosperity and apparently unlimited growth.
Cities are, therefore, at one and the same time active agents and victims of current economic turbulences. They are active agents, because the financial and fiscal crisis was originally caused by the residential mortgage default in the United States (see Chapter 3). On the other hand, they are major victims of the recession, not just because of the already mentioned spatial effects but also because of the generation of new urban outcasts: residents facing home foreclosure, migrants losing their jobs, public-sector employees being made redundant, casualized workers losing social-security benefits. In responding to this situation, national governments are looking for innovative politico-economic visions and strategies, capable of boosting a persistently anaemic growth. The two countries that had been in the forefront in the ‘neoliberal (counter)revolution’ in previous decades, the United States and Great Britain, are those where an exit strategy appears to be particularly urgent and impelling. The former is tempted by a return to Keynesianism, through an expansionary fiscal policy led by government spending, even though the Federal Administration led by President Obama has to face a neo-conservative backlash all across the country demanding lower property taxes and reduced market regulation. The latter, having witnessed in 2010 the Conservatives returning to power after 13 years of New Labour governments, is inclined to reproduce Thatcherite policies of fiscal austerity and public-sector downsizing, despite the reference to the pursuit of an alleged ‘Big Society’, which in principle advocates active citizenship and community involvement as a way to alleviate the effects of socio-economic restructuring, but in practice is likely to lead to the rise of a neo-charitable welfare system and a neo-paternalistic state.
In a context in which national politico-economic elites are finding it hard to find effective ways of getting out of the economic recession, advanced capitalist societies are being sunk into a deep melancholia, comparable to the sense of post-imperial melancholia analysed by Paul Gilroy (2004) in his reflections on the rise of assimilationist impulses towards the ethnic minorities in Britain. While nation-states respond to uncertainty and fear by resorting to economic nationalism combined [Page 181]with austerity plans on a domestic level, it is in the interstices of societies that one can still see a light of hope: namely, in what this book has identified, drawing on the insights of French philosopher Jacques Rancière, as the third dimension of urban politics, the politics as contestation led by poor residents struggling for their right to stay put, by marginalized ethnic and sexual minorities demanding recognition, and by a variety of campaigners for citizenship and social justice. This ‘politics of the common’ (Hardt and Negri, 2009) adds to the previously described scenario a dynamic of contestation which is to be understood not just as the capacity to resist the consequences of socio-economic and state restructuring processes, but is to be viewed as a source of institutional formation and also of economic experimentation. In their struggles and campaigns touching on life-related issues such as housing and food, social services and a living income, substantive citizenship and sexuality, grassroots social movements and civil-society groups bring to light a ‘living politics of the city’ (Patel, 2010), which complements and at the same time stands in contrast to the hegemonic bio-politics, merely concerned with disciplinary issues of safety and protection from the infecting and the deviant ‘Other’.
If cities and the wider capitalist societies want to get rid of the sense of post-neoliberal melancholia into which they are currently sunk, the living politics highlighted by contemporary urban social movements may show the way forward. ‘You must change your life’, as philosopher Peter Sloterdijk (2009) has put it in his recent book, is an ‘absolute imperative’ that can be applied not only to individuals but also to the larger society. That means, building on Sloterdijk's notion of ‘anthropotechnique’, that societies should be concerned with the search for discipline and method understood as a democratic practice and training. Urban neoliberalism prospered in an era characterized by unconditional belief in self-regulating markets, including housing markets. The illusion of ownership society, which symbolically traces its origins back to the adoption of Proposition 13 in California in 1978 and which was brought again to the fore of public debate by President George W. Bush in the mid-2000s, with the emphasis he placed on the neoliberal ideal of homeownership (see Chapter 3), drew on a sense of optimism and euphoria, which has been replaced by dictates of realism and rigour as soon as the recession has taken shape. Looking back at the last decade, the 2000s, one cannot fail to notice the way in which unbridled optimism and grey realism have followed one another in a neurotic fashion within the space of few months. Changing city life means, therefore, training the citizen and the larger urban community to cope with the limits of urban economic development and to contribute to the search for an alternative model of wealth generation and redistribution by restoring a sense of connection to the helpless Other and the struggling minorities.
accumulation The process of value creation resulting in the formation of economic, social, cultural or political capital.
actors The subjective entities performing actions, discourses, representations and acts of resistance on the basis of their identities, interests and needs within the urban public realm.
belonging The socio-political process leading to the development of a sense of attachment to a place or a social group (a prerequisite for the rise of a space of citizenship).
biopolitics The hegemonic politics of life itself within advanced liberal societies.
capabilities The capacity to act and achieve a recognized presence on the public sphere.
citizenship The codification of contested and fluid identities.
city branding/marketing The commodification of the image of the city.
commodification The primacy of exchange-value over use-value in the management of social relations.
community The visible outcome of a politics of belonging at the level of neighbourhood, ethnicity and other relatively bounded socio-spatial units.
competitiveness The conventional justification for actions and projects carried out in the name of the well-being of an urban community.
cosmopolitanism The post-national politics of belonging in which cities act as crucial arenas.
creativity The distinctive feature of thriving urban economies in a context of post-Fordism and immaterial capitalism.
crisis The disruption of the established socio-spatial and economic order.
democracy The ultimate goal of progressive politics either in formal or absolute/substantive terms.
development The pursuit of an allegedly more prosperous society.
difference A long-standing attribute of urban societies currently associated with the variety of socio-cultural positionalities coexisting in postmodern times.[Page 183]
elites Groups and classes that have attained a hegemonic position within urban societies.
gated communities A residential space of exception regulated in the last instance by violence.
globalization The politico-economic era characterized by the heightened circulation of commodities, bodies and discourses at a world scale.
governance A pluralistic practice of governing based on the negotiation and the coordination of the decision-making process.
governmentality The wide array of techniques, procedures and regulations giving rise to a governmental rationality.
homeownership The social goal of making the commodification and individualization of housing more acceptable in capitalist neoliberal societies.
institutions The variegated set of formal and informal rules, conventions, organizations and shared behaviours regulating socio-spatial relations.
justice The acknowledgement of the right and wrong in urban politics.
minorities Subaltern groups in urban societies identified along ethnic, religious, gender/sexual lines.
multiculturalism The ambivalent politics of presence, recognition and assimilation/integration taking shape around minority claims of diversity.
narratives The discursive strategy linked to a politics of representation.
negotiation The institutionalized way in which decisions are made in a context of urban governance.
neoliberalism The renewed belief in self-regulating markets.
police The preservation of a pre-fixed socio-spatial order by means of coercion, allowed by the state monopoly on the legitimate use of force.
positionality The contingent role performed by individuals and social groups in relation to others.
presence The very fact of being there and the associated claim to be granted recognition by the mainstream society.
recognition The government's response to a grassroots politics of presence.
redistribution The allocation of rights, duties and responsibilities between individuals, social groups and territories.
regeneration/renewal The expected outcome of a strategy aimed at tackling urban decline.[Page 184]
regime The capacity to govern through the mobilization of a broad range of actors, coalitions, rationalities and governance structures.
regulation The set of legal and informal norms shaping the agency of individuals, groups and collectivities.
resilience The routinized capacity to recover from disasters and other unpleasant events in today's crisis-laden world.
responsibility The feature that makes socio-spatial subjects (actors and spaces) accountable in liberal societies, thus allowing competition.
strategies The social construction of rationalities and actions aimed at achieving purposes that are conducive to the well-being of a community or a private entity.
References[Page 185]2008) ‘The financialization of home and the mortgage market crisis’, Competition and Change, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 148–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/102452908X289802(Aalbers. M.B. (Ed.) (2009) ‘Symposium on the sociology and geography of mortgage markets’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 281–442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00875.x1947) Dialektik der Aufklärung. Amsterdam: Querido (Eng. transl.: Dialectic of Enlightenment. London: Verso, 1997).and (1995) Homo sacer. Il potere sovrano e la nuda vita. Turin: Einaudi (Eng. transl. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998).(2002) ‘Security and terror’, Theory and Event, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1–2.(2003) Lo stato di eccezione. Turin: Bollati Boringhieri (Eng. transl. State of Exception. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2005).(2002) Making Political Geography. New York: Oxford University Press.(Aguiar, L.L.M. and Herod, A. (Eds) (2006) The Dirty Work of Neoliberalism: Cleaners in the Global Economy. Malden, MA: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444397406Ali, S.H. and Keil, R. (Eds) (2008) Networked Disease: Emerging Infections in the Global City. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/97814443050122003) Lost Geographies of Power. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470773321(1994) ‘Post-Fordism: models, fantasies and phantoms of transition’, In A.Amin (Ed.), Post-Fordism: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 1–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470712726.ch1(2002) ‘Ethnicity and the multicultural city: living with diversity’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 959–980. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a3537(2003) ‘Unruly strangers? The 2001 urban riots in Britain’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 460–463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00459(2005) ‘Local community on trial’, Economy and Society, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 612–633. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085140500277211(2006) ‘The good city’, Urban Studies, vol. 43, no. 5–6, pp. 1009–1023. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980600676717(1997) ‘The ordinary city’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 411–429. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1997.00411.xand (1995) ‘Institutional issues for the European regions: from markets and plans to socioeconomics and powers of association’, Economy and Society, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 41–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149500000002and (2002) Cities: Reimagining the Urban. Cambridge: Polity Press.and (2000) Cities for the Many Not the Few. Bristol: Policy Press., and (2006) ‘The millenium development goals. a critique from the south’, Monthly Review, vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 1–15.([Page 186]2004) ‘From nation-building to entrepreneurship: the impact of élite return migrants in Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana’, Population, Space and Place, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 133–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/psp.319(Archibugi, D., Held, D. and Köhler, M. (Eds) (1998) Re-imagining Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.2008) ‘Religion and rehabilitation: humanitarian biopolitics, city spaces and acts of religion’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 671–689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00804.x(2009) ‘The consequences of the creative class: the pursuit of creativity strategies in Australia's cities’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 64–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00837.xand (2007) ‘Globalization, the developmental state and the politics of urban growth in Korea: A multi-level analysis’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 543–560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00737.xand (2004) In Defense of Globalization. New York: Oxford University Press.(1997) ‘Les villes européennes comme société et comme acteur’, In A.Bagnasco and P.Le Galès (eds), Villes en Europe. Paris: La Découverte, pp. 7–43 (Eng. transl. Cities in Contemporary Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).and (2001) ‘Culture, policy, and subsidiarity in the European Union: from symbolic identity to the governmentalisation of culture’, Political Geography, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 405–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298%2801%2900002-6(2008) ‘Consuming ethics: articulating the subjects and spaces of ethical consumption’, Antipode, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 23–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0066-4812.2005.00472.x, , and (1997) Postmodernity and its Discontents. Cambridge: Polity Press.(1999) In Search of Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.(2008) ‘Faith action on urban social issues’, Urban Studies, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 2019–2034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098008094871(2000) The Sexual Citizen. Cambridge: Polity Press.and (2004) ‘Authenticating queer space: citizenship, urbanism and governance’, Urban Studies, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 1807–1820. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000243165and (2004) Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy. New York: Zed Books.(2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.(1996) ‘Falling towers: city life after urbicide’, In D.Crow (Ed.), Geography and Identity, Washington, DC: Maisonneuvre Press, pp. 172–192.(2009) ‘Justice, nature and the city’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 591–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00858.x, and (2004) ‘The city-as-target, or perpetuation and death’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 54–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch3and (1987) ‘Reaganomics’, Economic Policy, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 15–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1344620(1997) Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington, DC: Brooking Institution Press.and (2006) ‘Gated communities of the Moscow green belt: newly segregated landscapes and the suburban Russian environment’, GeoJournal, vol. 66, no. 1–2, pp. 65–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10708-006-9017-0, , and ([Page 187]2004) Unsettling the City: Urban Land and the Politics of Property. London: Routledge.(2002) ‘Living apart or together with our differences?’, Ethnicities, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 367–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14687968020020030501(2009) De la critique. Précis de sociologie de l'émancipation. Paris: Gallimard.(2006) ‘Decommodifying electricity in postapartheid Johannesburg’, In H.Leitner, J.Peck and E.S.Sheppard (Eds), Contesting Neoliberalism. New York: Guilford, pp. 157–178.and (2000) Les structures sociales de l'économie. Paris: Seuil (Eng. transl. The Social Structures of the Economy. Cambridge: Polity, 2005).(1999) ‘Growth machines and propaganda projects: a review of readings of the role of civic boosterism in the politics of local economic development’, In A.E.G.Jonas and D.Wilson (Eds), The Urban Growth Machine: Critical Perspectives Two Decades Later. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 55–70.(1999) ‘Globalisation as reterritorialisation: the rescaling of urban governance in the European Union’, Urban Studies, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 431–451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098993466(2000) ‘The urban question: Reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 361–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00234(2004) New State Spaces: Urban Governance and the Rescaling of Statehood. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199270057.001.0001(2002) ‘Cities and the geographies of “actually existing neoliberalism”’, Antipode, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 341–347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00245and (Brookings Institute (2010) State of Metropolitan America. Published report; http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2010/0509_metro_america.aspx.2007) ‘Mutinous eruptions: autonomous spaces of radical queer activism’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 2685–2698. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a38385(2009) ‘Public health as urban politics, urban geography: venereal power in Seattle, 1943–1983’, Urban Geography, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 1–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-36188.8.131.52(2003) ‘“Are we there yet?” Feminist political geographies’, Gender, Place and Culture, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 247–255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0966369032000114019and (2001) Politics Out of History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(2009) Welcome to the Urban Revolution: How Cities are Changing the World. New York: Bloomsbury Press.(Bryant, B. (Ed.) (1995) Environmental Justice: Issues, Policies, and Solutions. Washington DC: Island Press.Bulkeley, H. and Betsill, M. (Eds) (2005) Cities and Climate Change: Urban Sustainability and Global Environmental Change. London: Routledge.2008) ‘Multiculturalism's regeneration: celebrating Merdeka (Malaysian independence) in a European Capital of Culture’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 251–267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2008.00299.x(2008) ‘Abu Dhabi, stad als modern themapark’, NRC Handelsblad, 1 November.(1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.(2001) City of Walls. Crime, Segregation, and Citizenship in São Paulo. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.([Page 188]2002) ‘The class consciousness of frequent travelers: towards a critique of actually existing cosmopolitanism’, In S.Vertovec and R.Cohen (Eds), Conceiving Cosmopolitanism. Theory, Context and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 86–109.(2003) ‘Gentrification, housing redifferentiation and urban regeneration: “Going for Growth” in Newcastle upon Tyne’, Urban Studies, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 2367–2382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000136110(2001) Globalizing South China. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470712764(1972) La Question urbaine. Paris: Maspero (Eng. transl. The Urban Question. A Marxist Approach. London: Arnold, 1977).(1983) The City and the Grassroots: A Cross-Cultural Theory of Urban Social Movements. London: Arnold.(1989) The Informational City. Malden, MA: Blackwell.(1997) The Power of Identity. Malden, MA: Blackwell.(1994) Technopoles of the World. London: Routledge.and (Castells, M. and Mollenkopf, J. (Eds) (1991) Dual City: Restructuring New York. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.2000) Citizenship and Migration: Globalization and the Politics of Belonging. London: Routledge.and (2003) The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World. New York: Guilford Press (third edition; first edition 1998).and (Chen, X. (Ed.) (2009) Rising Shanghai: State Power and Local Transformations in a Global Megacity. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press.2004) ‘Modernisation, managerialism and the culture wars: the reshaping of the local welfare state in England’, Local Government Studies, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 481–496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0300393042000318950(2007) Understanding Urban Policy: A Critical Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.(1996) ‘Re-imagining Berlin: world city, national capital or ordinary place?’, European Urban and Regional Studies, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 145–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096977649900600204and (1996) ‘Manchester plays games: exploring the local politics of globalization’, Urban Studies, vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 1319–1336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098966673, and (1967) La politica delle città. Bari: Laterza.(2006) ‘Beijing as an “internationalized metropolis”’, In F.Wu (Ed.), Globalization and the Chinese City. London: Routledge, pp. 63–84.(2006) ‘Active citizenship and the governmentality of local lesbian and gay politics’, Political Geography, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 921–943. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.08.009(2009) Urbicide. The Politics of Urban Destruction. London: Routledge.(1993) ‘The local and the global in the new urban politics: a critical view’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 433–448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d110433(1988) ‘Locality and community in the politics of local economic development’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 307–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1988.tb00209.xand (1991) ‘From localised social structures to localities as agents’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 197–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a230197and (2002) ‘Multiethnic Rome: towards residential segregation?’, GeoJournal, vol. 58, no. 2–3, pp. 81–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:GEJO.0000010827.68349.9e(2003) French theory: Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze & Cie et les mutations de la vie intellectuelle aux Étas-Units. Paris: La Decouverte.([Page 189]1961) Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.(1968) Social Needs and Resources in Local Services. London: Joseph.(1990) City of Quartz: Excavating the Future of Los Angeles. London: Verso.(1999) Ecology of Fear: Los Angeles and the Imagination of Disaster. New York: Vintage Books.(2006a) ‘Fear and money in Dubai’, New Left Review, no. 41, pp. 47–68.(2006b), Planet of Slums. London: Verso.(2010) ‘Who will build the ark?’, New Left Review, no. 61, pp. 29–46.(2004) ‘Multiple disconnections: environmental justice and urban water in Canada and South Africa’, Space and Polity, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 209–225.and (1992) Left Coast City: Progressive Politics in San Francisco, 1975–1991. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.(2007) Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. London: SAGE.(2001) ‘Justice and the spatial imagination’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 1787–1805.(2005) ‘Space, politics, and the political’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 171–188.(2006) ‘Two decades of French urban policy: from social development of neighbourhoods to the republican penal state’, Antipode, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 59–81.(2008) ‘Guest editorial: on the other hand … dialectics’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 2549–2561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a41261, and (2003) ‘Image of Stockholm as an IT city: emerging urban entrepreneurship’, In C.Steyaert and D.Hjorth (Eds), New Movements in Entrepreneurship. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, pp. 200–217.(2000) ‘The dead zone and the architecture of transgression’, City, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 247–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604810050147857(Economist, The (2010) ‘Living the dream: the Shanghai World Expo’, 1 May, pp. 49–50.2010) Mobile Lives. London: Routledge.and (1995) Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1993) The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities and the Communitarian Agenda. New York: Crown.(European Commission (1999) Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A Framework for Action, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions; http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/communic/pdf/caud/caud_en.pdfEuropean Union (2007) Territorial Agenda of the European Union: Towards a More Competitive and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions, Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion, 24–25 May; http://www.bmvbs.de (accessed December 2009).Eurostat (2010) Europe in Figures: Eurostat yearbook 2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.2000) ‘The decline of citizenship in an era of globalization’, Citizenship Studies, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 5–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/136210200109997([Page 190]Farinelli, F., Olsson, G. and Reichert, D. (Eds) (1994) Limits of Representation. Munich: Accedo.2004) ‘Another anxious urbanism: simulating defense and disaster in cold war America’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 93–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch5(2006), ‘Stretching tacit knowledge beyond a local fix? Global spaces of learning in advertising service firms’, Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 517–540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbi023(2006) Global Shadows: Africa in the Neoliberal World Order. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.(2004) ‘The politics of forgetting: class politics, state power and the restructuring of urban space in India’, Urban Studies, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 2415–2430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980412331297609(2010) Emerald Cities: Urban Sustainability and Economic Development. New York: Oxford University Press.(2002) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.(2005) Cities and Creative Class. New York: Routledge.(1997) ‘Building paranoia’, In N.Ellin and E.J.Blakely (Eds), Architecture of Fear. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, pp. 13–26.(2007) ‘Borderlined in the global city (of angels)’, In A.Çinar and T.Bender (Eds), Urban Imaginaries. Locating the Modern City. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 37–54.(1975) Surveiller et punir: naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard (Eng. transl: Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Random House, 1977).(1976) Histoire de la sexualité I. La volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard (Eng. transl: The History of Sexuality Vol. 1: The Will to Knowledge. New York: Random House, 1978).(1979) ‘On governmentality’, Ideology and Consciousness, no. 6, pp. 5–21.(2004) Naissance de la biopolitique: Cours au Collège de France (1978–79). Paris: Seuil.(1995a) ‘From redistribution to recognition: dilemmas of justice in a “post – socialist” age’, New Left Review, no. 212, pp. 67–93.(1995b) ‘Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy’, Social Text, no. 25–26, pp. 56–80.(1997) Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the ‘Postsocialist’ Condition. New York: Routledge.(1929) Das Ungluck in der Kultur (Eng. transl: Civilization and Its Discontents. London: Penguin, 2002).(1986) ‘The world city hypothesis’, Development and Change, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 309–344. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.1986.tb00231.x(1989) ‘The end of history?’, The National Interest, no. 16, pp. 3–18.(2007) ‘L'impero e le sue scale: “metafisica” del potere, tracce per una geografia minore’, Rivista Geografica Italiana, vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 27–45.(1998) Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.(2008) ‘Let's drink to the great thirst! Water and the politics of fractured techno-natures in Sicily’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 392–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00789.xand (2004) After Empire: Melancholia or Convivial Culture?London: Routledge.([Page 191]2006) ‘Segregation and seclusion: the case of compounds for western expatriates in Saudi Arabia’, GeoJournal, vol. 66, no. 1–2, pp. 83–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10708-006-9018-z(1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.(2006) ‘Scalar narratives in Bilbao: a cultural politics of scales approach to the study of urban policy’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 836–857. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00693.x(2005) ‘Introduction: cities in the new conventional wisdom’, In N.Nuck, I.Gordon, A.Harding and I.Turok (Eds), Changing Cities: Rethinking Urban Competitiveness, Cohesion and Governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 78–93.and (1961) Megalopolis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(2004a) ‘Introduction: cities, warfare, and states of emergency’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch1(2004b) ‘Cities as strategic sites: place annihilation and urban geopolitics’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 31–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch2(2006) ‘Cities and the “war on terror”’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 255–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00665.x(1948–51) Quaderni dal carcere. Turin: Einaudi. (Eng. transl. Prison Notebooks. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010).(2006a) ‘Vanishing points. Law, violence, and exception in the global war prison’, In D.Gregory and A.Pred (Eds), Violent Geographies. Fear, Terror, and Political Violence. London: Routledge, pp. 205–236.(2006b) ‘“In another time-zone, the bombs fall unsafely …”: targets, civilians and late modern war’, The Arab World Geographer, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 88–111.(1962), Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. Neuwied: Luchterhand (Eng. transl. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989).(1966) The World Cities. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.(2000) ‘Creative cities and economic development’, Urban Studies, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 639–649. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980050003946(1997) Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London: SAGE.(Hall, T. and Hubbard, P. (Eds) (1998) The Entrepreneurial City: Geographies of Politics, Regime and Representation. Chichester: Wiley.1994) ‘Social polarisation in global cities: theory and evidence’, Urban Studies, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 401–424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420989420080401(2008) ‘Spaces of modernity: religion and the urban in Asia and Africa’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 617–630. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00800.xand (1997) ‘Urban regimes in a Europe of the cities?’, European Urban and Regional Studies, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 291–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096977649700400401(1994) ‘Elite theory and growth machine’, In D.Judge, G.Stoker and H.Wolman (Eds), Theories of Urban Politics. London: SAGE, pp. 35–53.(2000) Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.and (2009) Commonwealth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.and ([Page 192]Harloe, M. (Ed.) (1977) Captive Cities: Studies in the Political Economy of Cities and Regions. London: Wiley & Sons.2001) ‘Social justice and the city: the new “liberal formulation”’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 889–897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00350(1973) Social Justice and the City. London: Arnold.(1989a) The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.(1989b) The Urban Experience. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.(1989c) ‘From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism’, Geografiska Annaler B: Human Geography, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 3–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/490503(1996) Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell.(2003) Paris, Capital of Modernity. London: Routledge.(1978) Law, Legislation and Liberty: The Mirage of Social Justice. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226321233.001.0001(2009) ‘China's emergining neo-liberal urbanism: perspectives from urban redevelopment’, Antipode, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 282–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00673.xand (2004) ‘The treatment of space and place in the new strategic spatial planning in Europe’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 45–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00502.x(2001) ‘Policing the contemporary city: fixing broken windows or shoring up neo-liberalism?’, Theoretical Criminology, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 445–466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362480601005004003(2006) Citizens, Cops, and Power: Recognizing the Limits of Community. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226327358.001.0001(2002) ‘Radical queers or queer radicals? Queer activism and the global justice movement’, In B.Shepard and R.Hayduk (Eds), From ACT UP to the WTO: Urban Protest and Community Building in the Era of Globalization. London: Verso, pp. 106–120.(2005) ‘Urban wild things: a cosmopolitical experiment’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 643–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d351t, , and (1995) ‘Globalization and the future of the nation-state’, Economy and Society, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 408–442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149500000017and (Hoffmann, L.M., Fainstein, S.S. and JuddD.R. (eds) (2003) Cities and Visitors: Regulating People, Markets and City Space. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/97804707736731992) Immigrants, Markets and States: The Political Economy of Post-War Europe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(1998) ‘Spaces of insurgent citizenship’, In L.Sandercock (Ed.), Making the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp. 37–56.(2005) Economic Geographies: Circuits, Flows and Spaces. London: SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446216743(2000) ‘Governmentality and rights and responsibilities in urban policy’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 32, pp. 2187–2204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a331and (2007) ‘Neighbourhoods in the lead: grassroots planning for social transformation in post-Katrina New Orleans?’, Planning Practice and Research, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 131–153.and (2009) ‘Cultivating just planning and legal institutions: a critical assessment of the South Central Farm struggle in Los Angeles’, Journal of Urban Affairs, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 1–23.and (2000) ‘Introduction: democracy, citizenship and the city’, In E.F.Isin (Ed.), Democracy, Citizenship and the Global City. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–21.([Page 193]2002) Becoming Political. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press.(1969) The Economy of Cities. New York: Random House.(1981) The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.(Jenks, M., Burton, E. and Williams, K. (Eds) (1996) The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?London: Spon Press.1997) ‘The entrepreneurial city: re-imaging localities, redesigning economic governance, or restructuring capital?’, In N.Jewson and S.MacGregor (Eds), Transforming Cities: Contested Governance and New Spatial Divisions. London: Routledge, pp. 28–41.(2001) ‘Institutional re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 33, no. 7. pp. 1213–1235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a32183(2002) ‘Liberalism, neoliberalism, and urban governance: a state-theoretical perspective’, Antipode, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 452–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00250(2004a) ‘Critical semiotic analysis and cultural political economy’, Critical Discourse Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 159–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17405900410001674506(2004b) ‘Hollowing out the nation-state and multilevel governance’, In P.Kennett (Ed.) A Handbook Of Comparative Social Policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 11–25.(2000) ‘An entrepreneurial city in action: Hong Kong's emerging strategies in and for (inter)urban competition’, Urban Studies, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2287–2313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980020002814, (2007) ‘Greening the entrepreneurial city? Looking for spaces of sustainability politics in the competitive city’, In R.Krueger and D.Gibbs (Eds), The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in the United States and Europe. New York: Gilford Press, pp. 123–159.and (Jonas, A. and Wilson, D. (Eds) (1999) The Urban Growth Machine: Critical Perspectives Two Decades Later. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.2009) ‘Phase space: geography, relational thinking, and beyond’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 487–506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309132508101599(Judd, D.R. and Parkinson, M. (Eds) (1990) Leadership and Urban Regeneration: Cities in North America and Europe. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.1998) City Politics: Private Power and Public Policy. New York: Longman.and (2005) City of Flows: Modernity, Nature, and the City. London: Routledge.(2000) ‘Fetishizing the modern city: the phantasmagoria of urban technological networks’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 120–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00239and (1999) New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.(2009) ‘The prospects for culture-led urban regeneration in Latin America: cases from Mexico and Buenos Aires’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 483–501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00865.xand (1996) ‘Towards minor theory’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 487–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d140487(2005) ‘City branding: an effective assertion of identity or a transitory marketing trick?’, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 506–514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00482.xand ([Page 194]2003) ‘Urban political ecology’, Urban Geography, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 723–738. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-36184.108.40.2063(2009) ‘The urban politics of roll-with-it neo-liberalization’, City, vol. 13, no. 2–3, pp. 231–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604810902986848(2000) ‘Postcolonialism, representation, and the city’, In G.Bridge and S.Watson (Eds), A Companion to the City. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 261–269.(1995) ‘Citizenship for some but not for the others: spaces of citizenship in contemporary Europe’, Political Geography, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 121–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0962-6298%2895%2991660-V(2007) ‘Cultural icons and urban development in Asia: economic imperative, national identity, and global city status’, Political Geography, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 383–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.11.007(Krasna, F. and Nodari, P. (Eds) (2004) ‘L'immigrazione straniera in Italia. Casi, metodi e modelli’, Geotema, special issue, no. 23.2004), ‘City of talents? Berlin's regional economy, socio-spatial fabric and “worst practice” urban governance’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 511–529.(2005) ‘The post-Socialist growth machine: the case of Hungary’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 550–563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00605.xand (2000) The Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators. London: Earthscan.(2006) The Art of City Making. London: Earthscan.(1986) ‘Towards an analysis of the role of gay communities in urban renaissance’, Urban Geography, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 152–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-36220.127.116.11and (1996) ‘In the pursuit of difference: representations of gentrification’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 453–470. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a280453(2008) Gentrification. London: Routledge., and (1968) Le droit à la ville. Paris: Anthropos.(1970) La Révolution urbaine. Paris: Gallimard (Eng. transl. The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2003).(1974) La Production de l'espace. Paris: Anthropos (Engl. transl. The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991).(1996) Writings on Cities. Oxford: Blackwell.(1998) ‘Regulations and governance in European cities’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 482–506.(2007) Spaces of Colonialism: Delhi's Urban Governmentalities. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470712856(2007) ‘Faultline citizenship: ethnonational politics, minority mobilisation, and governance in the Israeli “mixed cities” of Haifa and Tel Aviv-Jaffa’, Ethnopolitics, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 235–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17449050701345025(2002) ‘Gated communities in Indonesia’, Cities, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 341–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751%2802%2900042-2(2002) ‘“The city is dead, long live the net”: harnessing european interurban networks for a neoliberal agenda’, Antipode, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 495–518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00252and (1999) ‘Competitive cities: introduction to the review’, Urban Studies, vol. 36, no. 5–6, pp. 791–793. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098993213and (1987) ‘Downtown redevelopment as an urban growth strategy: a critical appraisal of Baltimore renaissance’, Journal of Urban Affairs, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 103–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.1987.tb00468.x(2006) Mexico. The Struggle for Democratic Development. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.and (1994) L'Espace légitime: sur la dimension géographique de la fonction politique. Paris: Press de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques.(1997) Europe, une géographie, Paris: Hachette (Italian edition: Europa: Una geografia, Edizioni di Comunità, Turin 1999).([Page 195]Lévy, J. and Lussault, M. (Eds) (2003) Dictionnaire de la géographie et de l'espace des sociétés. Paris: Belin.2003) ‘Artists, aestheticisation and the field of gentrification’, Urban Studies, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 2527–2544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000136192(2002) ‘Three challenges for the Chinese city: globalization, migration, and market reform’, In J.R.Logan (Ed.), The New Chinese City: Globalization and Market Reform. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 3–21.(1987) Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.and (1988) ‘On the mechanics of economic development’, Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 3–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932%2888%2990168-7(2004) ‘Everyday technics as extraordinary threats: urban technostructures and non-places in terrorist action’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 120–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch7(2002) ‘From urban entrepreneurialism to a “revanchist city”? On the spatial injustices of Glasgow's renaissance’, Antipode, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 602–624. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00256(1988) Le Temps des tribus. Paris: Méridiens Klincksieck (Eng. transl. The Time of the Tribes: The Decline of Individualism in Mass Society. London: SAGE, 1996).(2000) ‘Cities in quarters’, In G.Bridge and S.Watson (Eds), A Companion to the City. London: Blackwell, pp. 270–281.(2006) ‘Security or safety in cities? The threat of terrorism after 9/11’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 919–929. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00700.x(Marglin, S. and Schor, J.B. (Eds) (1991), The Golden Age of Capitalism: Reinterpreting the Postwar Experience. New York: Oxford University Press.2003) ‘Who wants to be an active citizen? The politics and practice of community involvement’, Sociology, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 103–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038503037001390(2006) ‘Urban development and the politics of a creative class: evidence from the study of artists’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 1921–1940. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a38179(1950) Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.(2000) ‘The social construction of scale’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 219–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/030913200674086272(2001) ‘Dawn of the living wage: the diffusion of a redistributive municipal policy’, Urban Affairs Review, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 470–496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10780870122184966(2004) ‘Geographies of responsibility’, Geografiska Annaler B: Human Geography, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 5–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00150.x(2005) For Space. London: SAGE.(1992) High Tech Fantasies: Science Parks in Society, Science and Space. London: Routledge., and (1999) ‘Race, protest, and public space: contextualising Lefebvre in the U.S. city’, Antipode, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 163–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00098(2007) ‘Inequality and politics in the creative city-region: questions of livability and state strategy’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 188–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00713.x(2010) ‘Urban policy mobilities and global circuits of knowledge: toward a research agenda’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 107–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2010.520219(1998) ‘Some academic and political implications of Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference’, Antipode, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 3–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00060([Page 196]2008) ‘Political infrastructures: governing and experiencing the fabric of the city’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 363–374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00792.xand (2003) ‘Rome, global city? Church, state and the Jubilee 2000’, Political Geography, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 535–556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298%2803%2900034-9(2005) La città immaginata: Spazi sociali, luoghi, rappresentazioni a Salvador de Bahia. Milan: Angeli.(Merrifield, A. and Swyngedouw, E. (Eds) (1996) The Urbanization of Injustice. New York: New York University Press.2005) ‘The return of the camp’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 405–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/0309132505ph557xx(Mingione, E. (Ed.) (1996) Urban Poverty and the Underclass: A Reader. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/97804707129001997) ‘The annihilation of space by law: the roots and implications of anti-homeless laws in the United States’, Antipode, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 65–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00035(2003) The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York: Guilford Press.(2010) ‘The cultural production of locality: reclaiming the “European City” in post-Wall Berlin’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 281–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00894.x(2000) Décrire la ville: La construction des savoirs urbains dans l'interaction et dans le texte. Paris: Anthropos.(2005) On the Political. London: Routledge.(Moulaert, F., Rodriguez, A. and Swyngedouw, E. (Eds) (2005) The Globalized City: Economic Restructuring and Social Polarization in European Cities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.2003) Squatters as Developers? Slum Demolition and Redevelopment in Mumbai, India. Aldershot: Ashgate.(1961) The City in History. New York: Harcourt Brace.(2010) ‘The turning point in housing’, China Leadership Monitor, no. 33 (http://www.hoover.org/publications/china-leadership-monitor).(1992) Il potere costituente: Saggio sulle alternative del moderno. Varese: Sugarco (Eng. transl. Insurgencies. Constituent Power and the Modern State, Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press, 1999).(2008) Fabbrica di porcellana: Per una nuova grammatica politica. Milan: Feltrinelli (Eng. transl. The Porcelain Workshop: For a New Grammar of Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008).(2006) ‘The right to stay put, revisited: gentrification and resistance to displacement in New York City’, Urban Studies, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 23–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980500388710and (2009) Resilient Cities: Responding to Peak Oil and Climate Change. Washington, DC: Island Press., and (Newsweek (2010), “How Africa is becoming the New Asia,” February 19.2004) ‘The urbanization of justice movements? Possibilities and constraints for the city as a space of contentious struggle’, Space and Polity, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 107–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1356257042000273913and (1999) Sex and Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(2006) Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.([Page 197]1996) Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. London: Routledge.(OECD (2002) Urban Renaissance: Glasgow: Lessons for Innovation and Implementation. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2005) Culture and Local Development. Paris: OECD Publishing.1990) Borderless World: Power and Strategy in the Interlinked Economy. New York: Harper.(1995) ‘Globalization and the production of new urban spaces: Pacific Rim megaprojects in the late 20th century’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1713–1743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a271713(2004) ‘Pathways to global city formation: a view from the developmental city-state of Singapore’, Review of International Political Economy, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 489–521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969229042000252873and (1999) Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.(2007) ‘Neoliberalism as a mobile technology’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 3–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00234.x(2008) ‘The new mega-projects: Genesis and impacts’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 759–767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00829.xand (1999) ‘Governing cities: notes on the spatialisation of virtue’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 737–760. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d170737and (1972) L'imbroglio ecologico: L'ideologia della natura. Turin: Einaudi.(1993) ‘City marketing, image reconstruction and urban regeneration’, Urban Studies, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 339–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420989320080331(1995) Politics, Geography and Political Geography: A Critical Perspective. London: Arnold.(2010) The Value of Nothing: How to Reshape Market Society and Redefine Democracy. New York: Picador.(2005) ‘The local politics of “going global”: making and unmaking Minneapolis-St Paul as a world city’, Urban Studies, vol. 42, no. 12, pp. 2103–2122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420980500332114(2005) ‘Struggling with the creative class’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 740–770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00620.x(2006) ‘Liberating the city: between New York and New Orleans’, Urban Geography, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 681–713. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-3618.104.22.1681(2011) ‘Creative moments: working culture through municipal socialism and neoliberal urbanism’, In E.McCann and K.Ward (Eds), Mobile Urbanism: Cities and Policymaking in the Global Age. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, pp. 41–70.(2002) ‘Neoliberalizing space’, Antipode, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 380–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00247and (2003) Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO. London: Zed Books.(1981) City Limits. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226922645.001.0001(1998) The Politics of Presence. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198294158.001.0001(2006) ‘Parallel lives? Challenging discourses of British Muslim self-segregation’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 25–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d60j(1999) ‘Models of urban governance: the institutional dimension of urban politics’, Urban Affairs Review, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 372–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10780879922183988([Page 198]2002) ‘Globalization, kitsch and conflict: technologies of work, war and politics’, Review of International Political Economy, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09692290110102549(2009) Gouverner la ville par projet: Urbanisme et gouvernance des villes européennes. Paris: Sciences Po.(2006) ‘Cars are killing Luanda: cronyism, consumerism, and other assaults on Angola's postwar, capital city’, In M.J.Murray and G.A.Myers (Eds) Cities in Contemporary Africa. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 173–194.and (2000) ‘Cosmopolitanisms’, Public Culture, vol. 12, pp. 577–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/08992363-12-3-577, , and (2010) ‘Becoming a creative city: the entrepreneurial mayor, network politics, and the promise of an urban renaissance’, Urban Studies, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 1037–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098009353073and (1977) City-systems in Advanced Economies: Past Growth, Present Processes, and Future Development Options. New York: John Wiley & Sons.(2001) ‘Metropolitan political reorganization as a politics of urban growth: the case of San Fernando Valley Secession’, Political Geography, vol. 20, pp. 613–633. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298%2801%2900014-2(2003) ‘Citizenship and the right to the global city: reimagining the capitalist world order’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 564–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00467(2008) Recapturing Democracy: Neoliberalization and the Struggle for Alternative Urban Futures. London: Routledge.(2003) ‘Remaking place and securitising space: urban regeneration and the strategies, tactics and practices of policing in the UK’, Urban Studies, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 1869–1887. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098032000106645(2007) ‘Securing sustainable communities: security, safety and sustainability in New Urban Planning’, European Urban and Regional Studies, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 305–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969776407081164(1980) Pour une géographie du pouvoir. Paris: Libraires Techniques.(1995) La mésentente: politique et philosophie. Paris: Galilée (Eng. transl. Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press).(1998) Aux bords du politique. Paris: Gallimard (Eng. transl. On the Shore of Politics. London: Verso).(2001) ‘Ten theses on politics’, Theory and Event, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–16.(1971) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(2009) ‘From urban political economy to cultural political economy: rethinking culture and economy in and beyond the urban’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 447–465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309132508096352(2008) ‘The President, his church and the crocodiles’, New Statesman, 23 October.(1997) ‘Structural adjustment programmes and the city in tropical Africa’, Urban Studies, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1297–1307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098975646(2003) The Hydrogen Economy: The Creation of the Worldwide Energy Web and the Redistribution of Power on Earth. New York: Tatcher and Penguin.(2007) ‘Lifelong learning: beyond neo-liberal imaginary’, In D.N.Aspin (Ed.), Philosophical Perspectives of Lifelong Learning. Berlin: Springer, pp. 114–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6193-6_7(2002), ‘Global and world cities: a view off the map’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 531–554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00397(2000) ‘Citizenship, multiculturalism, and the European city’, In G.Bridge and S.Watson (Eds), A Companion to the City. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 282–291.([Page 199]Rogers, A. and Tillie, J. (Eds) (2001) Multicultural Policies and Modes of Citizenship in European Cities. Aldershot: Ashgate.2005) ‘Globalization, economic restructuring and local response in Johannesburg – the most isolated “world city”’, In K.Segbers, S.Raiser and K.Volkmann (Eds), Public Problems – Private Solutions? Globalizing Cities in the South. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 17–34.(1999) Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488856(2008) ‘La politica dello spazio pubblico nella città molteplice’, Rivista Geografica Italiana, vol. 115, no. 4, pp. 27–58.(2010a) ‘Castells, Manuel’, In R.Hutchison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Urban Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 114–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412971973(2010b) ‘The capitalist city’, In R.Hutchison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Urban Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 109–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412971973(2003) ‘Convergence space: process geographies of grassroots globalization networks’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 333–349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-5661.00096(2003), “Joburg: discover;” http://www.brandchannel.com(2006) ‘Justice and the geography of Hurricane Katrina’, Geoforum, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 4–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2005.10.002(1978) Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. New York: Vintage.(2008) ‘Rethinking urban projects: experiences in Europe’, Urban Studies, vol. 45, no. 11, pp. 2343–2363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098008095871(1982) Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.(2003) Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities for the 21st Century. London: Continuum.(1991) The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1995) ‘On concentration and centrality in the global city’, In P.Knox and P.Taylor (Eds), World Cities in a World-system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 63–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511522192.005(1996a) ‘Whose city is it? Globalization and the formation of new claims’, Public Culture, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 205–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/08992363-8-2-205(1996b) Losing Control?: Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.(2007) A Sociology of Globalization. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.(1994) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(2007) Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199286294.001.0001(1988) New Industrial Spaces. Flexible Production Organization and Regional Development in North America and Western Europe. London: Pion.(1998) Regions and the World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production, Competition, and Political Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(2000) The Cultural Economy of Cities. London: SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446217481(Scott, A.J. (Ed.) (2001) Global City-Regions: Trends, Theory, Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.2006) ‘Creative cities: conceptual issues and policy questions’, Journal of Urban Affairs, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2166.2006.00256.x([Page 200]2004) ‘There is an Istanbul that belongs to me: citizenship, space, and identity in the city’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 352–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2004.09402012.x(1999) Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor.(2009) The Idea of Justice. London: Penguin.(2006) ‘Migrants and the Middle East: welcome to the other side of Dubai’, Independent, Tuesday 28 March.(1999) ‘The spaces of democracy’, In R.Beauregard and S.Body-Gendrot (Eds), The Urban Moment. Cosmopolitan Essays on the Late 20th Century City. London: SAGE, pp. 273–285.(2004) ‘New wars of the city: relationships of “urbicide” and “genocide”’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 141–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch8(2006) ‘Disaggregating the State: networks and collective resistance in Shanghai’, China Quarterly, no. 186, pp. 114–132.and (1998) ‘Urban crisis/urban representations: selling the city in difficult times’, In T.Hall and P.Hubbard (Eds), The Entrepreneurial City: Geographies of Politics, Regime and Representation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 55–75.and (1999) Globalization and the City. Harlow: Pearson.and (2008) ‘Subprime crisis: American crisis or human crisis?’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 195–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d2602ged(2010) ‘The economic resilience of regions: towards an evolutionary approach’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 27–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsp029and (2004) For the City Yet to Come: Changing African Life in Four Cities. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.(2002) Globalization: Capitalism and Its Alternatives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(2005) ‘The transnational capitalist class and contemporary architecture in globalizing cities’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 485–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00601.x(2009) Du mußt dein Leben ändern, Frankfurt am Main as Suhrkamp (Italian translation: Devi cambiare la tua vita, Raffaello Cortina, Milan, 2010).(1997) ‘Geography and ethics: a moral turn?’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 583–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/030913297673492951(1984) Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.(1996) The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City. New York: Routledge.(1998) ‘Giuliani time: the revanchist 1990s’, Social Text, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/466878(2006) ‘Studying cosmopolitan landscapes’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 553–558.(1989) Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. London: Verso.(2000) Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions. Oxford: Blackwell.(1999) ‘Citizenship issues in China's internal migration: comparisons with Germany and Japan’, Political Science Quarterly, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 455–478. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2658206(1999) A Critique of Postcolonial Reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(2002) Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: Norton.(1989) Regime Politics. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.([Page 201]2009) ‘Rethinking human capital, creativity and urban growth’, Journal of Economic Geography, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 147–167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbn052and (2006) ‘Gated communities in Bulgaria: interpreting a new trend in post-communist urban development’, GeoJournal, vol. 66, no. 1–2, pp. 57–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10708-006-9016-1and (1997) Casino Capitalism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.(1992) ‘The Mammon quest, “Glocalization,” interspatial competition and the monetary order: the construction of new scales’, In M.Dunford and J.Kafkalas (Eds), Cities and Regions in the New Europe. London: Belhaven Press, pp. 255–274.(2007) ‘Impossible “sustainability” and the postpolitical condition’, In R.Krueger and D.Gibbs (Eds), The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in the United States and Europe. New York: Guilford Press, pp. 13–40.(1992) Multiculturalism and the ‘Politics of Recognition’. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(1982) ‘A materialist framework for political geography’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/621909(2000) ‘World cities and territorial states under conditions of contemporary globalization’, Political Geography, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 5–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298%2899%2900060-8(2005) Knowing Capitalism. London: SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446211458(2009) ‘The cultures of capitalism: Glasgow and the monopoly of culture’, Antipode, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 111–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2008.00658.x(2006) ‘European challenges to multicultural citizenship: Muslims, secularism and beyond’, In T.Modood, A.Triandafyllidou and R.Zapata-Barrero (Eds), Multiculturalism, Muslims and Citizenship. London: Routledge, pp. 1–22., and (1999) ‘The agonic freedom of citizens’, Economy and Society, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 161–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03085149900000001(2004) ‘Framing urban injustices: the case of the Amsterdam squatter movement’, Space and Polity, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 227–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1356257042000273977(2005) ‘Reinventing multiculturalism: urban citizenship and the negotiation of ethnic diversity in Amsterdam’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 622–640. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00614.x, and (UN (2005) Report of the Fact-Finding Mission to Zimbabwe to Assess the Scope and Impact of Operation Murambatsvina;http://www.un.org (accessed December 2009).UNESCO (1998) Report of the World Commission on Culture and Development “Our creative diversity” (2nd edition 2009). Paris: UNESCO.1995) Consuming Places. London: Routledge.(2004) ‘The global cities of Sub-Saharan Africa: fact or fiction?’, Urban Forum, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 36–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12132-004-0008-2(1994) ‘The dual city and the poor: social polarization, social segregation and life chances’, Urban Studies, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 995–1015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00420989420080911(2008) ‘The image of the creative city: Some reflections on urban branding in Turin’, Cities, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 370–382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2008.08.001(2010) ‘European spatial planning between competitiveness and territorial cohesion: shadows of neoliberalism’, European Planning Studies, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 1301–1315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654311003791358(2006) ‘Interrogating “urban citizenship” vis-à-vis undocumented migration’, Citizenship Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 229–249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13621020600633168([Page 202]2002) Transnational Networks and Skilled Labour Migration. Oxford: Economic and Social Research Council/University of Oxford.(Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (Eds) (1999) Migration, Diasporas and Transnationalism. Cheltenham: Elgar.1996) ‘Virtuosity and revolution: the political theory of exodus’, In P.Virno and M.Hardt (Eds) Radical Thought in Italy. A Potential Politics. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press, pp. 189–209.(2004) A Grammar of the Multitude: For an Analysis of Contemporary Forms of life. New York: Semiotext(e).(1999) Les prisons de la misère. Paris: Raisons d'agir.(2007) Urban Outcasts: A Comparative Sociology of Advanced Marginality. Cambridge: Polity Press.(2008) ‘The militarization of urban marginality: lessons from the Brazilian metropolis’, International Political Sociology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 56–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-5687.2008.00037.x(2005) Governing Europe: Discourse, Governmentality and European Integration. London: Routledge.and (1983) Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books.(1997) ‘Coalitions in urban regeneration: a regime approach’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1493–1506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a291493(2006) ‘“Policies in motion,” urban management and state restructuring: the trans-local expansion of business improvement districts’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 54–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00643.x(1999) The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics, and the Ethics of Queer Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(2004) ‘City streets – the war zones of globalization: democracy and military operations on urban terrain in the early twenty-first century’, In S.Graham (Ed.), Cities, War, and Terrorism. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 214–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470753033.ch12(2004) ‘Resource curse? Governmentality, oil and power in the Niger Delta, Nigeria’, Geopolitics, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 50–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14650040412331307832(2007) Hollow Land: Israeli's Architecture of Occupation. London: Verso.(2009) Policy Responses to Skilled Migration: Retention, Return and Circulation. Geneva: International Labour Office.(1958) Culture and Society. London: Chatto & Windus.(2004) ‘Toward a contingent urban neo-liberalism’, Urban Geography, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 771–783. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/0272-3622.214.171.1241(2007) ‘The real creative class’, Social and Cultural Geography, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 841–847. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649360802441473and (2004) ‘Domesticating urban theory? US concepts, British cities and the limits of cross-national applications’, Urban Studies, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 2103–2118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000268366(World Bank (1991) Urban Policy and Economic Development: An Agenda for the 1990s. Washington, DC: World Bank.World Bank (2000) Cities in Transition: World Bank Urban and Local Government Strategy. Washington, DC: World Bank.2003) ‘Transitional cities’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 1331–1338http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a3634([Page 203]2004) ‘Cultural strategies in Shanghai: regenerating cosmopolitanism in an era of globalization’, Progress in Planning, vol. 61, pp. 159–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2003.10.002(2007) ‘Race, gender, and statistical representation: predatory mortgage lending and the US community reinvestment movement’, Environment and Planning A, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 2139–2166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a38224, , and (1999) ‘Global/globalising cities’, Progress in Human Geography, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 607–616. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/030913299674647857(1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.(2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.(2003) ‘Spatial restructuring of financial centers in mainland China and Hong Kong: a geography of finance perspective’, Urban Affairs Review, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 535–571. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1078087402250364(2006) The Parallax View. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.(2008) ‘Censorship today: violence, or ecology as a new opium for the masses’; http://www.lacan.com/zizecology1.htm (accessed May 2010).(1980) ‘A decade of the new urban sociology’, Theory & Society, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 575–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00148354(1991) Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disneyworld. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.(1995) The Cultures of Cities. Oxford: Blackwell.(
The book is a revised and expanded version of the Italian-language Geogrofia Politica Urbana, which was published in October 2010. We'd like to thank Jamie Peck, AbdouMaliq Simone and Ola Söderström, who accepted our invitation to write a foreword to this book. We also wish to express our gratitude to Robert Rojek and Katherine Haw at SAGE. Robert enthusiastically supported our project from the very beginning; Katherine had the patience to read and edit the manuscript of two authors whose native language is not English. It goes without saying, the authors alone are responsible for any remaining errors or obscurities.