论文快递：第一百五十六期

六yi利物浦

编者按

Urban Studies 每年投稿量为1000多篇，每年发表16期，共180篇论文左右。由于稿件量大，文章从接收到正式出版周期较长，因此编辑部会在稿件接收排版后的第一时间在网上发布论文全文 (Online First) 。"论文快递" 栏目将同步推出网上刊登的最新论文，方便读者了解Urban Studies的最新动态，敬请关注！

本期为“论文快递”栏目的第一百五十六期，将介绍Urban Studies Special Issue: Comparative methods for global urban studies的五篇论文。主题包括大型项目开发中的政府、社区和开发商的关系，共享项目中的政府-社会共生关系，住房权去殖民化，比较与政治策略，德班和圣保罗贫民窟改造政治的比较分析，欢迎阅读。

01

Beyond variegation: The territorialisation of states, communities and developers in large-scale developments in Johannesburg, Shanghai and London

超越多样性：约翰内斯堡、上海和伦敦大型项目开发中的政府、社区和开发商的属地化

Jennifer Robinson（英国伦敦大学学院）Fulong Wu（英国伦敦大学学院）Phil Harrison（南非金山大学）等七位作者首次出版时间：2022/2/22｜研究论文
Abstract

Large-scale urban development projects are a significant format of urban expansion and renewal across the globe. As generators of governance innovation and indicators of the future city in each urban context, large-scale development projects have been interpreted within frameworks of ‘variegations’ of wider circulating processes, such as neoliberalisation or financialisation. However, such projects often entail significant state support and investment, are strongly linked to a wide variety of transnational investors and developers and are frequently highly contested in their local environments. Thus, each project comes to fruition in a distinctive regulatory context, often as an exception to the norm, and each emerges through complex interactions over a long period of time amongst an array of actors. We therefore seek to broaden the discussion from an analytical focus on variegated globalised processes to consider three large-scale urban development projects (in Shanghai, Johannesburg and London) as distinctive (transcalar) territorialisations. Using an innovative comparative approach, we outline the grounds for a systematic analytical conversation across mega-urban development projects in very different contexts. Initially, comparability rests on the shared features of large-scale developments – that they are multi-jurisdictional, involve long time scales and bring significant financing challenges. Comparing three development projects, we are able to interrogate, rather than take for granted, how a range of wider processes, circulating practices, transcalar actors and territorial regulatory formations composed specific urban outcomes in each case. Thinking across these diverse cases provides grounds for rebuilding understandings of urban development politics.

摘要大型城市开发项目是全球城市扩张和更新的重要形式。作为在每一城市背景下治理创新的推动者和未来城市的指标，人们已经在更广泛的流通过程的 “多样化” 框架内（例如新自由主义化或金融化）对大型开发项目进行了解读。然而，此类项目通常需要大量的政府支持和投资，与各种各样的跨国投资者和开发商密切相关，并且通常在当地环境中被激烈争夺。因此，每个项目都是在独特的监管环境中实现的，通常是作为打破常规的例外情形，并且，每个项目都是通过一系列参与者在很长一段时间内的复杂互动而形成的。因此，我们寻求拓宽这一探讨，从多样化全球化进程的分析重点出发，考察三个大型城市发展项目（分别位于上海、约翰内斯堡和伦敦），将其作为独特的（跨标量）地域化案例。我们使用创新性比较方法，为在背景非常不同的超大城市开发项目之间进行系统性分析对话奠定了基础。最初，可比性取决于大型开发项目的共同特征：它们涉及多个辖区、时间跨度长、并且伴随着重大的融资挑战。通过比较这三个开发项目，我们得以审视（而不是想当然地推断）在每种情况下，一系列更广泛的过程、流通实践、跨标量参与者和区域监管结构如何导致了特定的城市结果。对这些多元化案例的思考为重建对城市开发政治的理解提供了基础。
Keywords comparative urbanism, developers, financing, large-scale urban development, state–community relations, urban politics
关键词比较城市研究, 开发商, 融资, 大型城市开发项目, 政府 - 社区关系, 城市政治
原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211064159

02

Shared projects and symbiotic collaborations: Shenzhen and London in comparative conversation

共享项目与共生合作：深圳和伦敦的比较对话

Shaun SK Teo（新加坡国立大学）首次出版时间：2021/11/11｜研究论文
Abstract

This paper presents ‘shared projects’ and the ‘symbiotic’ relations they engender to capture accounts of state and society actors collaborating to turn individual constraints into collective opportunities for pursuing urban experiments which are institutionally-shaped but also institution-shaping. The concepts are developed through a sequential and recursive comparison – that is, a ‘comparative conversation’– between a case of urban village upgrading in Shenzhen and Community Land Trust Development in London. The paper uses a pragmatist approach to capitalist transformation as a starting point for comparison between these supposedly ‘incomparable’ cases. I build both heterogeneous and generalisable accounts of the pathways and progressive potential of collaborations on shared projects by recursively composing analytical proximities across the cases and their contexts of state entrepreneurialism and austerity localism. Theoretically, this paper contributes to scholarship which focuses on the contingency and complexity inherent in urban transformation. State and society actors are seen as potential collaborators working pragmatically to solve systemic problems without necessarily targeting wholesale systemic change. Methodologically, it contributes to ongoing attempts to demonstrate the positive relationship between experimental comparisons and conceptual innovation through staging a ‘comparative conversation’.

摘要 

本文介绍了“共享项目”及其产生的“共生”关系，以捕捉政府和社会行为者之间的合作，这种合作将个人限制转化为集体机会，以进行制度塑造的和塑造制度的城市实验。这些概念是通过深圳城中村升级案例与伦敦社区土地信托开发案例之间的顺序和递归比较—即“比较对话”而形成的。本文使用实用主义的方法看待资本主义转型，将其作为比较这些所谓“无可比拟”的案例的起点。我通过递归地组合案例及其政府创业和地方财政紧缩背景的分析近似性，构建了对共享项目合作途径和渐进潜力的异质性和可概括性说明。本文从理论上丰富了研究城市转型中固有的偶然性和复杂性的文献。政府和社会行为者被视为潜在的合作者，彼此合作以务实地解决制度性问题，而不必以大规模的制度性变革为目标。在方法论上，本文通过聚焦“比较对话”，为证明实验比较和概念创新之间的正相关系的持续努力做出贡献。

Keywords comparative urbanism, London, Shenzhen, state-society relations, urban experiments, urban transformation

关键词 

比较城市化, 伦敦, 深圳, 政府-社会关系, 城市实验, 城市转型

原文地址 https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211048675

03

De-colonising the right to housing, one new city at a time: Seeing housing development from Palestine/Israel

住房权去殖民化，一个新的城市：从巴勒斯坦/以色列看住房发展

Oded Haas（加拿大约克大学）首次出版时间：2021/11/28｜研究论文
Abstract

The right to housing is generally understood as a local struggle against the global commodification of housing. While useful for recognising overarching urbanisation processes, such understanding risks washing over the distinctive politics that produce the housing crisis and its ostensible solutions in different contexts around the globe. Situated in a settler-colonial context, this paper bridges recent comparative urban studies with Indigenous narratives of urbanisation, to re-think housing crisis solutions from the point of view of the colonised. Based on in-depth interviews with Palestinian citizens of Israel, the paper compares two cases of state-initiated, privatised housing developments, one in Israel and one in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: the new cities Tantour and Rawabi. Each case is examined as a singularity, distinctive formations of the spatialities of Zionist settlement in Palestine, which are now being transformed through privatised housing development. The paper presents these developments as mutually constituted through a colonial-settler project and Palestinian sumud resistance, the praxis of remaining on the land. The paper utilises comparison as a strategy, exploring each new city in turn, to reveal the range of directions in sumud. Thus, by seeing housing development as site for negotiating de-colonisation on the ground, the paper contributes to recent debates over the power of comparative urbanism to re-think global phenomena through treating urban terrains as singularities.

摘要 住房权通常被理解为当地反对全球住房商品化的斗争。虽然有助于识别总体城市化进程，但这种理解的风险在于，其可能会冲淡导致住房危机的独特政治，及其在全球不同背景下的表面解决方案。在定居者-殖民背景下，本文将最近的比较城市研究与城市化的原住民叙事联系起来，从被殖民者的角度重新思考住房危机的解决方案。基于对巴勒斯坦裔以色列公民的深入访谈，本文比较了两个由国家发起的私有化住房开发案例，一个位于以色列，位于巴勒斯坦被占领土：新城市坦图尔 (Tantour) 和拉瓦比 (Rawabi)。每个案例都被视为一个奇点，即独特的巴勒斯坦犹太复国主义定居点空间结构，现在正在通过私有化住房开发进行改造。本文将这些开发项目描述为由殖民定居者项目和巴勒斯坦苏穆德 (Sumud) 抵抗运动（留在故土上的生活方式）相互构成。本文采用比较策略，依次研究每个新城市，揭示苏穆德运动的方向范围。藉此，通过将住房开发项目视为去殖民化实地谈判的场所，本文为最近关于比较城市研究（通过将城市区域视为奇点）在再思全球现象方面的优势的辩论做出贡献。
Keywords comparison, Palestine-Israel, right to housing, settler-colonialism, singularity, sumud
关键词 
比较, 巴勒斯坦-以色列, 住房权, 定居者-殖民主义, 奇点, 苏穆德 (Sumud)

原文地址 
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211056226

04

Comparison and political strategy: Internationalism, colonial rule and urban research after Fanon

比较与政治策略：法农之后的国际主义、殖民统治与城市研究

Stefan Kipfer（加拿大约克大学）首次出版时间：2021/10/20论文
Abstract

Debates about comparative method have been at the forefront of English-language urban studies during the last two decades. In one sense, these debates simply derive from and help sustain the crucial labour process of urban research. In other respects, the rise of comparative method to foremost prominence has demonstrated theoretical differences in the field. The heat that some of these debates have occasionally generated (e.g. on scale, global cities, assemblage and planetary urbanisation) alerts us to the political stakes involved in comparison. These range from the micro-political dynamics of knowledge creation to various macrological considerations. In this paper, I deal not only with the political implications of comparative projects, I also raise the question: how do political strategies produce comparative perspectives? After a few observations about comparative debates in urban research and beyond, I zero in on Frantz Fanon’s tricontinental internationalism as a generator of a relational comparative outlook before discussing three intellectual engagements with Fanon’s legacy. These engagements are situated within the creole literary movement in Martinique, Indigenous radicalism in Canada and political anti-racism in mainland France. By highlighting the obstacles that stand in the way of translating Fanon’s internationalism, these engagements also underline the importance of understanding colonial rule and its legacies (including its urban dimension, which Fanon understood under the larger rubric of colonial compartmentalisation) in relationally comparative ways: historically and geographically distinct but inter-linked through broader processes, strategies and intellectual practices.

摘要在过去的二十年里，关于比较方法的争论一直处于英语城市研究的前沿。从某种意义上说，这些争论只是源于并帮助维持了城市研究的关键劳动过程。在其他方面，比较方法的兴起以及占据最主导的地位的事实已经证明了该领域的理论差异。其中一些辩论偶尔引起的热度（例如规模、全球城市、组合和行星城市化）提醒我们注意比较所涉及的政治风险。其范围既包括知识创造的微观政治动态，也包括各种宏观考量。在本文中，我不仅探讨比较项目的政治含义，还提出了一个问题：政治策略如何产生比较观点？在对城市研究及其他领域的比较辩论进行了一些观察后，我集中探讨弗朗茨·法农 (Frantz Fanon) 的三洲国际主义，将其视为关系性比较观点的肇始者，随后，我探讨与法农遗产有关的三个知识界运动。这三个运动分别是马提尼克岛 (Martinique) 的克里奥尔 (Creole) 文学运动、加拿大的原住民激进主义、和法国大陆的反种族主义政治运动。这些运动凸显了法农国际主义应用方面的障碍，从而突出了以关系性比较方法理解殖民统治及其遗产（包括其城市维度，法农在殖民区隔的更大框架下理解这一维度）的重要性：历史方法和地理方法各不相同，但又通过更广泛的过程、策略和智力实践相互联系。
Keywordsagglomeration/urbanisation, anticolonialism, commentary, comparison, politics, race/ethnicity, theory
关键词

集聚/城市化, 反殖民主义, 评论, 比较, 政治, 种族/民族, 理论

原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211049346

05

Disassembling connections: A comparative analysis of the politics of slum upgrading in eThekwini and São Paulo

拆解联系：德班和圣保罗贫民窟改造政治的比较分析 

Camila Saraiva（巴西ABC联邦大学）首次出版时间：2021/12/7｜研究论文
Abstract

This paper presents an innovative comparison that works creatively with the entangled spatialities of policy mobilities, drawing on a city-to-city cooperation between São Paulo (Brazil) and eThekwini (South Africa) municipalities for the exchange of slum upgrading expertise. The proposed comparative tactic entails tracing the establishment of this connection in order to disassemble the constituent flows and localities merged within it. Subsequently, by posing questions to one another, a relational comparison of the trajectory of slum upgrading policy in each locality is composed, unearthing the political and institutional conditions that preceded the existence of the connection per se. In that sense, both eThekwini and São Paulo are considered equivalent starting points from which local actors engaged in circulating ideas and mobilised slum upgrading policies. This paper not only brings a fresh approach to comparative methods – incorporating political contexts and their extensive overlapping networks of relations alongside a focus on particular policy trajectories – but also contributes to furthering global urban studies in two other ways. First, it provides insight into the processes by which policies are put on the move and localised (or not). Second, it demonstrates how repeated instances of urban practice may be unravelled by allowing each context of policy formation, with its distinctive trajectory of slum upgrading, to speak to one another. In this regard, the comparative analysis identified how, in both São Paulo and eThekwini, the consolidation of democracy was followed by the development of more technocratic approaches to the detriment of earlier slum upgrading initiatives focussed on community empowerment.

摘要
本文利用巴西圣保罗和南非德班两市之间交流贫民窟改造经验的合作成果，提出了一种创新性比较，该比较创造性地处理了政策流动性的纠缠空间性。提议的比较策略需要追踪这种联系的建立，以便分解合并在其中的组成流和地点。随后，通过相互提问，各地贫民窟改造政策轨迹的关系比较得以构建，从而揭示了先在于联系本身的政治和制度条件。从这个意义上说，德班和圣保罗都被认为是当地参与者参与思想传播和为贫民窟改造政策进行动员的同等起点。本文不仅为比较方法带来了一种全新的进路（即，将政治背景及其广泛重叠的关系网络结合起来，同时关注特定的政策轨迹），而且还从另外两个方面促进了全球城市研究。首先，本文提供了对将政策付诸实施和实现本地化（或非本地化）的过程的见解。其次，本文展示了如何通过每种政策形成背景（均具有各自独特的贫民窟改造轨迹）的相互交流来揭示城市实践的重复实例。在这方面，比较分析辨识了在圣保罗和德班，民主巩固之后如何形成了更多的技术官僚做法，从而损害了期侧重于社区赋能的早贫民窟改造举措。
Keywordscomparative urbanism, eThekwini, policy mobilities, São Paulo, slum upgrading
关键词比较城市研究, 德班, 政策流动性, 圣保罗, 贫民窟改造
原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211059703

扫码关注我们

微信号｜USJ_online

Urban Studies期刊官方微信公众号