论文快递：第一百五十七期

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”栏目的第一百五十七期，将介绍Urban Studies Special Issue: Comparative methods for global urban studies的五篇论文。主题包括基础设施主导的城市发展，全球南方城市的土地转型，冷战时期的城市比较，全球南方城市与北方城市的水基础设施建设，新比较策略反思，欢迎阅读。

01

Infrastructure-led development and the peri-urban question: Furthering crossover comparisons

基础设施主导的发展和城郊问题：进一步的交叉比较

J Miguel Kanai（英国谢菲尔德大学）Seth Schindler（英国曼彻斯特大学）首次出版时间：2022/3/2｜研究论文
Abstract

Contemporary development policy portrays enhanced connectivity as the key to fostering economic growth in lagging regions. This global policy consensus and consequent infrastructure scramble have resulted in a proliferation of new urban spaces. These are dispersed, fragmentary and often unrecognised as urban by projects and plans centred on large-scale connective infrastructures to integrate remote regions into circuits of capital. Whilst our understanding of infrastructure-led development is informed by critical engagements with planetary urbanisation, global infrastructure and logistics, this position paper seeks to reconcile political economy analyses with situated studies closer to lived forms of heterogeneous precariousness in emerging urban worlds. Addressing recent debates that frame these bodies of scholarship as antagonistic, we emphasise the supplementarity of perspectives from within and beyond urban studies. This pluralism can be practised through comparisons that will (i) trace the geo-economic relationality of mega-infrastructures, which conditions directly and indirectly their planning, financing, construction and management, and (simultaneously or independently) (ii) examine difference in the diverse experiences of and responses to emergent infrastructural urbanisms of precarity. The article shows that genetic and generative comparisons can inform a research agenda on (peri-)urban precariousness, engaging policies with unmistakable global moorings but complex multi-scalar politics, diverging outcomes and situated resistances and appropriations.

摘要当代发展政策将加强连通性描述为促进落后地区经济增长的关键。这种全球政策共识和随之而来的基础设施争夺导致了新城市空间的激增。这些城市空间是分散的、支离破碎的，并且往往不被以大规模连通性基础设施为中心的项目和计划（旨在将偏远地区整合到资本回路中）认可为城市。虽然我们对以基础设施为主导的发展的理解是通过对行星城市化、全球基础设施和物流的批判性研究得出的，但本立场文件旨在将政治经济学分析与更接近新兴城市世界中异质不稳定性的生活形式的情境化研究相协调。针对最近将这些学术研究相互对立起来的观点，我们强调分别来自城市研究内部和外部的观点的互补性。这种多元化可以通过比较来实践，这些比较将 (i) 追踪大型基础设施的地缘经济关系性，这种关系性直接或间接地影响它们的规划、融资、建设和管理，以及（同时或独立地）(ii) 考察对新兴基础设施城市化所带来的不稳定性的体验和反应的差异性。本文表明，遗传和生成比较可以为（周边）城市不稳定性的研究议程提供启示，考虑具有明确的全球普遍性、复杂的多标量政治、不同的结果以及情境化阻力和应用的各种政策。
Keywords comparative urbanism, East Africa, geographies of precarity, Latin America, planetary urbanisation
关键词比较城市化, 东非, 不稳定性地理, 拉丁美洲, 行星城市化
原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211064158

02

Speculating on land, property and peri/urban futures: A conjunctural approach to intra-metropolitan comparison

对土地、财产和周边/城市期货的投机：都市内比较的一种连接性方法

Helga Leitner（美国加州大学洛杉矶分校）Eric Sheppard（美国加州大学洛杉矶分校）首次出版时间：2022/4/1｜研究论文
Abstract

This article explores a conjunctural approach to comparison as a means to capture the complexity of the processes shaping metropolitan land transformations in a city of the global South, comparing the co-implicated actions of developers and local residents across central and peri-urban Jabodetabek. A conjunctural approach shares with some other forms of comparison the ambition to build new theories and challenge existing knowledge. Rather than controlling for the characteristics of units of analysis as in conventional comparison, a conjunctural approach attends to the broader spatio-temporal conjuncture. It involves highlighting unexpected or overlooked starting points for comparison, attending to inter-place, inter-scalar and inter-temporal relationalities in order to identify shared general tendencies as well as particularities and to chart their mutual constitution. Grounding this comparison iteratively puts local knowledge and observations in conversation with already existing theories. Deploying these principles in a socio-spatial intra-metropolitan comparison, we show that economic speculation on land and property is complexly entangled with actors’ socio-cultural speculations, as they seek also to realise aspirations for distinct peri/urban futures. Economic speculation deepens already existing inequalities in wealth and power differentials between and among developers and kampung residents. The erasure of informal settlements and displacement of their residents is supplemented by the ability of other kampungs and select residents to take advantage of spillover opportunities from the formal developments built on former kampung land. Distinct central city and peri-urban landscapes are emerging, shaped by differences in the social ecology of land and local governance and planning regimes.

摘要 

本文探讨一种连接性比较方法，以此来理解塑造了一个全球南方城市的大都市土地转型过程的复杂性，我们比较了大雅加达地区 (Jabodetabek) 市中心和城市周边的开发商和当地居民的相互影响行为。与其他一些比较方法一样，连接性方法致力于建立新理论和挑战现有知识。与传统比较中的控制分析单元的特征不同，连接性方法关注更广泛的时空连接性。它强调意料之外或被忽视的比较起点，关注地点之间、标量之间和时期之间的关系性，以识别共同的普遍趋势和特殊性，并标定它们之间的相互构成关系。以这种比较为基础，我们可以迭代地实现本地知识和观察与现有理论之间的对话。通过在大都市内的社会空间比较中运用这些原则，我们表明，对土地和物业的经济投机与行为者的社会文化投机复杂地纠缠在一起，因为投机者也同时寻求实现与不同周边/城市未来相关的抱负。经济投机加深了开发商和村庄居民之间（以及群体内部）业已存在的财富不平等和权力差异。伴随着非正规住区的消除和对其居民的排斥，其他村庄和部分居民还能利用在以前村庄土地上建造的正式开发项目所带来的溢出机会。市中心和城郊出现了不同的景象，这是由土地的社会生态、地方治理和规划制度的差异所决定的。

Keywords comparative urbanism, economic and socio-cultural speculation, Jakarta, land transformations, socio-spatial comparison

关键词 

比较城市研究, 经济和社会文化投机, 雅加达, 土地转型, 社会空间比较

原文地址 https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221081642

03

Socialist worldmaking: The political economy of urban comparison in the Global Cold War

社会主义的世界创造：全球冷战中城市比较的政治经济学

Łukasz Stanek（英国曼彻斯特大学）首次出版时间：2021/10/13｜研究论文
Abstract

This article revisits comparative urban studies produced during the Cold War in the framework of ‘socialist worldmaking’, or multiple, evolving and sometimes antagonistic practices of cooperation between socialist countries in Eastern Europe and decolonising countries in Africa and Asia. Much like the recent ‘new comparative urbanism’, these studies extended the candidates, terms and positionalities of comparison beyond the Global North. This article focuses on operative concepts employed by Soviet, Eastern European, African and Asian scholars and professionals in economic and spatial planning across diverse locations, and shows how they were produced by means of ‘adaptive’ and ‘appropriative’ comparison. While adaptive comparison was instrumental in the application of Soviet concepts in countries embarking on the socialist development path, appropriative comparison juxtaposed concepts from various contexts – whether the ‘West’ or the ‘East’ – in order to select those best suitable for the means and needs on the ground. This article argues that this conceptual production was conditioned by the political economy of socialist worldmaking and shows how these experiences are useful for a more critical advancement of comparative urban research today.

摘要 本文重新审视冷战期间在“社会主义世界构建”框架内产生的比较城市研究，这种框架即东欧社会主义国家与非洲和亚洲摆脱殖民化的国家之间的多重、不断发展、有时甚至是对抗性的合作实践。就像最近的“新比较城市研究”一样，这些研究将比较的候选对象、术语和位置扩展到了全球北方之外。本文重点介绍苏联、东欧、非洲和亚洲学者和专业人士在不同地点的经济和空间规划中采用的操作概念，并展示了它们是如何通过“适应性”和“专用”比较产生的。虽然适应性比较有助于苏联概念在走上社会主义发展道路的国家的应用，但专用比较将来自不同背景的概念（无论是“西方”还是“东方”的）并置以选择最适合当下方式和需求的概念。本文认为这种概念生产受到社会主义世界构建的政治经济学的制约，并展示了这些经验对于批判性推进当今比较城市研究的用处。
Keywords comparative urban research, Eastern Europe, Middle East, political economy of urban knowledge production, postcolonial urbanism, socialist urbanism, West Africa, worldmaking
关键词 
比较城市研究, 东欧, 中东, 城市知识生产的政治经济学, 后殖民城市化, 社会主义城市化, 西非, 世界构建

原文地址 
https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211050178

04

An experiment with the minor geographies of major cities: Infrastructural relations among the fragments

大城市的小地理实验：碎片之间的基础设施关系

Niranjana R（伦敦政治经济学院）首次出版时间：2022/5/4 ｜研究论文
Abstract

Research on urban water infrastructures has seldom reached across the Global North-South divide owing to their apparent developmental incommensurability. Yet, the universalising tendencies of urban theory has meant that cities of the Global South are often deemed to have ‘fragmented’ infrastructures or incomplete circulations in implicit comparison to the northern infrastructural ideal. So, in order to truly ‘world’ the study of infrastructures and cities, it is important to go beyond these dominant paradigms and attend to how infrastructures actually work and what socio-technical implications they have in cities of the Global South and North. Building on these provocations, this paper places the water infrastructures of two ‘most different cities’– Chennai, India and London, UK – alongside each other in ‘experimental comparison’, where the aim is not to arrive at paradigmatic urban theory but to highlight heterogeneity and excavate themes for further critical thinking on each case. This paper will delineate the dialogic and reflexive method of research and analysis adopted, tracing how it led to the practice of ‘minor theory’, which focuses on processes that do not find expression in dominant universalising analyses. Here, minor theory is mobilised towards challenging dominant or major constructs about each city and across cities, while amplifying urban multiplicities and enabling a deeper engagement with infrastructure making in the Global South and North, thus expanding urban studies’ toolbox of critical thinking.

摘要由于全球南方和全球北方城市水基础设施的发展具有明显的不可通约性，这方面的研究很少跨越全球南北鸿沟。然而，城市理论的普遍化趋势意味着，与北方的基础设施理想隐约形成对比的是，全球南方的城市基础设施通常被认为是“碎片化”的、或者说，没有形成完整的循环。因此，为了真正实现基础设施和城市研究的“世界化”，重要的是要超越这些主导范式，关注基础设施的实际运作方式以及它们对全球南方和北方城市的社会技术影响。基于这些灵感，本文将两个“最不相同的城市”—印度钦奈和英国伦敦—的水基础设施放在一起进行“实验比较”，目的不是得出典型的城市理论，而是强调异质性并针对每个案例挖掘可开展进一步批判性思考的主题。本文将描述所采用的对话式和反思性研究和分析方法，追溯它如何导致“次要理论”的实践，该实践侧重于在主流普遍化分析中找不到表达的过程。在这里，次要理论被调动起来挑战关于每个城市和跨城市的主导或主要结构，同时扩大城市多样性并促进全球南方和北方在基础设施建设方面更深入的对话，从而扩展城市研究的批判性思维工具。
Keywordsfragmentation, infrastructure, minor theory, technical expertise, water
关键词

碎片化, 基础设施, 次要理论, 技术专长, 水

原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221084260

05

Constructing comparisons: Reflecting on the experimental nature of new comparative tactics

构建比较：反思新比较策略的实验性质

Frances Brill（英国剑桥大学）首次出版时间：2022/5/2｜研究论文
Abstract

In this commentary I reflect on experimental approaches to comparative urbanism emerging in recent papers. Drawing on the methodological approaches employed in the special issue on Comparative Methods for Global Urban Studies, I highlight the way in which a more reactive and responsive approach – to both pre-existing conditions and understandings of urban development, as well as realities faced during fieldwork and analysis – have elucidated new ways of thinking with and through different cities to productively push forward the comparative urbanism agenda. In doing so I build on the long history of comparative approaches in urban studies to argue that experimenting with how we put new places into existing conversations, within a particular project or beyond, can be hugely powerful in transforming the way in which comparison is conducted in urban studies and geography.

摘要
在这篇评论中，我反思了最近的学术著作中出现的比较城市研究的实验方法。借鉴全球城市研究比较方法特刊中采用的方法论方法，我强调一种更具反应性和响应性的方法（既针对预先存在的条件和对城市发展的理解，也针对实地工作中面临的现实和分析），其阐明了思考不同城市并通过不同城市思考、以有效推进比较城市研究议程的新的一种思维方式。为此，我基于城市研究比较方法的悠久历史提出，如果我们在特定项目中或更广泛的范围内将新的地方纳入现有的对话中，这将极大地转变我们在城市研究和地理层面开展比较的方法。
Keywordscomparative urbanism, experiment, global urbanism
关键词比较城市研究, 实验, 全球城市化
原文地址https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221089590

扫码关注我们

微信号｜USJ_online

Urban Studies期刊官方微信公众号