Organizer: Susan S. Fainstein (Harvard University, USA)
Even in the age of global capitalism and neoliberalism, some urban regimes are committed to achieving more just outcomes. They have introduced policies for producing more affordable housing, greater and cheaper access to jobs and services, employment opportunities at a decent wage, protection for recent immigrants, and support for diversity. They have directed public subsidies to remedy disadvantage rather than to finance developers. This panel describes cities that have developed programs for greater justice and explores the underlying political and economic reasons for their trajectory.
Much of the literature on urban planning critiques urban planning and policy for reinforcing disadvantage, excluding “the other,” and relying on technical expertise to legitimate unjust policies. Yet, there is wide variation among cities regarding the extent to which they are inclusionary and redistributive. Sometimes more just outcomes are the result of committed officials, other times the consequence of urban social movements, and often the interaction of both. Critique without presenting models of better alternatives lacks the power to mobilize a following.
In this session we examine cases of urban programs that have resulted in greater equity. Papers could include:
- Case studies of single cities that have implemented more just policies. What are the programs that have produced this outcome? What are the political factors that have made this possible? What role has been played by different levels of government? By professionals? By social movements?
- Comparative analysis of cities along a spectrum of justice. How do two or more cities compare in relation to standards of justice? What explains the difference? What are the various dimensions of comparison?
- Analysis of planning programs that result in an improved quality of life for the most disadvantaged. Are their particular approaches/strategies that are more likely to improve the situation of those who are poor or who are excluded for reasons of ethnicity, gender identity, etc.? Can these programs be used to frame an agenda for urban social movements? For urban planners? They could be in the areas of housing, land use, transportation, open space, etc. Are some policies more likely to garner support from a broader range of people?
A.2.1 What cities are more just than most?
Chair: Susan S. Fainstein (Harvard University)
Luciana Maciel Bizzotto
Citizen participation in urban planning in the city of Belo Horizonte
Pierre Clavel, William Goldsmith
Local Justice Policies: Fated to Fail from External Opposition?
Hector Hidalgo, Priscilla Connolly
Comparative justice (injustice) of different regimes governing a single metropolitan area: mobility policies across metropolitan Mexico City
Roberta Cucca, Costanzo Ranci
(Un)equal cities in Europe? The challenge of post-industrial transition in times of austerity
Inclusionary and exclusionary practices in local settlement development programs in Hungary
Danilo Malta Ferreira, Ioshiaqui Shimbo, Carolina Maria Pozzi de Castro and Regina Gandolfi,
Solidarity Economy In São Carlos, São Paulo, Brasil
A.2.2 What cities are more just than most?
Chair: Susan S. Fainstein (Harvard University) John Logan ( Brown University)
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org John_Logan@brown.edu
Discussant: John Logan (Brown University)
Susanna F. Schaller
Reconceiving Urban (Re)Development in Tuebingen, Germany: Exploring the Potential of a Model to Draw Cross-national Lessons
Wouter Van Gent, Willem Boterman
Unraveling the just city paradox in Amsterdam through middle class politics