Marit Rosol

Vancouver’s “EcoDensity” Planning Initiative: A Struggle over Hegemony?

The proclaimed aim of EcoDensity, an initiative of the former mayor of Vancouver, Canada, was the achievement of a more sustainable city development through densification of existing neighbourhoods. Since the invention of EcoDensity in summer 2006 it has become a highly debated topic. This paper aims at a critical analysis of how a planning strategy of densification tried to tie itself onto a discourse of sustainability, and also how it had to re-invent and reform itself through contestation and public debate in order to gain acceptance. Thus, the development of the strategy and its contestation are the focus of this paper. Theoretically informed by the theory on hegemony by Laclau and Mouffe, the paper shows why EcoDensity has been—although eventually approved by Council—a failing hegemonic strategy. By referring to a theory on hegemony, the paper theoretically captures practices and struggles around a particular ‘urban sustainability fix’.

On resistance in the post-political city: conduct and counter-conduct in Vancouver

The paper contributes to understandings of contestation and resistance in urban politics, using a land use struggle against a “big-box” development in Vancouver, Canada as an example. It surveys Foucaults work on “governmentality,” highlighting the centrality of the notion of resistance in this work before focusing in particular on Foucaults yet underexplored conceptions of “conduct” and “counter-conduct”. These concepts offer an analysis of urban politics beyond the binary of successful implementation of city policies or their failure, and of cooption or revolt; therefore, proving especially useful in the analysis of urban governance which is increasingly characterised as “post-political”.

Governing cities through participation—a Foucauldian analysis of CityPlan Vancouver

In 1995 Vancouver City Council approved new policy guidelines for future urban development that departed from the traditional model of suburban growth, instead prioritizing urban intensification. Theoretically guided by the Foucauldian governmentality approach, I argue in this paper that this shift towards intensification can be understood through an analysis of Vancouver’s extensive participatory planning process known as CityPlan. Created as an answer to conflicts around the intensification of historically evolved urban neighbourhoods, CityPlan Vancouver exemplifies a specific form of urban governance that has been understudied in geography and participation research: a governance consisting of conducting the conduct of citizens through participatory processes. The paper examines this “governing through participation” by carrying out a microanalysis of the problematizations, rationalities, and technologies of CityPlan. Such an analysis differs significantly from an evaluation of participatory planning processes against normative ideals, and thus enriches critical research on participation in urban governance.

ortoloco Zurich: Urban agriculture as an economy of solidarity

This paper asks to what extent urban agriculture projects based on principles of Solidarity Economics are in a position to develop new economic forms based on solidarity—rather than competition—thereby posing an alternative model to neo-liberal capitalism. It seeks to understand how solidarity economies function concretely, what motivations, interests and goals move people to establish and participate in such initiatives, and what utopias they associate with such projects. It focuses on the Swiss gardening cooperative ortoloco, which can be defined as a peri-urban organic farm organised on principles that go beyond the supply of food to embrace explicit political aims and to realise an alternative economic model. For two years of existence, ortoloco has successfully applied these principles on its economic practice, but also constantly questioned them and developed them further. Extending the diversity of products and activities, and intensifying practical and theoretical cooperation with similar projects, the activists hope to apply the tested models on an ever-broader range of economic activities and spheres of living together in general. Whilst neo-liberal policies are presented almost worldwide as natural and without alternative, these projects are living proof that other ways of thinking and acting are possible.

Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes:

Urban areas are increasingly recognized as strategic sites to address climate change and environmental issues. Specific urban projects are marketed as innovative solutions and best-practice examples, and so-called green cities, eco-cities and sustainable cities have emerged worldwide as leading paradigms in urban planning and policy discourse. The transformation of cities into eco-cities (Kenworthy, 2006; Roseland, 1997) is often based on big data and – widely varying – indicators that should proof the success of urban climate governance (Bulkeley, 2010). The European Commission with its ‘Green Capital’ program, Britain’s ‘Sustainable City Index’, France’s ‘EcoCité’ scheme, the US-American’s ‘Greenest City’ ranking developed by WalletHub’s, the US and Canada ‘Green City Index’ sponsored by Siemens – these programs are all examples of public and private initiatives aimed at identifying and ranking the ‘greenest’ city or cities according to a competitive rationality. They are mostly quantitative approaches, based on ‘hard’ and ‘scientific’ indicators that allow cities to be compared according to their efforts in sustainable urban development. Using these indicators, cities worldwide have increasingly promoted sustainability initiatives in order to position themselves advantageously on the global scene (Chang and Sheppard, 2013; Cugurullo, 2013; Swyngedouw and Kaika, 2014; While et al., 2004). These urban ranking efforts tie into the fact that sustainability has become a metaconsensual policy term (Gill et al., 2012), resting upon broad support from diverse sectors of society. Promoted at first as a way of bringing forward an ecological urban agenda connected to social development, sustainability has lost much of its transformative potential. By now, even car manufacturing in Germany, oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada and nuclear power plants worldwide are being politically justified with reference to sustainability and climate change prevention. Despite controversial national positions regarding the processes, pace and extend of implementing environmental policies – a divergence that became very evident, for example, during the 2009 United Nations

Social Dimensions of Urban Restructuring: Urban Gardening, Residents’ Participation, Gardening Exhibitions

The conditions for urban development have changed considerably in the last decades. This can be attributed to social and economic changes encompassing the processes of globalisation, deindustrialisation and demographic change. The corresponding economic, social and ecological impacts pose new challenges on urban development and planning. Especially those cities which have undergone a transformation from a socialist planned economy to a social market economy in the last 20 years are affected from these new challenges. The “shrinking city” is a phenomenon which sets up a new dimension in urban development. Shrinking leads to a substantial reshaping of urban structures. It is causing urban decline and decay, vacancy and underuse of lots and buildings. The effects and problems resulting from a loss of function include the rise of urban brownfields, depopulation, empty apartments and unused social infrastructure such as schools and kindergartens. This calls for new forms of action, planning and controlling of urban development processes. Urban restructuring requires measures which provide opportunities to adapt existing structures to meet the needs of a changing society and a changing economy. Urban brownfield sites and vacant buildings offer potentials for a sustainable urban development and innovative temporary uses. These potentials provide a variety of options to improve natural und built environments for the inhabitants on varying spatial scales.

Alternative Ernährungsnetzwerke als Alternative Ökonomien

Zusammenfassung Vor dem Hintergrund eines zunehmenden Interesses an alternativen Ökonomien werden in diesem einführenden Beitrag Alternative Ernährungsnetzwerke als alternative wirtschaftliche Netzwerke konzeptualisiert, welche herkömmliche Produktions-Konsum-Beziehungen in ökologischer und/oder sozialer Hinsicht zu verändern suchen. Hierfür wird die Entwicklung der Debatte einschließlich kontroverser Aspekte nachgezeichnet. Um die geographische Ernährungsforschung weiter voranzubringen, werden abschließend wirtschaftsgeographisch orientierte Forschungsfragen und -perspektiven abgeleitet.

Ernährungssicherung durch Urban Gardening

einer gesunden Ernahrung in der Stadt beizutragen. Entsprechend stellt sich die Frage, inwiefern die neuen Gartenformen auch zur Ernahrungssicherung in der Stadt beitragen konnen. Da urbane Garten in Nordamerika bereits sehr viel langer und direkter mit Fragen von Ernahrungssicherung und Ernahrungsgerechtigkeit verbunden sind, werde ich im Folgenden – nach einer kurzen Einfuhrung zum Zusammenhang von Gemeinschaftsgarten und Ernahrungsgerechtigkeit – Gemeinschaftsgarten und Ernahrungsinitiativen in Toronto, Kanada vorstellen. Toronto verfugt schon seit einiger Zeit uber integrative, stadtpolitische Ansatze zur Ernahrungssicherung sowie eine aktive Anti-Hungerbewegung. Der Beitrag schliest mit einer Diskussion dazu, was wir hierzulande aus den nordamerikanischen Erfahrungen lernen konnen (Abb. 1).

State-led gentrification in previously ‘un-gentrifiable’ areas: Examples from Vancouver/Canada and Frankfurt/Germany:

Through an analysis of two international cases from Canada and Germany, this paper highlights the role of the state in governing gentrification and displacement in areas previously thought to be unattractive for profit-seeking capital, that is, ‘un-gentrifiable’. With this, we seek to contribute to the debate on how the role of the local state has changed from securing affordable housing for low-income households into becoming an essential player involved in real estate speculation. Taking Little Mountain in Vancouver as the first example, we examine the privatization and demolition of the public housing complex and thus the withdrawal of the state. Our second example, Ostend in Frankfurt, investigates the restructuring of a working-class neighbourhood through active state-led interventions including massive public investment. We analyse the two empirical examples along five dimensions: causal drivers and mechanisms that have led to the changing role of the state in governing urban transformations; policy instruments used by state agencies to encourage gentrification; strategies to legitimize state-led gentrification; outcomes in terms of direct and exclusionary displacement; and the forms of contestation and protest. We maintain that both cases, although presenting a stark contrast, follow the same rule, namely state-led gentrification.

Book Review: Power at the Roots: Gentrification, Community Gardens, and the Puerto Ricans of the Lower East Side

here that the book assumes that readers will have a good level of knowledge about the history of the area, the Palestinian–Israeli conflict and Israeli society and, as a result, it does not provide a great deal of background information on such aspects. On the whole, I admire the book for how it deals with a difficult and emotive topic; I also share the author’s belief that urban space has radical potential for inclusion and social justice. There is a need for planners and urban designers to recognise the historical and contextual aspects of space and place and, in the process, to question and critique ideologically, economically and politically motivated uses of the urban environment that serve to divide rather than unite people. Perhaps the most important aspect of the book is its examination of the contested nature of urban space and how violent acts become appropriated within visions and processes of urban development that serve élites and private capital rather than those diverse communities ‘on the ground’. However, I do feel that there is a need for further analysis of such ‘voices’ and how they respond to ‘top– down’ planning practices and urban design. This is particularly important in places like Tel Aviv, where sites are contested and where there are unequal power relations within and between communities. Although the book does pay attention to this, particularly in relation to Neve Shaanan, it would have been interesting to hear such voices more strongly. However, this is probably beyond the scope of such a book. I would also have liked to see the book make a stronger statement about how urban space, planners and architects can help to create geographies of similarity, sharing and communication, rather than separation and division, even when faced with terrible acts of violence. In the conclusion, Hatuka states that Israel’s architectural and planning discourse sees the Palestinian–Israeli situation as opposing one another. This binary opposition (occupier and occupied, guilty and just) has moved away from the core issue of human society inhabiting space, from the creation of mutual habitation patterns, and from enhancing similarities as well as differences (p.170).