Commoning the compact city: The role of old and new commons in urban development

IF 3.4 2区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Jessica Verheij , Jean-David Gerber , Stéphane Nahrath
{"title":"Commoning the compact city: The role of old and new commons in urban development","authors":"Jessica Verheij ,&nbsp;Jean-David Gerber ,&nbsp;Stéphane Nahrath","doi":"10.1016/j.geoforum.2024.104019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Although densification is generally seen to contribute to more sustainable urban development, it is often linked to market-oriented and for-profit development, contributing to the enclosure of urban space. We analyse how densification can take a different path through processes of commoning. We particularly aim to understand how commoning initiatives can contribute to new institutional arrangements that counteract enclosure and commodification in densification. We furthermore aim to contribute to conceptual clarity in the debate on urban commons by emphasizing the different roles of so-called ‘old’ and ‘new’ commons in urban development. Our analytical framework builds on a new institutionalist approach which stresses the analysis of localized and temporary institutional arrangements negotiated among actors in a given situation. We rely on a detailed case-study of a densification project in the city of Bern (Switzerland), where publicly-owned land was redeveloped into cooperative housing and urban green space. Our findings show how densification leads to a transition phase in which institutional arrangements defining land uses and allocating access and use rights are renegotiated. These are crucial moments where processes of commoning can shape the outcome of densification, although not independently from the supportive action of the public actor. We underline the potential of new commons, even when typically transitional, unstable, and temporary. Contrary to old commons, their potential lies not so much in the ability for long-lasting resource management, but rather in the capacity to change the conditions of governance during the transition between land uses, advancing more socially-sustainable outcomes in a key moment of the urban redevelopment process.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12497,"journal":{"name":"Geoforum","volume":"152 ","pages":"Article 104019"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718524000800/pdfft?md5=3cadb0cbcc9b15c2442d7a2202181e84&pid=1-s2.0-S0016718524000800-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoforum","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718524000800","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although densification is generally seen to contribute to more sustainable urban development, it is often linked to market-oriented and for-profit development, contributing to the enclosure of urban space. We analyse how densification can take a different path through processes of commoning. We particularly aim to understand how commoning initiatives can contribute to new institutional arrangements that counteract enclosure and commodification in densification. We furthermore aim to contribute to conceptual clarity in the debate on urban commons by emphasizing the different roles of so-called ‘old’ and ‘new’ commons in urban development. Our analytical framework builds on a new institutionalist approach which stresses the analysis of localized and temporary institutional arrangements negotiated among actors in a given situation. We rely on a detailed case-study of a densification project in the city of Bern (Switzerland), where publicly-owned land was redeveloped into cooperative housing and urban green space. Our findings show how densification leads to a transition phase in which institutional arrangements defining land uses and allocating access and use rights are renegotiated. These are crucial moments where processes of commoning can shape the outcome of densification, although not independently from the supportive action of the public actor. We underline the potential of new commons, even when typically transitional, unstable, and temporary. Contrary to old commons, their potential lies not so much in the ability for long-lasting resource management, but rather in the capacity to change the conditions of governance during the transition between land uses, advancing more socially-sustainable outcomes in a key moment of the urban redevelopment process.

紧凑型城市的公共化:新旧公共资源在城市发展中的作用
尽管人们普遍认为密集化有助于实现更可持续的城市发展,但它往往与以市场为导向、以盈利为目的的发展联系在一起,导致城市空间的封闭。我们分析了密集化如何通过公共化进程走上不同的道路。我们尤其希望了解公共化倡议如何能够促进新的制度安排,从而抵消密集化过程中的封闭和商品化。此外,我们还希望通过强调所谓的 "旧 "和 "新 "公共资源在城市发展中的不同作用,促进有关城市公共资源的讨论在概念上更加清晰。我们的分析框架以新制度主义方法为基础,强调分析特定情况下行动者之间协商达成的本地化和临时性制度安排。我们对瑞士伯尔尼市的一个密集化项目进行了详细的案例研究,在该项目中,公有土地被重新开发为合作住房和城市绿地。我们的研究结果表明,密集化是如何导致一个过渡阶段的,在这个阶段,界定土地用途、分配进入权和使用权的制度安排需要重新谈判。在这些关键时刻,共同化进程可以塑造密集化的结果,尽管并不是独立于公共行为者的支持行动。我们强调新公有地的潜力,即使是典型的过渡性、不稳定性和临时性公有地。与旧公有制相反,它们的潜力并不在于能够长期管理资源,而在于能够在土地用途过渡期间改变治理条件,在城市再开发进程的关键时刻推动产生更具社会可持续性的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geoforum
Geoforum GEOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
201
期刊介绍: Geoforum is an international, inter-disciplinary journal, global in outlook, and integrative in approach. The broad focus of Geoforum is the organisation of economic, political, social and environmental systems through space and over time. Areas of study range from the analysis of the global political economy and environment, through national systems of regulation and governance, to urban and regional development, local economic and urban planning and resources management. The journal also includes a Critical Review section which features critical assessments of research in all the above areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信