Just Transitions: New Urban Research and Policy Perspectives

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
W. Steele, J. Dodson
{"title":"Just Transitions: New Urban Research and Policy Perspectives","authors":"W. Steele, J. Dodson","doi":"10.1080/08111146.2022.2119382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This special issue sheds new light on critical questions of justice in transition, whether from settlercolonial relations to just decolonisation, to relationships of care with nature, the mediation of equitable urban foodscapes, or to the creation of technological configurations. This issue is one of two to emerge from the 2021 State of Australasian Cities Conference (SOAC) where the theme focused on how just urban and regional transitions can be mobilised to support more sustainable futures. The SOAC conferences (2003–2021) under the aegis of the Australasian Cities Research Network (ACRN) seeks to promote, foster, champion and disseminate new urban scholarship which is made available and free to access online through the Analysis and Policy Observatory (APO). This is a biennial forum which brings together academics, policy makers and practitioners to report and appraise the social, spatial, and economic consequences for equity, inclusion and justice. When the Journal of Urban Policy and Research (UPR) was launched by former Australian Prime Minister GoughWhitlamACQC in 1983, the focus was on the role of national government in urban development and regional cooperation in areas of critical infrastructure such as power, transport and water. The UPR journal invited researchers, practitioners and “interested persons” to submit policyrelevant articles that highlighted the contributions to contemporary practice. The ambition was to address the need to “take research to the streets” in what was described then, as a critical time for Australian cities characterised by: growing uncertainty, pessimism and inequity; patchwork and uncoordinated government responses; and cynicism about the usefulness of urban research when most needed (see UPR Editorial 1982, p. 1). Sound familiar? Track forward to the end of the 1990s, and a review article of the state of urban research inAustralia by Graeme Davison and Ruth Fincher (1998) emphasised the interdisciplinary nature, intellectual diversity and vibrancy of scholarship that was emerging. In key areas such as gender and feminist inquiry, housing policy, suburbanisation, urban history, socio-spatial equity, environmental planning issues and cultural studies, urban research was successfully pursuing approaches that were ‘open, critical and pluralist’ rather than managerial or ‘narrowly instrumental’. However, they cautioned that as ‘cities become larger and more complex and the need for high-quality urban research grows, creating policy impact through urban research is challengedwithin a context of rapidly contracting public funding’ (p. 195).Whilst a similar surveywas not undertaken forNewZealand researchmany of the themes identified by Davison and Fincher were also relevant to that context. Still familiar? Roiling twentyfirst century crises of the climate emergency, systemic racism,wealth inequalities and global health pandemics such as Covid-19, are putting pressure not just on what urban researchers focus on, but also the conditions within which urban research takes place, requiring urban research to bemore explicitly ethical in focus aswell as active andfinancially agile to support sustainable futures. Research impact is already occurring in city and regional policies (ACRN 2022). The critical issue is whether the impact urban researchers are creating is enabling progressive and transformative change, rather than simply reinforcing policies and practices that are more of the same in cities and regions – that is largely unsustainable, maladaptive, wasteful and harmful to people and planet. Urban inequalities have become evenmore visible duringCovid-19, and greater recognition of this forms the basis for just urban transitions. As Crystal Legacy (2021) highlights ‘the point is still to change it’.","PeriodicalId":47081,"journal":{"name":"Urban Policy and Research","volume":"40 1","pages":"173 - 183"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Policy and Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2022.2119382","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This special issue sheds new light on critical questions of justice in transition, whether from settlercolonial relations to just decolonisation, to relationships of care with nature, the mediation of equitable urban foodscapes, or to the creation of technological configurations. This issue is one of two to emerge from the 2021 State of Australasian Cities Conference (SOAC) where the theme focused on how just urban and regional transitions can be mobilised to support more sustainable futures. The SOAC conferences (2003–2021) under the aegis of the Australasian Cities Research Network (ACRN) seeks to promote, foster, champion and disseminate new urban scholarship which is made available and free to access online through the Analysis and Policy Observatory (APO). This is a biennial forum which brings together academics, policy makers and practitioners to report and appraise the social, spatial, and economic consequences for equity, inclusion and justice. When the Journal of Urban Policy and Research (UPR) was launched by former Australian Prime Minister GoughWhitlamACQC in 1983, the focus was on the role of national government in urban development and regional cooperation in areas of critical infrastructure such as power, transport and water. The UPR journal invited researchers, practitioners and “interested persons” to submit policyrelevant articles that highlighted the contributions to contemporary practice. The ambition was to address the need to “take research to the streets” in what was described then, as a critical time for Australian cities characterised by: growing uncertainty, pessimism and inequity; patchwork and uncoordinated government responses; and cynicism about the usefulness of urban research when most needed (see UPR Editorial 1982, p. 1). Sound familiar? Track forward to the end of the 1990s, and a review article of the state of urban research inAustralia by Graeme Davison and Ruth Fincher (1998) emphasised the interdisciplinary nature, intellectual diversity and vibrancy of scholarship that was emerging. In key areas such as gender and feminist inquiry, housing policy, suburbanisation, urban history, socio-spatial equity, environmental planning issues and cultural studies, urban research was successfully pursuing approaches that were ‘open, critical and pluralist’ rather than managerial or ‘narrowly instrumental’. However, they cautioned that as ‘cities become larger and more complex and the need for high-quality urban research grows, creating policy impact through urban research is challengedwithin a context of rapidly contracting public funding’ (p. 195).Whilst a similar surveywas not undertaken forNewZealand researchmany of the themes identified by Davison and Fincher were also relevant to that context. Still familiar? Roiling twentyfirst century crises of the climate emergency, systemic racism,wealth inequalities and global health pandemics such as Covid-19, are putting pressure not just on what urban researchers focus on, but also the conditions within which urban research takes place, requiring urban research to bemore explicitly ethical in focus aswell as active andfinancially agile to support sustainable futures. Research impact is already occurring in city and regional policies (ACRN 2022). The critical issue is whether the impact urban researchers are creating is enabling progressive and transformative change, rather than simply reinforcing policies and practices that are more of the same in cities and regions – that is largely unsustainable, maladaptive, wasteful and harmful to people and planet. Urban inequalities have become evenmore visible duringCovid-19, and greater recognition of this forms the basis for just urban transitions. As Crystal Legacy (2021) highlights ‘the point is still to change it’.
只是转型:新的城市研究和政策视角
本期特刊为转型期司法的关键问题提供了新的视角,无论是从定居者与殖民地的关系到公正的非殖民化,还是与自然的关怀关系,公平的城市食物景观的调解,还是技术配置的创造。这是2021年澳大利亚城市会议(SOAC)提出的两个问题之一,该会议的主题是如何动员城市和区域转型,以支持更可持续的未来。在澳大拉西亚城市研究网络(ACRN)的支持下,SOAC会议(2003-2021)旨在促进、培养、支持和传播新的城市奖学金,这些奖学金可以通过分析和政策观察站(APO)在线免费获取。这是一个两年一次的论坛,汇集了学者、政策制定者和实践者,报告和评估公平、包容和正义的社会、空间和经济后果。《普遍定期审议》期刊邀请研究人员、从业人员和“感兴趣的人士”提交与政策相关的文章,突出对当代实践的贡献。当时的目标是解决“将研究带到街头”的需求,当时被描述为澳大利亚城市的关键时刻,其特点是:日益增长的不确定性、悲观主义和不平等;政府应对措施零散、不协调;在最需要的时候,对城市研究的有用性持怀疑态度(见普遍定期审议1982年社论,第1页)。听起来很熟悉吗?追溯至20世纪90年代末,格雷姆·戴维森和露丝·芬奇(1998)撰写的一篇关于澳大利亚城市研究现状的综述文章强调了当时正在兴起的跨学科性质、知识多样性和学术活力。在性别和女权主义调查、住房政策、郊区化、城市历史、社会空间公平、环境规划问题和文化研究等关键领域,城市研究成功地采用了“开放、批判和多元化”的方法,而不是管理或“狭隘的工具”。然而,他们警告说,随着“城市变得更大、更复杂,以及对高质量城市研究的需求增长,在公共资金迅速收缩的背景下,通过城市研究产生政策影响面临挑战”(第195页)。虽然新西兰的研究没有进行类似的调查,但戴维森和芬奇确定的许多主题也与该背景相关。还熟悉吗?21世纪的气候紧急情况、系统性种族主义、财富不平等和2019冠状病毒病等全球卫生大流行等危机,不仅给城市研究人员的研究重点带来了压力,也给城市研究的开展条件带来了压力,要求城市研究更加明确地关注伦理问题,并在财务上更加积极灵活,以支持可持续的未来。研究影响已经在城市和区域政策中出现(acrn2022)。关键的问题是,城市研究人员正在创造的影响是否正在促成渐进式和变革性的变化,而不是简单地加强城市和地区的政策和做法——这些政策和做法在很大程度上是不可持续的、不适应的、浪费的、对人类和地球有害的。在2019冠状病毒病期间,城市不平等现象更加明显,对这一问题的更多认识是实现城市公正转型的基础。正如《水晶遗产》(2021)所强调的那样,“关键还是要改变它”。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
56
×
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