叛乱与剥削之间的合作生产:旅行概念的承诺与缺陷

IF 1.7 Q3 URBAN STUDIES
Urban Planning Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.17645/up.8235
Sophie Schramm
{"title":"叛乱与剥削之间的合作生产:旅行概念的承诺与缺陷","authors":"Sophie Schramm","doi":"10.17645/up.8235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Co-production has inspired planning practice and research in the past decades. Along with its appropriation in the planning literature it has undergone manifold translations and its boundaries have become blurry. In this commentary I propose a conceptualisation of co-production not only as efficient service provision by citizens and state actors together but furthermore as a kind of city-making that has transformative potential beyond concrete interventions in the present moment. This matters because it enables a conceptual discrimination between co-production and the exploitation of marginalised people’s resources, time, and labour. I argue that the necessity of this discrimination becomes apparent when analysing co-productive efforts in their embeddedness in space and time.","PeriodicalId":51735,"journal":{"name":"Urban Planning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Co-Production Between Insurgency and Exploitation: Promises and Precarities of a Traveling Concept\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Schramm\",\"doi\":\"10.17645/up.8235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Co-production has inspired planning practice and research in the past decades. Along with its appropriation in the planning literature it has undergone manifold translations and its boundaries have become blurry. In this commentary I propose a conceptualisation of co-production not only as efficient service provision by citizens and state actors together but furthermore as a kind of city-making that has transformative potential beyond concrete interventions in the present moment. This matters because it enables a conceptual discrimination between co-production and the exploitation of marginalised people’s resources, time, and labour. I argue that the necessity of this discrimination becomes apparent when analysing co-productive efforts in their embeddedness in space and time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Planning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17645/up.8235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/up.8235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去几十年来,共同制作激发了规划实践和研究。随着其在规划文献中的应用,它经历了多种翻译,其界限也变得模糊不清。在这篇评论中,我提出了共同缔造的概念,它不仅是公民和国家行为者共同提供的高效服务,而且是一种具有超越当前具体干预措施的变革潜力的城市缔造。这一点很重要,因为它能在概念上区分共同生产和对边缘化人群的资源、时间和劳动力的剥削。我认为,在分析共同生产在空间和时间上的嵌入性时,这种区分的必要性就显而易见了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Co-Production Between Insurgency and Exploitation: Promises and Precarities of a Traveling Concept
Co-production has inspired planning practice and research in the past decades. Along with its appropriation in the planning literature it has undergone manifold translations and its boundaries have become blurry. In this commentary I propose a conceptualisation of co-production not only as efficient service provision by citizens and state actors together but furthermore as a kind of city-making that has transformative potential beyond concrete interventions in the present moment. This matters because it enables a conceptual discrimination between co-production and the exploitation of marginalised people’s resources, time, and labour. I argue that the necessity of this discrimination becomes apparent when analysing co-productive efforts in their embeddedness in space and time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Urban Planning
Urban Planning URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
124
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Urban Planning is a new international peer-reviewed open access journal of urban studies aimed at advancing understandings and ideas of humankind’s habitats – villages, towns, cities, megacities – in order to promote progress and quality of life. The journal brings urban science and urban planning together with other cross-disciplinary fields such as sociology, ecology, psychology, technology, politics, philosophy, geography, environmental science, economics, maths and computer science, to understand processes influencing urban forms and structures, their relations with environment and life quality, with the final aim to identify patterns towards progress and quality of life.
×
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