赢得双重战争:2011年后叙利亚城市的城市化、非正式化和重建

IF 4.4 1区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Munqeth Othman Agha
{"title":"赢得双重战争:2011年后叙利亚城市的城市化、非正式化和重建","authors":"Munqeth Othman Agha","doi":"10.1177/00420980261492209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Syrian cities experienced extensive destruction during the 2011–2024 conflict, much of it inflicted by the Assad regime. Yet destruction did not end with the cessation of local hostilities; it persisted in formerly opposition-controlled enclaves through organized looting and mass municipal demolitions. This article asks why destruction was disproportionately concentrated in informal and formerly opposition-controlled areas, and especially at their intersection. It argues that these patterns were intentional, serving the regime’s double war: a military war to defeat the armed opposition, and an urban-economic war to incorporate undesirable urban forms into real-estate accumulation. Combining spatial autocorrelation analysis with Bayesian negative binomial and penalized logistic models across Damascus, Aleppo, and Homs, the study shows that destruction was spatially structured, concentrating where informality and opposition-control intersect, which jointly predict destruction beyond military necessity. This logic persisted across wartime, post-capture, and post-conflict periods. Urbicide thus operates as a dual-purpose modality for authoritarian urbanism: a wartime tactic and a mechanism of post-conflict socioeconomic reordering.","PeriodicalId":51350,"journal":{"name":"Urban Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Winning the double war: Urbicide, informality, and reconstruction in Syrian cities after 2011\",\"authors\":\"Munqeth Othman Agha\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00420980261492209\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Syrian cities experienced extensive destruction during the 2011–2024 conflict, much of it inflicted by the Assad regime. Yet destruction did not end with the cessation of local hostilities; it persisted in formerly opposition-controlled enclaves through organized looting and mass municipal demolitions. This article asks why destruction was disproportionately concentrated in informal and formerly opposition-controlled areas, and especially at their intersection. It argues that these patterns were intentional, serving the regime’s double war: a military war to defeat the armed opposition, and an urban-economic war to incorporate undesirable urban forms into real-estate accumulation. Combining spatial autocorrelation analysis with Bayesian negative binomial and penalized logistic models across Damascus, Aleppo, and Homs, the study shows that destruction was spatially structured, concentrating where informality and opposition-control intersect, which jointly predict destruction beyond military necessity. This logic persisted across wartime, post-capture, and post-conflict periods. Urbicide thus operates as a dual-purpose modality for authoritarian urbanism: a wartime tactic and a mechanism of post-conflict socioeconomic reordering.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Studies\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980261492209\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980261492209","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

叙利亚城市在2011年至2024年的冲突中遭受了大规模破坏,其中大部分是由阿萨德政权造成的。然而,破坏并没有随着当地敌对行动的停止而结束;它通过有组织的抢劫和大规模的市政拆除,坚持在以前反对派控制的飞地。这篇文章问为什么破坏不成比例地集中在非正式和以前反对派控制的地区,特别是在他们的交汇处。它认为,这些模式是有意为之,为该政权的双重战争服务:一场军事战争是为了击败武装反对派,另一场城市经济战争是为了将不受欢迎的城市形式纳入房地产积累。将空间自相关分析与贝叶斯负二项和惩罚逻辑模型结合起来,研究表明,大马士革、阿勒颇和霍姆斯的破坏是空间结构化的,集中在非正式和反对派控制相交的地方,这共同预测了军事必要性之外的破坏。这种逻辑贯穿了战争时期、占领后和冲突后的各个时期。因此,杀城作为专制城市主义的双重目的模式:一种战时策略,一种冲突后社会经济重新排序的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Winning the double war: Urbicide, informality, and reconstruction in Syrian cities after 2011
Syrian cities experienced extensive destruction during the 2011–2024 conflict, much of it inflicted by the Assad regime. Yet destruction did not end with the cessation of local hostilities; it persisted in formerly opposition-controlled enclaves through organized looting and mass municipal demolitions. This article asks why destruction was disproportionately concentrated in informal and formerly opposition-controlled areas, and especially at their intersection. It argues that these patterns were intentional, serving the regime’s double war: a military war to defeat the armed opposition, and an urban-economic war to incorporate undesirable urban forms into real-estate accumulation. Combining spatial autocorrelation analysis with Bayesian negative binomial and penalized logistic models across Damascus, Aleppo, and Homs, the study shows that destruction was spatially structured, concentrating where informality and opposition-control intersect, which jointly predict destruction beyond military necessity. This logic persisted across wartime, post-capture, and post-conflict periods. Urbicide thus operates as a dual-purpose modality for authoritarian urbanism: a wartime tactic and a mechanism of post-conflict socioeconomic reordering.
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 Studies
Urban Studies Multiple-
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
8.50%
发文量
150
期刊介绍: Urban Studies was first published in 1964 to provide an international forum of social and economic contributions to the fields of urban and regional planning. Since then, the Journal has expanded to encompass the increasing range of disciplines and approaches that have been brought to bear on urban and regional problems. Contents include original articles, notes and comments, and a comprehensive book review section. Regular contributions are drawn from the fields of economics, planning, political science, statistics, geography, sociology, population studies and public administration.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书