Towards spatial justice across Europe through place-based interventions
Simone Piras2023, Routledge eBooks
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
This chapter has been made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.
Related papers
JSSJ Meets RELOCAL -Mobilizations, Meaning and Uses of the Concept of Spatial Justice in a European Research Project
2019
The editors of this special issue are part of the H2020 2016-2020 research project RELOCAL: "Resituating the local in cohesion and territorial development". This project is concerned with the achievements and impacts of local and regional development throughout Europe. It explores the local effects of such development processes-in particular, how they might mitigate disadvantaged local areas and contribute to reducing disparities between places. The RELOCAL project draws on 33 case studies of local contexts across Europe. Fragments of empirical analysis underlie the research of several papers presented in this issue. As this project brings together a number of researchers from all over Europe, spread across 14 research institutions, it is an opportunity to reflect upon how each team and individual researcher relates the notion of spatial justice to their respective country and how, while doing their field work, their own understanding of this notion has evolved. Using the ...
Spatial justice on the horizon? A combined Theory of Change scenario tool to assess place-based interventions
European Planning Studies
This paper presents a methodology to assess the internal and external coherence, and the robustness to future uncertainty, of place-based interventions addressing spatial (in)justice. The methodology merges elements of Theory of Change (ToC) and mechanism mapping with scenario planning. It was designed based on analysis of a range of European interventions (public policies and bottom-up initiatives), selected to highlight the ways spatial injustices have been tackled across different scales. The first phase of the methodology uses a ToC mechanism map to illustrate the logic of the intervention, including its baseline assumptions (internal) and contextual conditions (external). In the second phase, scenarios for the locality are developed based on potential states of global and local macro-trends, revealing how the contextual conditions are expected to change, and whether the intervention's baseline assumptions are likely to hold. This then allows the elaboration of spatial justice trajectories, and for the ToC mechanism map to be updated. To effectively illustrate the methodology, we show how it has been applied using a case study intervention implemented in a territorially disadvantaged area. We present the methodology as a flexible tool allowing detection of more general stylised facts, and spatial comparisons between a broad range of interventions.
Place-based development and spatial justice
European Planning Studies, 2021
Within EU cohesion policy, a place-based approach is expected to promote a strategic shift towards more place-sensitive, crosssectoral and socially inclusive development. These expectations are underlined in the new Territorial Agenda 2030, which highlights that a place-based approach is key to territorial cohesion and to overall efforts towards a just Europe. Drawing on findings from the Horizon 2020 project RELOCAL-Resituating the local in cohesion and territorial developmentthis special issue explores the relations between place-based development and spatial justice. It addresses the complex challenges of place-based interventions, such as the critical role of the national policy environment in explaining variegated outcomes, enabling place-based agency in peripheralised regions, and assessing impacts. In this editorial, we provide an introductory discussion of the relations between place-based development and spatial justice, as well as brief introductions to the nine papers. We argue that there are a number of distinctive locally and nationally anchored mechanisms and inhibitors at play, which academics, and particularly planning professionals and policy-makers, need to be aware of in working towards a just Europe. Hence, place-based interventions are a valuable contribution to the territorial cohesion approach of the EU, but in the quest for spatial justice they cannot replace a redistributive territorial cohesion policy. KEYWORDS Place-based approach; spatial justice; territorial cohesion; EU cohesion policy; local development; just Europe [t]he priorities for a Just Europe underline the territorial dimension and spatial planning contributions to overarching policy priorities. These priorities include economic, social and territorial cohesion, the European Pillar of Social Rights, a Europe closer to citizens, a more inclusive, sustainable and integrated development of places, Just Transition and territorial integration in Europe. (Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development and/or Territorial Cohesion 2020, 13)
Spatial Justice : Accountability Through Collaboration and Confrontation
2017
PH OT O: S OC IO -E CO NO MI C RI GH TS IN ST IT UT E Approaches adopted by social justice organisations are often characterised as either primarily ‘collaborative’ in that their strategies aim to build collaborative relationships between government, citizens and civil society, or as ‘confrontational’ in that they aim primarily to activate citizens to hold government accountable. These approaches and strategies can however be interwoven, and while both are necessary, neither is sufficient to improve accountability to social justice imperatives, or to enhance the agency of communities to hold duty bearers to account.
Marginal public spaces in European cities
Journal of Urban Design, 2004
The main public spaces in European cities are the focus of much attention, whereas marginal public spaces are places of neglect and decline. The concentration of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in limited spaces creates a sense of entrapment. The social fragments that have been put next to each other in deprived neighbourhoods, either by market forces or by public planning, start to crack in public places of these neighbourhoods. On the one hand, intensive use of space by some groups excludes and intimidates others. On the other hands, the limited amount of public space is under the threat of encroachment by other demands on a finite commodity. In these places of fragmentation and competition, communication is often difficult, if not impossible, as different social groups speak different languages, have different attitudes, and have different frameworks. A public space that allows this diversity to become aware of itself through free expression can be a significant asset for such a diverse population. Improving public places can improve the actual conditions of life in these neighbourhoods, while injecting a sense of hope and a better image in the eyes of residents and the outside world. Although a key part of good governance, there is no doubt that this should be put in perspective, as one among a number of issues that need addressing.
Radical Standard - for the Implementation of Spatial Justice in Urban Planning and Design
2013
The value systems that are used in the design of buildings, urban space and in territorial organisation are subject to continuous change. In addition to the established system of “sustainability”, the criterion of “justice” is increasingly applied to the production of space (see: P. MARCUSE et al.: Searching for the Just City, E. SOJA: Seeking Spatial Justice, S. FAINSTEIN: The Just City). In contrast to paternalistic practices of the past, the current approaches for establishing justice in space support cultural diversity, freedom of choice and selfdetermination. The research on Spatial Justice, which was conducted at the Institute of Urban Design at TU Braunschweig from the summer of 2010 onwards, was supported by the Institute of History and Theory of Architecture and the City (GTAS) and aimed to develop this emerging planning paradigm which was formulated in the United States against the background of neo-liberal spatial planning policies in a crosscultural perspective. This work also included an exchange of ideas with Edward SOJA, who joined us in Braunschweig to review our work in November 2011. One central question arises: Haven’t the demands of the North American critics of space – such as for participation in decision-making, for state engagement in housing or for public transport – already become part of the professional and political consensus in Europe and many Latin American and Asian countries? However, for planners like us who are embedded in these systems and discourses, the “justice” approach evokes great expectations. We know that it is not enough to harp on again and again about the ecological and social consensus. What matters is how these principles are implemented. It is moreover unproductive to refine and complicate the system of planning and urban policy further. Instead, the question should be asked as to how far state action can go, what it can achieve and how it legitimises itself. The term “justice” raises the hope that something like straightforward, just framework conditions can be established, which bring about such levels of diversity, self-determined action, building and usage which characterise those places and inspire our ideas of cities. Engaging with Spatial Justice requires reflection on what distinguishes the criterion of “justice” in the design and provision of space from other criteria. With reference to John RAWLS the overwhelming characteristic appears to be that the rule emerging from a consideration of justice is applicable to an unknown future situation and thus, with reference to the Capabilities Approach by Amartya SEN and Marta NUSSBAUM, will enable individual and collective future development. Hence, it is also the strategic value of Spatial Justice to enhance the potential for continuous advancements and for an open future. Thus, Spatial Justice is in sharp contrast to the deterministic understanding of planning which prevailed in the 20th century. From this perspective, the approach of justice is the opposite position to the assumption that one knows exactly what people need and accordingly, what the world should look like. The confrontation with Spatial Justice forces planners to face the uncomfortable fact that one cannot know what needs and what spatial form future societies will have. Starting from the justice approach, one soon arrives at completely different solutions in many areas. For example in the field of transport: The pedestrian underpass represents the deterministic solution, whereas, against the background of justice, the principle of Shared Space would be appropriate – the common and respectful use of a public pathway. These new approaches are all the more necessary as a kind of eco-functionalism, an update of the deterministic system of regulation threatens to emerge from the logic of sustainability. In contrast to such tendencies, “justice” can be positioned as an umbrella term for environmental justice, gender justice, diversity and democracy – as a mode of on-going change, not as a goal in itself. Ultimately, something like a consensus on fundamental values could arise from the understanding of Spatial Justice, comparable to citizens’ rights, whose validity has successfully become detached from concrete and current situations."
Public space and the challenges of urban transformation in Europe, by Ali Madanipour, Sabine Knierbein and Aglaée Degros
Urban Research & Practice 7 (2), pp.241-242, 2014
Homelessness in Brussels -Limits of Multi-Level Governance in the Application of the Principle of Spatial Justice1
Justice spatiale/Spatial Justice, 2019
The transformations of the Belgian state entailing multiple transfers of competences from the central state to federated entities has had fundamental territorial consequences on the management of 'the social question'. The article proposes to study anti-poverty policies (APP) for homeless people in the Brussels-capital region based on successive transformations in the relationship between public actors and the voluntary sector. This analysis focuses on the way spatial and territorial transformations have rearticulated the management of poverty as well as 'games' of cooperation or eviction among actors dealing with extreme urban poverty, in which they accept the local poor and reject poor people from elsewhere. By combining insights from sociology and urban planning, the aim is to better understand both issues of multi-level governance in metropolitan areas and how to (try to) counter forms of spatial injustice.
Mapping Urban Injustices in Public Space: Challenges and Opportunities
The Journal of public space, 2023
Cities, as human constructs, are undergoing rapid transformations influenced by economic globalization, mobility, and European integration. This dynamic evolution brings about substantial changes in European urban landscapes, marked by the intense flow of people and cultures. This social and cultural diversity challenges established notions of identity and social relationships (Phillips, 2007) directly affecting public spaces. The need to understand the evolving role of these spaces as shared resources and as a common good to exercise democratic rights, cultural demands and social needs in a diverse urban environment is highlighted. Public spaces, seen as essential components of urban experience, do play a pivotal role in accommodating the diverse social life of various groups (Madanipour, 2003). The complexity of interactions within public spaces becomes apparent when observing the ways different user groups relate to the urban environment and to each other. Spatial dynamics further complicate the issue, as highlighted by Noussia and Lyons (2009). Coexistence in public spaces may give rise to spatial boundaries, acting as locales where diverse people, activities, and ideas come into contact, maintaining a distinctive contrast. However, this contrast can lead to the exclusion of certain groups, resulting in the colonization of urban space by dominant groups and contributing to a sense of fragmentation. Artificially constructed boundaries in cities, as noted by Hillier, can shape people's experiences of space, potentially reflecting social inequalities in the spaces they occupy (Hillier, 2005). Legeby further emphasizes that inequalities in the use of public space can influence movement flows, co-presence, and the nature of activities, directly contributing to spatial exclusion (Legeby, 2009). The continuous and fast-paced transformation of cities has not only reshaped the physical landscape but has also sparked intricate social conflicts, sets of cultural values and beliefs and political contentions among the diverse urban groups that often assert competing claims over the decisions and processes that influence urban transformations, raising fundamental questions about the fairness and justice of these processes. A prominent concern revolves around the prioritization of affluent urban THE JOURNAL OF PUBLIC SPACE
Related papers
Green justice in the city: A new agenda for urban green space research in Europe
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening , 2016
In this short communication, we discuss European urban green space (UGS) research from an environmental justice perspective. We show that European UGS scholarship primarily focuses on functional values and managerial aspects of UGS, while paying less attention to equity in the enjoyment of and decision-making around UGS. On this basis we discuss potentials for European urban green space research to take up a more explicit environmental justice framing to shed much-needed light on injustices in European cities and inspire change in policy and practice.
Editorial: Spatial Justice in Europe. Territoriality, Mobility and Peripherality
Europa XXI, 2019
The discussion surrounding the impact of territorial cohesion policy, and the territorial prioritiza-tion of cohesion policy, can offer significant insights by problematizing spatial justice. The notions of territo-riality, mobility and peripherality are presented and analyzed due to their relevance to territorial cohesion, but also because they may strengthen the concept of spatial justice. The main objective of this paper, and by extension of this issue, is to stress the relevance of spatial justice as a concept created to address socio-spatial and territorial inequalities and useful when framing policy strategies, articulating policy goals, implementing policies, or taking actions to mitigate socio-spatial inequalities. The paper is organized in four sections. The introductory section presents social and economic inequalities as signifiers of the (un)sustainability of the European project and stresses the challenges facing territorial cohesion policy. The second section includes a conceptualization of spatial justice which plays to both the analytical strength and normative rigour of the concept. Third, there is a brief discussion of the notions of territoriality, mobility and peripherality. The final section is dedicated to a description of the basic features of the six papers included in this issue.
Generative Justice In Places: Exploring the values of ‘Spatial Justice’
2021
What might generative justice look like in places? Are there forms of development and occupation in the city that may reveal where extractive values predominate, or where unalienable values may be in circulation or are under threat? The emerging literature on generative justice has been rightly concerned for the most part, on the forms and effects of extractive values on livelihoods through analyses of labor, ecologic and social value. While illuminating, there has arguably been less focus on the spatial means through which these are occurring, and the values could be mistaken as being necessarily universal and aspatial. We argue that a key form of value extraction in the city in terms of 'top-down‘, rather than 'bottom-up‘ values, occurs through urban re-developments – often labelled either 'urban renewal‘, urban regeneration‘ or 'urban rehabilitation‘. Our methodology featured a longitudinal case study of change in a London neighbourhood spanning key interventions ...
The City and Spatial Justice
Justice et injustices spatiales, 2000
The specific term "spatial justice" has not been commonly used until very recently, and even today there are tendencies among geographers and planners to avoid the explicit use of the adjective "spatial" in describing the search for justice and democracy in contemporary societies. Either the spatiality of justice is ignored or it is absorbed (and often drained of its specificity) into such related concepts as territorial justice, environmental justice, the urbanization of injustice, the reduction of regional inequalities, or even more broadly in the generic search for a just city and a just society 1. All of these variations on the central theme are important and relevant, but often tend to draw attention away from the specific qualities and meaning of an explicitly spatialized concept of justice and, more importantly, the many new opportunities it is providing not just for theory building and empirical analysis but for spatially informed social and political action. I hope I have been of some help in explaining why, after thirty or so years of relative neglect Lefebvre's passionate ideas about le droit à la ville have been so actively revived.
Spatial justice: A fundamental or derivative notion?
City, culture and society, 2024
The concept of “spatial justice” is widely employed in the contemporary academic literature and public debates. This concept is usually deemed decisive for a radical change in urban policies and planning. However, there is no agreed definition of what spatial justice is. This happens also because the idea, despite obtaining immediate and extensive success, still lacks some necessary conceptual and analytical explorations and clarifications. This article critically revisits the idea itself of “spatial justice”. To do so, it makes three preliminary specifications in regard to: the primary subject of justice; the distinction between the general concept of justice and specific substantive conceptions of justice; the circumscribed meaning of the notion of distributive justice as a mere component of the more general notion of social justice. Further specifications follow on the issue of “space” itself. Against this background, the article discusses five cases in which space is effectively involved in justice issues: as an influencing factor; as a unit of allocation; as a privately owned asset; as a public domain; as a precinct. The article concludes by arguing that the notion of “spatial justice” is derivative rather than foundational.
The Right to Spatial Development for Human Flourishing
Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning, 2020
This paper explores the literature on spatial development for people's multifaceted well-being and the rights to the city, and argues for people's right to live with dignity in cities. Nature and people-friendly spatial developments are fundamental to nourishing capabilities of human beings and realising their well-being. However, in reality, spatial developments are determined by legal planning and development regimes and socio-cultural discourses. These allocate different 'claims, privileges and power rights' to different stakeholders, and the results may not contribute to human flourishing. This paper attempts to synthesise an evaluation framework to achieve flourishing life with dignity in cities.
Urban Policies in Western Europe: 'Disentangling neighbourhood problems; area-based interventions in Western European Cities'
2009
Urban policies in Western Europe have increasingly taken a territorial focus in addressing social problems through area-based initiatives (ABI’s). Policy discourses emphasise the role of the residential environment in the social economic deprivation. However, a territorial focus which tackles both place-based issues and people-based problems would only make sense either when a ‘critical representation’ of the target population resides in several areas in an already divided city, or when neighbourhood effects take place. In the European context, the existence of either scenario is not a matter of fact. Our overview of four urban policies reveals that even though the rhetoric makes multiple allusions to the existence of the two scenarios, there is no convincing evidence. Moreover, in some cases the evidence refutes policy assumptions. This means that the policies are merely tackling unrelated problems: people-based social economic deprivation and place-based liveability and housing issues. In addition, urban policies stand against a backdrop of social and cultural integration debates. It is unknown what the territorial focus will do for integration, but it is unlikely that ABI’s will be successful in effectively tackling social economic deprivation in European societies.
PLACE AND SPACE IN CONTEMPORARY EUROPE: SOME LESSONS AND REFLECTIONS
Antipode, 1993
The “localities debate,” stimulated by the Economic and Social Research Council's “Changing Urban and Regional Systems” initiative, was conducted in the pages of Antipode and Society and Space at a length that showed scant regard for emerging environmental sensitivities. Much of it involved politically contentious claims and increasingly exhausted theory; it resolved very little and in that sense was little more than a storm in a pretty familiar pudding basin. A later flirtation with postmodernism simply pushed aside questions of explanation while raising the political stakes as celebration of the differences between places became the order of the day. Nonetheless, important issues emerge from or relate to that debate, and we draw on our experiences to comment on three of them: (i) agents, structures, the production of space and the material bases of place: some issues of theory; (ii) the production of places, people's attachment to place, and place-based political strategies: some issues of practice; (iii) localities, postmodernism and the difference that place makes: is the regressive turn to postmodernism as approach avoidable?
Spatial Justice, or Not?
Justice spatiale / Spatial Justice, 2018
Interview conducted on the 10th of July 2017 in Paris, between Anne Clerval and Fabrice Ripoll, from the JEDI Group, and online journal Justice Spatiale / Spatial Justice (Sophie Moreau and Pascale Philifert). For the ten-year (or so) anniversary edition of Justice Spatiale-Spatial Justice, and ten years after the founding conference entitled “Spatial Justice and Injustice” in 2008, we would like to open contradictory debates and discuss the concept of spatial justice.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.