Insurgent Planning Planning and Diversity Right to the city Just plannin
How can ordinary people claim space? How do people coexist in space? How does a just city look like How can planning
Holston, Sandercock, Meth, Miraftab Sandercock, Watson Lefebvre Young, David, Basta, Rawls, H
Planning perspectives from the global south Plurality of values formal acknowledgement of RTC Plurality of values
Plurality of values Challenging definition of “participation”
90s as part of radical planning Dictatorship + growth of social movements + Underlying value systems in p
rapid urbanization
→ 1988 Citizen Constitution, 2001 SOTC
Diversification of the public interest and
Beyond the boundaries of the neoliberal state Lefebvre’s Utopian City in Brazil and practical
underlying value systems and ethical ref in
and western traditions of planning application
planning theory
→ no planner, people and grass root are the → planners have multicultural skills, find → planners implement tools of the Statute → planners create the conditi
planners common ground via enlargement of thought justice
Youngs justice: Diversity (Sandercock) RTC: Political project for the reappropriation of Equality in concern of (Basta)
•Participatory democracy City as heterogenous places defined along hard • opportunity to have the righ
urban space and its modes of production by
•no spokesperson → humane urbanism (age, sex, . . ) and soft variables (worldview) • means to having financial m
with coexisting groups “manage our inhabitants (social justice)
Current Problems of Participation(Hildebrandt) coexistence in shared spaces” (Healey) •outcomes to owning all one
utopian right (Lefebvre)
Cooptation, Staging and Control Hyperdiversity (combining opportunity and m
conceived space of professionals within the
Sandercock: Types of differences (Sandercock) perceived space of everyday life Rawls arrangement-focused ju
• oppositional and mobilizing against the power God-given → socially constructed right of citizens to • Institutional top-down
of the state and/or the market • Inter-group differences: hard and soft 1 equal right to liberty compa
. . . difference, info, and the city
→ making the invisible visible to embrace the variables liberty for others
view from below • Regimes of differences resulting from 2 social and economic inequa
Autogestion:
empowerment, oppression, and exclusion • they are to be of the greate
expression of citizens’ rights through social
Meth: • soft can mutate/hybridize due to situation, least-advantaged, consistent
struggle in a radically decentralized,
•intellectually explore people’s alternative time, contact with other groups/own history savings principle
participatory institutional framework
actions operating outside/ alongside “formal” • offices and positions must b
planning framework” • State-citizen differences: conditions of fair equality of o
• Oeuvre - place of difference and struggle)
Insurgency the way how public authority’s mange general bottom line of equalit
• participation - decision making and resource
• marginalized people altering built relationship with citizens according to group, → translating to political liber
distribution (social justice)
environment how they are governed and rights/benefits they legitimization of a normative
• appropriation - use and claim of places
• challenge power asymmetries to the state receive promotion of social pluralism
• in transformative/repressive actions for a 1. Welfare -> market focus
→ The Urban
“just” future 2. Remaining colonialism Sen realization-focused justice
society beyond capitalism, with:
→ Emergence of deep difference (values → translates to spatial division & social divide: • Bottom-up
• meaningful engagement in a web of social
divergencies) fragmentation, splintering, segregation • what makes humans more e
connection created in in every space
Practices: Squatting, street traders inherent diversity?
• use value over exchange value
and Vigilantism Trends (Watson) • Alleviating injustice: reason
How can ordinary people claim space? How do people coexist in space? How does a just city look like How can planning
Holston, Sandercock, Meth, Miraftab Sandercock, Watson Lefebvre Young, David, Basta, Rawls, H
Planning perspectives from the global south Plurality of values formal acknowledgement of RTC Plurality of values
Plurality of values Challenging definition of “participation”
90s as part of radical planning Dictatorship + growth of social movements + Underlying value systems in p
rapid urbanization
→ 1988 Citizen Constitution, 2001 SOTC
Diversification of the public interest and
Beyond the boundaries of the neoliberal state Lefebvre’s Utopian City in Brazil and practical
underlying value systems and ethical ref in
and western traditions of planning application
planning theory
→ no planner, people and grass root are the → planners have multicultural skills, find → planners implement tools of the Statute → planners create the conditi
planners common ground via enlargement of thought justice
Youngs justice: Diversity (Sandercock) RTC: Political project for the reappropriation of Equality in concern of (Basta)
•Participatory democracy City as heterogenous places defined along hard • opportunity to have the righ
urban space and its modes of production by
•no spokesperson → humane urbanism (age, sex, . . ) and soft variables (worldview) • means to having financial m
with coexisting groups “manage our inhabitants (social justice)
Current Problems of Participation(Hildebrandt) coexistence in shared spaces” (Healey) •outcomes to owning all one
utopian right (Lefebvre)
Cooptation, Staging and Control Hyperdiversity (combining opportunity and m
conceived space of professionals within the
Sandercock: Types of differences (Sandercock) perceived space of everyday life Rawls arrangement-focused ju
• oppositional and mobilizing against the power God-given → socially constructed right of citizens to • Institutional top-down
of the state and/or the market • Inter-group differences: hard and soft 1 equal right to liberty compa
. . . difference, info, and the city
→ making the invisible visible to embrace the variables liberty for others
view from below • Regimes of differences resulting from 2 social and economic inequa
Autogestion:
empowerment, oppression, and exclusion • they are to be of the greate
expression of citizens’ rights through social
Meth: • soft can mutate/hybridize due to situation, least-advantaged, consistent
struggle in a radically decentralized,
•intellectually explore people’s alternative time, contact with other groups/own history savings principle
participatory institutional framework
actions operating outside/ alongside “formal” • offices and positions must b
planning framework” • State-citizen differences: conditions of fair equality of o
• Oeuvre - place of difference and struggle)
Insurgency the way how public authority’s mange general bottom line of equalit
• participation - decision making and resource
• marginalized people altering built relationship with citizens according to group, → translating to political liber
distribution (social justice)
environment how they are governed and rights/benefits they legitimization of a normative
• appropriation - use and claim of places
• challenge power asymmetries to the state receive promotion of social pluralism
• in transformative/repressive actions for a 1. Welfare -> market focus
→ The Urban
“just” future 2. Remaining colonialism Sen realization-focused justice
society beyond capitalism, with:
→ Emergence of deep difference (values → translates to spatial division & social divide: • Bottom-up
• meaningful engagement in a web of social
divergencies) fragmentation, splintering, segregation • what makes humans more e
connection created in in every space
Practices: Squatting, street traders inherent diversity?
• use value over exchange value
and Vigilantism Trends (Watson) • Alleviating injustice: reason
