International conference

Living urban renewal: Vulnerabilities, Tensions and Mobilization

Local Experiences, Global comparisons

Call for papers procedure and schedule (downloadable version at the page bottom)

Proposals should be submitted by October 22th, 2012. The expected paper should be an abstract of no more than a page (5,000 characters maximum, spaces included) along with a short curriculum vitae. It should precise fieldwork and methodology. Abstract will be chosen for November 5th, 2012. To allow maximum time for discussion, we intend that all papers should be put on the Conference website.

Papers should be written in French or English.

Final papers should be submitted by January 11th, 2013. It should be a detailed document: a paper which can not exceed 25,000 signs, detailed speech presentation, or Powerpoint.

The conference will take place at the ENSA – Val de Seine January 25th and 26th, 2013.

PRESENTATION

The recent processes of urban renewal are part of internationalization logics, influenced by major urban and socio-economic changes. Here « urban renewal » is taken in a broad sense. It mainly refers to public land redevelopment with building demolition and reconstruction, as known in France since the establishment of ANRU policies (National Agency for Urban Renewal). However, it also refers to interventions aiming to preserve the built heritage, despite involving the eviction of dwellers. We can identify at this stage two distinct argument and operational means. The first massive wave of urban redevelopment (around the 70s) aims to eradicate insalubrious housing and slums (H. Coin, 1966). Often, it is justified in the name of common interest and cities’ modernization. The second wave, which emerged in the mid 90s, combines urban renewal with modernization and population changes (C. Lelévrier, 2010). Megaprojects are often taken as operating modes (U. Lehrer, 2008) in cities supporting international competitive objectives in which transnational or partly exogenous capital is invested. In most global cities, precarious housing and deteriorated housing are priority targets for urban redevelopment or slums removal schemes in central or peri-central areas. (JF Pérouse, 2007). Within the scope of these operations, new operating modes emerge through the diversification of available investments (S. Benjamin, 2011).

Urban renovation usually involves identity issues and citizens’ claims, based on the fear of loss (both material and « memory » loss), as well as residential uncertainty. These rapid changes threaten the representations of social networks, of solidarity and of the ways to live together. Therefore, using complementary approaches, we should understand the implementation processes for projects or public policies, through observing public legitimization of unpopular or feared operation (Navez-Bouchanine, Berry-Chikhaoui, 2005). We observe new forms of social mobilization, responding to urban renovation, that raise the question of social movements around the bivalent issue: enrooting versus eviction (Y. Cabannes et alii, 2010). We should also identify the modalities according to which local governments and the civil society challenge a democratic approach to urban planning, urban projects and local political management of social vulnerabilities. The renewal of citizenship expectations around urban redevelopment diversity means that the different groups of inhabitants, communities, and associations, (A. Deboulet, 2010) need to be defined, as well as their increasing proximity with urban development professionals.

Recent research seems to indicate changes in the forms of mobilization as well as the development of new forms of mediation. It shows emerging claims for alternatives, for new perspectives and counter- projects which challenge the present logics of urban renewal city development. In this context, cities witness the emergence of new forms of public action and mobilization, even counter-projects, or collaborative, participatory projects, which gather professionals such as town and country planners and architects, as well as researchers and residents.

Therefore, this conference aims to understand the complex and changing patterns of government intervention and local social norms (G. Pinson, 2010; P. Watt, 2009), the persistence and the various modalities of urban renewal as well as their diverse impacts on economic and urban fabrics.

• What are the similarities between former and current modalities in urban renewal, even in very distinct urban and social contexts?
• Do recent developments in global cities both in developed and emerging countries lead to reconsider the structure of the motivations of those involved in urban renewal, whether for or against it – reconsider its scale and its nature?
• In regards of the increasing number of events and of forms in urban renewal processes occurring within a metropolization and privatization process, could we identify the tensions thus created, and the various answers – public as well as civic – to these uncertainties?
• This debate will focus on mediation and forms of commitments allowing to think about the near future on the basis of existing practices. Is it thus possible to explore the emergence of new practices leading professional and citizens to invent new ways to make cities ?

FOCUS POINTS OF THE CONFERENCE

Focus 1

Policies and actors of urban renewal within a global scope: a comparative approach

Cities seek to establish themselves as political and competitive economic actors. They set up more and more major projects regarding urban facilities and urban redevelopment – in historic centres and in working-class neighborhoods. What are the operative me­thods for these projects? (Project phases, stakeholders, target populations and territories …). Can we outline a global trend for «urban renewal»? Is there a place for « soft renewal policies »? Who are the urban renovation stakeholders today in Western and Southern cities? At which stage are they involved? Which skills are mobilized ? How can we compare diverse national and local experiences? (Socio-political context, economic policies, legislation, etc.). To which extent do these path the way for new practices ?

Focus 2

Stakeholders coalitions and urban renewal aims: a critical review

Funding systems, operating modes and financial interests combined lead many local authorities to comply with urban renewal rules (France, United States, Turkey…). However, many local project leaders have tried to resist to these incentives. Within those constraints, how can current practises be changed?

If we think about a project’s objectives and justification, it is therefore important to distinguish between official discourses and communication tools and the often hidden motives for action. What are the discursive frameworks and registers relating to urban renewal and its expectations? Local, international, formal or informal banks («thugs», house wreck contractors, land sellers, traders, agreement sellers, etc.. ) play a key role in these operations. What are the relations between the private and public sectors, considering that in researches to this date the private sector has been neglected?

In general, we will aim to identify real and reachable aims and effects on urban landscape, on territorial economy and on residents.

Focus 3

crossed commitments for «inhabitants», processionnal and researchers: how are of protest, cooperation and mediation forms renewed?

Renovation projects create tensions and uncertainties which lead citizens to mobilize, to organize collectively and to invent new forms of protest, resistance and cooperation. Practitioners and researchers are at the heart of these developments, and seem to be more and more numerous to promote a collaborative approach of urban projects outside of institutional frameworks. Therefore they contribute to improve the stakeholders’ capacities and willingness to cooperate, and representations. Through these crossed commitments, new forms of mediation are experimented and new skills are formalized. They also tend to modify the legal and institutional frameworks.

Who are the actors involved in a collaborative and citizen urban renewal? How will citizens get support and resources to strengthen their mobilization? How do researchers and practitioners involved in on-field projects interact? What do both the « civil society » and the local authorities claim and expect from these professionals? What are the modalities of access to and appropriation of these new collaborative forms of commitment ? What knowledge, which skills are exchanged through these experiences? What are the consequences of these commitments, both for professional and political practices? Finally, do the aforementioned changes help to renew the field of urban development?

ORGANISATION

Scientific Committee:

• Isabelle Berry-Chikhaoui, Senior lecturer, Université  de Montpellier, ARC-DEV
• Yves Cabannes, Chair of Development Planning, University College of London.
• Valérie Clerc, Researcher, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement.
• Agnès Deboulet, Professor, Université Paris 8 Saint-Denis, CRH LAVUE Paris.
• Mona Fawaz, Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Design, American University of Beirut.
• Muriel Girard, Senior lecturer, ENSA-Marseille, INAMA.
• Matthieu Giroud, Senior lecturer, Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, CRH LAVUE Paris.
• Rainier Hoddé, Professor, ENSA-Lyon, CRH LAVUE Paris.
• Christine Lelévrier, Professor, Institut d’Urbanisme de Paris, LAB’URBA.
• Jean-François Pérouse, Senior lecturer, Galatasaray University,  IFEA Istanbul.
• Rafael Soares Gonçalves, Senior lecturer, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Rio de Janeiro.
• Paul Watt, Senior Lecturer, Department of Geography, Birbeck University, London.
• Murat Cemal Yalcintan, Lecturer, Faculty of Architecture, Mimar Sinan University of Fine Arts, Istanbul.

Organization committee:

• Khedidja Mamou, PhD student, Université Paris-Ouest La Défense, CRH LAVUE Paris.
• Clémence Petit, PhD student, Université de Strasbourg, GSPE, IFEA Istanbul.

Contact

Conference venue and access