Policy mobilities as comparison: urbanization processes, repeated instances, topologies

J. Robinson
{"title":"Policy mobilities as comparison: urbanization processes, repeated instances, topologies","authors":"J. Robinson","doi":"10.1590/0034-761220180126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following on from calls to reformat comparative urban methods to support global urban studies, this paper draws inspiration from policy mobilities to explore how the genetic interconnectedness of urban processes and outcomes can be mobilised methodologically to critique and extend concepts in urban theory through comparison. What might be the scope and tactics for a practice of comparison through connections, which can start anywhere and build comparisons and analytical insights across a very great diversity of urban experiences? This paper explores three possible ways to take this forward. Firstly, tracing a specific connection, such as a policy link, from one context to another or across a number of different contexts contributes to understanding specific urbanization processes. Secondly, following connections brings into view the range and variety of processes and outcomes in different contexts. In the highly transnationalised world of urban policy this method potentially links a very wide variety of diverse urban contexts and draws attention to a multiplicity of repeated instances of urban forms. Finally, the paper considers the potential to work with the array of transnational processes shaping distinctive policy outcomes and development paths as they come together in one specific place — to explore how “elsewhere” is folded in to localised growth paths. Thus, comparative practices could follow policy mobilities to explore the potential of a more topological imagination of thinking across different contexts, and bringing a diversity of urban contexts into analytical conversation. Along these lines, the invention of concepts and understandings of the urban might emerge anywhere, and perhaps find wider relevance across different situations. Following the trajectories of policy mobilities is thus not only a pathway to inventing new methods but also potentially new grounds for theorizing the urban.","PeriodicalId":439406,"journal":{"name":"Handbook of Policy Transfer, Diffusion and Circulation","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handbook of Policy Transfer, Diffusion and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220180126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Following on from calls to reformat comparative urban methods to support global urban studies, this paper draws inspiration from policy mobilities to explore how the genetic interconnectedness of urban processes and outcomes can be mobilised methodologically to critique and extend concepts in urban theory through comparison. What might be the scope and tactics for a practice of comparison through connections, which can start anywhere and build comparisons and analytical insights across a very great diversity of urban experiences? This paper explores three possible ways to take this forward. Firstly, tracing a specific connection, such as a policy link, from one context to another or across a number of different contexts contributes to understanding specific urbanization processes. Secondly, following connections brings into view the range and variety of processes and outcomes in different contexts. In the highly transnationalised world of urban policy this method potentially links a very wide variety of diverse urban contexts and draws attention to a multiplicity of repeated instances of urban forms. Finally, the paper considers the potential to work with the array of transnational processes shaping distinctive policy outcomes and development paths as they come together in one specific place — to explore how “elsewhere” is folded in to localised growth paths. Thus, comparative practices could follow policy mobilities to explore the potential of a more topological imagination of thinking across different contexts, and bringing a diversity of urban contexts into analytical conversation. Along these lines, the invention of concepts and understandings of the urban might emerge anywhere, and perhaps find wider relevance across different situations. Following the trajectories of policy mobilities is thus not only a pathway to inventing new methods but also potentially new grounds for theorizing the urban.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
作为比较的政策流动性:城市化进程、重复实例、拓扑结构
在呼吁改革比较城市方法以支持全球城市研究之后,本文从政策流动性中汲取灵感,探索如何在方法上调动城市过程和结果的遗传相互联系,通过比较来批判和扩展城市理论中的概念。通过联系进行比较的实践的范围和策略可能是什么?这种比较可以从任何地方开始,并在非常多样化的城市经验中建立比较和分析见解?本文探讨了推进这一进程的三种可能途径。首先,从一种情况到另一种情况或跨越多种不同情况,追踪特定联系(如政策联系)有助于理解具体的城市化进程。其次,以下联系使人们看到了不同背景下过程和结果的范围和多样性。在高度跨国化的城市政策世界中,这种方法可能将各种各样的城市背景联系起来,并引起人们对城市形式重复实例的多样性的注意。最后,本文考虑了与一系列跨国进程合作的潜力,这些进程在一个特定的地方形成了独特的政策结果和发展道路——探索“其他地方”如何融入当地的增长道路。因此,比较实践可以遵循政策流动性,探索在不同背景下思考的更拓扑想象的潜力,并将城市背景的多样性带入分析对话中。沿着这些思路,概念的发明和对城市的理解可能会出现在任何地方,也许会在不同的情况下找到更广泛的相关性。因此,遵循政策流动的轨迹不仅是发明新方法的途径,而且可能是理论化城市的新基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
POLICY INSTRUMENTS Policy mobilities as comparison: urbanization processes, repeated instances, topologies CONCEPTS AND METHODS Policy transfer within the European Union and beyond: Europeanization in times of stability and crises CULTURE, CONTEXT AND DIRECTIONS
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1