将 NIMBY 解释为在难民营选址背景下要求参与性规划的运动:希腊两个地区的比较案例研究

IF 4.7 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY Political Geography Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103216
{"title":"将 NIMBY 解释为在难民营选址背景下要求参与性规划的运动:希腊两个地区的比较案例研究","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Citizens’ reactions to planning decisions imposed from above occur commonly, especially when it comes to the siting of controversial facilities, such as refugee camps. Explaining these reactions within the context of migration governance and forms of planning (participatory vs. conventional) could provide valuable insights to deepen our understanding of the underlying causes. This paper studies top-down planning procedures of refugee camp siting vis-à-vis the bottom-up local reactions characterized as NIMBY phenomena. To this end, it adopts a socio-spatial approach, with the logics of production (top-down planning) and appropriation (bottom-up mobilizations) of space. Employing qualitative research, based on media and document analysis as well as semi-structured interviews, the paper conducts a comparative analysis of two contrasting regions with low and high refugee concentration rates in Greece: Crete and Central Macedonia. It enriches the academic discourse on geography, sociology and political science and policy debates, highlighting the NIMBY phenomena as mobilizations claiming access to information and local community participation in planning and underlining the importance of participatory planning to address these reactions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48262,"journal":{"name":"Political Geography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpreting NIMBY as movements claiming participatory planning in the context of refugee camps’ siting: A comparative case study in two Greek regions\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103216\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Citizens’ reactions to planning decisions imposed from above occur commonly, especially when it comes to the siting of controversial facilities, such as refugee camps. Explaining these reactions within the context of migration governance and forms of planning (participatory vs. conventional) could provide valuable insights to deepen our understanding of the underlying causes. This paper studies top-down planning procedures of refugee camp siting vis-à-vis the bottom-up local reactions characterized as NIMBY phenomena. To this end, it adopts a socio-spatial approach, with the logics of production (top-down planning) and appropriation (bottom-up mobilizations) of space. Employing qualitative research, based on media and document analysis as well as semi-structured interviews, the paper conducts a comparative analysis of two contrasting regions with low and high refugee concentration rates in Greece: Crete and Central Macedonia. It enriches the academic discourse on geography, sociology and political science and policy debates, highlighting the NIMBY phenomena as mobilizations claiming access to information and local community participation in planning and underlining the importance of participatory planning to address these reactions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Geography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629824001653\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Geography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629824001653","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公民对上层强加的规划决策的反应很常见,尤其是在涉及难民营等有争议的设施选址时。在移民治理和规划形式(参与式规划与传统规划)的背景下解释这些反应,可为我们加深对根本原因的理解提供有价值的见解。本文研究了自上而下的难民营选址规划程序与自下而上的当地反应(NIMBY 现象)之间的关系。为此,本文采用社会空间方法,研究空间的生产(自上而下的规划)和占有(自下而上的动员)逻辑。本文采用定性研究方法,以媒体和文件分析以及半结构式访谈为基础,对希腊难民集中率较低和较高的两个地区进行了对比分析:克里特岛和中马其顿。论文丰富了地理学、社会学、政治学和政策辩论方面的学术论述,强调了 NIMBY 现象是要求获取信息和当地社区参与规划的动员行为,并强调了参与式规划对解决这些反应的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Interpreting NIMBY as movements claiming participatory planning in the context of refugee camps’ siting: A comparative case study in two Greek regions
Citizens’ reactions to planning decisions imposed from above occur commonly, especially when it comes to the siting of controversial facilities, such as refugee camps. Explaining these reactions within the context of migration governance and forms of planning (participatory vs. conventional) could provide valuable insights to deepen our understanding of the underlying causes. This paper studies top-down planning procedures of refugee camp siting vis-à-vis the bottom-up local reactions characterized as NIMBY phenomena. To this end, it adopts a socio-spatial approach, with the logics of production (top-down planning) and appropriation (bottom-up mobilizations) of space. Employing qualitative research, based on media and document analysis as well as semi-structured interviews, the paper conducts a comparative analysis of two contrasting regions with low and high refugee concentration rates in Greece: Crete and Central Macedonia. It enriches the academic discourse on geography, sociology and political science and policy debates, highlighting the NIMBY phenomena as mobilizations claiming access to information and local community participation in planning and underlining the importance of participatory planning to address these reactions.
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
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
210
期刊介绍: Political Geography is the flagship journal of political geography and research on the spatial dimensions of politics. The journal brings together leading contributions in its field, promoting international and interdisciplinary communication. Research emphases cover all scales of inquiry and diverse theories, methods, and methodologies.
期刊最新文献
‘I felt’: Intimate geographies of sentient diplomacy Knowledge popularization in a technocratic-populist context, or how the Israeli state shaped media coverage of large-scale urban plans Introduction to the special issue – Frontiers of property: promises, pitfalls, and ambivalences of ‘resurgent collectivisation’ in global land and resource governance Checkpoints, competing ‘sovereignties’, and everyday life in Iraq
×
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