Alexandra Makridou , Ioannis Frangopoulos , Nikos Kapitsinis
{"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":"Alexandra Makridou , Ioannis Frangopoulos , Nikos Kapitsinis","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":"115 ","pages":"Article 103216"},"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\":\"Alexandra Makridou , Ioannis Frangopoulos , Nikos Kapitsinis\",\"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\":\"115 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103216\"},\"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}
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.
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.