南非内陆城市的绅士化:尊严的获取需要恢复

IF 0.6 Q4 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING Town and Regional Planning Pub Date : 2023-06-20 DOI:10.38140/trp.v82i.7119
Prof. Geci Karuri-Sebina, Mr Frederick Beckley, G. Karuri-Sebina, Frederick Beckley
{"title":"南非内陆城市的绅士化:尊严的获取需要恢复","authors":"Prof. Geci Karuri-Sebina, Mr Frederick Beckley, G. Karuri-Sebina, Frederick Beckley","doi":"10.38140/trp.v82i.7119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urban development in South Africa has generally sustained and reproduced spatially unequal and exclusionary trends and outcomes particularly for the majority of the poor non-White populace. This article re-examines the urban redevelopment processes and ecosystems of South Africa to identify why this might be the case. Atuahene’s ‘dignity’ concept and framework is adopted for this inquiry. Her framework posits the combination of systematic property deprivation, dehumanisation and infantilisation of poor non-White South Africans as evidence to theorise that the urban land situation in post-apartheid South Africa constitutes ‘dignity takings’ (DT) and demands a ‘dignity restoration’ (DR) response. This article explores the applicability and usefulness of this DT/DR framework in advancing more spatially just and inclusive frameworks and futures for South Africa. It does this by applying the framework to the dynamics of urban socio-spatial change in post-apartheid South Africa, with a focus on the phenomenon of gentrification and its exclusionary effects in four urban case vignettes. The lived experiences of these cases are used to demonstrate that there are both material and non-material aspects to unjust urban development, and that both types of deprivation require attention. The article proposes that gentrification can be viewed as ‘dignity takings’, as it strips residents of their sense of place, ownership, and access to a better quality of life. It is thus argued that policymakers could consider the DR/DT framework as an urban development lens through which to understand the unsuccessful attempts to merely accept, resettle, or compensate displaced residents, proposing DR as a means to fully redress – rather than reproduce – the injustices of the past. The DR/DT framework could contribute towards achieving South Africa’s Integrated Urban Development Framework’s transformation goal of having development policies and approaches that move towards systematic DR that includes spatial justice, sustainability, efficiency, resilience, and good administration.","PeriodicalId":42151,"journal":{"name":"Town and Regional Planning","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gentrification in South Africa’s inner cities: Dignity takings requires restoration\",\"authors\":\"Prof. Geci Karuri-Sebina, Mr Frederick Beckley, G. Karuri-Sebina, Frederick Beckley\",\"doi\":\"10.38140/trp.v82i.7119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Urban development in South Africa has generally sustained and reproduced spatially unequal and exclusionary trends and outcomes particularly for the majority of the poor non-White populace. This article re-examines the urban redevelopment processes and ecosystems of South Africa to identify why this might be the case. Atuahene’s ‘dignity’ concept and framework is adopted for this inquiry. Her framework posits the combination of systematic property deprivation, dehumanisation and infantilisation of poor non-White South Africans as evidence to theorise that the urban land situation in post-apartheid South Africa constitutes ‘dignity takings’ (DT) and demands a ‘dignity restoration’ (DR) response. This article explores the applicability and usefulness of this DT/DR framework in advancing more spatially just and inclusive frameworks and futures for South Africa. It does this by applying the framework to the dynamics of urban socio-spatial change in post-apartheid South Africa, with a focus on the phenomenon of gentrification and its exclusionary effects in four urban case vignettes. The lived experiences of these cases are used to demonstrate that there are both material and non-material aspects to unjust urban development, and that both types of deprivation require attention. The article proposes that gentrification can be viewed as ‘dignity takings’, as it strips residents of their sense of place, ownership, and access to a better quality of life. It is thus argued that policymakers could consider the DR/DT framework as an urban development lens through which to understand the unsuccessful attempts to merely accept, resettle, or compensate displaced residents, proposing DR as a means to fully redress – rather than reproduce – the injustices of the past. The DR/DT framework could contribute towards achieving South Africa’s Integrated Urban Development Framework’s transformation goal of having development policies and approaches that move towards systematic DR that includes spatial justice, sustainability, efficiency, resilience, and good administration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42151,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Town and Regional Planning\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Town and Regional Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.38140/trp.v82i.7119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Town and Regional Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38140/trp.v82i.7119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

南非的城市发展总体上持续并再现了空间上不平等和排斥性的趋势和结果,尤其是对大多数贫穷的非白人人口来说。本文重新审视了南非的城市重建过程和生态系统,以确定为什么会出现这种情况。本次调查采用了阿图阿赫内的“尊严”概念和框架。她的框架将系统性的财产剥夺、非人化和贫穷的非白人南非人的幼稚化相结合,作为证据,证明种族隔离后南非的城市土地状况构成了“剥夺尊严”(DT),并需要“恢复尊严”(DR)的回应。本文探讨了DT/DR框架在推动南非空间更加公正和包容的框架和未来方面的适用性和有用性。它将该框架应用于种族隔离后南非城市社会空间变化的动态,重点关注四个城市案例中的士绅化现象及其排斥效应。这些案例的生活经验表明,不公正的城市发展既有物质方面,也有非物质方面,这两种剥夺都需要关注。文章提出,中产阶级化可以被视为“剥夺尊严”,因为它剥夺了居民的地方感、所有权和获得更好生活质量的机会。因此,有人认为,政策制定者可以将DR/DT框架视为一个城市发展视角,通过它来理解仅仅接受、重新安置或补偿流离失所居民的失败尝试,并将DR作为一种充分纠正——而不是再现——过去不公正的手段。DR/DT框架可以有助于实现南非综合城市发展框架的转型目标,即制定发展政策和方法,朝着包括空间正义、可持续性、效率、复原力和良好管理在内的系统性DR迈进。
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
Gentrification in South Africa’s inner cities: Dignity takings requires restoration
Urban development in South Africa has generally sustained and reproduced spatially unequal and exclusionary trends and outcomes particularly for the majority of the poor non-White populace. This article re-examines the urban redevelopment processes and ecosystems of South Africa to identify why this might be the case. Atuahene’s ‘dignity’ concept and framework is adopted for this inquiry. Her framework posits the combination of systematic property deprivation, dehumanisation and infantilisation of poor non-White South Africans as evidence to theorise that the urban land situation in post-apartheid South Africa constitutes ‘dignity takings’ (DT) and demands a ‘dignity restoration’ (DR) response. This article explores the applicability and usefulness of this DT/DR framework in advancing more spatially just and inclusive frameworks and futures for South Africa. It does this by applying the framework to the dynamics of urban socio-spatial change in post-apartheid South Africa, with a focus on the phenomenon of gentrification and its exclusionary effects in four urban case vignettes. The lived experiences of these cases are used to demonstrate that there are both material and non-material aspects to unjust urban development, and that both types of deprivation require attention. The article proposes that gentrification can be viewed as ‘dignity takings’, as it strips residents of their sense of place, ownership, and access to a better quality of life. It is thus argued that policymakers could consider the DR/DT framework as an urban development lens through which to understand the unsuccessful attempts to merely accept, resettle, or compensate displaced residents, proposing DR as a means to fully redress – rather than reproduce – the injustices of the past. The DR/DT framework could contribute towards achieving South Africa’s Integrated Urban Development Framework’s transformation goal of having development policies and approaches that move towards systematic DR that includes spatial justice, sustainability, efficiency, resilience, and good administration.
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
Town and Regional Planning
Town and Regional Planning REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Urban pressure on the Rietvlei Nature Reserve in Tshwane, South Africa: An application of the Greenspace Stress Model of Urban Impact A review of some of the criteria used in land-demarcation processes Conformity to zoned urban green spaces in physical development plans: A spatiotemporal analysis of Kisii Town, Kenya Gentrification in South Africa’s inner cities: Dignity takings requires restoration Differential urbanisation for settlement planning – A Western Cape case study
×
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