驱逐:重新定义来自全球南方的住房不安全

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY City & Community Pub Date : 2020-07-15 DOI:10.1111/cico.12503
L. Weinstein
{"title":"驱逐:重新定义来自全球南方的住房不安全","authors":"L. Weinstein","doi":"10.1111/cico.12503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urban sociologists have recently discovered the problem of residential evictions. Although displacement has been a major theme in sociological studies of gentrification, homelessness, and public housing transformation, the forced removal of tenants from rental housing been the subject of surprisingly little sociological research (Desmond 2012a; Hartman and Robinson 2003). With the new visibility that Matthew Desmond has brought to the topic with his award–winning ethnography Evicted and the rigorously researched articles he and his colleagues have produced, evictions have begun to attract more scholarly attention (Herring 2014; Desmond and Shollenberger 2015; Purser 2016; Desmond, Gershenson, and Kiviat 2015; Brady 2017; Sullivan 2018; Garboden and Rosen 2019; Brady 2019). Yet while the topic has been largely overlooked by American urban sociologists, interdisciplinary scholars studying cities in the Global South have been researching the problem of forced removals for decades, particularly in informal, auto–constructed, or “slum” settlements prevalent in southern cities. As American urban sociologists turn their attention to evictions, it is important that they not overlook the empirically grounded, theoretically robust insights drawn from urban research in the Global South. In this paper, I set up a conversation between the usually separate literatures on rental evictions in U.S. cities and urban “slum” evictions in the Global South. Given the geographical and disciplinary breadth of research on southern cities, I limit my review to studies of evictions in India and South Africa. As two former British colonies with distinct developmental trajectories but comparable levels of housing insecurity, these cases underscore both the common themes and contextual specificity found in this literature.1 When we reconceptualize evictions from the South, I argue that two aspects of housing insecurity come into clearer focus: First, despite the emphasis on individuals and families in the recent U.S. literature, evictions are also collective events that impact whole neighborhoods and communities. This insight is important for understanding not only the experience of evictions and their effects on cities, but also the possibilities for collective action. Secondly, when we re–center the study of evictions southward, it becomes clearer that evictions are patently political acts, and cannot be explained solely with a focus on markets and housing affordability. While housing insecurity in the United States is also shaped by historically entrenched political conflicts, discriminatory logics, and local power brokering, these political dimensions may be easier to discern in contexts where governments, rather than private landlords, typically do the evicting. 100069 CTYXXX10.1177/15356841211000695City & CommunityWeinstein research-article2020","PeriodicalId":47486,"journal":{"name":"City & Community","volume":"20 1","pages":"13 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cico.12503","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evictions: Reconceptualizing Housing Insecurity from the Global South\",\"authors\":\"L. Weinstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cico.12503\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Urban sociologists have recently discovered the problem of residential evictions. Although displacement has been a major theme in sociological studies of gentrification, homelessness, and public housing transformation, the forced removal of tenants from rental housing been the subject of surprisingly little sociological research (Desmond 2012a; Hartman and Robinson 2003). With the new visibility that Matthew Desmond has brought to the topic with his award–winning ethnography Evicted and the rigorously researched articles he and his colleagues have produced, evictions have begun to attract more scholarly attention (Herring 2014; Desmond and Shollenberger 2015; Purser 2016; Desmond, Gershenson, and Kiviat 2015; Brady 2017; Sullivan 2018; Garboden and Rosen 2019; Brady 2019). Yet while the topic has been largely overlooked by American urban sociologists, interdisciplinary scholars studying cities in the Global South have been researching the problem of forced removals for decades, particularly in informal, auto–constructed, or “slum” settlements prevalent in southern cities. As American urban sociologists turn their attention to evictions, it is important that they not overlook the empirically grounded, theoretically robust insights drawn from urban research in the Global South. In this paper, I set up a conversation between the usually separate literatures on rental evictions in U.S. cities and urban “slum” evictions in the Global South. Given the geographical and disciplinary breadth of research on southern cities, I limit my review to studies of evictions in India and South Africa. As two former British colonies with distinct developmental trajectories but comparable levels of housing insecurity, these cases underscore both the common themes and contextual specificity found in this literature.1 When we reconceptualize evictions from the South, I argue that two aspects of housing insecurity come into clearer focus: First, despite the emphasis on individuals and families in the recent U.S. literature, evictions are also collective events that impact whole neighborhoods and communities. This insight is important for understanding not only the experience of evictions and their effects on cities, but also the possibilities for collective action. Secondly, when we re–center the study of evictions southward, it becomes clearer that evictions are patently political acts, and cannot be explained solely with a focus on markets and housing affordability. While housing insecurity in the United States is also shaped by historically entrenched political conflicts, discriminatory logics, and local power brokering, these political dimensions may be easier to discern in contexts where governments, rather than private landlords, typically do the evicting. 100069 CTYXXX10.1177/15356841211000695City & CommunityWeinstein research-article2020\",\"PeriodicalId\":47486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"City & Community\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"13 - 23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cico.12503\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"City & Community\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12503\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"City & Community","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12503","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

城市社会学家最近发现了住宅拆迁的问题。尽管流离失所一直是中产阶级化、无家可归和公共住房转型的社会学研究的一个主要主题,但令人惊讶的是,将租户从出租住房中强行驱逐出去的社会学调查却很少(Desmond,2012a;Hartman和Robinson,2003年)。Matthew Desmond凭借其获奖的《被驱逐的民族志》以及他和同事们撰写的经过严格研究的文章,为这个话题带来了新的知名度,驱逐已经开始吸引更多的学术关注(Herring 2014;Desmond和Shollenberger 2015;Purser 2016;Desmond、Gershenson和Kiviat 2015;Brady 2017;Sullivan 2018;Garboden和Rosen 2019;Brady 2019)。然而,尽管美国城市社会学家在很大程度上忽视了这一话题,但研究全球南方城市的跨学科学者几十年来一直在研究强迫搬迁问题,特别是在南方城市普遍存在的非正规、自动建造或“贫民窟”住区。当美国城市社会学家将注意力转向驱逐时,重要的是他们不要忽视从全球南方的城市研究中得出的基于经验、理论上有力的见解。在这篇论文中,我在通常独立的关于美国城市租金驱逐和全球南部城市“贫民窟”驱逐的文献之间进行了对话。考虑到对南部城市的地理和学科研究的广度,我的综述仅限于对印度和南非驱逐行为的研究。作为两个有着不同发展轨迹但住房不安全程度相当的前英国殖民地,这些案例强调了本文献中的共同主题和背景特殊性。1当我们重新定义从南方驱逐的概念时,我认为住房不安全的两个方面变得更加清晰:首先,尽管最近的美国文献强调个人和家庭,但驱逐也是影响整个社区和社区的集体事件。这一见解不仅对理解驱逐的经历及其对城市的影响很重要,而且对理解集体行动的可能性也很重要。其次,当我们将驱逐研究重新集中在南方时,我们会更清楚地看到,驱逐显然是政治行为,不能仅仅以市场和住房负担能力为重点来解释。虽然美国的住房不安全也受到历史上根深蒂固的政治冲突、歧视性逻辑和地方权力中介的影响,但在政府而非私人房东通常进行驱逐的情况下,这些政治层面可能更容易辨别。100069 CTYXX10.1177/155366841211000695城市与社区Weinstein研究-文章2020
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
Evictions: Reconceptualizing Housing Insecurity from the Global South
Urban sociologists have recently discovered the problem of residential evictions. Although displacement has been a major theme in sociological studies of gentrification, homelessness, and public housing transformation, the forced removal of tenants from rental housing been the subject of surprisingly little sociological research (Desmond 2012a; Hartman and Robinson 2003). With the new visibility that Matthew Desmond has brought to the topic with his award–winning ethnography Evicted and the rigorously researched articles he and his colleagues have produced, evictions have begun to attract more scholarly attention (Herring 2014; Desmond and Shollenberger 2015; Purser 2016; Desmond, Gershenson, and Kiviat 2015; Brady 2017; Sullivan 2018; Garboden and Rosen 2019; Brady 2019). Yet while the topic has been largely overlooked by American urban sociologists, interdisciplinary scholars studying cities in the Global South have been researching the problem of forced removals for decades, particularly in informal, auto–constructed, or “slum” settlements prevalent in southern cities. As American urban sociologists turn their attention to evictions, it is important that they not overlook the empirically grounded, theoretically robust insights drawn from urban research in the Global South. In this paper, I set up a conversation between the usually separate literatures on rental evictions in U.S. cities and urban “slum” evictions in the Global South. Given the geographical and disciplinary breadth of research on southern cities, I limit my review to studies of evictions in India and South Africa. As two former British colonies with distinct developmental trajectories but comparable levels of housing insecurity, these cases underscore both the common themes and contextual specificity found in this literature.1 When we reconceptualize evictions from the South, I argue that two aspects of housing insecurity come into clearer focus: First, despite the emphasis on individuals and families in the recent U.S. literature, evictions are also collective events that impact whole neighborhoods and communities. This insight is important for understanding not only the experience of evictions and their effects on cities, but also the possibilities for collective action. Secondly, when we re–center the study of evictions southward, it becomes clearer that evictions are patently political acts, and cannot be explained solely with a focus on markets and housing affordability. While housing insecurity in the United States is also shaped by historically entrenched political conflicts, discriminatory logics, and local power brokering, these political dimensions may be easier to discern in contexts where governments, rather than private landlords, typically do the evicting. 100069 CTYXXX10.1177/15356841211000695City & CommunityWeinstein research-article2020
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
City & Community
City & Community Multiple-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
8.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
Environmentalizing Urban Sociology Origins of the Flint Water Crisis: Uneven Development, Urban Political Ecology, and Racial Capitalism Postscript: Environmentalize Urban Sociology? Spaces of Social Capital across Pandemic Time: COVID-19 Responses in Ho Chi Minh City’s High-rise and Low-rise Neighborhoods Cultural Policy Formation and State-Society Relations: Culture-led Urban Redevelopment of Enninglu in Guangzhou
×
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