Loading…

Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary

This article argues that the theoretical invisibility of non‐privatized land tenures constitutes a failure of the urban imaginary, which restricts the ability to forge less commodified urban futures. The article explicates two attributes of non‐privatized land—fungibility and combinatoriality—that p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of urban and regional research 2020-07, Vol.44 (4), p.561-581
Main Author: Ghertner, D. Asher
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433
container_end_page 581
container_issue 4
container_start_page 561
container_title International journal of urban and regional research
container_volume 44
creator Ghertner, D. Asher
description This article argues that the theoretical invisibility of non‐privatized land tenures constitutes a failure of the urban imaginary, which restricts the ability to forge less commodified urban futures. The article explicates two attributes of non‐privatized land—fungibility and combinatoriality—that produce an urban land nexus capable of fostering pro‐poor agglomeration economies and generating socialities that exceed the model of the separative self that is hegemonic in more propertied settings. Fungibility, it shows, externalizes supportive economies of production and reproduction into surrounding neighborhoods by shifting the boundaries and terms of usufruct without cadastral oversight or regulation. Combinatoriality—a hybrid formulation of combined territories and combined territorialities—describes overlapping forms of access to land or demarcations of legitimate land use, either competitive or reciprocal. Together, these two attributes of non‐privatized land systems produce a propinquity requirement for economic production, or a social density and liveliness more limited in privatized land markets. Through a diagnostic analogy with the simple reproduction squeeze characteristic of subsistence agrarian settings, it charts how an urban spatial reproduction squeeze—felt globally in dense, rising‐rent environments across the global North and South—generates subsistence needs that mixed‐tenure environments are uniquely capable of fulfilling and that can provide inspiration for radical housing struggles elsewhere.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1468-2427.12926
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2419736597</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2419736597</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUE1Lw0AQXUTBWj17XfCcdr-yyXqTYrUSENrmvGzSiW5Jk7qbKPXXu23Eq3OYL96beTyEbimZ0BBTKmQaMcGSCWWKyTM0-tucoxHhREWU0-QSXXm_JYQwnooRyjP7CfUBZ6bZ-Hu8fge82pvOmhovYe_aTV92tm3w6qMH-AYcYLgLoLmxde8At9VpzF1hGrzYmTfbGHe4RheVqT3c_NYxyueP69lzlL0-LWYPWVRyoWRkhFGJUKHnJmGM0CqRkhVQ8JgCL0qlDCNpwalKCyE2QjJFeckSiGMCSnA-RnfD3aA0CPSd3ra9a8JLzQRVCZdxSGM0HVCla713UOm9s7sgU1Oij97po1P66JQ-eRcYcmB82RoO_8H14iVfDsQfGddudw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2419736597</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Wiley:Jisc Collections:Wiley Read and Publish Open Access 2024-2025 (reading list)</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Ghertner, D. Asher</creator><creatorcontrib>Ghertner, D. Asher</creatorcontrib><description>This article argues that the theoretical invisibility of non‐privatized land tenures constitutes a failure of the urban imaginary, which restricts the ability to forge less commodified urban futures. The article explicates two attributes of non‐privatized land—fungibility and combinatoriality—that produce an urban land nexus capable of fostering pro‐poor agglomeration economies and generating socialities that exceed the model of the separative self that is hegemonic in more propertied settings. Fungibility, it shows, externalizes supportive economies of production and reproduction into surrounding neighborhoods by shifting the boundaries and terms of usufruct without cadastral oversight or regulation. Combinatoriality—a hybrid formulation of combined territories and combined territorialities—describes overlapping forms of access to land or demarcations of legitimate land use, either competitive or reciprocal. Together, these two attributes of non‐privatized land systems produce a propinquity requirement for economic production, or a social density and liveliness more limited in privatized land markets. Through a diagnostic analogy with the simple reproduction squeeze characteristic of subsistence agrarian settings, it charts how an urban spatial reproduction squeeze—felt globally in dense, rising‐rent environments across the global North and South—generates subsistence needs that mixed‐tenure environments are uniquely capable of fulfilling and that can provide inspiration for radical housing struggles elsewhere.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0309-1317</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2427</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1468-2427.12926</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>agglomeration ; Attributes ; Density ; Diagnostic systems ; gentrification ; Hegemony ; Housing ; India ; informality ; land tenures ; Land use ; Liveliness ; Markets ; Neighborhoods ; North and South ; postcolonial cities ; Privatization ; Production ; property ; Radicalism ; Reproduction ; Southern urbanism ; Tenure ; Urban areas ; urban imaginary ; Urban poverty ; urban theory ; Urbanism ; Visibility</subject><ispartof>International journal of urban and regional research, 2020-07, Vol.44 (4), p.561-581</ispartof><rights>2020 Urban Research Publications Limited</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,33200,33751</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ghertner, D. Asher</creatorcontrib><title>Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary</title><title>International journal of urban and regional research</title><description>This article argues that the theoretical invisibility of non‐privatized land tenures constitutes a failure of the urban imaginary, which restricts the ability to forge less commodified urban futures. The article explicates two attributes of non‐privatized land—fungibility and combinatoriality—that produce an urban land nexus capable of fostering pro‐poor agglomeration economies and generating socialities that exceed the model of the separative self that is hegemonic in more propertied settings. Fungibility, it shows, externalizes supportive economies of production and reproduction into surrounding neighborhoods by shifting the boundaries and terms of usufruct without cadastral oversight or regulation. Combinatoriality—a hybrid formulation of combined territories and combined territorialities—describes overlapping forms of access to land or demarcations of legitimate land use, either competitive or reciprocal. Together, these two attributes of non‐privatized land systems produce a propinquity requirement for economic production, or a social density and liveliness more limited in privatized land markets. Through a diagnostic analogy with the simple reproduction squeeze characteristic of subsistence agrarian settings, it charts how an urban spatial reproduction squeeze—felt globally in dense, rising‐rent environments across the global North and South—generates subsistence needs that mixed‐tenure environments are uniquely capable of fulfilling and that can provide inspiration for radical housing struggles elsewhere.</description><subject>agglomeration</subject><subject>Attributes</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>gentrification</subject><subject>Hegemony</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>India</subject><subject>informality</subject><subject>land tenures</subject><subject>Land use</subject><subject>Liveliness</subject><subject>Markets</subject><subject>Neighborhoods</subject><subject>North and South</subject><subject>postcolonial cities</subject><subject>Privatization</subject><subject>Production</subject><subject>property</subject><subject>Radicalism</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>Southern urbanism</subject><subject>Tenure</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>urban imaginary</subject><subject>Urban poverty</subject><subject>urban theory</subject><subject>Urbanism</subject><subject>Visibility</subject><issn>0309-1317</issn><issn>1468-2427</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUE1Lw0AQXUTBWj17XfCcdr-yyXqTYrUSENrmvGzSiW5Jk7qbKPXXu23Eq3OYL96beTyEbimZ0BBTKmQaMcGSCWWKyTM0-tucoxHhREWU0-QSXXm_JYQwnooRyjP7CfUBZ6bZ-Hu8fge82pvOmhovYe_aTV92tm3w6qMH-AYcYLgLoLmxde8At9VpzF1hGrzYmTfbGHe4RheVqT3c_NYxyueP69lzlL0-LWYPWVRyoWRkhFGJUKHnJmGM0CqRkhVQ8JgCL0qlDCNpwalKCyE2QjJFeckSiGMCSnA-RnfD3aA0CPSd3ra9a8JLzQRVCZdxSGM0HVCla713UOm9s7sgU1Oij97po1P66JQ-eRcYcmB82RoO_8H14iVfDsQfGddudw</recordid><startdate>202007</startdate><enddate>202007</enddate><creator>Ghertner, D. Asher</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202007</creationdate><title>Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary</title><author>Ghertner, D. Asher</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>agglomeration</topic><topic>Attributes</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>gentrification</topic><topic>Hegemony</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>India</topic><topic>informality</topic><topic>land tenures</topic><topic>Land use</topic><topic>Liveliness</topic><topic>Markets</topic><topic>Neighborhoods</topic><topic>North and South</topic><topic>postcolonial cities</topic><topic>Privatization</topic><topic>Production</topic><topic>property</topic><topic>Radicalism</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>Southern urbanism</topic><topic>Tenure</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>urban imaginary</topic><topic>Urban poverty</topic><topic>urban theory</topic><topic>Urbanism</topic><topic>Visibility</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ghertner, D. Asher</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>International journal of urban and regional research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ghertner, D. Asher</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary</atitle><jtitle>International journal of urban and regional research</jtitle><date>2020-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>561</spage><epage>581</epage><pages>561-581</pages><issn>0309-1317</issn><eissn>1468-2427</eissn><abstract>This article argues that the theoretical invisibility of non‐privatized land tenures constitutes a failure of the urban imaginary, which restricts the ability to forge less commodified urban futures. The article explicates two attributes of non‐privatized land—fungibility and combinatoriality—that produce an urban land nexus capable of fostering pro‐poor agglomeration economies and generating socialities that exceed the model of the separative self that is hegemonic in more propertied settings. Fungibility, it shows, externalizes supportive economies of production and reproduction into surrounding neighborhoods by shifting the boundaries and terms of usufruct without cadastral oversight or regulation. Combinatoriality—a hybrid formulation of combined territories and combined territorialities—describes overlapping forms of access to land or demarcations of legitimate land use, either competitive or reciprocal. Together, these two attributes of non‐privatized land systems produce a propinquity requirement for economic production, or a social density and liveliness more limited in privatized land markets. Through a diagnostic analogy with the simple reproduction squeeze characteristic of subsistence agrarian settings, it charts how an urban spatial reproduction squeeze—felt globally in dense, rising‐rent environments across the global North and South—generates subsistence needs that mixed‐tenure environments are uniquely capable of fulfilling and that can provide inspiration for radical housing struggles elsewhere.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/1468-2427.12926</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0309-1317
ispartof International journal of urban and regional research, 2020-07, Vol.44 (4), p.561-581
issn 0309-1317
1468-2427
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2419736597
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Wiley:Jisc Collections:Wiley Read and Publish Open Access 2024-2025 (reading list); Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts
subjects agglomeration
Attributes
Density
Diagnostic systems
gentrification
Hegemony
Housing
India
informality
land tenures
Land use
Liveliness
Markets
Neighborhoods
North and South
postcolonial cities
Privatization
Production
property
Radicalism
Reproduction
Southern urbanism
Tenure
Urban areas
urban imaginary
Urban poverty
urban theory
Urbanism
Visibility
title Lively Lands: The Spatial Reproduction Squeeze and the Failure of the Urban Imaginary
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-23T07%3A24%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lively%20Lands:%20The%20Spatial%20Reproduction%20Squeeze%20and%20the%20Failure%20of%20the%20Urban%20Imaginary&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20urban%20and%20regional%20research&rft.au=Ghertner,%20D.%20Asher&rft.date=2020-07&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=561&rft.epage=581&rft.pages=561-581&rft.issn=0309-1317&rft.eissn=1468-2427&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1468-2427.12926&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2419736597%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3496-a4a97493493a72201f7662beb351e3bc99a208b3198b44d462913c27e550e9433%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2419736597&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true