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...
Saved in:
Published in: | International journal of urban and regional research 2020-07, Vol.44 (4), p.561-581 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 |