Beyond variegation: The territorialisation of states, communities and developers in large-scale developments in Johannesburg, Shanghai and London

Jennifer Robinson, Fulong Wu, Phil Harrison, Zheng Wang, Alison Todes, Romain Dittgen and Katia Attuyer
Additional contact information
Jennifer Robinson: University College London, UK
Fulong Wu: University College London, UK
Phil Harrison: University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Zheng Wang: University of Sheffield, UK
Alison Todes: University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Romain Dittgen: University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Katia Attuyer: Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, China

Urban Studies, 2022, vol. 59, issue 8, 1715-1740

Abstract: Large-scale urban development projects are a significant format of urban expansion and renewal across the globe. As generators of governance innovation and indicators of the future city in each urban context, large-scale development projects have been interpreted within frameworks of ‘variegations’ of wider circulating processes, such as neoliberalisation or financialisation. However, such projects often entail significant state support and investment, are strongly linked to a wide variety of transnational investors and developers and are frequently highly contested in their local environments. Thus, each project comes to fruition in a distinctive regulatory context, often as an exception to the norm, and each emerges through complex interactions over a long period of time amongst an array of actors. We therefore seek to broaden the discussion from an analytical focus on variegated globalised processes to consider three large-scale urban development projects (in Shanghai, Johannesburg and London) as distinctive (transcalar) territorialisations. Using an innovative comparative approach, we outline the grounds for a systematic analytical conversation across mega-urban development projects in very different contexts. Initially, comparability rests on the shared features of large-scale developments – that they are multi-jurisdictional, involve long time scales and bring significant financing challenges. Comparing three development projects, we are able to interrogate, rather than take for granted, how a range of wider processes, circulating practices, transcalar actors and territorial regulatory formations composed specific urban outcomes in each case. Thinking across these diverse cases provides grounds for rebuilding understandings of urban development politics.

Keywords: comparative urbanism; developers; financing; large-scale urban development; state–community relations; urban politics; æ¯”è¾ƒåŸŽå¸‚ç ”ç©¶; å¼€å ‘å•†; èž èµ„; å¤§åž‹åŸŽå¸‚å¼€å ‘é¡¹ç›®; 政府 - 社区关系; 城市政治 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00420980211064159 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:59:y:2022:i:8:p:1715-1740

DOI: 10.1177/00420980211064159

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Urban Studies from Urban Studies Journal Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().