Abstract:The migrant crisis that hit Europe in 2015 established Belgrade as one of transit cities on the route along which they travel to the final destination. A large number of migrants, no matter of reason for leaving homeland (war, economy, climate change consequences), mostly men travelling alone, prefer to stay in the central urban parks or squares. The result was change of personal feeling of safety of citizens and intensive monitoring by local police, but some other examples gave us a different focus, when the … Show more
“…The informal settlements were built between 2016 and 2017 in the old station's warehouses, the railway workers’ houses, and the cargo buildings. Refugees received initial help by local and international solidarity groups (Cantat 2020; Hristic and Stefanovic 2020) and the old train station became home to around 2,000 refugees who were “trapped” in Serbia, following the closure of the borders to Hungary and Croatia and the so‐called Balkan refugee route to the European Union, in spring 2016 (Cantat 2020; Ruff 2017).…”
Section: The Refugees’ Vs the Investors’ Right To Belgrade's Waterfrontmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also important to mention at this point that the refugees’ commoning practices were supported by a wide range of solidarity groups, NGO volunteers, political activists, as well as locals who “voluntary provided different kind of goods, mostly food and warm clothes, toys for children” (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020:76). Radmila, a 56‐year‐old woman from Belgrade, while describing the relations between the locals and the refugees, emphasises that:Serbia has suffered a lot in the past decades with the wars of the break‐up of Yugoslavia and the people of Belgrade understand what it means to lose your home, to be uprooted and to emigrate.…”
Section: Newcomers’ Inventive and Expanding Commoning: The History Of...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Representations of barracks as a “fearscape” (Tulumello 2015) construct the refugees as threatening “others” and legitimise the exercise of an authoritarian power of displacement. In this context, during the winter and spring of 2017 the local media employed extensive negative propaganda that greatly influenced public opinion, and local citizens “repeatedly expressed their dissatisfaction” (Moratti 2017) as “the personal feeling of safety became seriously jeopardised” (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020:76).…”
Section: The “Badland” Rhetoric In Aid Of the Second Displacementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Empirically, the case study fills a significant gap in research data on refugee housing and commoning practices in Belgrade, since research on refugee housing in Serbia focuses mainly on state policies (Beznec et al. 2016; Obradovic‐Wochnik and Bird 2020; Stojic Mitrovic 2019), solidarity initiatives towards refugees (Cantat 2020; Milan 2019), humanitarian aid activities (Jovanovic 2020), and refugee housing conditions in the period prior to the old train station barracks occupation (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020; Obradovic‐Wochnik 2018; Stojic Mitrovic and Meh 2015).…”
We develop the concept of “second displacement” to symbolise the renewed forms of uprooting that refugees undergo in arrival cities in the name of urban regeneration. Focusing on the eviction of 2,000 refugees from a self‐organised settlement in Belgrade's old train station in order to redevelop the site as a luxurious “Waterfront” project, we show how the refugees’ commoning practices and claims for living space in city centres often come into direct conflict with public and private interests over urban regeneration and with imaginaries over who has the right to the city. Whilst most displacement literature focuses on state policies, we call attention to how the uprooting of refugees is often entangled with urban renewal plans and private investors’ interests. In Belgrade, the depiction of the refugees’ living spaces as “badlands” by the state, catalysed the formation of the rent gap that facilitated re‐allocation of rights to the city.
“…The informal settlements were built between 2016 and 2017 in the old station's warehouses, the railway workers’ houses, and the cargo buildings. Refugees received initial help by local and international solidarity groups (Cantat 2020; Hristic and Stefanovic 2020) and the old train station became home to around 2,000 refugees who were “trapped” in Serbia, following the closure of the borders to Hungary and Croatia and the so‐called Balkan refugee route to the European Union, in spring 2016 (Cantat 2020; Ruff 2017).…”
Section: The Refugees’ Vs the Investors’ Right To Belgrade's Waterfrontmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also important to mention at this point that the refugees’ commoning practices were supported by a wide range of solidarity groups, NGO volunteers, political activists, as well as locals who “voluntary provided different kind of goods, mostly food and warm clothes, toys for children” (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020:76). Radmila, a 56‐year‐old woman from Belgrade, while describing the relations between the locals and the refugees, emphasises that:Serbia has suffered a lot in the past decades with the wars of the break‐up of Yugoslavia and the people of Belgrade understand what it means to lose your home, to be uprooted and to emigrate.…”
Section: Newcomers’ Inventive and Expanding Commoning: The History Of...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Representations of barracks as a “fearscape” (Tulumello 2015) construct the refugees as threatening “others” and legitimise the exercise of an authoritarian power of displacement. In this context, during the winter and spring of 2017 the local media employed extensive negative propaganda that greatly influenced public opinion, and local citizens “repeatedly expressed their dissatisfaction” (Moratti 2017) as “the personal feeling of safety became seriously jeopardised” (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020:76).…”
Section: The “Badland” Rhetoric In Aid Of the Second Displacementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Empirically, the case study fills a significant gap in research data on refugee housing and commoning practices in Belgrade, since research on refugee housing in Serbia focuses mainly on state policies (Beznec et al. 2016; Obradovic‐Wochnik and Bird 2020; Stojic Mitrovic 2019), solidarity initiatives towards refugees (Cantat 2020; Milan 2019), humanitarian aid activities (Jovanovic 2020), and refugee housing conditions in the period prior to the old train station barracks occupation (Hristic and Stefanovic 2020; Obradovic‐Wochnik 2018; Stojic Mitrovic and Meh 2015).…”
We develop the concept of “second displacement” to symbolise the renewed forms of uprooting that refugees undergo in arrival cities in the name of urban regeneration. Focusing on the eviction of 2,000 refugees from a self‐organised settlement in Belgrade's old train station in order to redevelop the site as a luxurious “Waterfront” project, we show how the refugees’ commoning practices and claims for living space in city centres often come into direct conflict with public and private interests over urban regeneration and with imaginaries over who has the right to the city. Whilst most displacement literature focuses on state policies, we call attention to how the uprooting of refugees is often entangled with urban renewal plans and private investors’ interests. In Belgrade, the depiction of the refugees’ living spaces as “badlands” by the state, catalysed the formation of the rent gap that facilitated re‐allocation of rights to the city.
Some environmental changes (either natural or anthropogenic usually caused by leaving sustainable management of its natural resources) alter natural conditions to such an extent that individuals and entire communities are forced to leave their place of permanent residence and seek another that would provide them with at least the minimum subsistence level of living. Some of those journeys may be temporary and cover small distances; others may involve crossing the border of one’s homeland with no hope of ever coming back. Migrants struggle with not only their precarious financial situation, but also a wide range of legal and administrative difficulties, often compounded by social, cultural, religious, and political issues. Even though the number of people fleeing inhospitable environments is increasing every year, the international community and host countries refuse to grant them status to ensure due protection. This, however, does not relieve anybody from the obligation to search for a viable solution.
For public space to be adequately used and considered to be for the good of all citizens, it must not be privatized, and it is desirable for it to be safe. Tertiary activities have taken primacy by introducing the concepts of consumer society, the information age, and globalization, while the context and phenomenon of public urban space has found its parallel counterpart in cyberspace. The virtual world has offered new spaces for meetings and socializing, relieved of the limitations imposed by space and time and enriched with numerous possibilities and benefits. It has become a new reality, more important than the physical environment. The authors draw a parallel between public urban spaces and virtual reality, focusing on the aspects of safety of use, as an important factor in the quality of life. The problem of how to provide the desired level of security, without encroaching on privacy and personal freedom, without conducting surveillance, and without imposing exclusivity, remains the same, and even in the virtual world, it is becoming more pronounced.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
