Introduction. Inequalities in the Creative City: A New Perspective on an Old Phenomenon

Gerhard, Ulrike; Hœlscher, Michael; Wilson, David

doi:10.1057/978-1-349-95115-4_1

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Particular socio-spatial inequalities stem from the reappropriation of urban public space as a consumption-based amenity landscape for a "creative class" elite (Leslie and Catungal, 2012), and the expulsion of people and landuses, including local vernacular culture and identity, as well as marginal creative workers, small firms and smaller arts activities from inner-city areas (Lloyd, 2006;Hutton, 2017). Unanticipated inequalities related to age, gender and ethnicity have also emerged associated with creative industries work practices and workplaces, which also play out in the location of creative work and spatially gendered inequalities associated with home-based working (O'Callaghan, 2010; Leslie and Catungal, 2012;Gerhard et al, 2017).…”

Section: Geographies Of Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A growing body of research contends that gentrification is not an automatic outcome of creative industries development, however, and that it is far more place and context specific than existing literature acknowledges (Gerhard et al, 2017). More equitably distributed benefits and positive social impacts have been observed with bottom-up, grass-roots approaches, typically where non-profit and small-scale local arts mix with small-scale commercial cultural and creative enterprises (Markusen and Gadwa, 2010;Seifert, 2010/2013;Grodach, 2011;Silver and Miller, 2012;Grodach et al, 2014, Borrup, 2015; discussed in Oakley and O'Connor, 2015).…”

Section: Revisiting the Gentrification Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Curating the “Third Place”? Coworking and the mediation of creativity

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coworking spaces (CWS) and the associated practice of coworking, have emerged in numerous forms and various urban contexts to critically challenge traditional concepts of the workplace and location of creative work, while simultaneously confronting the way in which creative workers interact with and relate to each other as well as with space and to place. Heralded as a solution to increasingly atomised work patterns, CWS are imagined and presented as spaces of serendipitous encounter, spontaneous exchange and collaboration. Nonetheless, little is known about how coworking positively supports workers and how coworking relates to wider urban transformation processes has been largely unresearched. This paper contributes to a critical discussion through empirical analysis of a project aimed at establishing new creative CWS in city-centre locations across SE England. The study adopts a novel approach using Q-methodology. Motivations for coworking and benefits (or dis-benefits) of co-location are assessed, as is the extent to which coworking facilitates interactional effects and wider neighbourhood interactions. In particular, the role of the CWS manager as "mediator" is explored.Coworker benefits relate primarily to peer-interaction and support rather than formal collaboration.While CWS managers play a key connecting role, also in ensuring coworker complementarity and compatibility, the coworker profile (motivations, needs, experiences) ultimately influences outcomes.The study cautions against the use of CWS as "quick fix" urban renewal tools, with little indication that the benefits of coworking reach beyond immediate members or that linkages are easily established between coworkers and local (resident or business) communities.

show abstract

Section: Geographies Of Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Revisiting the Gentrification Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

Curating the “Third Place”? Coworking and the mediation of creativity

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, critical voices accuse ‘creative class’ and ‘creative city’ discourses of hiding underlying objectives, such as attracting external investors, increasing land value and city branding (Doucet et al, 2011; Sacco et al, 2014; Sechi, 2016). They are seen as a neoliberal tool that legitimates massive investment flows for large-scale projects and responds to the needs of upper and middle classes, and thus entails the risk of growing social polarization (Gerhard and Hoelscher, 2017; Moulaert et al, 2001; Shaw, 2013).…”

Section: Integrating Knowledge Districts Into the Citymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another important point is that strategies promoting the urban integration of knowledge districts bear the risk of a ‘new-build gentrification’ (Davidson and Lees, 2005) or even a ‘studentification’ process (Smith, 2005), when the project comes with university facilities, causing displacement pressures and feelings of exclusion among the local communities (Stefanovics, 2016). Gerhard and Hoelscher (2017) argue that ‘mechanisms of class closure’ (p. 136) benefit an already privileged population, while other social groups remain excluded from the creation of knowledge-related jobs and suffer further marginalization. There is a discrepancy between, on the one hand, the place and investments attributed to knowledge institutions, considered as key actors in neoliberal regeneration policies, and on the other hand, the mostly low-qualified profile of the local population, who may feel excluded from the project (Chatterton, 2010; Van Winden, 2010).…”

Section: Integrating Knowledge Districts Into the Citymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This urban turn in knowledge-related, technical and scientific activities was led under the influence of the ‘knowledge economy’ paradigm and new urban strategies (Gerhard and Hoelscher, 2017). In Europe, it has been politically supported by the European Commission, with 20 years of economic agendas promoting R&D with the Lisbon strategy and its successor, the Europe 2020 initiative.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigating the local socio-spatial integration of the Belval knowledge district into Esch/Alzette: A dissimilarity-based approach

Birsens

Decoville

2022

European Urban and Regional Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social and spatial integration of knowledge-related urban development projects into their urban environment is seen by policymakers as a necessity to unlock local and regional growth dynamics and regeneration. However, the understanding of socio-spatial integration, and how it can be scientifically analysed and interpreted at a local scale remains somewhat vague when the concept is not approached in its totality and measured by unidimensional indicators. The current article first proposes a holistic and multidimensional analytical framework to measure and analyse the socio-spatial integration of knowledge districts. Then, it focuses on one specific dimension – the structural dissimilarities between territories – and suggests an indicator-based multivariate analysis that is applied to the case of Belval, in Esch/Alzette (Luxembourg). Our findings for the Belval case study show that the structural dissimilarities between knowledge districts and adjacent neighbourhoods are mainly due to the young, international and professional profile of the population this place attracts, while differentials in terms of socio-economic status are much less significant than expected. In other words, the specificity of this knowledge district lies in the educational and migratory backgrounds of its inhabitants, rather than in their economic wealth. Accordingly, we call for a more nuanced debate concerning the urban integration of knowledge districts.

show abstract

Toward a Dracula urbanism: Smart city building in Flint and Jakarta

Wilson

Wyly

2022

Dialogues in Urban Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study two places experiencing the rise of both the real-estate state and smart city building, Jakarta, Indonesia and Flint, USA. Our core thesis: these real-estate states work through and make a kind of urbanism that we term Dracula urbanism. We identify Dracula urbanism as a deep-reaching, human-punishing unfolding that is simultaneously a state of mind, a mode of institutional operation, a vision of people, one gaze onto growth's true needs and a kind of growth produced. Our Dracula urbanist notion that is seen to engulf real-estate states has four central features. First, the political and economic resources to drive smart city building are secured through ever-thickening parasitic relations, particularly with upper-level sources of power and authority. Second, city building involves unrelenting drives to kill and destroy (not rehabilitate or therapeutize) supposedly deep civic ‘cancers’, such as the poor's presumed anti-civic, morally and culturally deficient dispositions and ways. Third, city building is promoted through strategically deploying the materiality and discursive terrors of decline. Fourth, local real-estate states are decisively integrated into ‘planetary urbanizations’ through circuits of smart-growth capital investment and techno-scientific claims to expertise. All of these, we chronicle, are vintage characteristics of Stoker's rendition of Dracula. The results suggest that the cultural politics of in-your-face revanchism that Neil Smith helped us to see, and is still present in cities such as Flint and Jakarta, is today accompanied by an equally punishing, complicated and adroitly adapting state politics in these places.

show abstract

Introduction. Inequalities in the Creative City: A New Perspective on an Old Phenomenon

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Curating the “Third Place”? Coworking and the mediation of creativity

Curating the “Third Place”? Coworking and the mediation of creativity

Investigating the local socio-spatial integration of the Belval knowledge district into Esch/Alzette: A dissimilarity-based approach

Toward a Dracula urbanism: Smart city building in Flint and Jakarta

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About