The Spatial Puzzle of Mobilising for Car Alternatives in the Montreal City-region

Abstract

Scholars have recently advocated going beyond a fetishism for one spatiality to consider a diversity of socio-spatial relations in the study of political mobilization. The objective of this article is to propose an operationalization of the four spatialities framework (networks, scale, place and territory) and use it on the investigation of the mobilization for car alternatives in the Montreal city-region. Our approach is to start with the spatiality and structure of the network, to then identify brokers and focus on them for the detailed analysis of scale, territory and place. The article sheds light on the particular assets which the use of each spatiality, and their combination, offers for mobilization in the city-regional context. The findings also illustrate how city-regionalism is experienced by civic actors building coalitions to defend specific causes.

Claiming Rights To Mobility Through The Right To Inhabitance: Discursive Articulations from Civic Actors in Montreal

“…In parallel to the environmental impact assessment procedure, highway projects have to go through a participatory public hearing. Often the arena of polarized opinions, public hearings have triggered much media coverage of transport and mobility issues, providing a place for interaction and the constitution of alliances (Sénécal and Harou, ; Van Neste and Bherer, ).…”

“…Between Québec en Forme and local civic actors, there existed environmental and urban mobility organizations acting as ‘brokers’ (Van Neste and Bherer, ). These brokers had hitherto been active primarily on the national and regional scenes (e.g.…”

“…Local conditions of inhabitance would be improved, and the metropolitan region would not take any further steps to implement a ‘car‐dependent’ mobility system that is detrimental to the whole region in terms of air quality and the quality of urban spaces. This territorial (re)construction was supported by more than 50 actors who jointly asked for it to form the basis for debate in the 2009 public hearings, instead of the strict infrastructure of the Turcot interchange (Van Neste and Bherer, ). This chain of equivalence thus links vulnerability to health and social problems, the design of a highway infrastructure and a ‘metropolitan’ (or at least Montreal east–west) community enabling public transit.…”

Governing the new metropolis

“…Connecting to broader theoretical as well as more concrete-complex empirical debates on the merits of relational approaches to city-regions vis-a`-vis knowledge of their underlying territorial politics, Jonas et al explore the tensions arising from major investment in retrofitting metropolitan Denver for integrated mass transit and viable alternative to the region's automobile dependency (cf. Van Neste and Bherer, 2013). One of the most visible ways large-scale metropolitan planning and governance is being exercised, constructing regionalised spaces for collective provision of transportation infrastructure, housing, and shared services reflects the new demands for collaboration across metropolitan regions.…”

“…Such issues are thrown into sharper focus by Sophie Van Neste and Laurence Bherer (2013) when highlighting the difficulty of mobilising politically in a moment of consensual metropolitan politics. Investigating the mobilisation for car alternatives in the Greater Montreal Area, they reveal the rather complex conundrum of how social movements navigate multiple geographical scales.…”