The urbanization of transition: ideology and the urban experience

Abstract

a cardiff university -school of Geography and planning Glamorgan Building, cardiff, uK; b national research university higher school of Economics, moscow, russian Federation ABSTRACT This paper debates the relationships between transition and urbanization by problematizing the operation of transition on three inter-related levels. Firstly, at the level of ideology, it is important to rehearse the understanding of transition from that of merely area-based reforms and rather understand it as a totalizing project of planetary reach, which completes the subjugation of the whole world to capitalism and crowns neoliberalism as the only global order. Secondly, at the level of practice, it is important to properly account for the spatializing effects of that ideology -which is not simply "domesticated" by local practices, but itself mediates the subsumption of preexisting practices by capital, thus alienating them from their history. Thirdly, at the level of the urban: while urban change is usually portrayed merely as a projection of societal relations, the urban is actually the central stage where ideology mixes with the everyday, through which the societal change is mediated; new meanings, social relations, and class divisions are construed; and through which ideological transition achieves its practical completeness. What combines these three levels is the notion of urbanization of transition, which articulates the centrality of the urban in the spectacular postsocialist experience.

Introduction: Post-socialist cities and urban theory

“…The third challenge refers to the classical problem of research on socialist and post-socialist cities, which is how to make sense of, and to theorize, the relation between social change and urban space (Bouzarovski, Sýkora, and Matoušek 2016;Golubchikov 2016;Ouředníček 2016). This issue clearly remains important in stimulating new ideas and new conceptual tools in urban studies, reaching well beyond the field of research on post-socialist cities.…”

“…As Castells (1976, 60) explained, "[e]very science … consists of a mixture, which sometimes varies according to circumstances, of ideology and theory." The conceptual and theoretical debates on the postsocialist city raise our awareness of this intermingling, analyzing its influence on the state of the art produced in academia, and several contributions to this volume engage with this complication (Chelcea and Druţă 2016;Golubchikov 2016;Ferenčuhová 2016b).…”

“…On the other hand, a different picture -that of important changes having taken place during the socialist period -seems to emerge at the scale of the specific parts of cities, such as urban margins: Bouzarovski, Sýkora, and Matoušek (2016) consider the new "socio-technical lock-ins" that appeared during the post-socialist period and as part of the on-going transformations in the city of Liberec (Czech Rep.), emphasizing how the material urban environment has been used strategically by political and economic actors to create new path-shaping outcomes. Relatedly, Golubchikov (2016) formulates an important appeal to scholars writing on post-socialist cities by introducing "the notion of urbanization of transition (emphasis added), which articulates the centrality of the urban in the spectacular post-socialist experience" (<p. XX>).…”

From a sports mega-event to a regional mega-project: the Sochi winter Olympics and the return of geography in state development priorities

“…Trubina (2014) focusing on the interplay of mega-events and their spatialities sees Sochi as an event through which Russian urban transformations become internationally connected and which as such will already have a lasting legacy. However, in line with the tendencies of post-socialist studies to see urban change as a projection of social change rather than a dimension of social change (Golubchikov 2016b), Trubina only treats Sochi as 'the most visible expression of the spatial dynamics of Russia' (p. 623), not as a vehicle of transformative changes. As Flyvbjerg (2014, p. 6) argues, however, mega-projects 'are designed to ambitiously change the structure of society, as opposed to smaller and more conventional projects that .…”

Neoliberalism(s) as a Guide to Post‐Wall Urban Change: Explanation Out of the Blue?

“… This is not to suggest that neoliberalism is no longer occasionally taken for granted. Examples drawn from our sample journals include Chelcea and Druţă (), Golubchikov (), Haase et al (), Schmiz (), Voiculescu and Jucu (), Bouzarovski et al () and others. However, the chosen timeframe also implies that we, as authors, reduce the risk of influencing the sample simply by taking an interest in the issue in focus.…”