In order to understand the complexity of the colonial city in Africa, this article suggests a comparative study on two levels, corresponding with two important phenomena in the planning process of African cities. The first level can be described as the diffusion of planning models to the colonies, and the second as the actual implementation of these planning models on the colonial terrain. Each level requires different scales of research and frames of analysis. They are particularly valuable when examined together

In this article we propose an arrival infrastructure’s perspective in order to move beyond imaginaries of neighbourhoods as a ‘port of first entry’ that are deeply ingrained in urban planning discussions on migrants’ arrival situations. A focus on the socio-material infrastructures that shape an arrival situation highlights how such situations are located within, but equally transcend, the territories of neighbourhoods and other localities. Unpacking the infrastructuring work of a diversity of actors involved in the arrival process helps to understand how they emerge through time and how migrants construct their future pathways with the futuring possibilities at hand. These constructions occur along three dimensions: (1) Directionality refers to the engagements with the multiple places migrants have developed over time, (2) temporality questions imaginaries of permanent belonging, and (3) subjectivity directs attention to the diverse current and future subjectivities migrants carve out for themselves in situations of arrival. This perspective requires urban planners to trace, grasp and acknowledge the diverse geographies and socio-material infrastructures that shape arrival and the diverse forms of non-expert agency in the use, appropriation and fabrication of the built environment in which the arrival takes place.

This chapter draws spatial lessons from the lockdown experience for the post-COVID-19-city. It argues that it is predominantly a ‘white’ middleclass perspective that is prevailing, while the pandemic affected the urban population in very different ways, hitting vulnerable groups most heavily. How can the spatial needs of these vulnerable groups be taken into consideration? Although some changes like car-free streets and more walkable cities undoubtedly will result in more healthy and liveable cities, they also reconfirm a gentrification agenda that in all likelihood will not improve live for all urban dwellers equally.

No abstract

No abstract