The task for critical urban research is to analyze processes of neoliberalization "on the ground". This paper examines-based on original empirical research-in how far the outsourcing of former local state responsibilities for public services and urban infrastructure is expressed in the promotion of community gardening in Berlin (Germany). It shows the contradictory outcomes: on the one hand, a failing strategy of outsourcing towards residents and the opening up of opportunity structures for other interests. On the other hand it shows how far the emergence of open green spaces maintained by volunteers can only be understood against the background of "roll-back" neoliberal urban politics and that their rationality cannot be separated from "roll-out neoliberalism".

SummaryThis article examines citizen participation in the governance of contemporary urban green space. Rather than exploring normative questions of ideal forms of participatory democracy, it focuses on changing roles and relationships between local state and non-state actors in order to identify and explain the changing nature of participation. I argue that neoliberal urban restructuring has changed the conditions for participation and thus participation itself in fundamental ways and that we need an account of changes in statehood and governance in order to capture this conceptually. Based on the case of community gardens in Berlin, the article discusses the extent to which this changed relationship is expressed by current citizen participation as well as the potential and problems that result from it. My empirical results show the emergence of a new political acceptance of autonomously organized projects and active citizen participation in urban green space governance. The central argument of this article is that this new acceptance can be conceptualized as an expression of the neoliberalization of cities. Nevertheless, this neoliberal strategy at the same time leads to complex and contradictory outcomes and the resulting benefits are also acknowledged.

Urban areas are increasingly recognized as strategic sites to address climate change and environmental issues. Specific urban projects are marketed as innovative solutions and best-practice examples, and so-called green cities, eco-cities and sustainable cities have emerged worldwide as leading paradigms in urban planning and policy discourse. The transformation of cities into eco-cities (Kenworthy, 2006;Roseland, 1997) is often based on big data and -widely varying -indicators that should proof the success of urban climate governance (Bulkeley, 2010). The European Commission with its 'Green Capital' program, Britain's 'Sustainable City Index', France's 'EcoCite´' scheme, the US-American's 'Greenest City' ranking developed by WalletHub's, the US and Canada 'Green City Index' sponsored by Siemens -these programs are all examples of public and private initiatives aimed at identifying and ranking the 'greenest' city or cities according to a competitive rationality. They are mostly quantitative approaches, based on 'hard' and 'scientific' indicators that allow cities to be compared according to their efforts in sustainable urban development. Using these indicators, cities worldwide have increasingly promoted sustainability initiatives in order to position themselves advantageously on the global scene (Chang and Sheppard, 2013;Cugurullo, 2013;Swyngedouw and Kaika, 2014;While et al., 2004).These urban ranking efforts tie into the fact that sustainability has become a metaconsensual policy term (Gill et al., 2012), resting upon broad support from diverse sectors of society. Promoted at first as a way of bringing forward an ecological urban agenda connected to social development, sustainability has lost much of its transformative potential. By now, even car manufacturing in Germany, oil pipelines in Alberta, Canada and nuclear power plants worldwide are being politically justified with reference to sustainability and climate change prevention. Despite controversial national positions regarding the processes, pace and extend of implementing environmental policies -a divergence that became very evident, for example, during the 2009 United Nations

Learning our way out' partly depends on more democratic and autonomous ways of knowing that build on local realities and different indicators of well-being, wealth and the 'good life'. As this citizens' report on European CSAs demonstrates, transforming knowledge and ways of organising economic life for food and agriculture are not only possible. This can also lead to more viable, socially just, convivial, and sustainable living for people and the land.

The proclaimed aim of EcoDensity, an initiative of the former mayor of Vancouver, Canada, was the achievement of a more sustainable city development through densification of existing neighbourhoods. Since the invention of EcoDensity in summer 2006 it has become a highly debated topic. This paper aims at a critical analysis of how a planning strategy of densification tried to tie itself onto a discourse of sustainability, and also how it had to re-invent and reform itself through contestation and public debate in order to gain acceptance. Thus, the development of the strategy and its contestation are the focus of this paper. Theoretically informed by the theory on hegemony by Laclau and Mouffe, the paper shows why EcoDensity has been—although eventually approved by Council—a failing hegemonic strategy. By referring to a theory on hegemony, the paper theoretically captures practices and struggles around a particular ‘urban sustainability fix’.