Abstract:Interlude. Jharna (Spring)-191 6. DISCONNECTION-193 Interlude. Miracles-219 conclusion-223 Notes-239 References-265 Index-289
Contents
This page intentionally left blankx-Preface patient pressure. Nevertheless, hydraulic proj ects continue to reanimate the city in an always incomplete effort to make environments predictable and reliable. As we enter times beyond the grasp of human history, we now need to confront the very real possibility that modernist modes of hydraulic government may no longer be sufficient… Show more
“…For example, in the state of Maharashtra, in which Mumbai is located, the development of informal settlements is governed by the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act of 1971 (Government of Maharashtra, ), which makes provision for ‘improvement works’ that include ‘laying of water mains, sewers and storm water drains’ and ‘provision of urinals, latrines, community baths, and water taps’. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), by contrast, stipulates that settlers who cannot provide documentation proving that they were resident in their location prior to the year 2000 are not eligible for basic services or for compensation when their homes are bulldozed (Graham et al ., ; Björkman, ; Anand, ). Similar policies govern urban informal development in Delhi and Faridabad, meaning that most settlers do not receive basic services, nor are they compensated when they are displaced, because they typically lack formal documentation even though they may have resided in their location prior to the cut‐off dates (Murthy, ; Doshi, ).…”
In this article, we draw on the narratives of residents and development workers to understand what freedoms hinder and enable access to water services in informal settlements in the Indian cities of Faridabad, Delhi and Mumbai. We show that although development practice and thinking in the water sector often frame water deficiencies as politically neutral technical and governance challenges, residents and development workers on the ground identify a lack of freedoms relating to first of all, residents’ rights to the city and its resources, and secondly, meaningful engagement between residents and the political establishment as key causes for inadequate access to water services. Our findings indicate that water‐service development efforts can be more effective if they include strategies to strengthen informal settlers’ rights to the city through a politicization of public engagement. We discuss the implications of our findings for practice and outline a future research agenda geared towards operationalizing our key findings.
“…For example, in the state of Maharashtra, in which Mumbai is located, the development of informal settlements is governed by the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act of 1971 (Government of Maharashtra, ), which makes provision for ‘improvement works’ that include ‘laying of water mains, sewers and storm water drains’ and ‘provision of urinals, latrines, community baths, and water taps’. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), by contrast, stipulates that settlers who cannot provide documentation proving that they were resident in their location prior to the year 2000 are not eligible for basic services or for compensation when their homes are bulldozed (Graham et al ., ; Björkman, ; Anand, ). Similar policies govern urban informal development in Delhi and Faridabad, meaning that most settlers do not receive basic services, nor are they compensated when they are displaced, because they typically lack formal documentation even though they may have resided in their location prior to the cut‐off dates (Murthy, ; Doshi, ).…”
In this article, we draw on the narratives of residents and development workers to understand what freedoms hinder and enable access to water services in informal settlements in the Indian cities of Faridabad, Delhi and Mumbai. We show that although development practice and thinking in the water sector often frame water deficiencies as politically neutral technical and governance challenges, residents and development workers on the ground identify a lack of freedoms relating to first of all, residents’ rights to the city and its resources, and secondly, meaningful engagement between residents and the political establishment as key causes for inadequate access to water services. Our findings indicate that water‐service development efforts can be more effective if they include strategies to strengthen informal settlers’ rights to the city through a politicization of public engagement. We discuss the implications of our findings for practice and outline a future research agenda geared towards operationalizing our key findings.
“…Such studies have urged researchers to document the entanglements and coconstitution of the technological and the social, rather than "purifying" them into separate domains (Latour, 1993, p. 5) -that is, analyzing technology as exterior to "society." This is an approach that has inspired significant research that demonstrates that the design, scope, and gaps in infrastructural provision -understood as a tangible and durable form of biopolitics -make, remake, and unmake urban citizenship (Amin, 2014;Anand, 2017;Bjorkman, 2015;Von Schnitzler, 2017).…”
Section: Evictions As Infrastructural Disconnections and Reconnectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The analytic path that we follow in this article is to approach evictions as inframaking and as bundles of material and socio-technical relations (Carse, 2017, p. 891;Lancione, 2017aLancione, , p. 1016Lancione & McFarlane, 2016). To understand the evictees' resistance to being rendered abject and their struggles to maintain dignity is also to document how the evicted piece together often unstable, yet vital socio-technical assemblages for basic life processes and camp life (Anand, 2017;Picker & Pasquetii, 2015;Simone, 2004).…”
Infrastructures are productive ethnographic entry points for understanding evictions. Three analytic strategies have informed the research on the entanglements of evictions and infrastructures. We outline a fourth, centered on evictees' inframaking. A relatively frequent occurrence after evictions in central neighborhoods in Bucharest, Romania, has been that evicted families camp out in front of "their" former houses. Drawing on a case of this kind, we suggest that the way to understand resistance to being rendered abject is to invite ethnographers to foreground the disconnections, reconnections, and networked ties that the evicted mobilize post-eviction for both survival and protest. That means paying attention not only to material socio-technical assemblages, but also to preparedness in anticipation of eviction, post-eviction claims, and biopolitical expectations of care by the state. Social infrastructures, some neighborhood relations, access to networked connectivity at the workplace, and urban commons such as public water fountains gain heightened importance after eviction.
“…For instance, just over 10 years ago, geographer Bruce Braun () synthesized varying geographic perspectives on these “more than human urban geographies”: Such investigations have only proliferated since then, intersecting with broader conversations about contradictions in the politics of sustainability, resilience, and capitalism (Krueger & Gibbs, , Heynen, McCarthy, Prudham, & Robbins, ); the publics and politics of infrastructures (Anand, ; Karvonen, ); developing relational approaches attentive to relationships circulating in, through, and beyond urban environments (Amin & Thrift, ); and emerging climate politics, socio‐ecological transformations, and the Anthropocene (Braun, ; Clark & Yusoff, ). This more than human turn within geography provides an essential backdrop for thinking through yards and gardens—spaces inherently entangled as one interface between people and their more than human surroundings.…”
Section: Knowing Yards: Natures Of Everyday Lived Experiencementioning
This paper provides a critical assessment of geographic research on yards and private gardens, with a focus on how geographers study people's engagements with more than human organisms and surroundings. Geographies have come alive as assemblages of lively materials, distributed agencies, and animated political and material flows. At the same time, there is renewed interest on the part of geographers to better take into account lived experiences and the embodied politics of difference. Relations between people and their everyday surroundings are central to these critical analyses. This paper examines one such potent realm of these everyday engagements: the yard. These are spaces intimately bound up with uneven geographies of residential development, as well as places of creativity, care, and failure. Contemporary environmental efforts increasingly enroll the yard or garden as a crucial interface through which to refashion relations between water, infrastructure, particular species, chemical inputs, and food systems. This paper identifies two themes within contemporary yard and garden research, as well as ongoing tensions. I argue that the familiarity of such spaces to Anglophone geography challenges and invites further methodological experimentation and analysis. Yards and private gardens also provide purchase on pressing questions of social inequalities, property, and nature. Thus, I identify two directions for future yard research: developing more experimental methodological approaches beyond a focus on lawns and better situating yards within broader geographies of inequity and the production of geographic knowledge.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.