Production of space, intercultural encounters and politics: Dynamics of consummate space and spatial intensity among the Israeli Bedouin

Abstract

The "spatial turn", represented primarily by the Lefebvrean theory of production of space, fails to internalise insights from the "cultural turn" which delves into high cultural resolutions of minority ethnic or religious sub-groups within Western culture. These insights suggest that space may be characterised by spatial pluralism that originates in ontological pluralism of place and space. This ontological pluralism originates in the contemporary reality of cultural pluralism within the same space. By deconstructing the classical Lefebvrean theory of production of space as a super concept into finer scales, we facilitate internalisation of these cultural insights through a series of new sub-concepts of consummate space, spatial imbrication and spatial intensity. These successive concepts are capable of creating a process of production of space with possible political consequences at group level. That is, violation of a space perceived and practised as consummate may lead to political action by group members. This conceptual framework, highlighting at high resolution the agency of space in culture, is demonstrated through a detailed analysis of a unique cultural group, the indigenous Bedouin of the Negev desert in Israel, through three phases of their spatial history over a period of two centuriessemi-nomadic pastoralism, sedentary farming and urban wage labour.This case may serve to illustrate the value of this theoretical approach for future analysis of other unique cultural groups and a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of production of space. K E Y W O R D SBedouin, consummate space, indigenous ontologies, Israel, production of space, spatial intensity 1 | INTRODUCTION This paper deals with the limited encounter between social and cultural understandings of space and the incongruence of their research resolutions. We argue that their limited mutual engagement results in oversight of significant sub-processes that are masked by low resolutions of spatial research. This proposition originates in our study of the spatial relationships between the spaces of the indigenous Bedouin in Israel and the enveloping Western culture. In our interpretation, studying these relationships at high resolutions reveals concealed spatial situations that may produce political outcomes. The issue is related to the interface between the spatial and cultural "turns" of the social sciences. The essence of the "spatial turn" lies in realising the centrality of the built environment in understanding social processes ---

Expressing the Spatial Concepts of Interior Spaces in Residential Buildings of Huizhou, China: Narrative Methods of Wood-Carving Imagery

“…He asserted that the production of space reflected specific production relationships [23] and that the shaped space also maintained these relationships [24]. Space began to represent a mapping of social relations and social practices [25,26]. The theory of spatial production emphasizes that space is a dynamic and ongoing process of production, not a static entity.…”

Critique and Progress: Production of Knowledge and the Planning of Bedouin Settlements in Israel

“…In regard to production of knowledge of/in planning, Lefebvre’s “production of space” theory has much to offer. This theory has received wide attention in the recent decade regarding the Jewish-Bedouin conflict, beginning in Karplus and Meir (2014; also, Meir and Karplus 2018) and proceeding in Jabareen (2014; also, Jabareen and Switat 2019) and Dekel, Meir, and Alfasi (2019a, 2019b). The core of this theory is to see spatial processes as a continuous endeavor in three dimensions: the perceived , material (practical, physical) production of objects such as structures or bodies; the lived , the production of meaning, composing sets of emotions, ideologies, and symbols that are attributed to space; and the conceived , the production of knowledge, arrangement of space through paradigmatic configurations such as plans, tenure rights, laws, and theoretical knowledge (Schmid 2008).…”

“…Indeed, planning was widely seen as a crucial vector of producing state spaces and hegemony (Harvey 1978; Huxley and Yiftachel 2000). Nevertheless, Meir and Karplus (2018) assert that there is no single spatial comprehensive and hegemonic product. Subaltern groups may struggle for alternative codes of spatial conduct.…”

“…Civil-society and critical scholars have chosen to see them otherwise, as “unrecognized villages,” implying that they represent a coherent settlement form, structured along non-Western, yet no-less legitimate spatial-cultural codes. Living outside the formal frameworks enabled the Bedouin to practice a traditional lifestyle and livelihood (Kohn, Meir, and Kissinger 2020; Meir 2019; Meir and Karplus 2018). They still maintain a rural—yet gradually urbanizing—spatiality and lifestyle, producing a peri-urban tribally segregated landscape up to thirty miles away from Be’er-Sheva.…”

Spatial production and spatial dialectic: Evidence from the New Urban Districts in China

“…With introduction of theories such as scale reconstruction and spatial production, the state-level NUD is interpreted as a specific scale reconstruction tool under the central government decision-making (Fu and Zhang, 2018). Starting from the theory of spatial production, power and capital promote the new urbanization and also cause the alienation of urban spaces (Meir and Karplus, 2018;. Therefore, it is necessary to further understand the special logic of capitalization of space.…”