Territorial Destigmatization in an Era of Policy Schizophrenia

Abstract

The authors are grateful for the time that the project managers took to participate in and contribute to our work. The article is dedicated to those who, on a daily basis under very difficult conditions, strive to make a difference for people living in stigmatized and neglected areas. We are also thankful for the comments and suggestions made by the participants at the panel on territorial stigmatization chaired by Hamish Kallin at RGS IGB in Cardiff in 2018 on an early version of the manuscript, especially to Hamish himself. We are also grateful for the comments from our research groups SODYC and MOSPUS and for the comments and suggestions by the IJURR reviewers, which helped improve the original manuscript.

The Role of Public-Private Partnerships in Housing as a Potential Contributor to Sustainable Cities and Communities: A Systematic Review

“…Based on the number of mentions in the literature review, implementation is by far the largest theme in social equity (Table 3) and sheds light on the tendency of the PPP to develop housing and public space within a system of neoliberal governance [71,73]. In the reviewed literature, most researchers argue that neoliberal policies do not resonate well with policies of social equity (as described in Table 3) but are often implemented by inciting fear and anxiety among poor and affluent residents alike.…”

“…Counteract negative effects of gentrification [57] Deliberate conflict resolution in land-use [61,63] Promote revamping distressed neighbourhoods [64] Include all stakeholders in a specific governable context [65] Introduce strong social focus on BID property development [73,74] 3. Stigmatization [40,71] Avoid redevelopment through stigmatization of neighbourhood [40] Be wary of territorial destigmatization regimes [71] Concerning the elite power theme intrinsic to justice, researchers suggest that four steps can be taken toward justice (as in Table 5). The common denominator for their argumentation is the need for new approaches to avoid an uneven distribution of housing resources [52,60].…”

“…As a reaction to this unwanted outcome, some researchers suggest that the PPP or other similar collaborations ought to focus instead on a process of destigmatization here defined "as interventions, initiatives, processes or strategies carried out with the intention of reducing, removing, redirecting or remedying the territorial stigmatization of specific places" [71] (p. 1). Schultz Larsen and Delica [71] show, moreover, that this phenomenon is also a wicked problem since it too leads to displacement, and via its Sisyphean character, it "has become a legitimation of the current radical policy measures of demolition, eviction, gentrification and reprivatisation of the stigmatized territories" [71] (p. 17). In sum, the issue of justice, or housing development as fairness, is predominantly a reaction to what scholars perceive as a radical, harmful, aggressive, and socially unsustainable neoliberal housing policy.…”

“…They have presented several different proposals for the creation of social networks from which are derived eight arguments in Table 6. Address collective action challenge [63] Construct formal and informal actor-network to mobilize support for urban development [56,73,74] Co-create value via, inter alia, co-management zones [55,59,61] Combine different mode of governing, participation, and coproduction as a counterweight to non-coordinated elite (neoliberal) strategies [66,68,72] Concerning the connectivity theme, there is an obvious need to reshape the social network in a way that, according to Schultz Larsen and Delica [71] (p. 17), addresses what they term as policy schizophrenia defined here as "fragmentations, splits and contradictions of the current policy regime of housing development". It is argued that the collaborative dimension of social network ought to have both a formal and an informal interaction character [56,73].…”

“…They argue for the promotion of the idea of social inclusion and participation in what they term as the existing urban governance structure [68,69]. This may be a solution to the policy schizophrenia referred to by Schultz Larsen and Delica [71].…”