*Apologies for cross-posting* AAG 2012 Call for papers and panelists Unpacking the Eco-city Phenomenon: Variegations in Theory and Practice
Session Organizers: I-Chun Catherine Chang (University of Minnesota, US), Federico Cugurullo (Kings College London, UK), Elizabeth Rapoport (University College London, UK) Sponsored by the Urban Geography Research Group Session overview We invite paper presenters and panellists to participate in a two-part session to be held at the February 2012 AAG annual meeting in New York, entitled Unpacking the Eco-city Phenomenon: Variegation in Theory and Practice. Part one will be a paper session, featuring papers which apply a variety of analytical approaches to understanding case studies of particular eco-city projects. Part two will consist of an interdisciplinary panel discussion on the eco-city phenomenon. Abstract The past decade has seen a substantial increase in the number of cities and urban projects labelled as eco-cities. Utopian visions of urban settlements that exist in harmony with the natural environment are not new; they can be traced back at least to the nineteenth century Garden City vision of Ebenezer Howard. Today however the term eco-city is employed to describe a broad range of projects, including small urban infill developments, the retrofitting of existing cities along sustainable principles, and, in an echo of Howard’s utopian ambitions, brand new cities built from scratch. The emphases of these projects also vary—from emissions reduction and self-sufficiency to economic development and global competitiveness. Many of these projects appear to reflect broader trends in urban studies and planning, including urban entrepreneurialism (Harvey, 1989), the growing transnationalism of urban policy (Ong & Roy, 2011; McCann & Ward, 2011), and the increasing dominance of sustainability as a driving objective in planning practice (Gunder, 2006). Although it is often associated with debates on urban sustainability more generally, the eco-city is rapidly becoming a stand-alone phenomenon in urban planning practice and research. In this context, it is time to give further consideration to the multiple dimensions and broader significance of the contemporary eco-city. The eco-city has already been read through a number of perspectives by urban researchers, including as a normative approach to achieving sustainable urbanism (Kenworthy, 2006), an entrepreneurial planning strategy (Gibbs and Krueger, 2007), a change that signals new environmental regulation (Whitehead, 2003), an attempt towards ecological security (Hodson and Marvin, 2009), and a proof of prevailing technological governmentality (May, 2011). Yet there still is little engagement on eco-cities across disciplines, and few cross-case comparisons. The purpose of this session is to promote a research agenda exploring how eco-cities are understood and practiced differently across geographical spaces and scales, discuss the relationship between different eco-city projects, and, ultimately, determine how and whether it may be possible to theorize the eco-city. We welcome proposals from paper authors and panellists who would like to join us in a discussion that will include, but is not limited to, the issues raised in the following questions: 1. How should the eco-city be understood? As a distinct normative model of urban planning? A loose collection of ideas and objectives? A utopian ideal? How can we assess a project’s ‘eco-cityness’? 2. What key ideas and discourses lie at the foundations of the eco-city phenomenon? 3. In what ways are eco-city projects converging and diverging? Are there particular trends emerging in the way eco-city projects are conceived and implemented? 4. What are the implications of the eco-city phenomenon for power relations and social justice in urban areas? 5. What are the connections between the eco-city phenomenon and broader trends in urban studies and planning? Administrative directions We seek proposals from those interested in participating in the panel session or submitting a paper. Paper submissions: Interested authors are invited to submit their paper titles, abstracts (of no more than 250 words) and presenter identification number (PIN) to the session organizers by September 25. Panellists: Please submit a description of your interests in this area (of no more than one page), including any publications, and your proposed contribution to the session to the three organizers by 25 September 25. I-Chun Catherine Chang (University of Minnesota): [email protected] Elizabeth Rapoport (University College London): [email protected] Federico Cugurullo (Kings College London): [email protected] References Gibbs, D., and Krueger, R. 2007. Containing the contradictions of rapid development? New economy spaces and sustainable urban development. In: The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in The United States and Europe. New York: Guilford. Gunder, M. 2006. Sustainability: Planning’s Saving Grace or Road to Perdition? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 26: 2. 208-221. Harvey, D. 1989. From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. 71:1. 3-17. Hodson, M., and S. Marvin. 2009. Urban Ecological Security: A New Urban Paradigm? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 33:193‐215. Kenworthy, J. 2006. The eco-city: ten key transport and planning dimensions for sustainable city development. Environment and Urbanization. 18:1. 67-85. May, S. 2011. Ecological Urbanization: Calculating Value in an Age of Global Climate Change. In: Worlding Cities: Asian Experiments and the Art of Being Global. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. McCann, E. and K. Ward, 2011. Mobile Urbanism: Cities and Policymaking in the Global Age, Minneapolis: University Of Minnesota Press. Ong, A. and Roy, A. 2011. Worlding Cities: Asian Experiments and the Art of Being Global. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Whitehead, M. 2003. (Re)‐analyzing the sustainable city: nature, urbanization and regulation of socio‐environmental relations in the UK. Urban Studies, 40(7):1183‐1206.
