A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Doing comparative urbanism differently: Conjunctural cities and the stress-testing of urban theory
Ongoing splintering and siloification in urban studies require alternative approaches to bring the major theoretical and epistemological perspectives into constructive dialogue. Reflecting growing calls for engaged pluralism, we analyse the extent to which different perspectives can come together as complementary alternatives in understanding cities and present a framework for overcoming the key theoretical and methodological challenges caused by fragmentation. Using Istanbul as our illustrative case, we do this in three steps. Theoretically, we stress-test the potentials and limits of four dominant perspectives in urban theory making – global cities, state rescaling, developmental and postcolonial – revealing how each can only ever generate a partial, one-dimensional, explanation. Methodologically, we proceed to make the case for doing comparative urbanism differently by developing a conjunctural approach. Finally, and conceptually, we identify ‘conjunctural cities’ as a distinctive type of city and as a new approach to analysing cities. Our contention is that approaching all cities conjuncturally provides a significant step towards putting engaged pluralism into action, as well as indicating new terrain on which the future of urban theory/urban studies can be constructively debated ; WOS:000649156000001 ; Q1 ; Q2
Doing comparative urbanism differently: Conjunctural cities and the stress-testing of urban theory
Ongoing splintering and siloification in urban studies require alternative approaches to bring the major theoretical and epistemological perspectives into constructive dialogue. Reflecting growing calls for engaged pluralism, we analyse the extent to which different perspectives can come together as complementary alternatives in understanding cities and present a framework for overcoming the key theoretical and methodological challenges caused by fragmentation. Using Istanbul as our illustrative case, we do this in three steps. Theoretically, we stress-test the potentials and limits of four dominant perspectives in urban theory making – global cities, state rescaling, developmental and postcolonial – revealing how each can only ever generate a partial, one-dimensional, explanation. Methodologically, we proceed to make the case for doing comparative urbanism differently by developing a conjunctural approach. Finally, and conceptually, we identify ‘conjunctural cities’ as a distinctive type of city and as a new approach to analysing cities. Our contention is that approaching all cities conjuncturally provides a significant step towards putting engaged pluralism into action, as well as indicating new terrain on which the future of urban theory/urban studies can be constructively debated ; WOS:000649156000001 ; Q1 ; Q2
Doing comparative urbanism differently: Conjunctural cities and the stress-testing of urban theory
Sayın, Özgür (author) / Hoyler, Michael (author) / Harrison, John (author) / Fakülteler, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İktisat Bölümü / orcid:0000-0003-2111-6152 / Sayın, Özgür
2020-01-01
18
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
DDC:
720
Transatlantic city, part 1: Conjunctural urbanism
| Online Contents | 2016
Transatlantic city, part 1: Conjunctural urbanism
| Online Contents | 2017
Regulate, replicate, and resist – The conjunctural geographies of platform urbanism
| BASE | 2020
Rethinking global urbanism : comparative insights from secondary cities
| UB Braunschweig | 2012