Bollens, S. A. (2000), On Narrow ground (intro2)
Bollens, S. A. (2000), On Narrow ground, State University of New York Press, p.415
Ideology : political belief system that embraces an inner logic and guide & justify organized political and social action
(Bilski & Galnoor 1980)
Ideology of government fro desired urban outcomes in society of conflicting ethnic groups
Emphasize government ideology because puvlic authorities operating amidst ethnic unrest must adopt an explicit doctrine that justifies and defends their policies amidst societal fragmantation
p.20
governing ideology in urban planning = intake [admission] or gatekeeper f() group to penetrate and frame public policy Þ ethnonationalists or civic
the translation of governing ideology into urban policy is not straightforward [simple]
ideology Þ ¹ interpretation for achieve chosen ends no just enough to want peace or equality
“Fundamental ideology in an urban system is implemented primarily through urban planning and policy decision
p.22
give concrete meaning to goal, Fundamental ideology not easlely translatable into the urban landscape
ideology of urban separation segregation vs centripetal and interdependent dynamic ir urban areas
p.23
Model of urban Policy strategy p.23
| Strategy | Tactic |
| Neutral | Address urban symptoms of ethnic conflict at individual level |
| Partisan | Maintain/increase disparities |
| Equity | Address urban systems of ethnic conflict at ethnic group level |
| Resolver | Address root cause /sovereignty issue |
Neutral seek depoliticize territorial issue urban problem value free, technical issue solvable through planning procedure technical emphasis “color-blind approach”
Social conservatism
Patisan city’s governing ideology merge with the empowered group’s ethnonationalist ideology Þ dominant strategies land use, regulation Þ control access (Lustick 1979, Sack 1981)
“In most case, however, the importance difference between partisan and neutral urban strategies leis not in their visible tools, but more covertly in the goal pursued and their handling of urban ethnicity
p.24
Use same tool and language is objective and rational
Territorial control and subjugation
Yiftachel 1995
Urban planning tool emphasize regulation and control of land use
p.25
equity Þ recognize and emphazed ethnic affiliation for the decrease of intergroup inequalities
Nordlinger 1972 Esman 1973
Creation equity-based criteria Þ f()an and technical criteria
(Krumholz & Forester 1990)
remediation and affirmative action policy
based on group idetntity
lessen urban inequalityes
Polarized city Þ cause of ethnic conflict tension reside partially in economic disparity of y-urban landscape
“Equity planning may also be used by empowered group in a less accommodating spirit as a way to defer the need to engage in broader sovereignty and political discussion
p.26
Urban equity strategies that disconnected from sovereignty and territorial negotiations may be bounded by the political dynamics of the opposing ethnic communities and may act as a flashpoint for urban unrest and state repression
Resolver link urban issue to root political cause urban polarizaion resolve the conflict rather than managing it
Urban planning innovation public policy arena Þempower subordinate urban group and address root issue of the conflict
Friedmann 1992, 1987
Not incremental reform of basic parameters but emancipation an basic structuras change
“The resolver urna strategic is essentially confrontation of the status quo on its attempts to link scientific and technical knowledge to processes of system transformation
p.27
Urban ethnic condition relation social, cultural and economic deprivation and the unfulfillment of basic human needs for identity and purpose