000 02316nab a2200181 4500
003 OSt
005 20230818102915.0
007 cr aa aaaaa
008 230818b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100 _aBlok, Anders
_956969
245 _aUrban green gentrification in an unequal world of climate change/
260 _bSage,
_c2020.
300 _aVol 57, Issue 14, 2020 ( 2803–2816 p.).
520 _aOver the past few decades, notions of environmental, ecological or green gentrification in cities have entered the lexicon of critical urban scholars and activists alike, not least in North American and European settings. This happens amidst growing concerns that the current policy and planning emphasis on making cities more sustainable serves in some cases to exacerbate socio-material inequalities in the city via forms of residential displacement. In this critical commentary, I respond to recent calls for expanding the socio-geographical parameters of green gentrification research, and for enriching the agenda via new theoretical approaches, by highlighting one particular avenue of problematisation that seems so far conspicuously lacking. This is the realisation that, in an unequal world of anthropogenic climate change, green gentrification must be grasped not only at local but also, simultaneously, at transnational scales of risk-induced socio-spatial restructuring. My suggested approach to a more multi-scalar and climate-sensitive notion of green gentrification proceeds via sociologist Ulrich Beck’s theorising of the intensifying socio-material inequalities of climate change in ‘world risk society’, along with ethnographic work on urban climate politics in Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, and in the North-West Indian city of Surat. While allowing us to analyse the many local ambivalences wedded with urban sustainability politics in the global North and global South alike, Beck helpfully insists that we keep their unequal trans-local interconnectedness in view, yielding a radicalised notion of green gentrification as set in-between and connecting localised and globalised frames of inequality in new ways.
773 0 _08843
_916581
_dLondon Sage Publications Ltd. 1964
_tUrban studies
_x0042-0980
856 _uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0042098019891050
942 _2ddc
_cEJR
999 _c14240
_d14240