Despite its diffusion in urban studies and its importance for urban policies, “urban fragmentation” has yet to be fully conceptualized. The only aspect on which there is fairly broad consensus among both researchers and policy makers concerns the anatomy of the phenomenon. It is seen as the result of two (not necessarily related) dynamics. On the one hand, there would be a process of social segmentation, which appears to be irreversible due to a supposed lack of any mechanism of social integration, even of a conflictive nature. On the other hand, this process should take a spatial form, as each social segment tends to place in (or be confined to) a definite portion of the urban space. There is, however, little agreement about the ultimate cause (or causes) of the phenomenon. Moreover, the difficulty of integrating interpretations referring to Developing Countries with those concerning (post)Industrialized Countries contributes considerably to the weakness of the related concept. This paper aims at providing an analytical foundation for urban fragmentation, which holds for both Developing and Industrialized Countries. To this purpose, its material cause is distinguished from its formal cause. While the first one lies in grinding discontinuity in the conditions of vulnerability to which different groups of urban dwellers are exposed, the second one belongs to the institutional domain, and is consequent to the fact that those groups are induced to adopt dualistic institutional arrangements. Urban fragmentation just forms at the intersection of these two occurrences. Taking this interpretative framework as our term of reference, two case studies are examined. While confirming the role exerted by the institutional component in shaping urban fragmentation, they show the importance of intermediate institutions in determining the integration-oriented or the disintegration- oriented character of the phenomenon. Normative indications are then furnished, regarding both the theoretical and the practical domains
An Institutional Approach to Urban Fragmentation
CUSINATO, AUGUSTO;
2008-01-01
Abstract
Despite its diffusion in urban studies and its importance for urban policies, “urban fragmentation” has yet to be fully conceptualized. The only aspect on which there is fairly broad consensus among both researchers and policy makers concerns the anatomy of the phenomenon. It is seen as the result of two (not necessarily related) dynamics. On the one hand, there would be a process of social segmentation, which appears to be irreversible due to a supposed lack of any mechanism of social integration, even of a conflictive nature. On the other hand, this process should take a spatial form, as each social segment tends to place in (or be confined to) a definite portion of the urban space. There is, however, little agreement about the ultimate cause (or causes) of the phenomenon. Moreover, the difficulty of integrating interpretations referring to Developing Countries with those concerning (post)Industrialized Countries contributes considerably to the weakness of the related concept. This paper aims at providing an analytical foundation for urban fragmentation, which holds for both Developing and Industrialized Countries. To this purpose, its material cause is distinguished from its formal cause. While the first one lies in grinding discontinuity in the conditions of vulnerability to which different groups of urban dwellers are exposed, the second one belongs to the institutional domain, and is consequent to the fact that those groups are induced to adopt dualistic institutional arrangements. Urban fragmentation just forms at the intersection of these two occurrences. Taking this interpretative framework as our term of reference, two case studies are examined. While confirming the role exerted by the institutional component in shaping urban fragmentation, they show the importance of intermediate institutions in determining the integration-oriented or the disintegration- oriented character of the phenomenon. Normative indications are then furnished, regarding both the theoretical and the practical domains
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
