This paper is a sympathetic critique of mainstream grammars of urban injustice, arguing that they are frequently too one‐sided and selective to adequately grasp the full complexity of urban realities. Most prominently, I contend that urban injustice and punitiveness co‐exist with, if not sometimes depend upon, more supportive responses within urban space. I therefore counterbalance the spectacular logics of punitive urbanism and the everyday logics of control with a tripartite approach to logics assembled within the urban voluntary sector (abeyance, care and survival) as a way to reconnect to a broader set of practices. Two case studies are used to illustrate these contentions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geoffrey DeVerteuil (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: