Abstract Space is foundational to questions of refuge and asylum, but this space is one of conditional hospitality, extended to those deemed worthy of protection by virtue of their victimhood, while physically and discursively excluding others who share similar life circumstances but are deemed unworthy. Space here is understood to be mutually constituted with the social. Hence, refuge is constituted through bodies that are cast out of national belonging, and refugees and asylum-seekers are simultaneously defined through the ‘protection space’ of the refuge and asylum. But in an age of displacement, how do refuge and asylum seek to construct a specific group of people that are distinct from the poor, and how is this distinction problematic? This article sets out to unpack part of this puzzle through an urban lens. Using urban research around shelter and housing, I demonstrate how that is used to separate communities. I argue that refuge and asylum promise safe spaces but strip people of mobility and futures, while poor citizens are denied the promise of secure land and housing, exploited for their labour, and compelled to live a life of constant displacement. This article demonstrates how these differences, shaped against each other, are relational, and asks if we can reimagine the city as a protection space for all.
Romola Sanyal (Mon,) studied this question.