Speaker
Description
This paper revisits the class question in the context of socio-ecological transformations. More specifically, it examines how socio-spatial analysis understood as a method can better respond to both social and ecological conditions. Socio-spatial methods have been widely applied in the redesign of public spaces. They are often used as a basis for competitions, planning processes, and participatory practices. Socio-spatial analysis comes in various forms, yet it often lacks depth and thus fails to capture the multi-layered nature of social space, particularly in terms of class. To address the class dimensions of space adequately, this paper suggests to consider social relationships and practices that, in the Bourdieusian sense, are “inscribed” in specific places, yet that also reflect and reinforce existing, translocal social hierarchies (Bourdieu 1979). This deeper consideration is essential to understand who participates in planning processes, who is excluded, who uses public space and has access to it and who does not. It is also critical for understanding the social behaviors that emerge within different groups and societies. Environmental challenges, especially climate change, disproportionately affect marginalized, low-income, and vulnerable communities, which have contributed the least to the crisis yet suffer its harshest impacts.
In this light, the class question becomes even more pressing, particularly in relation to the multiple crises currently affecting spatial planning. Socio-spatial analysis offers a crucial tool for critically reflecting on and uncovering the different power relations and structures of domination that shape spatial development. This analysis, in turn, is vital for addressing socio-economic and socio-spatial inequalities. The guiding question of the article thus becomes: What class-specific dimensions and criteria should be integrated into socio-spatial analysis to make it a critical planning tool? This question is particularly relevant in the context of socio-ecological transformation, where understanding the intersections between class and environmental change is crucial.
This paper is conceptual in nature and draws on contemporary class theories to identify criteria for reforming socio-spatial analysis understood as a method. A key example of this approach is Klaus Dörre’s work, in which the relevance of both the socio-ecological crisis and class conflict is particularly prominent. By exploring these connections in different current class theories, the paper aims to eliminate the “class blindness” that often characterizes the socio-spatial analysis and design of spatial transformations.
| Keywords | class theory; socio-ecological transformation; socio-spatial analysis; critical planning tool |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
