| 1. |
- Biegańska, Jadwiga, et al.
(författare)
-
The ”agri-ghetto” : On dysfunctional landscapes and the rural-urban paradox
- 2014
-
Ingår i: PECSRL 2014: Unraveling The Logics Of Landscape. - : University of Gothenburg, Sweden. ; , s. 130-130, s. 130-131
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- 1989 was a turning point within the socio-economic development in the former Eastern bloc, initiating a system transformation that affected both rural and urban areas. It also contributed to the crystallization of certain cultural landscapes, hitherto largely illegible due to the inhibition of spatial processes encountered during Communism. After a quarter-century of free market economy, the focus on social problems began to expand to the spatial realm as well. It became apparent that the progressive social polarization that followed was most prominent in environments striated by a special landscape type – “socjałki”. In Poland, the dysfunctional character of socjałki is noticeable in a wide array of dimensions: unemployment, poverty, social anomies and pathologies, claiming attitudes, substandard housing, and ghettoization. The main characteristic of socjałki, however, is their equal prevalence in both urban environments (dormitory suburbs) and in rural areas (state agricultural farms). Particularly in the context of the latter – of which socjałki are an integral part – they differ significantly from traditional rural landscapes of Poland. Nevertheless, being formally rural, they are subject to development programs labeled as “rural”, despite the striking similarity to their urban counterparts, which, in turn, prompt “urban” developmental endeavors. To illustrate this discrepancy, two similar Polish socjałki were investigated – one formally urban and one formally rural. By taking account of the residents’ perceptions of their everyday lives, we allowed them to define their own problems in view of the rural-urban bias that frames and impregnates them. The main research problem revolves around the assumption that socjałki are distinct landscapes that are poorly explicated using the pervasive rural-urban axis as an analytical tool. In this respect, we highlight the consolidation of a new type of landscape that transcends formal dichotomies. We argue it could benefit from being studied and evaluated on the basis of commonalities other than the rural-urban stereotype.
|
|
| 2. |
-
Under urban mask: On rural landscapes with different logics
- 2014
-
Proceedings (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- As a result of natural hazards, ecological disasters, lawlessness, wars and fluctuations in economy, numerous European landscapes slowly but surely lose their ‘raison d’être’. The consequence of this is a continuous process of degradation, both in respect to infrastructure as well as the social fabric. Effectively, the changes that occur create specific landscapes that encompass elements, which, at a first glance, could be considered both urban and rural. However, these are prone to mechanisms other than the progressive blurring of the rural-urban dichotomy brought on by urbanization; they are subject to a different kind of rationale. Are they just dissonant nests of desolation or merely slumbering resources for future creative uses? How do we view them? How should we handle them? To the fore of this special session we bring analyses of rural landscapes endowed with specific urban traits whose common denominator is their dysfunctional character. The main task of this special session is to unravel the logics of these particular landscapes by means of: (1) Cognition of the factors and mechanisms that contributed to their emergence; (2) Analyses of the processes that take place in them in order to: (a) determine their course and dynamics, (b) establish potential directions of change; (c) propose methodological solutions – how to do research; (3) Generalization of the research results in search of common problems and similarities in order to: (a) formulate universal methodological assumptions, (b) marshal solutions that are useful in decision-making on administrative and institutional levels. The session has attracted 10 presentations addressing any of these issues in the context of dysfunctional rural landscapes with interesting perspectives and innovative approaches. The spectrum of this double session included: post-war rural areas in Amsterdam (J.E. Abrahamse), Zagreb’s peri-urban fringe (A. Toskić, D. Njegač & D. Orešić), rural transformation from urban influences in Olsztyn (M. Wasilewicz-Pszczółkowska, A. Szczepańska & A. Senetra), degraded urban agglomerations in Poland (R. Krzysztofik, I. Kantor-Pietraga & T. Spórna), landscapes transcending rural-urban characteristics in Gothenburg (M. Dymitrow, R. Brauer, G. Holmertz, B. Apostolovska-Toševska, F. Holmberg & L. Johansson), landscape discriminants in valorization of rural areas in Poland (A. Bocheńska-Skałecka, Z. Kuriata, I. Niedźwiecka-Filipiak, A. Podolska & L. Serafin), degraded towns in Silesia (R. Szmytkie), agri-ghettos in central Poland (J. Biegańska, E. Grzelak-Kostulska & M. Dymitrow), Bucharest's Romani ghetto (D. Teodorescu) and urban agriculture in socially deprived areas of Thessaloniki (E. Gavriilidou, D. Dedousi, E. Oureilidou & M. Ritou).
|
|
