Name: Urban Planning in the Global South: Conflicting Rationalities in Contested Urban Space (en Inglés)
Price: 522093.00 COP
Availability: InStock
Author: Richard De Satgé; Vanessa Watson
ISBN: 9783319694955

portada Urban Planning in the Global South: Conflicting Rationalities in Contested Urban Space (en Inglés)

Urban Planning in the Global South: Conflicting Rationalities in Contested Urban Space (en Inglés)

Formato

Libro Físico

Editorial

Palgrave Macmillan

Autor

Richard De Satgé; Vanessa Watson

Año

2018

Idioma

Inglés

N° páginas

255

Encuadernación

Tapa Dura

ISBN13

9783319694955

N° edición

Categorías

Planificación y gestión urbana y municipal

Urban Planning in the Global South: Conflicting Rationalities in Contested Urban Space (en Inglés)

Richard De Satgé; Vanessa Watson (Autor) · Palgrave Macmillan · Tapa Dura

Libro Nuevo Importado

Envío: 14 a 20 días háb.

$ 1.044.187$ 522.093

-50%

Costos de importación incluídos en el precio ✅

Libro Nuevo

Quedan más de 100 unidades

$ 522.093

¡Envío Gratis! Llega entre el 25 Ago y el 03 Sep a Bogota, Cundinamarca. Seleccionar ubicación

Agregar a lista de deseos

Reseña del libro "Urban Planning in the Global South: Conflicting Rationalities in Contested Urban Space (en Inglés)"

This book addresses the on-going crisis of informality in rapidly growing cities of the global South. The authors offer a Southern perspective on planning theory, explaining how the concept of conflicting rationalities complements and expands upon a theoretical tradition which still primarily speaks to global ‘Northern’ audiences. De Satgé and Watson posit that a significant change is needed in the makeup of urban planning theory and practice – requiring an understanding of the ‘conflict of rationalities’ between state planning and those struggling to survive in urban informal settlements – for social conditions to improve in the global South. Ethnography, as illustrated in the book’s case study – Langa, a township in Cape Town, South Africa – is used to arrive at this conclusion. The authors are thus able to demonstrate how power and conflict between the ambitions of state planners and shack-dwellers, attempting to survive in a resource-poor context, have permeated and shaped all state–society engagement in this planning process.