A Manifesto for the Just City

A Manifesto for the Just City
30 // 276
MEET
THE
SPEAKERS
ROBERTO ROCCO, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF SPATIAL PLANNING & STRATEGY, TU DELFT.
To better be able to
discuss the issues at
hand, we were joined by
a celebrated line-up of
speakers, who helped
“set the tone” of the conversation
and animate the discussion. The
idea was to discuss a few topics
and give the participants the
opportunity to interact with the
speakers and with each other, in
short online workshops after each
talk. Participants were then tasked
with writing a short paragraph
in small groups, using some of
the ideas discussed during the
main talks. This discussion was
tremendously enriched by the
diversity and reach of the UTC.
With more than 100 participating
universities, the diversity of points
of view would ensure a rich and
exciting discussion. We were
tremendously felicitous in the
choice of speakers. Leilani Farha,
former UN Rapporteur for the
Right of Housing opened the UTC,
by highlighting the centrality of
housing for a happy accomplished
life and, consequently, for socially
sustainable development. She
asked difficult questions related
to the excessive commodification
of housing. One of these difficult
questions had to do with the Right
to the City: if someone cannot
afford a house in a city, should
they be allowed to live there?
This is not a cynical question,
but one that goes to the centre
of the current neoliberal thought
that guides many governments:
must all human relationships and
possibilities be mediated by the
market? Or is there something
else we must concern ourselves
with?
Efrat Cohen-Bar from the Israeli
collective BIMKOM followed
suit with a pungent description
of how spatial planning can
be a tool for oppression, by
describing how it has been used
by successive Israeli government
to disenfranchise and oppress
the Palestinian population, in
the hopes that people would
“just leave,” making a unified
Jerusalem and other cities
throughout Israel more “Jewish.”
But Efrat also described how
BIMKOM, using spatial planning
and the rule of law, is able to
assist Palestinian communities
achieve some rights, including
access to housing and quality
public space. Spatial planning is
a force for good when people are
involved in the planning process.
Participatory, efficient spatial
planning has a flagrant impact
in the quality of life of people.
In this case, Efrat helped the
audience navigate an extremely
difficult conflict, maybe one of the
defining conflicts of our times, in
which space and resources are at
the very centre of the discussion.
Another important take-away
from Efrat’s talk was the
discussion on the role of the State
in granting rights to people, and
the issue of citizenship. In times
of pandemic, having access to
quality public space and safe and
dignified housing have acquired a
new dimension.
Stijn Oosterlynck talked about
something that connects the
two previous talks very well:
solidarity. The difference was that
Stijn didn’t talk about solidarity
in an abstract, romanticised
manner, but as something very
tangible and necessary if we
want to live together in cities.
He also explored how the State
creates and uses solidarity by
creating homogeneity and by
sometimes creating external
shared enemies. He talked at
length about how solidarity
can be “institutionalised” in the
legal and cultural practices of a
society. But in face of increasing
diversity, how can we keep