Claiming Invited and Invented Spaces

^†Reference to invited and invented spaces (Miraftab 2009).

: Contingencies for Insurgent Planning Practices

^‡A previous version of this paper was presented at the Joint AESOP/ACSP Congress in Dublin, Ireland, July 2013.

Abstract

Insurgent planning practice is an emerging idea for counter-hegemonic urban planning in the Global South, derived (generalized) from empirical work on specific southern contexts (Watson, V. 2013. “Planning and the ‘Stubborn Realities’ of Global South–East Cities: Some Emerging Ideas.” Planning Theory 12 (1): 81–100. doi:10.1177/1473095212446301). In this paper, we position ourselves with Meth (2010. “Unsettling Insurgency: Reflections on Women's Insurgent Practices in South Africa.” Planning Theory and Practice 11 (2): 241–263) who argues that insurgence and insurgent planning practices cannot be generalized across contexts but requires specific case by case empirical analysis to understand tactics and strategies within very different political and institutional situations. This paper is based on empirical evidence from two specific case-by-case analysis of potential insurgent action in Kathmandu, Nepal. We find that if insurgence is to present hope for counter-hegemonic outcomes in the context of Nepal, it is contingent upon a maturity of grass-roots organization, sharing of power among these, what constitutes ‘planning’ in insurgent planning and how success of such actions is measured. There is also a strong role of the nature of social mobilization and the institutional context of planning.

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Faranak Miraftab for her valuable feedback on an earlier version of this paper. A special thanks to Tore Sager and Tor Medalen for their insights on the drafts of this paper. We would also like to thank John Forrester for his valuable feedback at the presentation of this paper at the AESOP — ACSP Conference in Dublin, July 2013. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their valuable feedback.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

^† Reference to invited and invented spaces (Miraftab 2009).

^‡ A previous version of this paper was presented at the Joint AESOP/ACSP Congress in Dublin, Ireland, July 2013.

1. 1 USD = 76.675 NPR (January 2002).

2. 1 ropani = (74 * 74) ft².