Pluriversal urbanisms

CITY is opening up a platform for research and theory from and about places and topics that are, and researchers who are, under- and mis-represented in urban studies journals. For want of a satisfying and even joyful term that doesn’t homogenise complexity or have an implied negative counterpart (e.g. “Global South”; “majority world”), we are using the placeholder term of pluriversal urbanisms. Here we draw on recent works by Escobar (2018) and Blaser and de la Cadena (2018) drawing attention to alterity and to the ways in which it can be nourished. These works stay with the principles of the Zapatista thought: “We want a world where many worlds fit.” By using this term we pay attention to “the difference that all marginalised and subaltern groups have to live with day in and day out” (Escobar 2018, xvi), while at the same time striving for social justice and radical equality of all beings. Pluriversal urbanisms then encompass “multiple elsewheres” (Gandy 2022), the abundance of urban experiences, and make calls for reimagining and reconstructing local worlds.

We understand pluriversal urbanisms, as with all terms, to be constantly open to revision and we hope your submissions will challenge the available terminology and propose new vocabularies. We acknowledge the limitations of languages, in plural, in encapsulating the depth of human experiences, yet also recognise the spatial dimensions of language; its geographical, historical, and consequently political facets bearing material significance (Moreno-Tabarez 2023; Sawyer 2022; Zhao 2020). Our endeavour with this initiative is to traverse the deficiencies of language, its fissures, entrapments, and beyond, to envisage emancipatory spacetimes: urban pasts, presents, and futures intertwined with justice, for justice in urban spacetimes is the pressing narrative of the now. Amidst this exigency, we discern that the language representing alterity is a snare, a cycle of inherited hierarchies, and we find solace in poetry as a mechanism to dismantle these power structures (Glissant 1997). With such a poetic urbanism lens, among many other possible ways, we aim to underline the specific politics the term ‘pluriversal urbanism’ brings to the fore.

Segueing into the realm of ‘pluriversal urbanisms,’ we unfurl a tapestry of critical dialogues and interrogations. Once again, these are starting points to spark deeper debates. Central among these is the narrative of urbanism intricately entwined with the legacy of colonialism, a legacy that is still chained against the grim past and present of slavery. The scholars entrenched in pluriversal urbanisms discourse critique the prevailing northwestern urbanism model for its imbrication in colonial and enslavement principles, such as forced migration, resource and labour exploitation, and the effacement of Indigenous and other non-Western ways of living. They champion a pluriversal lens on urbanism that acknowledges the rich tapestry of urban experiences and knowledges, steadfastly centering the rights and needs of marginalised groups and cohorts.

The scrutiny extends to the role of the state in urban metamorphosis, where these scholars express a trenchant scepticism towards state-led urban development paradigms, critiquing them for often catalysing displacement, gentrification, precarisation and a spectrum of injustices that do not always have a name, or, at the very least, not the same name (Zhao 2022). Their advocacy veers towards more decentralised, participatory urban planning and governance frameworks, envisioning communities at the helm of their own developmental narratives and forms of urban autonomy (Dussel 2013; Fals Borda 1985).

Broaching the human-nature dialogue within urban spaces unveils a critical stance against the northwestern urbanism model, identified for its unsustainable ethos deeply rooted in natural resource exploitation and waste generation. These critical dialogues also work with an envisioned symbiotic human-nature interaction within urban realms, articulated through movements for ecological justice and related approaches to urban design. This symbiotic envisaging forms a blueprint, an alternative paradigm that challenges the orthodoxy of urban design that has, for generations, distanced humanity from the natural realm (Leff 2021). The infusion of green spaces isn't merely an aesthetic or recreational venture, but a profound reconnection, a respectful acknowledgment of nature's intrinsic value and its indispensable role in urban sustainability. The discourse hence propagates a shift from exploitation to harmonisation, from usurping to co-existing.

Moreover, pluriversal urbanisms unfold a lens to delve into more nuanced matters, each bearing its own weight in the discourse. The dynamism of social movements in urban transitions is first up for discussion, with scholars spotlighting how these movements challenge entrenched urbanism models, fostering alternative urban spaces and practices. For example, the struggle for housing rights, public space access, and sustainable transportation have emerged as focal points of urban resistance and re-imagination (Burgum and Vasudevan 2023; Guma et al. 2023; Rolnik, Amadeo, and Ansari 2022; Rozena 2022; Sims and Sarmiento 2023; Zalar and Pries 2022). Second is the exploration of urban narratives of marginalised groups, such as racialised peoples, migrants, people with disabilities, LGBTQ + people, religious minorities, low-income people, homeless people, people who have been incarcerated, and people who are affected by specific policies or practices such as poverty, climate change, and conflict, which can help us to understand the experiences of individuals and groups who are disproportionately impacted by the forces of “transnational white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” (Hooks 2000). This discourse examines the experiences of these marginalised groups, carefully analysing and critiquing their frequent exclusion from urban planning discussions and the ways in which they are disproportionately affected by harmful urban policies (Burte and Kamath 2023; Carastathis and Tsilimpounidi 2021; Dotsey and Chiodelli 2021; Humphry 2023; Lees and Robinson 2021; Louissaint 2023; Routray 2023; Tang and d’Auria 2023). The horizon of urban transformation then takes the stage with an optimistic undertone pervading the pluriversal urbanisms narrative regarding urban transformation potential. The discourse posits that embracing diversity, decentralisation, and sustainability harbours the seeds for the emergence of more just, equitable and emancipatory urban spacetimes (Ahmed, Baker, and Bhattacharya 2022; Gibbons 2021; Madden 2023; Mayer 2020; Milligan 2023; Moreno-Tabarez 2020; Richter and Humphry 2021; Russo 2021; Simone and Broto 2022; Zeiderman and Dawson 2022).

In this vein, pluriversal urbanisms emerge as a catalytic framework to reimagine our urban life-planning and development ethos. It challenges the prevailing paradigms, urging a more inclusive, diverse consideration of urban residents’ needs and perspectives, especially those marginalised and historically excluded. All this while maintaining a critical and careful balance of not falling prey to the politics of inclusion and diversity (Ahmed 2012). The melding of poetics and pragmatic urban discourse beckons a reevaluation and decolonisation of urbanism paradigms, ensnaring the emancipatory potential rooted in language, poetry, and pluriversal praxis. This blend aims to dismantle inherited hierarchies, to unshackle urban spacetimes from the chains of conventional urbanism, and to sow the seeds of a more inclusive, justice-oriented urban narrative that holds the promise of redefining urban space in a manner that resonates with the diverse tapestry of human and natural existence.

This initiative transcends the superficial goal of representation for its own sake. The spectre of the impossibility of representation, as alluded to by Derrida in “Specters of Marx” (1994), lingers over our endeavour, reminding us of the potential pitfalls embedded within the politics of inclusion, respectability, and other problematic politics inherent in existing power structures under which we work. Our journey is a collective reflection not merely on the pragmatics and poetics of carving out space for alterity—these so-called ‘pluriversal urbanisms'—but also on the processual and collective critical interrogation of this terminology. Moreover, the ‘emancipatory spacetimes’ we aim to foster require meticulous clarification through collective and critical dialogues and debates.

The scope of work we seek is open-ended, encouraging rigorous discussion and exploration of interdisciplinary perspectives. This is especially pertinent when considering fields of study that are either nascent in their engagement with urbanisms and urban studies or have yet to merge with them. Our gaze also extends to rethinking the paradigms that measure impact, inspired by Moreno-Tabarez (2021) call to make impact strange and, conversely, to make strange impact. To articulate more plainly, we are keen on soliciting testimonies, declarations, arguments, and poetry that pave the way for alternative standards, aiding us—the editors rooted in northwestern institutions, as well as broader and relevant local audiences—in assessing the strange impact when the neoliberal keyword, impact, is rendered strange through our invocation of pluriversal urbanisms policies.

As previously suggested, this initiative also beckons a deeper examination of how historical and geographical scopes intersect with the politics of representation and language—a hermeneutical endeavour, critically engaged with histories and geographies, thus enriching the discourse. Entries are invited to reflect on how theoretical and practical contributions can be synthesised without being tethered to our interpretation of pluriversal urbanisms. We acknowledge that we are not solely wedded to Escobar and others—your geographical context may harbour different theoretical genealogies, and we are eager to learn about them. So, please do not take our interpretation as gospel: we are also struggling with the debates that we are forced to have because of the way we use geographical language. As Sawyer (2022) put it: ‘Don’t write to “us”’; instead, write to the thinkers, movements, inhabitants and comrades trying to make sense of and transform the urbanising world.

While we deliberately create room for activists and activist-academics, our interest also lies in delving into critical policy studies. This may guide us in deciphering how pluriversal urbanisms might offer local or geographic-specific principles ripe for translation into actionable policy recommendations or urban planning practices. In our engagement with marginalised communities, we yearn to reflect on the feasibility of collaborative, participatory, co-production methodological work. We draw upon the essence of Participatory Action Research principles (Cornish et al. 2023)—albeit not strictly confined to that terminology—focusing on co-investigation, data analysis, and the editing of ‘germinable’ products or deliverables emblematic of pluriversal urbanisms. Through this lens, we aspire to craft a narrative that’s not merely a theoretical dalliance but a pragmatic pathway towards a more inclusive and just urban narrative.

We invite submissions in a variety of formats (written/ audio/ visual): e.g. conversations; debates; reviews and responses; agenda-setting pieces; manifestos; proceeds from workshops and seminars. We are open for various formats, and while these should generally follow the guidelines set out on the T&F page, please reach out should you have a different entry, so that we can work with you on making sure your submission is legible and coherent. Submissions can be hosted in the main journal, in our Scenes Sounds Action section or as a blog on our website. Please send proposals and enquiries to us at [email protected] with ‘CITY Open Call’ in the title. We look forward to hearing from you.