IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v58y2021i5p881-902.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enclaving: Spatial detachment as an aesthetics of imagination in an urban sub-Saharan African context

Author

Listed:
  • Morten Nielsen

    (National Museum of Denmark, Denmark)

  • Jason Sumich

    (University of Essex, UK)

  • Bjørn Enge Bertelsen

    (University of Bergen, Norway)

Abstract

While detachment and separation continue to be central to urban development across the globe, in several sub-Saharan African cities they have acquired a particular form of acute social and political efficacy. In many European and American cities, the making of fortified enclosures is considered to be an effect of an endemic fear of societal dissolution, and a growing number of sub-Saharan African cities are, seemingly, affected by a similar socio-political and economic dynamic. However, in sub-Saharan Africa the spatial lines of separation that isolate the affluent few from surrounding urban spaces follow both a much wider and less coordinated meshwork of social divisions and political fissures, and draw on a deeper socio-cultural, economic and historical repertoire. In this article, we trace the contours of enclaving as a critical urban driver, which is rapidly changing the social and physical fabric of cities across the sub-Saharan continent. Rather than considering enclaving simply as a physical manifestation of dominance and privilege, however, we consider it as an ‘aesthetics of imagination’ that migrates through the cities and thereby weaves together otherwise dissimilar and distinct social practices and spaces, political desires and economic aspirations.

Suggested Citation

  • Morten Nielsen & Jason Sumich & Bjørn Enge Bertelsen, 2021. "Enclaving: Spatial detachment as an aesthetics of imagination in an urban sub-Saharan African context," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(5), pages 881-902, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:58:y:2021:i:5:p:881-902
    DOI: 10.1177/0042098020916095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098020916095
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0042098020916095?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claire W. Herbert & Martin J. Murray, 2015. "Building from Scratch: New Cities, Privatized Urbanism and the Spatial Restructuring of Johannesburg after Apartheid," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 471-494, May.
    2. Kaihuai Liao & Rainer Wehrhahn & Werner Breitung, 2019. "Urban planners and the production of gated communities in China: A structure–agency approach," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(13), pages 2635-2653, October.
    3. Naomi Smith & Peter Walters, 2018. "Desire lines and defensive architecture in modern urban environments," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 2980-2995, October.
    4. Harrington, James, 1656. "The Commonwealth of Oceana," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number harrington1656.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephanie Wakefield, 2022. "Critical urban theory in the Anthropocene," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(5), pages 917-936, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yiru Jia & Nicky Morrison & Franziska Sielker, 2023. "Delivering common property in Chinese contractual communities: Law, power and practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(16), pages 3272-3293, December.
    2. Siân Butcher, 2020. "Appropriating rent from greenfield affordable housing: developer practices in Johannesburg," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(2), pages 337-361, March.
    3. Tauri Tuvikene & Wladimir Sgibnev & Wojciech Kȩbłowski & Jason Finch, 2023. "Public transport as public space: Introduction," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(15), pages 2963-2978, November.
    4. Robert Rosenberger, 2020. "On hostile design: Theoretical and empirical prospects," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(4), pages 883-893, March.
    5. Korah, Prosper Issahaku & Osborne, Natalie & Matthews, Tony, 2021. "Enclave urbanism in Ghana’s Greater Accra Region: Examining the socio-spatial consequences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Naji Akbar & Ismaila Rimi Abubakar & Adel Saleh Bouregh, 2020. "Fostering Urban Sustainability through the Ecological Wisdom of Traditional Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-19, December.
    7. Laurence Côté-Roy & Sarah Moser, 2019. "‘Does Africa not deserve shiny new cities?’ The power of seductive rhetoric around new cities in Africa," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(12), pages 2391-2407, September.
    8. Moogoor, Adithi & Močnik, Špela & Yuen, Belinda, 2022. "Neighbourhood environmental influences on older adults’ physical activities and social participation in Singapore: A photovoice study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    9. Ivan Turok, 2016. "South Africa's new urban agenda: Transformation or compensation?," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 31(1-2), pages 9-27, February.
    10. Loor, Ignacio & Evans, James, 2021. "Understanding the value and vulnerability of informal infrastructures: Footpaths in Quito," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    11. Robin James Smith & Jonathan Ablitt & Joe Williams & Tom Hall, 2023. "The Coining of Convivial Public Space: Homelessness, Outreach Work, and Interaction Order," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 42-51.
    12. Francesca Governa & Angelo Sampieri, 2020. "Urbanisation processes and new towns in contemporary China: A critical understanding from a decentred view," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(2), pages 366-382, February.
    13. Frances Brill & Veronica Conte, 2020. "Understanding project mobility: The movement of King’s Cross to Brussels and Johannesburg," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(1), pages 79-96, February.
    14. Zenzile E. Mbinza, 2024. "Connecting place branding to social and governance constructs in Johannesburg, South Africa," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(3), pages 408-423, September.
    15. Geoffrey K Turnbull & Velma Zahirovic-Herbert, 2020. "Private government, property rights and uncertain neighbourhood externalities: Evidence from gated communities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(4), pages 711-730, March.
    16. Senqi Yang & Wenken Tan & Longxu Yan, 2021. "Evaluating Accessibility Benefits of Opening Gated Communities for Pedestrians and Cyclists in China: A Case Study of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Frances Brill, 2022. "Governing investors and developers: Analysing the role of risk allocation in urban development," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(7), pages 1499-1517, May.
    18. Richard Ballard & Siân Butcher, 2020. "Comparing the relational work of developers," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(2), pages 266-276, March.
    19. Zezhou Wu & Lu Yang & Kexi Xu & Jinming Zhang & Maxwell Fordjour Antwi-Afari, 2021. "Key Factors of Opening Gated Community in Urban Area: A Case Study of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-10, March.
    20. Manisha Anantharaman & Marlyne Sahakian & Czarina Saloma, 2023. "Spatialising degrowth in Southern cities: Everyday park-making for (un)commoning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(7), pages 1266-1284, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:58:y:2021:i:5:p:881-902. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.