GGY201_Foundations of urban social landscapes_part 1 (2) (1).pdf
Transcript
GGY201 – URBAN STRUCTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY. LECTURE NOTES: FOUNDATIONS OF URBAN SOCIAL LANDSCAPES (PART 1) In the previous sessions we focused on how cities are organised according to functional zones. We shift our focus to understand the social landscapes of cities. ...
GGY201 – URBAN STRUCTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY. LECTURE NOTES: FOUNDATIONS OF URBAN SOCIAL LANDSCAPES (PART 1) In the previous sessions we focused on how cities are organised according to functional zones. We shift our focus to understand the social landscapes of cities. As urban geographers we seek to understand the spatial organisation of urban society. We consider theories that have attempted to explain urban social structures. During the late 19th and early 20th century several urban scholars argued that the process of urbanisation led to the death or loss of community. The traditional “community” focused on relationship, familial relations and social bonds were increasingly under threat in large urban centres. Communities are socially bonded through likeness, common beliefs, common rituals and symbols. For these early scholars, urban society was markedly different – focused rather on the economic organisation of society, with social interactions short-lived and superficial. Social order is rather based on differences and through division of labour. One of these scholars, Simmel (1903); argued that cities have an adverse influence on society; o Dynamic density; the bigger the population, the less social controls are in place and behaviour is weakened. o Rationality/ impersonality; influence of economic relationships on social interactions. o Overstimulation; the “press” of people causes some to withdraw to preserve a sense of privacy. o Anomie; increased social isolation. o These factors could lead to deviant behaviour. Their main argument was one of “community lost”. This is a rather an outdated and pessimistic view of urban life. 1 The Chicago School of Urban Sociology (early to mid-20th century). o Burgess and Park (1925) observed social groups in specific urban contexts and how urban society is organised spatially. 2 o The Chicago school, also known as the ecological school drew inspiration from the biological or natural sciences to explain complex human behaviour. o They described cities as “natural” or “ecological” communities. o This “scientific” approach was used to provide a rational and predictable overview on the social patterns of cities based on competition among social groups over resources. o Concepts such as social distance emerged; social groups want to have little contact as possible with other groups. o The latter is achieved through spatial distance. o Therefore, the urban social landscape is marked by distinctive (segregated) neighbourhoods. o Neighbourhoods can experience change over time, through process of invasion and succession. o Social area analysis (factorial ecology) argues that three primary forces shape urban areas; Advanced job skills are increasingly required Family structures are changing Residential mobility increases o Murdies (1969) urban mosaic details that three forces identify social areas in cities; Socio-economic status Family status Ethnic status 3 o The Chicago or ecological school has been criticised for reinforcing racism and segregation. o Using biological sciences to explain complex human behaviour is problematic and be seen as a form of social Darwinism. o It ignores complex social, economic and political forces that shape human behaviour. o Social identity is a lot more complex in metropolitan areas and are influenced by race, gender, sexuality, age and lifestyle. 4
