ClaimingInvitedandInventedSpaces: Contingencies for Insurgent Planning Practices

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 31 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.