IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijurrs/v38y2014i3p935-950.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Whose Right to Jerusalem?

Author

Listed:
  • Gillad Rosen
  • Anne B. Shlay

Abstract

Jerusalem is a city mired in spatial conflict. Its contested spaces represent deep conflicts among groups that vary by national identity, religion, religiosity and gender. The omnipresent nature of these conflicts provides an opportunity to look at Henri Lefebvre's concept of the right to the city (RTC). The RTC has been adopted and celebrated as a political tool for positive change, enabling communities to take control of space. Based on extensive fieldwork and in-depth interviews, this article explores the complexity of the RTC principles and examines three urban battlefields in Jerusalem — Bar-Ilan Street, the Kotel and the Orient House. The RTC is a powerful idea, providing the opportunity to examine people's everyday activities within the context of how space can be used to support their lives. Yet Jerusalem's myriad divisions produce claims by different groups to different parts of the city. In Jerusalem, the RTC is not a clear vision but a kaleidoscope of rights that produces a fragmented landscape within a religious and ethno-national context governed by the nation state — Israel. The growth of cultural and ethnic diversity in urban areas may limit the possibility for a unified RTC to emerge in an urban sea of demands framed by difference. Space-based cultural conflict exemplifies urban divisions and exacerbates claims to ‘my Jerusalem’, not ‘our Jerusalem’. Identity-based claims to the RTC appear to work against, not for, a universalistic RTC.

Suggested Citation

  • Gillad Rosen & Anne B. Shlay, 2014. "Whose Right to Jerusalem?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 935-950, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijurrs:v:38:y:2014:i:3:p:935-950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/1468-2427.12093
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Marcuse, 2009. "From critical urban theory to the right to the city," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2-3), pages 185-197, June.
    2. Gillad Rosen & Eran Razin, 2008. "Enclosed Residential Neighborhoods in Israel: From Landscapes of Heritage and Frontier Enclaves to New Gated Communities," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(12), pages 2895-2913, December.
    3. David Harvey, 2003. "The right to the city," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 939-941, December.
    4. Mark Purcell, 2003. "Citizenship and the right to the global city: reimagining the capitalist world order," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 564-590, September.
    5. Margit Mayer, 2009. "The 'Right to the City’ in the context of shifting mottos of urban social movements," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2-3), pages 362-374, June.
    6. Scott A. Bollens, 1998. "Urban Planning amidst Ethnic Conflict: Jerusalem and Johannesburg," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 35(4), pages 729-750, April.
    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. Sören Becker & James Angel & Matthias Naumann, 2020. "Energy democracy as the right to the city: Urban energy struggles in Berlin and London," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(6), pages 1093-1111, September.
    2. Jonathan Rokem & Laura Vaughan, 2018. "Segregation, mobility and encounters in Jerusalem: The role of public transport infrastructure in connecting the ‘divided city’," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(15), pages 3454-3473, November.
    3. Noam Brenner & Dan Miodownik & Shaul R. Shenhav, 2024. "Leadership repertoire and political engagement in a divided city: The case of East Jerusalem," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(1), pages 58-77, January.
    4. Nachmany, Harel & Hananel, Ravit, 2019. "A tale of two neighborhoods: Toward a new typology of land rights," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 233-245.
    5. Jonathan Rokem & Marco Allegra, 2016. "Planning in Turbulent Times: Exploring Planners' Agency in Jerusalem," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 640-657, May.

    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. Kafui Attoh, 2017. "Public transportation and the idiocy of urban life," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(1), pages 196-213, January.
    2. Sergio Belda-Miquel & Jordi Peris Blanes & Alexandre Frediani, 2016. "Institutionalization and Depoliticization of the Right to the City: Changing Scenarios for Radical Social Movements," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 321-339, March.
    3. Justus Uitermark & Walter Nicholls & Maarten Loopmans, 2012. "Cities and Social Movements: Theorizing beyond the Right to the City," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(11), pages 2546-2554, November.
    4. Morgana G Martins Krieger & Marlei Pozzebon & Lauro Gonzalez, 2021. "When social movements collaborate with the state towards the right to the city: Unveiling compromises and conflicts," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(5), pages 1115-1139, August.
    5. Kira Kosnick, 2015. "A Clash Of Subcultures? Questioning Queer–Muslim Antagonisms in the Neoliberal City," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 687-703, July.
    6. Junxi Qian & Shenjing He, 2012. "Rethinking Social Power and the Right to the City Amidst China's Emerging Urbanism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(12), pages 2801-2816, December.
    7. Lila Leontidou, 2010. "Urban Social Movements in ‘Weak’ Civil Societies: The Right to the City and Cosmopolitan Activism in Southern Europe," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(6), pages 1179-1203, May.
    8. Esin Özdemir & Tuna Tasan-Kok, 2019. "Planners’ role in accommodating citizen disagreement: The case of Dutch urban planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(4), pages 741-759, March.
    9. Kon Kim, 2022. "Exclusion and Cooperation of the Urban Poor Outside the Institutional Framework of the Smart City: A Case of Seoul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-18, October.
    10. Esin Özdemir & Ayda Eraydin, 2017. "Fragmentation in Urban Movements: The Role of Urban Planning Processes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 727-748, September.
    11. Eduardo Mendieta, 2010. "The city to come: Critical urban theory as utopian mapping," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 442-447, August.
    12. Shenjing He, 2012. "Two Waves of Gentrification and Emerging Rights Issues in Guangzhou, China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(12), pages 2817-2833, December.
    13. Peter Marcuse, 2010. "In defense of theory in practice," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 4-12, February.
    14. Massingue, Suzanna Allen & Oviedo, Daniel, 2021. "Walkability and the Right to the city: A snapshot critique of pedestrian space in Maputo, Mozambique," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    15. Cardullo, Paolo, 2018. "Commoning the smart city: A case for a public Internet provision," SocArXiv u8dk2, Center for Open Science.
    16. Mine Eder & Özlem Öz, 2015. "Neoliberalization of Istanbul's Nightlife: Beer or Champagne?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 284-304, March.
    17. Rasa Pranskuniene & Dalia Perkumiene, 2021. "Public Perceptions on City Landscaping during the Outbreak of Coronavirus Disease: The Case of Vilnius Pop-Up Beach, Lithuania," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.
    18. Sören Becker & James Angel & Matthias Naumann, 2020. "Energy democracy as the right to the city: Urban energy struggles in Berlin and London," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(6), pages 1093-1111, September.
    19. Oren Yiftachel, 2015. "Epilogue—from ‘Gray Space' to Equal ‘Metrozenship'? Reflections On Urban Citizenship," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 726-737, July.
    20. Wang, Siqiang & Yung, Esther, Hiu Kwan & Yu, Yifan & Tsou, Jin Yeu, 2022. "Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: The case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:ijurrs:v:38:y:2014:i:3:p:935-950. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0309-1317 .

    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.