IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v42y2010i4p856-873.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geographical Knowledges and Neoliberal Tensions: Compulsory Land Purchase in the Context of Contemporary Urban Redevelopment

Author

Listed:
  • Brett Christophers

    (Department of Social and Economic Geography, Uppsala University, Box 513, 75120 Uppsala, Sweden)

Abstract

The author examines the materialization of geographical knowledges in relation to the ongoing neoliberalization of urban space where the latter is based on processes of compulsory land purchase. The specific context for the study is two recently planned commercial redevelopments for the south London borough of Croydon in the United Kingdom, and the arguments mustered in support of these proposals. The author identifies and discusses three principal sets of geographical knowledges, which he examines under the headings symbolic , biopolitical , and scalar . In each case, he shows that the knowledges have strong modernist overtones. The paper seeks both to understand and contextualize these historical connections, and to consider the contemporary political work performed by the knowledges in question.

Suggested Citation

  • Brett Christophers, 2010. "Geographical Knowledges and Neoliberal Tensions: Compulsory Land Purchase in the Context of Contemporary Urban Redevelopment," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(4), pages 856-873, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:42:y:2010:i:4:p:856-873
    DOI: 10.1068/a42209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a42209
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a42209?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. Miceli, Thomas J. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2007. "The Economics of Eminent Domain: Private Property, Public Use, and Just Compensation," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 3(4), pages 275-329, July.
    2. N.A. Phelps & N. Parsons & D. Ballas & A. Dowling, 2006. "Business at the margins? Business interests in edge urban politics," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 362-383, June.
    3. Thomas Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2007. "Private Property, Public Use, and Just Compensation: The Economics of Eminent Domain," Working papers 2007-12, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. At, Christian & Béal, Sylvain & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2015. "Freezeout, compensation rules, and voting equilibria," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 91-102.
    2. Yun-chien Chang, 2015. "An economic and comparative analysis of specificatio (the accession doctrine)," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 225-243, April.
    3. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Mookherjee, Dilip, 2014. "Land acquisition for industrialization and compensation of displaced farmers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 303-312.
    4. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2014. "Takings," Working papers 2014-17, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    5. Eric Cardella & Carl Kitchens, 2017. "The impact of award uncertainty on settlement negotiations," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 333-367, June.
    6. Hans-Bernd Schäfer & Ram Singh, 2018. "Takings of Land by Self-Interested Governments: Economic Analysis of Eminent Domain," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 427-459.
    7. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2011. "Regulatory Takings," Working papers 2011-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    8. Casey B. Mulligan, 2015. "In-Kind Taxes, Behavior, and Comparative Advantage," NBER Working Papers 21586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    10. Pham Huu Ty & A. C. M. Van Westen & Annelies Zoomers, 2013. "Compensation and Resettlement Policies after Compulsory Land Acquisition for Hydropower Development in Vietnam: Policy and Practice," Land, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-27, November.
    11. Hui Cheng & David Shaw, 2021. "POLYCENTRIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE FORMATION OF EDGE URBAN AREAS IN CHINA'S MEGA CITY REGIONS: Case Study of Nansha, Guangzhou," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(6), pages 1009-1027, November.
    12. Nicholas A. Phelps & Andrew M. Wood, 2011. "The New Post-suburban Politics?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 48(12), pages 2591-2610, September.
    13. Miquel-Àngel Garcia-López & Ivan Muñiz, 2010. "Employment Decentralisation: Polycentricity or Scatteration? The Case of Barcelona," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(14), pages 3035-3056, December.
    14. Sebastian Dembski, 2015. "Structure and imagination of changing cities: Manchester, Liverpool and the spatial in-between," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(9), pages 1647-1664, July.

    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:sae:envira:v:42:y:2010:i:4:p:856-873. 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: .

    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.