IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa15p1450.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An exploration on integrated spatial issues in geopolitical conflict zones to describe the conceptual framework of ?Geopolitical Brownfields?

Author

Listed:
  • Mohsen Shojaee Far

Abstract

Land and urban management techniques in geopolitical conflict zones are globally associated with significant challenges, in which the built environment and their associated lands usually suffer from lack of essential elements, including, but not limited to, ownership status, accessibilities, clear governing policies, and real estate market values. To address the challenges associated with these kind of properties ? usually abandoned ? it is not sufficient to search technical solutions within the technical competence of urban planners, architects, engineers, economists, and other similar professionals and academics. According to the origins of geopolitical conflict zones, the problem was usually based on political and social conflicts associated with the geographical location of an affected area. In this sense, techniques within the social and political sciences are major elements to be associated with spatial models of analysis, would neatly fit into regional science studies. This study suggests a conceptual framework that argues the necessity of a new land typology to conceptualise the issues associated with abandoned properties in geopolitical conflict zones. Correspondingly, this paper presents the nature and origin of the proposed conceptual framework, throughout the exploration of philosophical notions of space, power, geography, and politics. The nature of this conceptual framework, borrowed from the combination of the global understanding of ?brownfield? sites and the philosophical concept of power on space, was influenced by a Foucauldian philosophical approach, producing the notion of ?geopolitical brownfields?. This conceptual framework is a new idea that is initiated by this study, and there are several important areas where this study makes an original contribution such as the field of regional science, and in particular in strategical researches on land management issues among geopolitical conflict zones. The term ?geopolitical brownfield? suggests spaces of contested powers, as all space is power and power produces space. This paper?s main concern is to advance the theoretical basis regarding challenges in dealing with disputed lands and properties in geopolitical conflict zones in a completely new conceptual framework via spatial integrated approaches, as an original methodological contribution of this study to foster the regeneration possibilities of such properties. This research tends to focus on previously vibrant urban fabrics/districts/neighbourhoods which are today abandoned/degraded as a consequence of geopolitical conflicts rather than general issues related to brownfield lands. The conceptual framework of ?geopolitical brownfields? addresses the challenges regarding abandoned properties within cities and urban settlements engulfed in domestic or international conflicts, or urban areas fractured by social and religious division. The rare case of the Cyprus conflict has had a significant impact on the nature and origin of this study, as it provided a first-hand experience of abandoned properties, frozen in time, through more than four decades of an on-going geopolitical conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohsen Shojaee Far, 2015. "An exploration on integrated spatial issues in geopolitical conflict zones to describe the conceptual framework of ?Geopolitical Brownfields?," ERSA conference papers ersa15p1450, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa15p1450
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa15/e150825aFinal01450.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Adams & Christopher De Sousa & Steven Tiesdell, 2010. "Brownfield Development: A Comparison of North American and British Approaches," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(1), pages 75-104, January.
    2. Sandra Alker & Victoria Joy & Peter Roberts & Nathan Smith, 2000. "The Definition of Brownfield," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 49-69.
    3. Mohsen Shojaee Far & Carlos Marrmolejo Duarte, 2014. "Geopolitical Brownfields: introducing a new terminology for brownfields within conflict zones," ERES eres2014_158, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    4. repec:arz:wpaper:eres2014-158 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. David Boyce, 2004. "A short history of the field of regional science," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Raymond J. G. M. Florax & David A. Plane (ed.), Fifty Years of Regional Science, pages 31-57, Springer.
    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. I-Chun Chen & Yeng-Chieh Tsai & Hwong-Wen Ma, 2016. "Toward Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Using Life-Cycle Thinking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Alberto Longo & Danny Campbell, 2017. "The Determinants of Brownfields Redevelopment in England," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(2), pages 261-283, June.
    3. J.W.R. Whitehand & N.J. Morton, 2006. "The Fringe-belt Phenomenon and Socioeconomic Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(11), pages 2047-2066, October.
    4. Anna Alberini & Dennis Guignet, 2008. "Voluntary Cleanups and Redevelopment Potential: Lessons from Baltimore, Maryland," Working Papers 2008.87, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Meg Holden & Andy Scerri & Azadeh Hadizadeh Esfahani, 2015. "Justifying Redevelopment ‘Failures' Within Urban ‘Success Stories': Dispute, Compromise, and a New Test of Urbanity," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 451-470, May.
    6. Perić Ana, 2016. "Institutional Cooperation in the Brownfield Regeneration Process: Experiences from Central and Eastern European Countries," European Spatial Research and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 23(1), pages 21-46, June.
    7. Marjorie Tendero & Cécile Bazart, 2018. "" Empty lands " ? Social representations of contaminated brownfields in France," Working Papers halshs-01709548, HAL.
    8. Han, Qingye & Zhu, Yuming & Ke, Ginger Y. & Hipel, Keith W., 2019. "Public private partnership in brownfield remediation projects in China: Identification and structure analysis of risks," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 87-104.
    9. Kronenburg García, Angela & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Abeygunawardane, Dilini & Sitoe, Almeida A., 2022. "Waves and legacies: The making of an investment frontier in Niassa, Mozambique," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1).
    10. Ricardo J. G. Mateus & João C. Bana e Costa & Pedro Verga Matos, 2017. "Supporting Multicriteria Group Decisions with MACBETH Tools: Selection of Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment Actions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 495-521, May.
    11. Liviu Jigoria-Oprea & Nicolae Popa, 2017. "Industrial brownfields: An unsolved problem in post-socialist cities. A comparison between two mono industrial cities: ReÅŸiÅ£a (Romania) and PanÄ evo (Serbia)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(12), pages 2719-2738, September.
    12. B Glumac & Q Han & W Schaefer, 2018. "A negotiation decision model for public–private partnerships in brownfield redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 45(1), pages 145-160, January.
    13. Hunter Bacot & Cindy O’Dell, 2006. "Establishing Indicators to Evaluate Brownfield Redevelopment," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 20(2), pages 142-161, May.
    14. Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp & Soushi Suzuki, 2021. "The science of space: new endeavours in regional science," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 149-153, February.
    15. Naveed Ahmad & Yuming Zhu & Muhammad Ibrahim & Muhammad Waqas & Abdul Waheed, 2018. "Development of a Standard Brownfield Definition, Guidelines, and Evaluation Index System for Brownfield Redevelopment in Developing Countries: The Case of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, November.
    16. Hongli Lin & Yuming Zhu & Jiahe Zhou & Bingxu Mu & Caihong Liu, 2022. "Stakeholder Engagement Behavior(s) in Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: A Network Embeddedness Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-21, May.
    17. Raul P. Lejano & Anne Taufen Wessells, 2006. "Community and Economic Development: Seeking Common Ground in Discourse and in Practice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(9), pages 1469-1489, August.
    18. Mellor, P. & Lord, R.A. & João, E. & Thomas, R. & Hursthouse, A., 2021. "Identifying non-agricultural marginal lands as a route to sustainable bioenergy provision - A review and holistic definition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    19. Tonin, Stefania & Bonifaci, Pietro, 2020. "Assessment of brownfield redevelopment opportunities using a multi-tiered approach: A case in Italy," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    20. Donaldson, Ross & Lord, Richard, 2018. "Can brownfield land be reused for ground source heating to alleviate fuel poverty?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 344-355.

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa15p1450. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.