Comparing Policy Rationales and Narratives of the Global South and North in the Resilient Cities Network

The Resilient Cities Network, formerly known as the 100 Resilient Cities, supports the development of local resilience policies in partaking cities from around the globe. Various policies in the network are an example of an upcoming trend where experiments are increasingly conducted in the urban space to shape governance. Experiments in this context are purposeful interventions to increase resilience through learning and the temporal and spatial diffusion of results. Experimentation and resilience are highlighted in the literature on political ecology for policies presumably leading to urban transformations. Both approaches face strikingly similar critiques, namely that related rationales and narratives frequently maintain the political and economic status quo and reproduce socially unjust urban realities. However, they are rarely examined together and empirical findings are missing when it comes to comparative research; particularly between the Global South and North. Against this background, this paper asks: Which role plays social justice in rationales and narratives of resilience experiments in Global South and Global North cities? I examine experimental policy actions in Global South and North cities of the Resilient Cities Network (N = 112) qualitatively through an analytic lens that links a social justice understanding to the setting, agency, and design of resilience experiments. Based on this analysis, I compare the results to explore emerging patterns of the role given to social justice in urban resilience experimentation across cities of the Global South and North. The findings show that narratives in Global North cities revolve stronger around recognising social justice, but Global South cities put more emphasis on marginalised groups and learning mechanisms that potentially foster social justice through output legitimacy.