From the compact city to the cross-border agglomeration: analysing Geneva’s planning narratives (1970s–2020s)
This article argues that planning narratives can be mobilized as resources through a simultaneous hybridization of temporalities and territorial scales. We draw on Ameel’s (2021) typology of planning narratives and propose to complement it by distinguishing a) project narratives promoting a persuasi...
محفوظ في:
| الحاوية / القاعدة: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/articulo, |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون الرئيسيون: | , |
| التنسيق: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| منشور في: |
Journal of Urban Research
2025
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوصول للمادة أونلاين: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| الملخص: | This article argues that planning narratives can be mobilized as resources through a simultaneous hybridization of temporalities and territorial scales. We draw on Ameel’s (2021) typology of planning narratives and propose to complement it by distinguishing a) project narratives promoting a persuasive vision of the future, from b) continuity narratives seeking consensus on a certain vision of the status quo. We then examine the evolution of planning narratives elaborated by the Genevan authorities over five decades (1970s–2020s). Our longitudinal analysis demonstrates that, until the mid-1990s, Geneva’s masterplans were articulated around a ‘compact-city myth’ relying on continuity narratives aiming to preserve the canton’s agricultural belt while exporting urban sprawl in neighboring France. Then, from the mid-1990s to the late 2000s, ‘project narratives’ shifted to emphasize the multipolar character of the cross-border agglomeration surrounding Geneva. Finally, since the 2010s, we observe a notable comeback of the compact city myth, thereby creating tension between project and continuity narratives. This tension is exacerbated by sustainability objectives whose territorial deployment remains deliberately vague. We therefore encourage future studies to pay more attention to this simultaneous hybridity of planning narratives regarding their temporality and their spatiality. |
|---|