V. I. Filonenko, L. A. Shtompel, O. M. Shtompel. City and “Urbanˮ: Identity and Difference

UDК 338.28(1-21)

DOI: 10.15507/2413-1407.118.030.202201.204-225

Abstract

Introduction. The current global trend of changing the urban form, which is expressed in the development of suburbs and in the transfer of business centers in megalopolises from central business districts to peripheral ones, actualizes the problem of identifying what is preserving in these new urban formations from “urban” properly. Purpose of the article is on the basis of theoretical understanding of the essence of “urbanicity” and the results of the conducted empirical research to identify the possibility of preserving “urban” during the transformation of the urban form.

Materials and Methods. The materials of the study were the data of a sociological survey of residents of southern Russian cities. 1532 people from all types of cities in the Southern Federal District were interviewed by the questionnaire method. The conceptual framework of the analysis was a combination of spatial and cultural-anthropological approaches. This made it possible to interpret the citizens’ assessments of their life in cities as a representation of the degree of presence of the urban element in their lives.

Results. The performed analysis of the collected empirical material has revealed that “urban” in modern southern Russian cities is being eroded. This is expressed in the general dissatisfaction with the cultural level of those around them, in the feeling of insufficient security, in the incompleteness of the feeling of happiness from life in the city, in the highlighted shortcomings of open public spaces, in the passivity of the townspeople.

Discussion and Conclusion. The future of cities is determined not only by spatial transformations and technological innovations, but by the ability to preserve the “urban” basis per se: that is, the ability to ensure the safety, diversity, communication and freedom of townspeople. “Urban” is an effective connection with the city of every city dweller as an active participant in its life, and not only as a consumer of ready-made urban forms. The analysis of the collected material has been targeted at the regional authorities implementing urban and cultural policy. The research results may prove useful to civil society institutions promoting interaction between the administration and urban residents.

Keywords: city, urban, urban form, exopolis, postmetropolis, diversity, public space, culture, city dweller

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

For citation: Filonenko V.I., Shtompel L.A., Shtompel O.M. City and “Urbanˮ: Identity and Difference. Regionology = Russian Journal of Regional Studies. 2022; 30(1):204-225. doi: https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.118.030.202201.204-225

REFERENCES

1. Soja E.W. Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions. Oxford; Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2000. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Postmetropolis%3A+Critical+Studies+of+Cities+and+Regions-p-9781577180012 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

2. Lang R.E. Edgeless Cities: Exploring the Elusive Metropolis. Washington: Brookings Institutions Press; 2003. Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Edgeless-Cities-Exploring-Elusive-Metropolis/dp/0815706111 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

3. Zamyatin D.N. Post-City (II): Cartographies of Imaginaton and Co-spatiality Politics. Sociologicheskoe obozrenie = Sociological Review. 2019; 18(1):9-34. Available at: https://sociologica.hse.ru/2019-18-1/256971607.html (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

4. Zamyatin D.N. Post-City (III): Co-spatiality Politics and New Mediality. Sociologicheskoe obozrenie = Sociological Review. 2020;19(3):232-266. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2020-3-232-266

5. Zamyatin D.N. Post-City: Space and Ontological Models of Imagination. Politicheskie issledovaniya = Polis. Political Studies. 2018; (3):147-165. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2018.03.10

6. Napalkova I.G., Soldatova A.S., Kurochkina K.V. Specifics of the Development of the Ethno-National Space of Modern Russia as a Factor in Nation Building: A Strategic Situational Analysis. Regionology = Russian Journal of Regional Studies. 2019; 27(4):734-755. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.109.027.201904.734-755

7. Filippov A.F. Sociology of Space. Logos. Filosofsko-literaturnyj zhurnal = Logos. Philosophical and Literary Journal. 2000; 10(2):113-151. Available at: https://logosjournal.ru/archive/2000/476698/ (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Russ.)

8. Yanicki O.N. Metabolic Concept of Modern City. Sociologicheskaya nauka i socialnaya praktika = Sociological Science and Social Practice. 2013; (3):16-32. Available at: https://www.jour.fnisc.ru/index.php/snsp/article/view/2997 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

9. Lebedeva N.A., Mitin I.I. From City towards Exopolis? Urban Cultural Landscape in Critical Geography & Geohumanities. Chelovek: Obraz i sushchnost. Gumanitarnye aspekty = Human Being: Image and Essence. Humanitarian Aspects. 2019; (36):197-220. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.31249/chel/2019.01.00

10. Silái I., Vitková L. Public Spaces and the Reflection of Society and its Culture. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 2017; 245(4). (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/245/4/042009

11. Mulley C., Nelson J.D., eds. Urban Form and Accessibility. Elsevier; 2020. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/urban-form-and-accessibility/mulley/978-0-12-819822-3 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

12. Galderisi A., Colucci A., eds. Smart, Resilient and Transition Cities Emerging Approaches and Tools for A Climate-Sensitive Urban Development. Elsevier; 2018. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/smart-resilient-and-transition-cities/galderisi/978-0-12-811477-3 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

13. Renn O., Ulmer F., Deckert A. The Role of Public Participation in Energy Transitions. Cambridge, Mass.: Academic Press; 2020. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-02096-4

14. Hemphill T.A. The Innovation Governance Dilemma: Alternatives to the Precautionary Principle. Technology in Society. 2020; 63. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101381

15. Bermúdez C., Carlos J., König R. The Role of Technologies and Citizen Organizations in Decentralized Forms of Participation. A Case Study about Residential Streets in Vienna. Technology in Society. 2021; 66. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101604

16. Ross A., Godwyll J., Searle M. Walking Mediates Associations between the Neighborhood Environment and Flourishing. Wellbeing, Space and Society. 2021; 2. (In Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2020.100014

17. Pile S. What is a city? In: Massey D., Allen J., Pile S., eds. City Worlds. London: Routledge; 1999. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9780203980323-8/city-john-allen-doreen-massey-steve-pile (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

18. Massey D. Cities in the World. In: Massey D., Allen J., Pile S., eds. City Worlds. London: Routledge; 1999. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9780203980323-10/cities-world-john-allen-doreen-massey-steve-pile?context=ubx&refId=ad657876-4193-433d-bf7a-3d88ea0e8fd0 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Eng.)

19. Shtompel L.A. Cities Creating Us: Transformation of the Participation Culture. Gradostroitelnoe parvo = Town-Planning Law. 2020; (3):35-38. Available at: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=43817996 (accessed 24.06.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

20. Simmel G. The Metropolis and Mental Life. Logos. Filosofsko-literaturnyj zhurnal = Logos. Philosophical and Literary Journal. 2002; (3):23-34. Available at: https://www.ruthenia.ru/logos/number/34/02.pdf (accessed: 24.06.2021). (In Russ.)

Submitted 30.06.2021; approved after reviewing 31.08.2021; accepted for publication 16.09.2021.

About the authors:

Victor I. Filonenko, Professor, Institute of Philosophy and Socio-Political Sciences, Director of the Center for Socio-Political Research, Southern Federal University (105/42 B. Sadovaya St., Rostov-on-Don 344006, Russian Federation), Doc. Sci. (Sciology), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6967-7683, vfilonenko@sfedu.ru

Liudmila A. Shtompel, Professor, Department of Theory of Culture, Ethics and Aesthetics of the Institute of Philosophy and Political Sciences, Southern Federal University (105/42 B. Sadovaya St., Rostov-on-Don 344006, Russian Federation), Doc. Sci (Philosophy), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7358-1940, Scopus ID: 57204318981, lashtompel@sfedu.ru

Oleg M. Shtompel, Professor, Department of Theory of Culture, Ethics and Aesthetics of the Institute of Philosophy and Socio-Political Sciences, Southern Federal University (105/42 B. Sadovaya St., Rostov-on-Don 344006, Russian Federation), Doc. Sci. (Philosophy), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6881-0806, Scopus ID: 57204313743, omshtompel@sfedu.ru

Contribution of the authors:

V. I. Filonenko – academic supervision; collection and processing of data; critical analysis and revision of the text.

L. A. Shtompel – academic supervision; concept formation; collection and processing of data; qualitative analysis of the results; preparation of the initial version of the text and its subsequent revision; formulation of conclusions.

O. M. Shtompel – analysis of the literature on the research problem; development of research methodology; revision of the text of the article; formulation of conclusions.

The authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

To download article