000			02097nab a2200253 4500
999			_c11331 _d11331
003			OSt
005			20210224121724.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			210224b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aMarx, Colin _943803
245			_aKnowing urban informalities
260			_bSage _c2019
300			_aVol 56, Issue 3, 2019 : (494-509 p.)
520			_aHow do Anglophone urban scholars know urban informalities? This article reviews three dominant ways of knowing urban informality, noting that, despite the profoundly rich insights they each provide, two critiques of the overall concept endure. These are that the concept is often imprecise, and that the contribution to knowing ‘the urban’ more generally remains clearly circumscribed to the ‘urban non-west’. In our view, these limitations curtail the possibilities of sharpening our understanding of the relationship to inequalities and injustices. We work with these critiques, suggesting that they represent two sides of the same problem, associated with binaries. In doing so, we build on the existing emphasis on practices and work across the three dominant ways of knowing urban informalities. This reveals that binaries are not held together magically and transparently so that each is the mirror opposite. Instead, the difference is constituted through unnamed aspects of common denominators – two of which we highlight (property rights and aesthetics) – and may be intrinsic to the way urban informality has come to develop. It is through the latent power relations that inhere in these common denominators that urban scholars can achieve greater conceptual precision and make different contributions to broader urban theory committed to challenging injustices.
650			_adevelopment _943807
650			_atheory _943808
650			_aurban informality _943809
650			_apoverty/exclusion _943810
650			_aplanning _943811
700			_aKelling, Emily _943812
773	0		_011188 _915499 _dsage, 2019. _tUrban studies
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018770848
942			_2ddc _cART