SOCIAL JUSTICE AND

THE CITY
(DAVID HARVEY)
 SOCIAL JUSTICE AND THE CITY

 A CRITIQUE OF LIBERAL
FORMULATIONS
 THE ANALYSIS HAS TO DEAL WITH
THE SOCIAL PROBLEMS THAT
REQUIRE SOCIAL JUSTICE IN THE
URBAN SYSTEMS
FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM TO BE
INVESTIGATED

 HOW TO ARRIVE AT A
REDISTRIBUTION THAT IS NOT
ONLY EFFICIENT BUT ALSO JUST?
 ANALYSE

 THE REAL INCOME DISTRIBUTION

IN THE CITY
 INCLUDE THE “EXTERNAL EFFECTS”
SUCH AS MECHANISMS THAT WORK
AGAINST THE GOOD INTENTIONS OF
THOSE WHO WISH TO IMPLEMENT
SOCIAL POLICIES OF REDISTRIBUTION
IN FAVOUR OF LOW-INCOME GROUPS
 DEFINITION OF REAL INCOME

 VALUE OF MARKET RIGHTS EXERCISED

IN CONSUMPTION
 CHANGE IN PROPERTY RIGHTS AS
MEASURED FROM ONE PERIOD TO THE
NEXT
 STATEMENT

 THE INCAPACITY OF MARKET

MECHANISMS TO DISTRIBUTE
RESOURCES EFFICIENTLY DUE TO
EXTERNAL EFFECTS CONSTITUTES A
PROBLEM
 STATEMENT

 FROM A POLICY POINT OF VIEW THIS

PROVIDES A LOGICAL BASIS FOR
INTERVENTION BY THE PUBLIC SECTOR
IN SAID MARKET MECHANISMS.
THIS ALSO PROMPTS THE DIFFICULT
QUESTIONS OF WHO HAS THE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PRODUCTION
OF PUBLIC GOODS AND HOW THEY ARE
TO BE PRODUCED.
 MOREOVER

WE ALSO FIND MANY “MIXED” GOODS IN

THE CITY
(FOR EXAMPLE A FIRE STATION, A LARGE
SUPERMARKET).
THESE GOODS ALSO AFFECT THE
REDISTRIBUTION OF REAL INCOME ON
THE BASIS OF ACCESSIBILITY.
 URBAN CONTEXT

THE CITY IS NOT A SYSTEM IN EQUILIBRIUM:

 THE POPULATION OF A CITY INCREASES OR
DIMINISHES
 INDUSTRIES ARRIVE IN THE CITY OR LEAVE IT

 THE CITY ATTRACTS SERVICES

 THERE ARE CONSTANT CHANGES IN THE

POSSIBILITIES OF ACCESS TO NEW SOURCES
OF WEALTH AND KNOWLEDGE
 SOCIAL INEQUALITY

 THE ADAPTIVE CAPACITY OF THE

DIFFERENT SOCIAL GROUPS IN
RELATION TO THESE CHANGES VARIES
FROM ONE SOCIAL CLASS TO ANOTHER.
 FOR INSTANCE, NEW TECHNOLOGIES
 ADAPTATION TO URBAN
TRANSFORMATIONS
 THE DISTANCE (TIME) BETWEEN THOSE WHO
ADAPT AT THE START AND THOSE WHO
MANAGE IT AT THE END CAN BE MORE THAN A
GENERATION
 GIVEN THAT THE CITY IS IN CONSTANT
TRANSFORMATION THE RYTHM OF
ADAPTATION TO THE CHANGES THAT OCCUR
WILL GENERATE NEW INEQUALITIES.
 GENERATORS OF NEW INEQUALITIES

 THE “EXTERNAL EFFECTS”

.
 THE PRICE OF ACCESSIBILITY

 THE COST OF PROXIMITY

 THE PRICE OF ACCESSIBILITY

THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT WHEN

IT CONCERNS HAVING ACCESS TO:

 EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES,
 RESOURCES (SUCH AS HOUSING), AND
 SOCIAL SERVICES.
 THE PRICE OF ACCESSIBILITY

 THE WAY TO MEASURE THE PRICE OF

ACCESSIBILITY IS:

THROUGH MEASURING THE COST OF

THE DISTANCE ONE HAS TO OVERCOME
(IN TIME AND MONEY) IN ORDER TO
REACH AND GAIN ACCESS TO A
PARTICULAR RESOURCE
 THE PRICE OF ACCESSIBILITY

 VARIES IN RELATION TO INCOME GROUPS.

EXAMPLES:
 THE TIME THAT STUDENTS PASS IN
TRANSPORT
 THE PRACTICAL IMPOSSIBILITY WHICH POOR
PEOPLE IN CITY CENTRES ENCOUNTER TO
FIND AND KEEP JOBS WHEN MOST
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE MOVED
TO THE OUTSKIRTS.
 THE PRICE OF ACCESSIBILITY

 IN BOTH CASES WE SEE:

SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS
THAT HAVE TO BE OVERCOME IN ORDER
TO HAVE ACCESS TO A PARTICULAR
RESOURCE.
HOWEVER, THE CAPACITIES TO
OVERCOME BARRIERS VARY FOR
MEMBERS OF SOCIETY (SOCIAL
CLASSES).
 CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROCESSES
OF RELOCALISATION OF
OPPORTUNITIES

 “THE INHABITANT OF A LOW-INCOME

ZONE IN THE INNER CITY HAS, IN
GENERAL FEWER OPPORTUNITIES TO
USE NEW SOURCES OF JOBS (…) AS A
RESULT THERE EXISTS A TENDENCY
TOWARDS EVER HIGHER LEVELS OF
UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE INNER CITY
DISTRICTS”
CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROCESSES
OF RELOCALISATION OF
OPPORTUNITIES
 “GIVEN THE LOW ELASTICITY AND THE
INFLEXIBILITY IN THE LOCALISATION OF
NEW LOW-COST HOUSING, THE LOW-INCOME
FAMILY HAS FEW OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE
TO SUBURBAN DISTRICTS AND IS
CONFRONTED WITH RISING HOUSE PRICES
IN THE INNER CITY”
CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROCESSES
OF RELOCALISATION OF
OPPORTUNITIES

 “IF A MEMBER OF A LOW-INCOME

FAMILY FINDS A JOB IN THE SUBURBS
S/HE FACES TRANSPORT EXPENSES
HIGHER THAN S/HE SHOULD BE ABLE,
THEORETICALLY, TO SUPPORT”
 THE COST OF PROXIMITY

 THIS IS THE RESULT OF THE EFFECTS OF

LIVING NEXT TO SERVICES AND
INFRASTRUCTURES THAT THE POPULATION
DOES NOT USE DIRECTLY OR WHICH AFFECT
IT NEGATIVELY.
 LIVING CLOSE TO A SOURCE OF POLLUTION
WILL INCREASE THE COST OF LAUNDRY BUT
ALSO (AND THIS IS MORE DIFFICULT TO
MEASURE) THE COST OF STAYING HEALTHY.
 EXAMPLES (AIRPORT, FIRE STATION)
 LOCALISATION OF COLLECTIVE
SERVICES
 FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE
DISTRIBUTION AND OF THE CONSUMPTION
THE LOCALISATION OF CERTAIN SERVICES IS
OF GREAT IMPORTANCE FOR THOSE WHO LIVE
NEAR THEM.

 FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE

PRODUCTION OF PUBLIC GOODS THE
LOCALISATION CAN BE IRRELEVANT.
 LOCALISATION OF RESOURCES

 IT IS NECESSARY TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF

HOW DECISIONS ARE TAKEN WITH
RESPECT TO THE LOCALISATION OF
PUBLIC GOODS.
 POLITICAL PROCESSES INFLUENCE
GREATLY WHERE THE BENEFITS AND
THE EXTERNAL COSTS OF PUBLIC GOODS
WILL BE EXPERIENCED
 SOCIAL INEQUALITY

 THE DISEQUILIBRIUM PRODUCED BY THE

MARKET MECHANISMS AND BY THE
EXTERNAL EFFECTS REDISTRIBUTES
INCOME IN THE CITY IN A REGRESSIVE
WAY
 CHANGES IN PROPERTY RIGHTS

INTERVENING FACTORS:
 DEMOGRAFIC CHANGES
 PUBLIC POLICY INTERVENTION OF URBAN
REMODELLING
 NEW INVESTMENTS
 PLACEMENT OF DESIRABLE/NON DESIRABLE
INFRASTRUCTURES AND SERVICES
 FASHION
 GENERALLY FAVOUR HOUSING OWNERS IN
“DESIRABLE” DISTRICTS
 POLITICAL PROCESSES

 IN THE LOCAL CONTEXT THESE

PROCESSES FAVOUR THOSE WHO
ARE BETTER ORGANISED (IN
GENERAL HIGH-INCOME OR
MEDIUM/HIGH-INCOME GROUPS,
ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO HAVE
ORGANISED ECONOMIC INTERESTS)
  FINALLY

 SOCIAL VALUES, TOGETHER WITH THE

CULTURAL DYNAMIC OF THE URBAN
SYSTEM :

FAVOUR THOSE WITH HIGHER

QUALIFICATIONS AND HARM THE
SUBCULTURES