CORE READINGS

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2020) IFRC World Disasters Report 2020. Geneva: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

https://media.ifrc.org/ifrc/ world-disaster-report-2020/

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018) ‘Summary for Policymakers — Global Warming of 1.5 oC’, in Global Warming of 1.5°C. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/ https://items.ssrc.org/understanding-katrina/ theres-no-such-thing-as-a-natural-disaster/

An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva: World Meteorological Organization.

Smith, N. (2006) ‘There’s No Such Thing as a Natural Disaster’, Social Science Research Council, 11 June.

Video

Xuereb, M. (2020) How Architecture Can Fight Climate Change. (TEDxToronto).

https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=tHMLhm3hc5c&t=183s

References

Auffhammer, M. (2019) The (economic) Impacts of Climate Change: Some Implications for Asian Economies. Asian Development Bank Institute, p. 31. Available at: https://www.adb. org/publications/economic-impacts-climatechange-implications-asian-economies

Cramer, N. (2017) The Climate Is Changing. so Must Architecture., Architect. Available at: https:// www.architectmagazine.com/design/editorial/ the-climate-is-changing-so-must-architecture_o

Earth Science Communications Team - NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, H. (2021) Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know? NASA. Available at: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

Escobar, A. (2018) Designs for the Pluriverse: Radical Interdependence, Autonomy, and the Making of Worlds. Durham: Duke University Press (New ecologies for the twenty-first century).

Fitz, A. and Kransy, E. (eds) (2019) Critical Care: Architecture and Urbanism for a Broken Planet. Cambridge, MA and London: The MIT Press.

Davis, I. (1978) Shelter After Disaster. Oxford: Oxford Polytechnic Press.

Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (2018)

‘Synthesizing the State of Knowledge to Better Understand Displacement Related to Slow Onset Events’. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/ files/resource/WIM%20TFD%20I.2%20Output.pdf

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2021) What Is a Disaster? - Ifrc, IFRC. Available at: https://www.ifrc.org/ en/what-we-do/disaster-management/ about-disasters/what-is-a-disaster/

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (2021) WDR 2005Chapter 2: Run, Tell Your Neighbour! Hurricane Warning in the Caribbean - Ifrc. IFRC. Available at: https://www.ifrc.org/en/publications-andreports/world-disasters-report/wdr2005/ wdr-2005---chapter-2-run-tell-your-neighbour- hurricane-warning-in-the-caribbean/ Islam, S.N. and Winkel, J. (2017) ‘Climate Change and Social Inequality: Desa Working Paper No. 152’. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Available at: https://www. un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018) ‘Summary for Policymakers — Global Warming of 1.5 oC’, in Global Warming of 1.5°C. Available at: https:// www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/

Los Angeles Times (2005) Cuban Hurricane Preparation Offers Lessons in Organization, Los Angeles Times. Available at: https:// www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm2005-sep-10-na-cuba10-story.html

McClean, D. (2021) Sendai Framework 6th Anniversary: Time to Recognize There Is No Such Thing as a Natural Disaster - We’re Doing It to Ourselves. ReliefWeb. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/world/ sendai-framework-6th-anniversary-timerecognize-there-no-such-thing-natural-disaster Smith, N. (2006) There’s No Such Thing as a Natural Disaster. Social Science Research Council, 11 June. Available at: https:// items.ssrc.org/understanding-katrina/ theres-no-such-thing-as-a-natural-disaster/ Squires, G.D. and Hartman, C.W. (2007) There Is No Such Thing as a Natural Disaster: Race, Class, and Hurricane Katrina. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Available at: https://www. routledge.com/There-is-No-Such-Thing-as-aNatural-Disaster-Race-Class-and-Hurricane/ Squires-Hartman/p/book/9780415954877

United Nations Climate Change Secretariat (2017) Opportunities and Options for Integrating Climate Change Adaptation with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. United Nations Climate Change Secretariat. Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/ files/resource/techpaper_adaptation.pdf

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2021) What Is the Paris Agreement?, The Paris Agreement | UNFCCC. Available at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/ the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (2021) Disaster, UNDRR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/terminology/disaster

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (2020) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. UNDRR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendaiframework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030

Xuereb, M. (2020) How Architecture Can Fight Climate Change. (TEDxToronto). Available at: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=tHMLhm3hc5c&t=183s

Migration

Learning Objectives

1. To become familiar with the main terminology used when referring to displaced people and the key concepts around them, such as international human rights and national obligations. To challenge concepts like home, nation, integration and citizenship.

2. To gain an understanding of what it is like to be transitory through the journeys of different displaced people, and how this affects their habitational needs.

3. To understand the relationship between place and displacement, and the different contexts that refugees and migrants find themselves in, such as refugee camps and urban areas.

Defining Migration

The 21st Century has been termed the ‘century of the migrant’ due to both the extent of movement and the related debates such movement has triggered, making the migrant a central political figure. (Nail, 2015) Migration, however, is a controversial phenomenon. There are many different ways to interpret the term ‘migrant’, but no definition of ‘migrant’ actually exists in law. While some international organisations relate migration strictly to individuals’ quests to improve their existence, (UNHCR, 2016 cited in Karakoulaki, Southgate et al., 2018) others define it as movement within or across borders, notwithstanding its reasons, legal status or the duration of stay. (IOM, n.d. cited in Karakoulaki et al., 2018) One of the key difficulties around migration, therefore, is that of terminology, since many terms are used interchangeably. Moreover, recently the number of classifications of people ‘on the move’ has multiplied, further complicating the issue. (Crawley and Skleparis, 2017)

While there has never been a time when people have not moved across bounded spaces, (Isayev, 2018) the way in which such movement has been perceived, quantified and compounded is very much dependent on geopolitical conjunctures. A second challenge when dealing with migration comes in understanding who is being counted as a migrant. This entirely depends on the categories used to analyse migration, and is very much connected to a problem inherent in the depiction of migration. Migration is commonly thought of in terms of ‘flows’, represented on maps as arrows with widths proportional to the numbers of people moving. (Migreurop, 2012)

Migration and the City

Whether occurring within national borders or across them, migration is mostly oriented to cities. Urban space is the primary terrain upon which migrationrelated phenomena unfold. (Hatziprokopiou et al., 2016, p.53) As such, migration is inherently linked with the notion of diversity and how this impacts urban areas. Diversity has become a major characteristic of many cities across the globe, and in itself has been the subject of further qualification, from super-diversity to hyper-diversity. (Vertovec, 2007) These concepts have been conceived as ways of considering diversity beyond ethnically driven biases. They have emerged out of the intention to recognise multidimensional shifts in migration patterns, whereas other factors such as age and economic characteristics complexify often reductive and homogenising views on who migrates and why. (Vertovec, 2007; Meissner and Vertovec, 2015)

Diversity, in its various meanings, has also challenged the ways in which migrants have settled in cities. For several decades the standard migrant spaces in cities were thought to be ethnic enclaves (ethnically homogeneous congregations) and ghettos (forced spatial segregation). (Peach, 2005) These are both examples of spatial patterns of ethnic residential segregation. They have sparked heated debate over whether the clustering of same-origin migrants is (or not) a productive step in terms of their ‘assimilation’ or ‘integration’ into new urban areas. Clearly, this interrogation is rooted in a perspective that imagines that migrants have to fundamentally modify their behaviour to conform with the ‘host’, who already has strongly shared cultural norms and values [See module 3. Social Exclusion].

In the case of the ethnic enclave, its association with ethnic entrepreneurship and economies has led to questions on whether, and in what ways, concentrations of people with a shared geographic origin is beneficial in terms of livelihood formation and consolidation. Ethnic streets and economic enclaves represent a clear illustration of how particular groups coalesce. However, these have also become sites of discussion around diversity, since they are spaces where everyday encounters between diverse groups take place. They exemplify how diversity is experienced and lived daily. (Amin, 2002)

Recently, in contrast with the negative connotations that have characterised ghettos and ethnic enclaves, more composite concepts of ‘arrival infrastructure’, ‘arrival neighbourhood’ and ‘arrival cities’ have been advanced (Meeus, Arnaut and van Heur, 2018; Saunders, 2011). This has led to a focus on those parts of the urban fabric “within which newcomers become entangled on arrival, and where their future local or translocal social mobilities are produced as much as negotiated” (Meeus, Arnaut and van Heur, 2008, p.1). Placing emphasis on arrival has transcended the focus on the rights of migrants to actually arrive and stay. It has also extended the number of groups who may be interested in such arrival infrastructure, to include other transient and temporary persons who do not have migrant backgrounds.

Other spatial configurations associated with migration, that share a more ambiguous relationship with the urban context, are planned camps and spontaneous encampments (Agier, 2018). Both are associated with ‘temporary status’ and are viewed as being other than the city. Although some camps have, with time, become very urban in their morphological and socio-economic configurations, they are still exceptional due to the suspended rights of their inhabitants, who may experience a condition of ‘permanent temporariness’. Camps are planned settlements that provide basic needs and protection to those displaced (usually) by conflict or natural hazard. Whereas encampments are spontaneous occupations that occur when a people’s movement is hindered or suspended, thus making such occurrences particularly visible.

Addressing Migration through Spatial Planning / Urban Design

Conceptual and practical questions have arisen about how to cater for the growing diversity of urban users and manage their dynamic coexistence in shared environments [See module 10. Ethics in Built Environment Practice]. Moving away from the assimilationist model of ‘integration’, the notions of ‘cosmopolis’ and the ‘intercultural city’ have been advanced. (Landry and Wood, 2007; Sandercock, 1998; 2003) These highlight the stimulating exchanges that derive from encounters between highly diverse profiles. It is when dealing with the interrelationship between diversity and place that urban design and planning policies come to the fore. Planning must manage existing superdiverse conditions, and also achieve diversity where it may not currently be present. Social mix policies have been implemented, with rather mixed results, in the attempt to avoid socio-spatial segregation and, less straightforwardly, the clustering of sameorigin migrants.

However, urban design and planning has expressed further preoccupations. It extends its scope of action beyond promoting social diversity, and considers functional or land-use diversity to be equally important. In such contexts, one of the underlying questions concerns the role that physical design can play in enabling diversity: “the appropriate question for planners is not whether the built environment creates diversity, but whether diversity thrives better, or can be sustained longer, under certain physical conditions that planners may have some control over”. (Talen, 2006, p.242) The reinforcement of the public realm, and its nonresidential uses, has been viewed as a key provision for promoting diversity while avoiding conflict. While social infrastructure and public amenities as ‘micro-publics’ for multi-directional encounters are important, designing spaces to enable encounters in a superdiverse context is a different challenge. This raises questions over which spatial characteristics diverse sites of encounter should include in order to fully host diversity.

Environments that have been viewed as effective in accommodating diversity are those that foster social interaction while simultaneously creating distinct domains where different preferences can be expressed and individual cultures can be emphasized and celebrated. (Knapp, 2009) A relevant example is the Superkilen park in Copenhagen, Denmark, conceived in the broader context of a regeneration project in the district of Nørrebro. To celebrate diversity, the designers asked residents representing more than 60 nationalities to suggest objects from around the globe, several of which found their way into the park’s final design. The park epitomises the vision of a cosmopolitan city. This vision is embraced by several urban areas that are profiled to be multicultural centres where diversity is an asset.