ARTICLE: CRITICAL REVIEW
ARTICLE ONE:
Introduction: International Perspectives on the New Enclavism and the Rise of Gated Communities
The article focuses on the aspects and concepts pointing towards the gated communities and gathers together some revised versions of papers in Glasgow, Scotland in September 2003 (2005) as this aims to discuss the significance, relative problems and benefits associated with the international rise of gated communities as there tend to cluster around housing development that restricts public access, usually through the use of gates, booms, walls and fences. ( 2005) The article argues that such residential areas may also employ security staff in order to monitor access. It can be acceptable that the growth of such private spaces has provoked debates on how such good developments evolve that easily. According to the authors, the article presents an opportunity to gather together contemporary and diverse views on what is agreed to be a radical urban form within the gated communities. The article imposes that living in a gated community means signing up to a legal framework which allows the extraction of monies to help pay for maintenance of common-buildings, common services, such as rubbish collection, and other revenue costs such as paying staff to clean or secure the neighborhood. (2005)
This has led the people back to the important physical aspects of the certain process of urban developments that were reflected within the ideal structures of those gates and walls enclosing space otherwise expected to be publicly accessible. The article claims that these gated communities may possibly be defined as walled or fenced housing developments, to which public access is restricted, characterized by legal agreements which tie the residents to a common code of conduct and the collective responsibility for management and it is often argued that gated communities express more than a simple constellation of particular physical and socio-legal characteristics. ( 2005 ) The article describes the principles that linked towards new urbanism of the community as supported by the built environment surrounding the people as there were clear examples of an attempt to grow defensible space and the means to exclude the unwanted. The article claims that the people can now observe a continuum of ‘gating’ (2005 ) which can be seen moving between symbolic and more concrete examples that may suggest a lack of ‘permeability’ (2005 ) in the built environment directed at achieving increasingly privatized lifestyles, through the pursuit of security and attempting for self-imposed exclusion from the wider neighborhood as well as the exclusion of others from the gated community, which has driven a much wider debate about the relative merits of gating and other strategies to achieve security, when set alongside other key concerns such as freedom of access to the wider city, social inclusion and territorial justice.
For analysis, it can be clear in the article that, gated communities have already divided many observers, critically over whether ability to pay for security and privacy should allow such voluntary social exclusion and access to these bubbles of safety. According to the article, observers have suggested that urban segregation has represented the crystallization of social divisions and problems that are largely negative in their impact like in the empathy generated by meeting people of different social backgrounds and experiences and there claims made by (2002) that the residential choices of society at large have important secondary impacts on those with least choice and whose concentration dislocates and disconnects them from prospects for personal development. The article integrates the process of gating surrounds, this is an attempt to disengage with wider urban problems and responsibilities to create a ‘weightless’ ( 2004;2001) experience of the urban environment with elite fractions seamlessly moving between secure residential, workplace, education and leisure destinations ( 2004; 2001).
However, the centralized taxation and spending systems cut across place of residence and link people of diverse social positions together in socially homogeneous areas. Aside, the gated communities appear as segregated spaces with a social ecology that is planted into the fabric of the city; where the wall starts a new social area begins, whether one lives inside or out. There mentions of linking legitimate fears to personal residential choice is difficult to challenge in the abstract and yet, in areas of social life where the decision to go it alone would have deleterious consequences for others, the state regularly and legitimately intervenes to reduce negative wider outcomes. As argued by (1958), gated communities represent a desire for accentuated positive freedoms implying the ability to do something for others in adjacent neighborhoods and along growing consumer and media interest the US and South African models of such development may form templates for understanding this direction in preferences, primarily directed by fear, privacy and predictability. (1958) As it is evident from the article that such gated communities might be seen as barometers indicating the future shape and scale of social forces linked to social fear and aspirations toward ex-territoriality (2000).
In evaluation, the article explains the significance of gated communities contributing to social pressures and that directing where and how people live. It was also said that those gated communities have provided a rich vein for research since they conflict with the personal politics and wider ideals often enshrined in planning frameworks as well as attempts at achieving relative social justice and balance in the neighborhood context. The article stated the withdrawal of the generally affluent into gated enclaves presents us with a range of possibilities. (2005) First, a loss of social diversity in the neighborhoods that have left leading to a revisualization of exited locales, thus reinforcing tendencies toward social segregation. Second, the displacement of crime away from increasingly hardened targets, inhabited by those who can afford access to security, towards those areas which present softer targets. ( 2005 ) This article reflects on issues and provides a range of explanatory and descriptive frameworks for trying to understand why gated communities have arisen, why they persist and whether or not normative theories of the good city should challenge gated neighborhoods as desirable in a context of wider social justice in the city as the article is not the last in continuing to present a controversial topic for analysis by urban and housing researchers. (2005 )
ARTICLE TWO:
Some Reflections on the Economic and Political Organization of Private Neighborhoods
This article deals about the spreading of privately organized and often gated neighborhoods in many regions of the world has triggered a widespread discussion about the relations between social and urban development. The article involve certain presentation on some reflections on the economic and political organization of such type of housing such as the club goods as the theory is used to explain the potential attractiveness of this form of housing for developers, local governments as well as residents but, the club goods theory alone does not enable one to understand the global but regionally differentiated development. (2004) The article has proposed to view the analysis of private neighborhoods as club economies against the background of historically and regionally differentiated patterns of urban governance which render urban development path-dependent. (2004 ) Thus it mentions that in order to evaluate the political and social consequences, the private neighborhoods are analyzed as a new form of political organization and are compared with a territorial organization with public municipalities. (2004 )
The spreading of private and often gated neighborhoods in many regions of the world has triggered a new and widespread discussion about the relations between social and urban development. Therefore, it often remains unclear what exactly is privatized and how privatization is carried out. There describes the private neighborhoods as a ‘privatization of public space’ tend to dichotomize between a public realm and a private realm; they often focus unilaterally on material changes in space and therefore risk blocking from view a more profound and differentiated analysis of the complex socioeconomic and socio-political changes which are under way with the spreading of private neighborhoods. (2004) However, several authors have argued that the economic and political functioning of private neighborhoods might not be as different from public municipalities as usually assumed. The analysis of private neighborhoods as territorial club economies explains the potential attractiveness of this form of housing for developers and local governments as well as residents. However, the writings relating the club goods theory with the spread of private neighborhoods tend to overlook the social construction of institutions, the differing interests in society and the unequal distribution of power. ( 2004) Thus, this article has proposed of the analyzed private neighborhoods as club economies against the background of historically and regionally differentiated patterns of urban governance and second, to critically evaluate the private neighborhoods as shareholder democracies.
Also, it was clear in the articles that gated communities meet certain of the principles people advocate as planners as gated developments can facilitate higher densities by making compact urban form more palatable to consumers. They have strong amenity standards, design qualities and green spaces and often employ reduced lot setbacks and road dimensions. These communities facilitate traffic calming and may generate a sense of place, character and community as supported by gated enclaves. Gated developments limit street connectivity and rarely further transit goals but seldom include a mix of uses or affordable housing enhancing land use, class and age segregation. It is crucial that they fly in the face of aims of social integration and cohesion at the larger urban scale as there needs to understand what draws people to gated developments. Alternatives to gating have to offer neighborhoods that can create character, promise privacy and security, feature desirable local amenities and manage traffic effectively. If current trends continue, though, many communities seem likely to accept gating, especially in the parts of the country that are growing rapidly, and where older residents constitute an important segment of the market. The presence of strong design guidelines used in many cities with gated enclaves seek to keep walls attractive and minimize the visual impact of the developments to managing gated developments where enclaves are accepted in the marketplace. Concerns about segregated projects and the possible impacts of gating will not make private communities go away, nor will they reduce the demand for enclaves.
COMPARE AND CONTRAST
The articles share its comparison in such a way that there contents and flow of discussion points towards the concept of urbanization and built environment as supported by the ideas behind gated communities and the privatization of neighborhoods as the first article features gated communities (GCs) have become a common feature in urban areas around the world within investigation of a range of social, political and urban issues related to the rise of GCs as the other article integrates such organization of private neighborhoods respectively. ( 2003) There believes that gates augment the market value of residential developments by providing an impression of exclusivity and improving the feeling of security. Others contend that gates represent social segregation and that people residing in gated communities are not supportive of community services. (1997) However, there still can maintain the security of communities without using gates through the use of such alternatives like for instance, the privatization of the neighborhood crime monitoring program as well as the use of passive security devices. Some say gated communities offer security and exclusivity. Others see them as nasty social dividers as caught in the middle of the cross fire are builders who must decide which side is right. (2003)
Meanwhile, several critics have seized on gated communities as symbols of social segregation. (1994) the author of "Privatopia: Homeowner Associations and the Rise of Residential Private Government," thinks gates cause social and economic segregation the same way race-restricted covenants did in an earlier era. As he pointed out, ‘people who live in gated communities are saying that they don't support public services that support a community’. (1994) As said, ‘’gated communities are special districts that aren't built into the intergovernmental framework, even radical libertarians admit that public safety is the essential public function, it's a medieval approach - with builders turning into feudal lords offering refuge from the hordes’’. (1994) Thus, it can be that the state action doctrine should be used to address the social harms residential associations inflict on nonmembers through racial discrimination and restrictions on free speech and movement. (1994) These articles fully suggest that private neighborhoods as well as gated communities upon which adheres the state actors is the proper approach to regulating serious harm that may affect the lifestyle of every individual within the community. In the articles, there imposes a form of such external force that relates to a successful urbanization within the neighboring communities as well as the assuming of authority control over facilities created at public expense, such process can lead off to such additional public resources through the adaptation of livable environment due to urbanization of the gated houses and neighborhoods. (1994)
The articles implied that such gated communities have increased in number and spread across the country like, in the lifestyle communities which include leisure activities and amenities the residents want to protect, the elite communities are the communities for the rich and famous and security zone communities are created to keep crime and outsiders out within the those gated communities. (2000) Long-term crime rates are not affected by the installation of gates and fences, but residents feel safer. There argues that, no evidence found to support the idea of greater community spirit even if the gated communities have sprung up everywhere, the process was not the normal way of doing so. (2000) The private neighborhood may relate as the retirement and leisure communities but in recent years, these private neighborhoods and gated communities have been erected in nearly every metropolitan area within the country. (2003) In addition, the evidence indicates that homes in these communities do appreciate in value faster than those outside the walls. Moreover, these neighborhoods and gated communities were retirement villages for the wealthy. (. 2002 ) Today, such places create not only physical barriers but many privatized services; moreover, they are governed by a legal, not a social, contract administered by a homeowners association. Indeed there is some concern that the concept might spread to states where it is legally easier to create local government, thus further hardening the divisions between citizens. (2002)
The lifestyle communities are leisure communities and retirement and suburban new towns. The prestige gated communities are the fastest growing type in the nation elsewhere. (1999 ) The articles noted that gated communities are a symbol of underlying social tensions and has examine the issues of race, poverty, crime and sub-urbanization that are the backdrop for the communities and that such privatization of neighborhoods do not work fully in order offer several other solutions, such as crime prevention through environmental design which seeks to re-create neighborhoods; traffic calming; and sustainable community programs.
_____________________
0 comments:
Post a Comment