Disambiguating the southern urban critique Propositions, pathways and possibilities for a more global urban studies

• Published in: Urban studies (Edinburgh, Scotland) Vol. 57; no. 1; pp. 3 - 20
• Main Authors: Lawhon, Mary, Truelove, Yaffa
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, England Sage Publications, Ltd 01.01.2020; SAGE Publications; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Attention; Contingency; Convergence; Conversation; Critical junctures; Globalization; Hegemony; Interrogation; Ontology; Postcolonialism; Research methodology; Scholarship; Social exclusion; Traditions; Urban areas; Urban studies; Urbanism; politics; development; 社会公正; method; 地方化理论; 发展; 方法; 政治; southern urbanism; provincialising theory; 理论; 南方城市化; social justice; theory
• ISSN: 0042-0980; 1360-063X
• DOI: 10.1177/0042098019829412

Scholarship engaging with (northern) urban theory from the south has troubled the core of urban studies. At this critical juncture, we argue that it is important to clarify core propositions and call attention to points of convergence and dissonance amongst advocates of ‘the southern urban critique’. We briefly review foundational arguments for this scholarly community, then outline three distinct iterations of the source of this critique: the south is empirically different; EuroAmerican hegemony works to displace a diversity of intellectual traditions; and the postcolonial encounter requires the critical interrogation of research practices. We then consider whether the southern urban critique is an argument for the study of a distinct southern urbanism, an ontological position about the socio-spatial contingency of all theorisation or a tactical strategy for calling attention to marginalised places and ideas to be superseded by an urban studies of a world of cities. We hope our efforts contribute to further conversation and greater analytical clarity, enabling more rigorous and robust articulations of the precise objects and objectives of the southern urban critique in particular, and urban studies more generally. 南方学界对（北方）城市理论研究的参与困扰了城市研究的核心。在这个关键时刻，我们认为澄清核心命题、并引起人们对“南方城市批评”倡导者的趋同点和不和谐之处的关注是很重要的。我们简要回顾了这个学术群体的基本论点，然后概述了这个批评来源的三个不同的迭代：南方在经验上是不同的；欧美霸权致力于取代多元化的知识传统；而后殖民时期的遭遇需要对研究实践进行批判性拷问。然后，我们探讨了南方城市批评到底是一种独特的南方城市化研究主张，一种关于所有理论的社会空间偶然性的本体论立场，亦或是一种战术策略，旨在将人们的注意力集中到将被对城市世界的研究取代的边缘化地方以及思想。我们希望我们的努力有助于进一步的对话和更大的分析清晰度，以便更加严格和有力地阐明南方城市批评（以及更普遍的城市研究）的精确对象和目标。