Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

Socio-spatial structure of the post-socialist city and evolution of "dangerous places" in Moscow megalopolis  
Veronica Usacheva (Russian Academy of Science)

Paper short abstract:

The paper examines the development of socio-spatial structure of modern Moscow, and focuses on the processes connected to a 'new wave' of migration as well as widening of gap in living standards; analyzes the possibilities of formation of 'dangerous places' on ethnic and/or social bases in Moscow.

Paper long abstract:

Nowadays Moscow, the largest megalopolis in Russia, faces the same challenges and problems, as other world megalopolises (labour migration, gap in standards of living and common weal, overpopulation, pollution, etc). At the same time, we see that the Soviet heritage of urban development and registration of population laid down some limitation, that still influence on the formation of new "dangerous places".

In the paper we argue, the socialist urban development is the basis for a process of socio-status segregation in modern Moscow. The 'privileged quarters' as well as 'problem districts' or so-called 'proletarian outskirts' have arisen during the Soviet times in large. In the Soviet period these 'privileged quarters' were inhabited by communist party nomenklatura, top bureaucracy, artists and differed from other districts because of its brick-build houses with sizeable apartments. The periphery districts traditionally face transport problems, depressing monotony of the standard building and have the image of 'not-really-Moscow' in the perception of Muscovites, because they have emerged on the land of villages, included into Moscow urban area borders 1970s. Labour migrants (so called "limita") occupied these new residential areas.

Today the growth of temporary ethnic labour migration from the C.I.S. countries generates new trend in development of "dangerous places" in Moscow, at least, as Muscovites perceive it.

The paper on the base of analysis of public opinion polls, interviews with Moscow officials working in social and housing sphere, ratings of Moscow secondary residential property (worked out by major real estate agencies), tries to formulate the main trends of development of "dangerous places" in Moscow.

Panel W116
The making of "dangerous places": disentangling fear, violence and urban space
  Session 1 Wednesday 11 July, 2012, -