Solidarity hubs as social infrastructure: A comparative approach to voluntary services for transient foreign workers in East Asian City-regions

针对日本的情况，我在福冈和横滨进行了调查和实地考察。两个城市有着相似的空间结构，长期投资都集中在CBD和填海滨水区。另一方面，它们的内城一直是民族主导和/或与民族有关的小规模投资的目标，提供低收入就业并创造新的消费空间。在这些地区出现的团结中心首先要解决外国低收入人口明显的不稳定问题。为了考虑到这些中心的服务和网络实践的多样性，我组织了一个以外国低收入人群的社会基础设施为主题的研讨会。在福冈，通过网络和项目开发实现服务的集中和专业化的步骤脱颖而出，而在横滨，Kotobukicho服务中心的密切存在作为服务锚。最后，由于东南亚人口的代表性很大，必须考虑到宗教设施的作用。它们是文化上可以接受的社会基础设施形式，团结中心可以围绕这些基础设施有效地实现。

Focusing on the Japanese case, I have conducted surveys and fieldwork in Fukuoka and Yokohama. Both cities share a similar spatial structure where long-term investment flows have concentrated on the CBD and reclaimed waterfront areas. On the other hand, their inner cities have been the target of ethic-led and/or ethnic-related small-scale investments, providing low-income employment and creating new spaces of consumption. The solidarity hubs emerging in these areas foremost deal with conspicuous forms of precarity attached to foreign low-income populations.In order to take account of the diversity of services and networking practices of these hubs, I have organized a workshop themed around social infrastructure for foreign low-income populations. In Fukuoka, steps to concentration and professionalization of services through networking and project development stood out, while in Yokohama the close presence of Kotobukicho's service hub serves as a service anchor. Finally, due the large representation of South-East Asian population, the role of religious facilities must be taken into account. They serve as culturally accepted forms of social infrastructure around which solidarity hubs can effectively materialize.