Coping with Complexity and Urban Inequality: Dilemmas of Democratic Mega-city Governance

该项目应对三大全球性挑战：不平等的城市化、日益复杂的治理体系和对民主的信任危机。目前，世界上一半以上的人口居住在城市，这一比例预计还会增加。现代城市地区高度不平等，大部分人口生活在贫困中，难以获得城市服务（Tonkiss 2018）。治理系统日益复杂，导致越来越多的非国家行为者不受民主问责，其行动难以控制或监管（Jervis 1997）。最后，随着人们对民主治理的信任沿着下降，对民粹主义的支持和对威权主义做法的接受度不断上升（Foa and Mounk 2016）。由于这些挑战的全球影响和相互关联的性质，对这些问题的任何社会科学对策都不能单独对待它们。现有的跨学科研究往往侧重于解决其中一些挑战，往往没有认识到其更广泛的影响。例如，关于治理复杂城市政体的研究集中在自上而下和技术官僚工具上，这导致了民主危机的深化和进一步的不平等（例如Kubler和Lefevre 2017）。反过来，解决城市不平等问题的民主和参与性办法往往依赖于自下而上的社区和面对面的决策，而忽视了城市决策的更广泛的复杂性。最后，关于民主控制复杂治理的可能性的研究忽视了它可能产生的不平等问题。因此，为了应对这三个挑战，需要新的、更集成的解决方案。我正在申请ESRC奖学金，以提出这样的集成解决方案。我的项目“应对复杂性和城市不平等：民主大城市治理的困境”调查城市治理的战略，在复杂的条件下，实现民主的理想，并导致更平等的城市社会。它借鉴了我以前的政治理论博士研究，补充它与实证案例研究的制约因素的民主治理在伦敦，以产生一个专题。像伦敦这样的大城市，由于其全球人口份额和预计的持续增长，将成为全球综合应对民主治理信任危机、管理日益复杂的治理和应对不平等城市化后果的重要行动者。伦敦是一个重要的案例研究，由于其不平等，复杂的治理组成的地方，国家和国内机构和民主的政治制度。本项目采用了跨学科，创新的研究设计，植根于应用政治哲学和定性案例研究。应用政治哲学的就业促进民主的理论可能性的分析，平等的城市治理。此外，它有助于根据现实生活环境的约束（在伦敦）重新塑造哲学概念。定性方法的应用--对城市从业者、城市非政府组织、市理事会成员、居民协会进行的一系列访谈--提供了有关伦敦发展民主、平等治理的制约因素和机会的信息。这一分析构成了政策建议的基础，适用于具体案例研究以外的领域。此外，还计划举办一次讲习班，邀请城市从业人员、城市非政府组织、居民城市理事会代表和选定的居民区协会参加。为了确定特定城市问题的解决方案，研讨会将应用一种名为“三个地平线”框架的管理工具（夏普2016）。这种将政治哲学与质的研究方法相结合的混合研究设计，为城市政策的实证研究提供了基础，也是一种方法论上的创新。

This project responds to three global challenges: unequal urbanisation, growing complexity of the governance systems and a crisis of trust in democracy. More than half of the world population currently live in cities and this share is expected to increase. Modern urban areas are highly unequal, with vast shares of the population living in poverty and struggling to access city-services (Tonkiss 2018). The growing complexity of governance systems leads to an increased number of non-state actors who are not held democratically accountable and whose actions are difficult to control or regulate (Jervis 1997). Finally, along dropping trust in democratic governance, there is rising support for populism and growing acceptance for authoritarian practices (Foa and Mounk 2016). Due to the global impact and interconnected nature of these challenges, any social-scientific response to these problems cannot treat them separately. Existing interdisciplinary research tends to focus on solutions to some of these challenges, often without acknowledging its broader impact. For example, research on governing complex urban polities is focused on top-down and technocratic tools, which contributes to the deepening of the democratic crisis and further inequality (e.g. Kubler and Lefevre 2017). In turn, democratic and participatory solutions to urban inequality often rely on bottom-up communities and face-to-face decision-making, while ignoring the wider complexity of urban decision-making. Finally, research on the possibilities of democratic control over the complex governance ignores the questions of inequality it can produce. As a result, to respond to these three challenges, new, more integrated solutions are necessary.I am applying for ESRC Fellowship to propose such an integrated solution. My project 'Coping with Complexity and Urban Inequality: Dilemmas of Democratic Mega-city Governance' investigates strategies of urban governance, in conditions of complexity, to realise democratic ideals and lead to more equal urban societies. It draws on my previous PhD research in political theory, complements it with an empirical case-study of constraints of democratic governance in London in order to produce a monograph. Big mega-cities, such as London, due to their global population share and projected continued growth will be vital actors in an integrated global response to the crisis of trust to democratic governance, managing the growing complexity of governance and to responding to consequences of unequal urbanisation. London is a critical case study, due to its inequalities, complex governance consisting of local, national and intra-national bodies and its democratic political system.This project employs a cross-disciplinary, innovative research design that is rooted in applied political philosophy and qualitative case studies. Employment of applied political philosophy facilitates analysis of theoretical possibilities of democratic, equalising urban governance. Further, it facilitates re-shaping of the philosophical concepts according to the constraints of real-life circumstances (in London). Application of qualitative methods - a series of interviews with urban practitioners, urban NGO's, city council members, inhabitants' associations - provides information on constraints and opportunities for the development of democratic, equalising governance in London. This analysis constitutes a basis for policy-recommendation applicable beyond the specific case studies. Further, a planned workshop engages urban practitioners, urban NGO's, representatives of inhabitants' urban council and selected neighbourhood association. To identify solutions to given urban problems, the workshops will apply a management tool called Three Horizons' Framework (Sharpe 2016). Such mixed-methods research design combining political philosophy and qualitative methods provides a basis for philosophically informed urban policy and constitutes a methodological innovation.