Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
power still seek to maintain and improve their advantage. This has led to additional
attempts to buttress the rationale for adopting the fairness criterion as a guiding
principle. For example, it has been argued that fairness was a basic binding value
in many social groups, as seen in its extensive use as a basis for redistribution by
traditional hunting and gathering groups, or in the close relations found in many
social animals. These examples suggest that it is important to see fairness as a foun-
dational function of redistribution among social groups. Others have based their
support for the idea on the traditional values developed in many religions, in which
sharing with people in need has always been a key moral principle.
34
More Focused Redistributive Justice
Those who advocate a new emphasis upon societal injustices in the city argue that
the essentially ad hoc successes of some recent welfare policy initiatives have done
little to prevent the increasing inequality in society, or the general reduction in the
aims and effectiveness of planning in the public interest. It is argued that these
problems cannot be solved only by three types of policy: the type of affirmative ac-
tions used in the past, such as by more effective national welfare policies and social
security nets; the pressure from various urban protest groups; or thirdly through the
type of transformative societal process advocated by neo-Marxists, in which either
the state dominates all sectors and directs change, or some new form of urban-based
change occurs to create socialist cities.
The first approach is seen to be as too weak and haphazard in its spatial impacts
and not focused enough on urban settlements. The second is often too incoherent
and lacks wide-spread political support. The third solution, the transformational
one, may be beloved of some intellectuals and still provides cutting criticisms of
many of the problems in contemporary society. But its practice is still considered
by most people in the democratic west to be tainted by the disasters of the experi-
ence of communist states with their extreme limitation in personal freedoms, as
well as the corruption that created a ruling class with privileges that the majority
could not share in. The result is that many believe that all three of these approach-
es have proved ineffective solutions against an increasingly dominant neo-liberal
culture buttressed by contributionist beliefs. This has led to new ways of creating
greater fairness in towns and cities, and upon the decision-making that occurs
within them, which are dealt with in subsequent sections. One is based on the
application of new Communicative approaches. Another deals with extensions of
the Capabilities concepts. A third is upon the identification of basic principles that
should be used to remove injustices. The fourth seeks to focus on specific guides
to public policy in urban places, so as to delivering policies that are more just in
the redistributive sense.
