Currently, there appears to be an unhealthy disjunction between grand expectations and acknowledged reality in the face of urban transformations underway throughout the world. Drawing on the “right to the city” discourses, adopting a Lefebvrian approach to the production of space, and a critical regionalist approach to housing and the built environment, the article explores the conceptual analytical neologism of contested urbanism, where the struggle for bottom-up, inclusive development processes push against political hand market pressures towards becoming a world-class city. Dharavi, at the heart of Mumbai, India, is at the frontline of oppositional practices confronting neoliberal, futuristic Dubai-style mega-projects focused on capital accumulation, elite consumption, slum clearance, and deregulated real-estate speculation. Building upon a three-week academic studio exercise in situ, the confrontational power dynamics that shape people's access to housing and redevelopment are depicted here as exemplar of a wider struggle over social justice, where Dharavi emerges as an eminent yet paradoxical example of a universal expression of contested spatial form in the Global South.
AllweilY., & KallusR. (2008). Public-space heterotopias: Heterotopias of masculinity along the Tel Aviv shoreline. In De CauterL., & DehaeneM. (Eds), Heterotopia and the city: Public space in a postcivil society (pp. 191–202). New York: Routledge.
3.
AppaduraiA. (2001). Deep democracy: Urban governmentality and the horizon of politics.Environment and Urbanization, 13 (2), 23–43.
4.
BarthesR. (1997). The Eiffel Tower and other mythologies.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
BevanR. (2006). The destruction of memory. Architecture at war.London: Reaktion Books.
8.
BoanoC. (in press). Post-disaster recovery planning: Challenges and potentials. In Lopez-CarresiA., & WisnerB. (Eds), Disaster management: Challenges in the XXI century.Madrid: Studium Press.
9.
Bombay First and McKinsey & Company Inc. (2003). Vision Mumbai: Transforming Mumbai into a world-class city. Retrieved April 12, 2010, from http://www.bombayfirst.org/McKinseyReport.pdf
10.
BrillembourgC. (2004). The new slum urbanism of Caracas, invasions and settlements, colonialism, democracy, capitalism and devil worship.Architectural Design, 74 (2), 77–81.
DavisM. (2006). The planet of slums.London: Verso.
15.
DikeçM., & GilbertL. (2002). Right to the city: Homage or new societal ethics?.Capitalism Nature Socialism, 13 (2), 58–74.
16.
DoronG. (2008). “… Those marvelous empty zones on the edge of our cities: Heterotopia and the ‘dead zone.’” In De CauterL., & DehaeneM. (Eds), Heterotopia and the city: Public space in a postcivil society (pp. 203–14). New York: Routledge.
FoucaultM. (2003). The birth of the clinic.London: Taylor and Francis.
19.
FoucaultM. (1984). Different spaces. In FaubionJ. D. (Ed.), Essential works of Foucault 1954-1984, Volume II: Aesthetic, epistemology, methodology.New York: New York Press.
20.
FramptonK. (1998). Towards a critical regionalism: Six points for an architecture of resistance. In FosterH. (Ed.), The anti-aesthetic: Essays on postmodern culture (pp. 17–34). New York: The New Press.
21.
HarveyD. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change.Oxford: Blackwell.
22.
HarveyD. (2003a). The right to the city.International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27 (4), 939–941.
23.
HarveyD. (2003b). The new imperialism.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
HeideggerM. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper.
25.
HeynenH., & LoeckxA. (1984). Scenes of ambivalence: Concluding remarks on architectural patterns of displacement.Journal of Architectural Education, 52 (2), 100–108.
26.
JamesonF. (1991). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism.Durham: Duke University Press.
27.
KezerZ. (1984). Contesting urban space in early Republican Ankara.Journal of Architectural Education, 52 (1), 11–19.
28.
KRVIA (2007). Dharavi summary [Presentation].Mumbai: KamlaRaheja and Vidyanidhi Institute for Architecture.
29.
LeachN. (1997). Introduction. In LeachN. (Ed.), Rethinking architecture: A reader in cultural theory (pp. xiii–xxi). London: Routledge.
30.
LefebvreH. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
31.
LefebvreH. (2003). Space and the state. In BrennerNeil, JessopBob, JonesMartin, & MacleodGeorge (Eds), State/space (pp. 84–100). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
32.
LefaivreL. (2003). Critical regionalism: A facet of modern architecture since 1945. In TzonisA., & LefaivreL. (Eds), Critical regionalism: Architecture and identity in a globalized world (pp. 22–53). Munich: Prestel Verlag.
MayerM. (2009). The “Right to the City” in the context of shifting mottos of urban social movements.City, 13 (2-3), 362–374.
35.
McFarlaneC. (2004). Geographical imaginations and spaces of political engagement: Examples from the Indian alliance.Antipode, 36 (5), 890–916.
36.
MitchellD. (2003). The right to the city: Social justice and the fight for public space.New York: Guillford Press.
37.
MitlinD., & PatelS. (2005). Re-interpreting the rights-based approach: A grassroots perspective on rights and development, Working Paper Series, 22, Global Poverty Research Group of the Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon.
38.
MumfordL. (1947, October). Sky line.The New Yorker, New York.
39.
PatelS., ArputhamJ., BurraS., & SavchukK. (2009). ‘Getting the information base for Dharavi's redevelopment.Environment and Urbanization, 21 (1), 241–251.
40.
PatelS., & ArputhamJ. (2007). An offer of partnership or a promise of conflict in Dharavi, Mumbai?Environment and Urbanization, 19(1), 501–508.
41.
PurcellM. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant.Geojournal, 58, 99–108.
42.
RoyA. (2006). Praxis in the time of empire.Planning Theory, 5 (1), 7–29.
43.
RoyA. (2009a). Civic governmentality: The politics of inclusion in Beirut and Mumbai.Antipode, 41 (1) 159–179.
44.
RoyA. (2009b). Why India cannot plan its cities: Informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanisation.Planning Theory, 8 (1), 76–87.
45.
RicoeurP. (2007). Universal civilization and national cultures. In CanizaroV. B. (Ed.), Architectural regionalism: Collected writings on place, identity, modernity, and tradition (pp. 43–53). New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
46.
SandercockL. (2005). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel cities in the 21st century.London: Continuum.
47.
SharmaK. (2000). Rediscovering Dharavi: Stories from Asia's largest slum.Delhi: Penguin Books India.
Urbanology (2008). Urban typhoon workshop: Koliwada, Dharavi.Mumbai: Partners for Urban Knowledge, Action and Research.
54.
VoiseyH., & O'RiordanT. (2001). Globalization and localization. In O'RiordanT. (Ed.), Globalization, localism and identity: Fresh perspectives on the transition to sustainability (pp. 25–42). London: Earthscan.
55.
WatsonV. (2009). Seeing from the South: Refocusing urban planning on the globe's central urban issues.Urban Studies, 46 (11), 2259–2275.
56.
WoessnerM. (2009). Rescuing the right to the city.City, 13 (4), 474–475.
