In French periurban municipalities, principles of justice considered legitimate by periurbanites are increasingly less associated to the political sphere and more attached to the economic sphere. Some municipalities (especially those with less than 2000 inhabitants) carry out policies that are increasingly similar to the management of private residential clubs. Thus, regarding territorialisation of periurbanites, the major transformation is less a rise of the private sector to the detriment of the public sector, than a change in the philosophical definition of the relationship to residential space. More precisely, the former should be regarded as a symptom of the latter, and not as a cause.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baccaïni, B. (1998) Recent periurban growth in the Ile-de-France: forms and causes, Population: An English Selection, 10(2), pp. 349-384.
2.
Berger, M. (2005) Les périurbains de Paris: de la ville dense à la métropole éclatée. Paris: Presses du CNRS.
3.
Berger, M. (2006) Périurbanisation et accentuation des logiques ségrégatives en Ile-de-France, Hérodote, 122(3), pp. 198-211.
4.
Berube, A., Singer, A., Wilson, J.H. and Frey, W.H. (2006) Finding exurbia: America's fast-growing communities at the metropolitan fringe. Living Cities Census Series, The Brookings Institution, Washinton, DC, October.
5.
Bidou, C. (1984) Les aventuriers du quotidien: essai sur les nouvelles classes moyennes. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
6.
Blackmar, E. (2006) The tragedy of property rights discourse, in: S. Low and N. Smith (Eds) The Politics of Public Space, pp. 49-80. New York: Routledge.
7.
Brevard, L. (2003) Les trajectoires d'insertion des nouveaux habitants à la périphérie des villes. PhD thesis, University of Toulouse -Le Mirail.
8.
Buchanan, J.-M. (1965) An economic theory of clubs, Economica, New Series, 32(125), pp. 1-14.
9.
Charmes, E. (2005) La vie périurbaine face à la menace des gated communities . Paris: L'Harmattan.
10.
Charmes, E. (2006) Les petites communes périurbaines face aux nouvelles formes de l'entre-soi. Research report, Plan Urbanisme Construction Architecture, Paris.
11.
Charmes, E. (2007a) Carte scolaire et clubbisation des petites communes périurbaines, Sociétés Contemporaines, 67, pp. 67-94.
12.
Charmes, E. (2007b) Suburban fragmentation versus mobilities: is suburbanism opposed to urbanism?, Cybergeo, article no. 369, March.
13.
Chauvel, L. (2006) Les classes moyennes à la dérive. Paris: Seuil.
14.
Chenu, A. and Tabard, N. (1993) Les transformations socioprofessionnelles du territoire français, 1982-1990, Population, 48(6), pp. 1735-1769.
15.
Coase, R.H. (1974) The lighthouse in economics, Journal of Law and Economics, 17(2), pp. 357-376.
16.
Dear, M. (1993) Comprendre et surmonter le syndrome NIMBY, 2001 Plus, 27, pp. 2-20.
17.
Demouveaux, J.-P. (2004) Le droit de l'urbanisme au service de la ségrégation urbaine, in: F.-N. Buffet, L. Davezies, J.-P. Demouveaux et al. (Eds) Les mécanismes fonciers de la ségrégation , pp. 113-137. Paris: ADEF.
18.
Donzelot, J. (2004) La ville à trois vitesses: relégation, périurbanisation, gentrification, Esprit, 303(March/April), pp. 14-39.
19.
Dowding, K. and John, P. (1994) Tiebout: a survey of the empirical literature, Urban Studies, 31(4/5), pp. 767-798.
20.
Esprit (2004) Table ronde la mixité urbaine estelle une politique?, Esprit, 303(March/April), pp. 121-142.
21.
Estèbe, P. (2008) Gouverner la ville mobile. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
22.
Filippi, B., Funès, C., Nabos, H. and Tutin, C. (2007) Marchés du logement et fractures urbaines. Collection Recherches du PUCA No. 173, Lyon: CERTU.
23.
Fischel, W.A. (2001) Why are there NIMBYs?, Land Economics , 77(1), pp. 144-152.
24.
Foldvary, F. (1994) Public Goods and Private Communities: The Private Provision of Social Services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
25.
Ghorra-Gobin, C. (1992) Planification urbaine et incorporation aux Etats-Unis: les fondements de la politique d'exclusion, Les Annales de la recherche urbaine, 51, pp. 40-47.
26.
Gilbert, G. and Guengant, A. (2002) L'économie publique locale quinze ans après: entre espace et territoire, Revue d'économie regionale et urbaine , 1, pp. 157-182.
27.
Glasze, G., Webster, C. and Frantz, K. (Eds) (2005) Private Cities: Global and Local Perspectives. London: Routledge.
28.
Guengant,A. (1992) Les coûts de la croissance périurbaine: l'exemple de l'agglomération rennaise. Paris: ADEF.
29.
Hamilton, B.W. (1975) Zoning and property taxation in a system of local government, Urban Studies, 12(2), pp. 205-211.
30.
Ihlandfeldt, K.R. (2004) Exclusionary land-use regulations within suburban communities: a review of the evidence and policy prescriptions, Urban Studies, 41(2), pp. 261-283.
31.
Jaglin, S. (Ed.) (2008) Territorialisation des espaces urbanisés dans les grandes villes: une confrontation nord/sud . Paris: LATTS, CNRS.
32.
Jaillet, M.-C. (2004) L'espace périurbain: un univers pour les classes moyennes, Esprit, 303(March/April), pp. 40-61.
33.
Judd, D.R. and Swanstrom, T. (2004) City Politics: Private Power and Public Policy . New York : Pearson Longman.
34.
Keil, R. and Ronneberger, K. (1994) Going up the country: internationalization and urbanization on Frankfurt's northern fringe, Environment and Planning D, 12, pp. 137-166.
35.
Kelleher, C. and Lowery, D. (2002) Tiebout sorting and selective satisfaction with urban public services: testing the variance hypothesis, Urban Affairs Review, 37(3), pp. 420-431.
36.
Lagrange, H. (Ed.) (2006) L'épreuve des inégalités. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
37.
Lang, R.E. and Lefurgy, J.B. (2007) Boomburbs: The Rise of America's Accidental Cities . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
38.
Lefevre, C. (2001) L'évolution de l'organisation institutionnelle des Etats européens: des processus de décentralisation marqués par le poids des héritages nationaux. Paris: IAURIF.
39.
Le Goix, R. and Webster C. (2008) Gated communities, Geography Compass , 2(4), pp. 1189-1214.
40.
Low, S. and Smith, N. (Eds) (2006) The Politics of Public Space . New York: Routledge.
41.
Low, S.M. (2003) Behind the Gates: Life, Security and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. New York: Routledge.
42.
McKenzie, E. (2005) Planning through residential clubs: homeowners' associations, Economic Affairs, 25(4), pp. 28-31.
43.
Miller, D. and Walzer, M. (1995) Pluralism, Justice and Equality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
Nelson, R.H. (2005) Private Neighborhoods and the Transformation of Local Government. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
45.
Oates, W.E. (1969) The effects of property taxes and local public spending on property values: an empirical study of tax capitalization and the Tiebout hypothesis, Journal of Political Economy, 77(November) pp. 957-971.
46.
Ostrom, E., Gardner, R. and Walker, J. (1993) Rules, Games, and Common-pool Resources. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
47.
Ostrom, V., Tiebout, C.M. and Warren, R. (1961) The organization of government in metropolitan areas: a theoretical inquiry, The American Political Science Review, 55(4), pp. 831-842.
48.
Phillips, T. and Smith, P. (2006) Rethinking urban incivility research: strangers, bodies and circulation, Urban Studies, 43(5/6), pp. 879-901.
49.
Pinson, D. and Thomann, S. (2002) La maison en ses territoires: de la villa à la ville diffuse. Paris: L'Harmattan .
50.
Préteceille, E. (2003) La division sociale de l'espace francilien: typologie socioprofessionnelle 1999 et transformations de l'espace résidentiel 1990-99 . Research report, Observatoire sociologique du changement , Paris.
51.
Préteceille, E. (2006) La ségrégation contre la cohésion sociale: la métropole parisienne, in: H. Lagrange (Ed.) L'épreuve des inégalités, pp. 195-246. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
52.
Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Touchstone .
53.
Ramadier, T. (2002) Rapport au quartier, représentation de l'espace et mobilité quotidienne: le cas d'un quartier périphérique de Québec-Ville , Espaces et Sociétés, 108/109, pp. 111-131.
54.
Rémy, J. (2004) Culture de la mobilité et nouvelles formes de territorialité , in: L. Vodoz, B. Pfister-Giauque and C. Jemelin (Eds) Les territoires de la mobilité: l'aire du temps, pp. 13-42. Lausanne : Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes .
55.
Rhode, P.W. and Strumpf, K.S. (2003) Assessing the importance of Tiebout sorting: local heterogeneity from 1850 to 1990, The American Economic Review , 93(5), pp. 1648-1677.
56.
Rougé, L. (2005) Accession à la propriété et modes de vie en maison individuelle des familles modestes installées en périurbain lointain. Les captifs du périurbain? PhD thesis, University of Toulouse -Le Mirail.
57.
Sack, R. (1986) Human Territoriality: Its Theory and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
58.
Sandler, T. and Tschirhart, J. (1997) Club theory: thirty years later, Public Choice, 93, pp. 335-355.
59.
Soja, E. (2000) Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Region. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing .
60.
Teaford, J.C. (1997) Post-suburbia: Government and Politics in the Edge Cities. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
61.
Tiebout, C. (1956) A pure theory of local expenditures, The Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), pp. 416-424.
62.
Urry, J. (2000) Sociology beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge.
63.
Vilmin, T. (2006) Le système local de l'urbanisation en maisons individuelles: étude de cas en Ile-de-France. Logiville, rapport pour le PUCA , Ministère de l'Equipement.
64.
Walzer, M. (1984) Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books .
65.
Webster, C.J. (2002) Property rights and the public realm: gates, green belts and gemeinschaft, Environment and Planning B, 29(3), pp. 397-412.
66.
Webster, C.J. (2003) The nature of the neighbourhood, Urban Studies, 40(13), pp. 2591- 2612.
67.
Webster, C.J. and Lai, L.W.C. (2003) Property Rights, Planning and Markets: Managing Spontaneous Cities. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
68.
Wollmann, H. (2000) Local government systems: from historic divergence towards convergence? Great Britain, France, and Germany as comparative cases in point, Environment and Planning C, 18, pp. 33-55.
