POST-SOCIALIST POST-SUBURBIA: GROWTH MACHINE AND THE EMERGENCE OF “EDGE CITY” IN THE METROPOLITAN CONTEXT OF MOSCOW
https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2010-3-1-44-55
Abstract
To what extent do the ideas of “edge city”, “post-suburbia” and associated models of urban growth apply in the transition economy case? The paper considers urban development and place-making on the periphery of Moscow, based on the case of Khimki, a former off-limits “satellite city” and more recently a fast-growing area. The forces and ideologies driving the growth on the edge of Moscow and the relationship between different actors are considered. The paper argues that while the Russian case shares some commonalities with the Western models of “edge city” and “growth machine”, growth in Khimki is fuelled by opportunistic profit-making initiatives that are disconnected from “local” city. It is yet to be seen whether a growing demand for new infrastructure, as well as emerging residents’ movements will restructure the modes of governing urban growth more in line with proactive place-focused post-suburban politics.
About the Authors
Oleg GolubchikovUnited Kingdom
Research fellow, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Christ Church, St Aldates, Oxford, OX 1 1DP
Alla Makhrova
Russian Federation
Senior research fellow, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119899
Nicholas Phelps
United Kingdom
Professor, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, London, UK, 22 Gordon Street, London WC1H0QB
References
1. Badyina, A. and Golubchikov, O. (2005) Gentrification in Central Moscow – a market
2. process or a deliberate policy? Money, power and people in housing regeneration in
3. Ostozhenka. Geografiska Annaler B, N 87 (2), pp. 113-129.
4. Bater, J. H., Amelin, V. and Degtyarev, V. (1998) Market reform and the central city: Moscow
5. revisited. Post-Soviet Geography, N 39, pp.1-18.
6. Cox, K. And Mair, A. (1988) Locality and community in the politics of local economic
7. development, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, N 78, pp. 307-325
8. French, R. A. (1995) Plans, Pragmatism and People: The Legacy of Soviet Planning for
9. Today’s City. London: UCL Press.
10. Garreau, J. (1991) Edge City: Life on the New Frontier. Doubleday, New York.
11. Golubchikov, O. (2004) Urban planning in Russia: towards the market. European Planning
12. Studies, N 12 (2), pp. 229-247.
13. Kling, R., Olin, S. and Poster, M. (1995) The emergence of postsuburbia: an introduction. In
14. Kling, R. Olin, S. and Poster, M (eds.) Postsuburban California: The Transformation of Orange
15. County Since World War Two. University of California Press, Berkeley.
16. Kulcsar, L. J. and Domokos, T. (2005) The post-socialist growth machine: the case of
17. Hungary. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, N 29 (3), pp. 550-563,
18. Logan, J. and Molotch, H. (1987) Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. University
19. of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
20. Makhrova, A. and Molodikova, I. (2007) Land market, commercial real estate, and the
21. remolding of Moscow’s urban fabric. In K. Stanilov (ed.), The Post-Socialist City: Urban
22. Form and Space Transformations in Central and Eastern Europe after Socialism. Dordrecht,
23. the Netherlands: Springer.
24. Makhrova, A. G., Nefedova, T. G. and Treivish, A. I. (2008) Moskovskaya Oblast Segodnya
25. i Zavtra: Tendentsii i Perspektivy Prostranstvennogo Razvitiya (Moscow Oblast Today
26. and Tomorrow: Tendencies and Perspectives of Spatial Development). Moscow: Novyy
27. Khronograf.
28. Molotch, H. L. (1976) The city as a growth machine. American Journal of Sociology, N 82 (2),
29. pp. 309-330.
30. Mosoblkomstan (2000-2007)a Social and Economic Status of Municipalities of
31. Moscow Oblast, various years. Moscow: Moscow Oblast Committee for State Statistics
32. (Mosoblkomstat).
33. Mosoblkomstan (2000-2007)b Population migration in Moscow Oblast, various years.
34. Moscow: Moscow Oblast Committee for State Statistics (Mosoblkomstat).
35. Roland, G. (2004) Understanding institutional change: fast-moving and slow-moving
36. institutions. Studies in Comparative International Development. N 38 (4), pp. 109-131.
37. Rudolph, R. and Brade, I. (2005) Moscow: processes of restructuring in the Post-Soviet
38. metropolitan periphery. Cities, N 22 (2), pp.135-150.
39. Tasan-Kok, T. (2006) Institutional and spatial change. In S. Tsenkova and Z. Nedovic-
40. Budic (eds.), The Urban Mosaic of Post-Socialist Europe: Space, Institutions and Policy.
41. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.
Review
For citations:
Golubchikov O., Makhrova A., Phelps N. POST-SOCIALIST POST-SUBURBIA: GROWTH MACHINE AND THE EMERGENCE OF “EDGE CITY” IN THE METROPOLITAN CONTEXT OF MOSCOW. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2010;3(1):44-55. https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2010-3-1-44-55
Views: 1087
Email this article 