Ferrara (Italy). 12 December 2019
PAPER SESSION: ‘Ethnographic Accounts of Personal Networks’
We practice personal networks every day. Each of us is the center of our own universe. We know who our friends are, how they are connected to each other, and what kinds of sociability, help, and information they might provide. But how do such network individuals operate? Personal network analysis and visualization combined with ethnographic interviews and participant observation have the potential for researching creatively integrating ethnography and network analysis, based on the assumption that it is due to ethnography that we characterize ties. Ethnography permits the revealing, the unveiling, and the classifying of networks. In this sense, the information on composition of networks are gathered ethnographically in a rich and complex fashion due to the extended contact time between researchers and the community of participants. These ethnographic accounts of personal networks accurately display social relationships as they come and go, thus demonstrating their dynamism and mobility.
In this panel session we analyze territorially specific patterns of social interactions that are bundled in the urban social milieu by inviting papers that address some of the following:
– communities as networks with a focus on social integration and mobility of migrants and/or minority groups;
– the role of specialized ties in promoting social support and network capital;
– how do homogeneous networks are conduit for social control and channels for the reproduction of inequalities? In other words, how does homophily is disadvantageous for lower-status groups?
– linkages over time between life stage experiences, relationships and changes in personal networks.
Chua, V., J. Madej, and B. Wellman (2011). Personal Communities: The World According To Me. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds), The SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis, pp. 101-115. London: Sage Publications.
Domínguez, S. and Hollstein, B. (ed.) (2014). Mixed methods social networks research: design and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hannerz, U. (1980). Exploring the City: Inquiries Toward an Urban Anthropology (chapter 5: “Thinking with Networks”). New York: Columbia University Press.
McCarty, C., Lubbers, M. J., Vacca, R., & Molina, J. L. (2019). Conducting Personal Network Research: A Practical Guide. New York: Guilford Press.
Wellman, B. (2007). The Network is Personal: Introduction to a Special Issue of Social Networks. In Social Networks 29, 349–356.
Lidia MANZO, firstname.lastname@example.org
Enzo COLOMBO, email@example.com
Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan (Italy)
De Montfort University, Leicester (UK) 12 – 13 June, 2019
The Centre for Urban Research on Austerity Urban Methodologies Summer School is a two-day event aimed at PhD researchers, early-career academics and advanced postgraduate students. It will be held at De Montfort University, Leicester, on 12-13 June 2019. The UMSS will feature four masterclass sessions led by David Bailey (Birmingham), Sarah Marie Hall (Manchester), Cristina Temenos (Manchester) and Michael Hoyler (Loughborough). These sessions will cover novel and innovative approaches to researching disruption and urban resistance, the everyday of austerity, urban policy mobilities and the global urban of world city networks. Two Doctoral Student Plenaries will also feature, where selected participants will deliver short fifteen minute presentations on their own research methodology to receive feedback from participants and a panel of CURA researchers.
Details of masterclass sessions can be found here.
The provisional programme is available to view here.
On April 14 2014, I have finally (successfully) defended my Ph.D. in Sociology and Social Research. The discussion was held in English at the Sociology Department of the University of Trento (Italy) with a doctoral committee chaired by Sharon Zukin with Jerome Krase and Tom Slater. My study was focused on institutions, housing and lifestyles in the Super-gentrification process of Brooklyn’s Park Slope, whereby I have held a twenty-months long affiliation as Visiting Doctoral Researcher at The City University of New York.
Here the thesis-library references, the abstract and some materials (visual also) that remind the defence-day!
2014. Manzo, L.K.C. «Give me a break! I’m from Brooklyn, we’re not fancy». Institutions, Housing and Lifestyles in Super-gentrification process. A Field and Historical research in Park Slope, New York City, The University of Trento, Unitn-eprints PhD.
In an attempt to make concrete linkages between neighborhood change and the boundary-making paradigm, this field and longitudinal study of a New York City’s neighborhood, addresses the influences of displacement, housing- abandonment and resettlement in Super-gentrification processes on 1) the types of institutions that emerged to represent different class interests; 2) the types of social groups that came to inhabit the neighborhood; 3) the pattern of that evolution over time; 4) the particular goals, values, and morals that such community organizations evolved; and 5) the social status displays carried out in cultured consumption in housing and leisure.
Employing a multi-methodological and theoretical approach, the study follows the evolution and development of neighborhood change over forty years through the analysis of social groups and their community organizations (looking at archival documents for the past and by in-depth interviews, shadowing and ethnographic observation for the present time), census data analysis, archival/documental research, and visual data.
Community organizations emerged, on the one hand, to represent different class interests – improvement, mandated, ideological - and to emphasize liberal progressive values, on the other. This emergence followed historical and geographical patterns of accelerating gentrification. The study argues that four waves of gentrification showed up across the time and tended to concentrate in four different neighborhood areas, where the incoming groups formed parallel boundary shifts.
Accordingly, I found that different waves of gentrification were associated with the emergence of different types of Gentrifiers over time, and this had to do with the changing role of post-industrial cities within the American economy, the processes of government/local institution interventions in the neighborhood housing market, the changes in class interests, morals and ideologies, and the increased aestheticized re-scriptings of neighborhood housing choices and lifestyles. Such aesthetic appreciation operated for gentrifiers as a visible marker of social status.
As residential displacement, the disappearance of “old” local stores, and their replacement of upscale shops entailed forms of social inequality that enhanced the lifestyle of new waves of gentrifiers (raising housing values and rents) while, at the same time, forced out morally (by alienation) or practically (by displacement) long-term residents, who helped produce the neighborhood socio-cultural fabric. Diversity and aesthetic appeal seemed to underlie the motives of wealthier, well-educated newcomers to move into the neighborhood. Interestingly, those have not been changing throughout the different waves of gentrifiers who came to inhabit the community in the last 40 years. However – during the process of Super-gentrification - I found that the more they populate the neighborhood, the more it becomes homogenized and less richly diverse, still quite progressive but in a different way. I would say, in a privileged progressive way.
Despite the fact that the moral order of these institutions has always been the one of community solidarity, culture, education, and growth, I observed at the same time the playing out of the most common paradox of gentrifiers. The desire of diversity and the producing of difference. This is, I believe, the central problem of gentrification: the balance between, or the combination of, pleasure and power. Balancing pleasure and power is a social, political, and moral problem. It brings together many of the concerns about gentrification, the desire for (and the loss of) diversity, and expresses the central thesis of this study.
PDF (Thesis Front Cover) – Cover Image
PDF (Thesis Abstract) – Supplemental Material
PDF (Thesis Preface) – Supplemental Material
In honor of the 50th anniversary edition of Jane Jacobs’ influential book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Fortune has republished one of Jacobs’ earlier articles in which the urban activist laid out the case against modernist planners.
“The prettiest apartment of the bunch is in a 1890 brownstone in Sunset Park. The parlor-floor 1BR features a bay window, french doors, crown molding, ceiling medallions, and decorative fireplace. It was also recently repainted. It’s asking $1,600/month.”
Welcome back to Curbed Comparisons, a column that explores what one can rent for a set dollar amount in various New York City neighborhoods.
[Curbed NY, 11/27]
Maps don’t typically convey time very well. They’re static snapshots of a moment in history. They tell you what exists, not when people go there, or how the value of a place might be tied to time – whether it’s a nightlife district or a public park most popular with early-morning joggers.
An EU-funded project is building platforms to detect patterns in how people use urban spaces: which parts of a city come alive between midnight and 3 a.m.? How about at lunch time? And what might those patterns tell us about how individual places – and whole cities – are experienced differently over the course of a day?
Read more here: