This article presents commentary and analysis on the Urban Studies special collection on the night-time city. The collection highlights burgeoning interest in the urban night from across the social sciences and helps consolidate what might be referred to as the ‘third wave’ of research on the evening and night-time economy (ENTE). The collection addresses the challenges of 21st cen- tury place-making after dark in a variety of international contexts. This commentary interprets individual contributions to this collection in the light of the author’s research experience within an evolving and increasingly sophisticated field of knowledge. The articles have, I suggest, power relations, social exclusion and social sustainability as their most prominent meta-themes. I pro- pose a new conceptual model for the interpretation of situated assemblages of power, capacity and influence, as operating across four overlapping modes of urban governance.
Urban sociologists and criminologists have maintained housing’s importance in providing individuals with a sense of security within their neighborhood. Yet it remains unclear whether all types of housing provide this sense of safety in the same way. This article provides an analysis of the relationship between dwelling type and fear of crime. Data from the 2009 Canadian General Social Survey are analyzed. Results suggest that living in a multiunit dwelling has no statistically significant impact on fear of crime in the neighborhood; however, individuals living in high-rise and low-rise residences are less likely to be fearful of crime while at home in the evening. One possible explanation for these findings is the fortress effect: High-rise buildings isolate individuals in physical space, providing security in the home, and creating physical and social distance from the rest of the neighborhood. The implications of these findings are discussed.
This article examines cultural practices and social life in urban public spaces of postreform China, focusing on the everyday leisure, entertainment, and cultural activities spontaneously organized by grassroots residents or groups. It examines performativity in constituting cultural meanings, reproducing everyday identities, and building up mutual engagements, and unravels the ways in which ordinary people devote resources, labor, and energy to keep alive individual or collective identities. Performances of cultural identities in public spaces entail improvised and temporary social relations which emerge from the immediate contexts of mundane spatial practices. Empirical analyses of public performativity in Guangzhou identify three scenarios, namely, the performativity of public teaching, public shows and performances, and the performative displays of cultural difference between carnivalesque dancing and “high-end culture” in public leisure.
