Прибрежная территория как стратегия накопления: городское озеленение, создание недвижимости и превращение воды в актив
Аннотация
Настоящее исследование обращается к истокам сингапурской программы развития прибрежных территорий, чтобы показать, как на протяжении трех десятилетий городское озеленение, девелопмент недвижимости и джентрификация нового строительства тесно переплетались между собой; работа завершается анализом планов по созданию «Большого Южного прибрежного района». Во всем мире городские прибрежные зоны были переориентированы с промышленных на рекреационные функции, способствуя переходу к экономике услуг и недвижимости. Детальные исторические исследования того, как городское озеленение содействует этой социоэкономической трансформации, чрезвычайно актуальны для современной критики водно-зеленой инфраструктуры, которая как инструмент планирования и дизайна основана на ассетизации природы. Развитие прибрежных территорий имело ключевое значение для городского обновления в Сингапуре. Благодаря масштабному переключению капитала оно позволило вывести высокоценную землю на рынки недвижимости, тем самым укрепив статус правительства как «государства-собственника» и ускорив экологическую джентрификацию. В статье показано, что прибрежные территории стали новым инструментом для предпринимательского управления и либерализации планирования. Подчеркивается, что внедрение водно-зеленой инфраструктуры, в котором Сингапур был пионером в 1990-х, определялось прежде всего политико-экономическими целями (регенерация городов, повышение класса недвижимости, диверсификация экономики), а не принципами устойчивого развития. Автор утверждает, что государственные власти ассетизировали воду, капитализируя ее уникальные биофизические свойства, чтобы открыть новые возможности для накопления капитала на прибрежных территориях и обеспечить метаболическую основу для финансиализации земли и недвижимости.
Скачивания
Литература
Aalbers, M. B. (2020). Financial geography III: The financialization of the city. Progress in Human Geography, 44(3), 595–607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519853922
Anguelovski, I., C. Irazábal-Zurita, & Connolly, J. J. T. (2019). Grabbed urban landscapes: Socio-spatial tensions in green infrastructure planning in Medellín. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 43(1), 133–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12725
Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J. T., Garcia-Lamarca, M., Cole, H., & Pearsall, H. (2019). New scholarly pathways on green gentrification: What does the urban “green turn” mean and where is it going? Progress in Human Geography, 43(6), 1064–1086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518803799
Bakker, K. (2010). Privatizing water: Governance failure and the world’s urban water crisis. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Bakker, K., & Bridge, G. (2006). Material worlds? Resource geographies and the “matter of nature.” Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 5–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132506ph588oa
Balasingamchow, Y.-M. (2009). Sentosa Cove. Singapore: Editions Didier Millet
Birch, K. (2017). Rethinking value in the bio-economy: Finance, assetization, and the management of value. Science, Technology & Human Values, 42(3), 460–490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243916661633
Birch, K., & Ward, C. (2024). Assetization and the “new asset geographies.” Dialogues in Human Geography, 14(1), 9–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20438206221130807
Birch, K., & Muniesa F. (Eds.) (2020). Assetization: Turning things into assets in technoscientific capitalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12075.001.0001
Brenner, N. (2019). New urban spaces: Urban theory and the scale question. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190627188.001.0001
Bunce, S. (2009). Developing sustainability: Sustainability policy and gentrification on Toronto’s waterfront. Local Environment, 14(7), 651–667. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830903097740
Carton, W., Jönsson, E., & Bustos, B. (2017). Revisiting the “subsumption of nature”: Resource use in times of environmental change. Society & Natural Resources, 30(7), 789–796. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1320176
Centre for Liveable Cities. (2017). The Active, Beautiful, Clean waters programme: Water as environmental asset. Singapore: Centre for Liveable Cities.
Chiapello, E. (2024). So what is assetization? Filling some theoretical gaps. Dialogues in Human Geography, 14(1), 43–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20438206231157913
Chisholm, R. A., Kristensen, N. P., Rheindt, F. E., Chong, K. Y., Ascher, J. S., Lim K. K. P., Ng, P. K. L., Yeo, D. C. J., Meier, R., Tan, H. H. et al. (2023). Two centuries of biodiversity discovery and loss in Singapore. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(51), e2309034120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2309034120
Christophers, B. (2018). The new enclosure. London: Verso.
Christophers, B. (2020). Rentier capitalism. London: Verso.
Chua, B.-H. (2011). Singapore as model: Planning innovations, knowledge experts. In A. Roy & A. Ong (Eds.), Worlding cities: Asian experiments and the art of being global (pp. 29–54). Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444346800.ch1
Colven, E. (2023). A political ecology of speculative urbanism: The role of financial and environmental speculation in Jakarta’s water crisis. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 55(2):490–510. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X221110883
Connolly, C., & Muzaini, H. (2022). Urbanizing islands: A critical history of Singapore’s offshore islands. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 5(4), 2172–2192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486211051082
Cook, I. R., and K. Ward. (2012). Relational comparisons: The assembling of Cleveland’s waterfront plan. Urban Geography, 33(6), 774–795. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.6.774
Dasgupta, S., & Prins, A. (2023). “Worlding” Bangladeshi urbanism through water. Urban Geography, 44(5), 1021–1034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2023.2184583
Davidson, M., & Lees, L. (2005). New-build “gentrification” and London’s Riverside renaissance. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 37(7), 1165–1190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/a3739
Desfor, G., Laidley, J., Stevens, Q., & Schubert, D. (Eds.). (2011). Transforming urban waterfronts: Fixity and flow. London and New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203841297
Diep, L., Parikh, P., Dodman, D., Alencar, J., & Martins, J. R. S. (2023). Problematizing infrastructural “fixes”: Critical perspectives on technocratic approaches to green infrastructure. Urban Geography, 44(3), 470–491. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2022.2087947
Dooling, S. (2009). Ecological gentrification: A research agenda exploring justice in the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(3), 621–639. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00860.x
Ekers, M., & Prudham, S. (2017). The metabolism of socioecological fixes: Capital switching, spatial fixes, and the production of nature. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 107(6), 1370–1388. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2017.1309962
Ekers, M., & Prudham, S. (2018). The socioecological fix: Fixed capital, metabolism, and hegemony. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 108(1), 17–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2017.1309963
Fields, D. (2018). Constructing a new asset class: Property-led financial accumulation after the crisis. Economic Geography, 94(2), 118–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2017.1397492
Finewood, M. H., Matsler, A. M., & Zivkovich, J. (2019). Green infrastructure and the hidden politics of urban stormwater governance in a postindustrial city. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(3), 909–925. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2018.1507813
Gandy, M. (2014). The fabric of space: Water, modernity, and the urban imagination. The MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8313.001.0001
García-Lamarca, M., Anguelovski, I., & Venner, K. (2022). Challenging the financial capture of urban greening. Nature Communications, 13(1), 7132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-34942-x
Hackworth, J., & Smith, N. (2001). The changing state of gentrification. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 92(4), 464–477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00172
Haila, A. (1988). Land as a financial asset: The theory of urban rent as a mirror of economic transformation. Antipode, 20(2), 79–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1988.tb00170.x
Haila, A. (2016). Urban land rent: Singapore as a property state. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118827611
Hansard. (1997a). Addenda, Ministry of National Development. Singapore Parliamentary Debates, 67 (1).
Hansard. (1997b). Debate on President’s Address. Singapore Parliamentary Debates, 67(1).
Hansard. (2007). Debate on the Annual Budget. Singapore Parliamentary Debates, 82(1).
Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 71(1), 3–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.1989.11879583
Harvey, D. [(1982)] (2006). The limits to capital. London: Verso.
Hug, M., & Purcell, T. (2014). The muddy waters of financialisation and new accumulation strategies in the global water industry: The case of AGBAR. Geoforum, 53, 11–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.01.011
Jamieson, W. (2017). There’s sand in my infinity pool: Land reclamation and the rewriting of Singapore. GeoHumanities, 3(2), 396–413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2373566X.2017.1279021
Jonas, A. E. G., Gibbs, D., & While, A. (2011). The new urban politics as a politics of carbon control. Urban Studies, 48(12), 2537–2554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011411951
Kaika, M. (2005). City of flows: Modernity, nature, and the city. London and New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203826928
Kaika, M., & Ruggiero, L. (2024). Class meets land: The embodied history of land financialization. Berkeley: University of California Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520410091
Kay, K., & Tapp, R. (2022). Un/making assets: The institutional limits to financialization. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 112(5), 1243–1259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2021.1960474
Langley, P. (2021). Assets and assetization in financialized capitalism. Review of International Political Economy, 28(2), 382–393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1830828
Lees, L., & Ley, D. (2008). Introduction to special issue on gentrification and public policy. Urban Studies, 45(12), 2379–2384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098008097098
Loftus, A. (2006). Reification and the dictatorship of the water meter. Antipode, 38(5), 1023–1045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2006.00491.x
Loftus, A., & March, H. (2015). Financialising nature? Geoforum, 60, 172–175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.02.004
Loftus, A., & March, H. (2016). Financializing desalination: Rethinking the returns of big infrastructure. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 40(1), 46–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12342
March, L., & Bunce, S. (2023). Placing the more‐than‐human in environmental gentrification. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 48(1), 180–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12563
Millington, N. (2018). Linear parks and the political ecologies of permeability: Environmental displacement in São Paulo, Brazil. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 42(5), 864–881. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12657
Ministry of the Environment. (1992). The Singapore green plan: Towards a model green city. Singapore: Ministry of the Environment.
National Archives of Singapore. (2001). Speech by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong at the official opening of Punggol 21 (Document No. 2001070803).
Nelson, S. H., & Bigger, P. (2022). Infrastructural nature. Progress in Human Geography, 46(1), 86–107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132521993916
Neo, H. (2007). Challenging the developmental state: Nature conservation in Singapore. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 48(2), 186–199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8373.2007.00340.x
Nugent, J. (2015). Ontario’s infrastructure boom: A socioecological fix for air pollution, congestion, jobs, and profits. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 47(12), 2465–2484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/a140176p
O’Brien, P., O’Neill, P., & Pike, A. (2019). Funding, financing and governing urban infrastructures. Urban Studies, 56(7), 1291–1303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018824014
Oakley, S., & Johnson, L. (2013). Place-taking and place-making in waterfront renewal, Australia. Urban Studies, 50(2), 341–355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012452328
Pearsall, H. (2012). Moving out or moving in? Resilience to environmental gentrification in New York City. Local Environment, 17(9), 1013–1026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.714762
Peck, J., & Whiteside, H. (2016). Financializing Detroit. Economic Geography, 92(3), 235–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2015.1116369
Public Utilities Board. (2008). Annual report 2007/2008. Singapore: Author.
Public Utilities Board. (2011). Annual report 2010/2011. Singapore: Author.
Quastel, N. (2009). Political ecologies of gentrification. Urban Geography, 30(7), 694–725. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.30.7.694
Rérat, P., Söderström, O., & Piguet, E. (2010). New forms of gentrification: Issues and debates. Population, Space and Place, 16(5), 335–343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.585
Rosol, M., Béal, V., & Mössner, S. (2017). Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49(8), 1710–1718. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17714843
Shatkin, G. (2014). Reinterpreting the meaning of the “Singapore Model”: State capitalism and urban planning. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(1), 116–137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12095
Singapore Institute of Architects. (1990). Simpang development guide plan.
Singapore Institute of Architects. (1992). Changi Point development guide plan.
Smith, N. (1979). Toward a theory of gentrification: A back to the city movement by capital, not people. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(4), 538–548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01944367908977002
Smith, N. (1987). Gentrification and the rent gap. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(3), 462–478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1987.tb00171.x
Smith, N. (2002). New globalism, new urbanism: Gentrification as global urban strategy. Antipode, 34(3), 427–450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00249
Smith, N. (2007). Nature as accumulation strategy. Socialist Register, 43, 1–21.
Stabrowski, F. (2014). New-build gentrification and the everyday displacement of Polish immigrant tenants in Greenpoint, Brooklyn. Antipode, 46(3), 794–815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12074
Stein, S. (2019). Capital city: Gentrification and the real estate state. London: Verso.
Straits Times. (1984). Three hour raid at waterfront ends masquerade.
Straits Times. (1996). Punggol 21 should turn town into a “walking one.”
Straits Times. (2007). Deliver on Punggol, win over the young.
Swyngedouw, E. (2004). Social power and the urbanization of water: Flows of power. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198233916.001.0001
Tajudeen, I. (2007). Sentosa: A narrativized timeline of paradise in perspective. Singapore Architect, 240, 95–97.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1989a). Master plan for the urban waterfronts at Marina Bay and Kallang Basin. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1989b). Skyline 41 (July–August). Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1991). Living the next lap. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1993). Aesthetic treatment of waterbodies in Singapore. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1998). Punggol planning area: Planning report. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1999a). Annual report 1998/99. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (1999b). Model cities: Urban best practices. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (2002). Skyline 20th anniversary commemorative edition. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (2004). URA moves to implement plans for downtown at Marina Bay. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (2005). Annual report 2004/2005. Singapore: Author.
Urban Redevelopment Authority. (2009). Annual report 2008/2009. Singapore: Author.
Urban Task Force. (1999). Towards an urban renaissance. London: Spon.
Usher, M. (2014). Veins of concrete, cities of flow: Reasserting the centrality of circulation in Foucault’s Analytics of government. Mobilities, 9(4), 550–569. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2014.961263
Usher, M. (2018). Conduct of conduits: Engineering, desire and government through the enclosure and exposure of urban water. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 42(2), 315–333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12524
Usher, M. (2024). Territory, hydraulics, biopolitics: Internal colonization through urban catchment management in Singapore. Territory, Politics, Governance, 12(6), 846–865. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2056503
Van Loon, J., Oosterlynck, S., & Aalbers, M. B. (2019). Governing urban development in the Low Countries: From managerialism to entrepreneurialism and financialization. European Urban and Regional Studies, 26 (4), 400–418. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776418798673
Wade, R. (2025). Properties of air: Wind resourcification via assetization in the republic of Ireland. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 8(3), 779. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486251332779
Wakefield, S. (2007). Great expectations: Waterfront redevelopment and the Hamilton Harbour Waterfront Trail. Cities, 24(4), 298–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2006.11.001
Wakefield, S. (2019). Miami Beach forever: Urbanism in the back loop. Geoforum, 107, 34–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.10.016
Waldron, R. (2018). Capitalizing on the state: The political economy of real estate investment trusts and the “resolution” of the crisis. Geoforum, 90, 206–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.02.014
Ward, C. (2022). Land financialisation, planning informalisation and gentrification as statecraft in Antwerp. Urban Studies, 59(9), 1837–1854. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211028235
Ward, C., & Swyngedouw, E. (2018). Neoliberalisation from the ground up: Insurgent capital, regional struggle, and the assetisation of land. Antipode, 50(4), 1077–1097. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12387
Webber, S. (2024). For and against climate capitalism. Geographical Research, 62(1), 14–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12628
Williams, J. (2021). “Money is not the problem”: The slow financialisation of Kenya’s water sector. Antipode, 53(6), 1873–1894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12755
WWF. (2024). Living planet report: A system in peril. Gland, Switzerland: Author.
Yeoh, B. S. A. (2005). The global cultural city? Spatial imagineering and politics in the (multi)cultural marketplaces of South-east Asia. Urban Studies, 42(5–6), 945–958. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980500107201
Copyright (c) 2025 Городские исследования и практики
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
