000			02129nab a2200265 4500
999			_c11355 _d11355
003			OSt
005			20210225164806.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			210225b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aKudla, Daniel _944379
245			_aManaging territorial stigmatization from the ‘middle’: The revitalization of a post-industrial Business Improvement Area
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 51, Issue 2, 2019,( 351-373 p.)
520			_aWacquant’s territorial stigmatization concept asserts that state/private actors mobilize discourses of stigmatization about specific areas in a city in order to legitimize spatial solutions in an attempt to solve complex political-economic problems. Unlike conventional studies of territorial stigmatization which delineate the concept between the production of stigma from ‘above’ and the resistance of stigma from ‘below,’ this paper contributes the concept of territorial stigmatization from the ‘middle’. Given their conceptualization as key players in the urban assemblage, we specifically examine how Business Improvement Areas (also known as Business Improvement Districts in the U.S) negotiate territorial stigmatization throughout the neighbourhood revitalization process. We highlight Business Improvement Areas’ unique middle position by drawing on data collected from interviews, media articles, and urban planning reports in London Ontario’s Old East Village over a fifteen-year period. In short, we find the use of territorial stigmatization by Business Improvement Areas is contingent upon their relationship within the urban assemblage (both actors from above and below).
650			_aTerritorial stigmatization, _944380
650			_aBusiness Improvement Areas, _944381
650			_abusiness, _944382
650			_aimprovement districts, _944383
650			_aurban assemblage, _944384
650			_a Canada _944385
700			_aCourey, Michael _944386
773	0		_011325 _915507 _dSage, 2019. _tEnvironmental and planning A: Economy and space
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X18786966
942			_2ddc _cART