Round Tables

Main chair: Matěj Spurný, Doc. PhD., Insitute for Contemporary History, Czech Science Academy
E-mail: matej.spurny@seznam.cz
1^st Co-chair: Kimberly E. Zarecor, Prof., Iowa State University
E-mail: zarecor@iastate.edu

Short abstract

This roundtable will explore, how local practices and approaches to public/social housing provision have produced obstacles and opportunities for imagining, how this housing stock can be sustained into the future and remain a source of tenancy and ownership for diverse groups of urban citizens.

Round Table content

Public investment in housing after World War II was significant across Europe in both state socialist and welfare capitalist states. Since 1990 (or earlier in some western countries), the housing stock in many cities has been transformed through alternate ownership structures, economic de-industrialization, and massive wealth accumulation in real estate. This roundtable will explore how local practices and approaches to public/social housing provision – on a spectrum from socialist mass housing to semi-private market strategies – have produced obstacles and opportunities for imagining how this housing stock can be sustained into the future and remain a source of tenancy and ownership for diverse income groups. The presenters come from architecture, heritage conservation, and urban history with knowledge of case studies across the continent.

The discussants: Matěj Spurný, Kimberly E. Zarecor, Petr Roubal (ÚSD AV ČR), Judit Bodnár (CEU), Milles Glendinning (Edinburg College of Art), Peter Szalay (Historical institute SAV), Jasna Mariotti

Main chair: Bert De Munck, Prof. Dr., University of Antwerp, Centre for Urban History
E-mail: bert.demunck@uantwerpen.be
1^st Co-chair: Greet De Block, Prof. Dr., University of Antwerp, Urban Studies Institute
E-mail: greet.deblock@uantwerpen.be
2^nd Co-chair: Stijn Oosterlynck, Prof. Dr., University of Antwerp, Centre for Research on Environmental and Social Change
E-mail: stijn.oosterlynck@uantwerpen.be

Short abstract

This roundtable concentrates on the impact of the institutional environment on urban studies and the place and role of specific disciplines in it. It examines and discusses how institutional constraints and path dependencies have hindered and shaped interdisciplinary collaboration and determine the role of urban history in the broader field.

Round Table content

The past decades have witnessed an impressive rise of interdisciplinary platforms on urban studies at universities, often with strong support of university leadership. These institutes and centres are mostly conceived as platforms which gather and bring into dialogue a broad variety of disciplines, ranging from urban sociology, political sciences, history, geography and transport economy to architecture, urban planning and engineering to environmental and health sciences.

On the surface, the rationale is clear. While these institutes and research centres are designed to tackle environmental, social and cultural problems which escape the confines of the nation state and require an integrated approach, they take shape in a context in which cities and urban actors reposition themselves relative to the nation state and to international political and institutional networks. However, questions remain with regard to the local differences and specificities of the institutions and research centres involved. Inevitably, the specific institutional environment and institutional path dependencies have a huge impact on the shape of these platforms and the nature of the research developed in their context. While interdisciplinarity can both be fostered and hindered, local and regional varieties with respect to the type of universities hosting them, the availability and nature of funding channels and the relationships with non-academic stakeholders very much determine the specificities of the interdisciplinary collaboration and approaches eventually emerging.

This round table explores and discusses the impact of institutional varieties and path dependencies on interdisciplinary collaboration and integrated approaches within the broader field of urban studies. Specifically, we discuss the impact on the themes and issues selected, the specific research questions addressed, and the conceptual and methodological approaches developed. With respect to the determining factors, we consider the range of disciplines involved, what the place and role of urban history is, what the precise incentives and impediments of interdisciplinary collaboration are, which funding channels can be and are being tapped, what the autonomy of the institutes is and how they relate to faculties or other institutional boundaries, etcetera.

The Discussants: Patrick Le Galès (Science Po Urban School, Centre for European Studies and Comparative Politics, Paris) and Manon van der Heijden (Comparative Urban History, University of Leiden), Christoph Bernhardt (Humboldt-University and Leibniz Institute voor Research on Society and Space, Berlin).

Main chair: Michaela Závodná, Mgr., Ph.D., University of Ostrava
E-mail:
1^st Co-chair: Martin Pekár, prof. PaedDr., PhD. Pavol Jozef Šafárik University / Univerzita P. J. Šafárika (Košice, Slovakia)
E-mail: martin.pekar@upjs.sk

Short abstract

The aim of the round table is to reflect on the contemporary identity of post-industrial settlements and their manifestations in public space.

Round Table content

The roundtable participants reflect on the transformation of contemporary cities. The discussion focuses primarily on the so-called post-industrial regions, which have undergone significant change over the last thirty years. As a result of economic change, these settlements, often unilaterally focused on heavy industry, have been forced to search for the meaning of their continued existence. The desire to adapt their image to the requirements of modern times has led city leaders to change the image of the city from dark industrial centres to modern, university-oriented cities (Ostrava) or fighting with the new circumstances (Košice). At the same time, however, this "new" image of the city continues to resonate with old stereotypes and patterns. The question is to what extent these old stereotypes are successfully refuted, how they are used and accentuated in the creation of an "appropriate" city image, how they are dealt with from the PR point of view and where the boundary between a/history is. We invite to the roundtable discussants who are interested in the history of mentalities, visuality, history or economics and who can make the above accessible through concrete examples of selected cities.

The discussants: Michaela Závodná (University of Ostrava), Martin Pekár (Pavol Jozef Šafárik University), Viktor Pál (University of Ostrava), Mariusz Czepczyński (University of Gdańsk)

Main chair: Maarten PRAK, Utrecht University
E-mail: m.prak@uu.nl
1^st Co-chair: Patrick Lantschner, University College London
E-mail: p.lantschner@ucl.ac.uk

Short abstract

We plan to launch the three volumes of the Cambridge Urban History of Europe during the conference in Ostrava. The round-table presents a sample of the chapters from volume 2, Middle Ages & Early Modern.

Round Table content

The Cambridge Urban History of Europe will offer a synthesis of the work that urban historians all over Europe have been doing over the past decades and is designed to be the standard work of reference for decades to come. We have made explicit efforts to recruit contributors from all over Europe and also across generations. The diversity of scholarship not only ensures substantial chapters on Nordic, Central and Eastern en South-Eastern Europe, but the books also look at the impact of European urbansation around the globe. In Antwerp, the editors of the three volumes have outlined their plans and the way the volumes are shaping up. In Ostrava we would like to hand over to the authors, for short presentations of individual chapters. Ideally, there will be two "main sessions" for this major project. Currently, the following authors will be presenting their work during the Ostrava conference: *Fabrizo Nevola (Exeter): Renaissance Italy *Katalin Szende (Budapest/Vienna): East-Central and Eastern Europe *Colin Arnaud (Münster): Neighbourhoods and urban zoning *Bert De Munck & Peter Stabel (Antwerp): Urban industries *Regula Schmidt (Bern): The military city *Manon van der Heijden (Leiden) Crime and the city.

Main chair: Maarten PRAK, Utrecht University
E-mail: m.prak@uu.nl
1^st Co-chair: Patrick Lantschner, University College London
E-mail: p.lantschner@ucl.ac.uk

Short abstract

We plan to launch the three volumes of the Cambridge Urban History of Europe during the conference in Ostrava. The round-table presents a sample of the chapters from volume 3, from 1850.

Round Table content

The Cambridge Urban History of Europe will offer a synthesis of the work that urban historians all over Europe have been doing over the past decades and is designed to be the standard work of reference for decades to come. We have made explicit efforts to recruit contributors from all over Europe and also across generations. The diversity of scholarship not only ensures substantial chapters on Nordic, Central and Eastern en South-Eastern Europe, but the books also look at the impact of European urbansation around the globe. In Antwerp, the editors of the three volumes have outlined their plans and the way the volumes are shaping up. In Ostrava we would like to hand over to the authors, for short presentations of individual chapters. Ideally, there will be two "main sessions" for this major project. Currently, the following authors will be presenting their work during the Ostrava conference: *Simon Gunn (Leicester): Britain and Ireland *Markian Prokovovych (Durham): Eastern and Southeastern Europe *Ilja Vandamme: The postindustrial city *Carl Nightingale (Buffalo): Race and ethnicity *Marjaana Niemi: Provisioning the city *Nicolas Kenny (Simon Fraser University): Emotions and the city *Jan-Hein Furnee (Nijmegen): Leisure in the city.

Main chair: Christoph Bernhardt, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
E-mail: bernhchr@hu-berlin.de

Short abstract

The Round Table will discuss with renowned experts the current state of debate in field Urban History and the Anthropocene.

Round Table content

Dynamics of urbanisation and metropolisation have been identified as major drivers and creators of the fundamental human transformation of the earth system (Chacrabarty 2021; McNeill/Engelke 2003; WBGU 2015). This transformation has rapidly accelerated since the 1950 and is currently discussed in broader public and scientific discourses under the term "Anthropocene". Amongst urban historians the debate on the relevance of the Anthropocene concept for the writing of urban history, the place of urbanisation in the emergence of the Anthropocene, the challenges for urban historians to contribute to the transdisciplinary Anthropocene debate and for established concepts of writing urban history has only just begun.

The Round Table will discuss with renowned experts the current state of debate in this field and address the following key questions on the relation of urban history and the Anthropocene:

Guiding questions:

1. What is the state of research on the interferences and causalities between urbanisation, urban history and the Anthropocene concept (e.g. in the writings of Dipesh Chakrabarty, Caroline Merchant, John McNeill, Carl Nightingale and others)? Which key elements and major discourses within the Anthropocene concept are especially relevant for the writing of urban history, like "deep time", materiality, scale, "variations of the Anthropocene in the Global South/North ect.", "Capitalocene" and alike?
2. On which approaches and results of current research in the fields of urban, environmental and global history can we build if we want to connect the writing of urban history to the Anthropocene debate? Can approaches like urban metabolism, urban agency, animal studies etc. be points of departure? Which major challenges does the Anthropocene debate raise for the current "main stream" of urban history writing, e.g. with the conceptual cornerstones of "deep/geological time", "materiality/geology", "scalar interferences between the local and the planetary", re-balancing of history, present and future, etc.?
3. Which next steps should we go, as urban historians, if we want to better connect the writing of urban history with the Anthropocene perspective? Do we/you agree, that widening the still dominating "local" approach in the mainstream of urban history to a multi-scalar perspective would be necessary, but also challenging? Which formats of scientific collaboration should we favour – or do we have to practice -, especially with regard to transdisciplinary cooperation?

The discussants: Carl Nightingale, Sabine Barles, Viktor Pal