نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• حمید عطایی شاد ¹
• سحر ندایی طوسی ²

¹ دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی

² عضو هیئت علمی گروه برنامه‌ریزی و طراحی شهری و منطقه‌ای دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی

چکیده

در حالی که شهرها به کانون اصلی منازعه‌های سیاسی و جنبش‌های اعتراضی قرن بیست‌ و یک بدل شده‌اند، دانش ما درباره "منطق فضایی تولید قدرت اعتراضی" همچنان در بن‌بستِ نگاه ابزاری گرفتار است. این پژوهش با عبور از رویکردهای سنتی که فضا را صرفاً بستر یا موضوع اعتراض می‌دانند، در پی تبیین این مسئله است که این کنش‌ها چگونه از طریق صورت‌بندی‌های متفاوت فضایی، قدرت خود را سازماندهی و اعمال می‌کنند. با اتکا به راهبرد مطالعة تطبیقی کیفی و تحلیل مضمون سیزده اپیزود اعتراضی جهانی (۲۰۱۱-۲۰۲۰) از بسترهای متفاوت سیاسی، جغرافیایی و فرهنگی، این مقاله گونه‌شناسی نوآورانه و سه‌گانه‌ای را از منطق‌ فضایی جنبش‌های اعتراضی شهری معرفی می‌کند: (۱) منطق تمرکز فضایی، منجر به تولید قدرت از طریق تراکم و هم‌مکانی در نقاط نمادین (مانند میدان تحریر) می‌شود که ظرفیت بسیج و رؤیت‌پذیری رسانه‌ای را به اوج می‌رساند. (۲) منطق قلمرو مقاومت که فراتر از اشغال ساده، بر کنترل، اداره و بازتولید نظم جایگزین در یک محدوده استوار است؛ جایی که ایجاد زیرساخت‌های موازی نظیر درمانگاه‌ها، آشپزخانه‌های جمعی و نظامات تصمیم‌گیری مستقل، اعتراض را به تجربه‌ای پایدار از حکمرانی فضایی بدل می‌کند. (۳) منطق فضای شبکه‌ای که براساس آن تولید قدرت از طریق اتصال و تکثیر کنش میان گره‌های پراکنده شهری رخ می‌دهد. در این الگو (مانند جنبش BLM) قدرت نه در یک مکان واحد، بلکه در تاب‌آوری و انعطاف‌پذیری شبکه نهفته است؛ به‌طوری‌که حذف یک گره منجر به فروپاشی کل حرکت نمی‌شود.

یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که این منطق‌ها نه مراحلی خطی، بلکه پاسخ‌های راهبردی و غیرخطی به شرایط ساختاری مانند شدت سرکوب، مقیاس جغرافیایی مطالبات‌ و دسترسی به فناوری‌های ارتباطی هستند که می‌توانند به‌صورت هم‌زمان در یک اپیزود واحد حضور داشته باشند. برای مثال، در حالی که تمرکز فضایی بر نقش ابزاری فضا تکیه دارد، قلمرو مقاومت عملاً به تولید فضای جدید منجر می‌شود. همچنین، تحلیل روند تاریخی نشان‌دهنده افزایش سهم منطق شبکه‌ای در دهة اخیر است، هرچند عناصر تمرکز فضایی همچنان به‌عنوان زیرلایه در این جنبش‌ها باقی مانده‌اند.

نوآوری مرکزی این نوشتار جابه‌جایی کانون تحلیل از "نقش فضا" به "منطق‌های تولید قدرت از طریق فضا" (تراکم، کنترل و اتصال) است. این پژوهش نخستین گونه‌شناسی تطبیقی از اعتراض‌های شهری معاصر را ارائه می‌دهد که امکان مقایسة نظام‌مند آن‌ها را بر اساس منطق سازماندهی فضایی‌شان و نه صرفاً مطالبات یا هویت کنشگران، فراهم می‌سازد و افق‌های تازه‌ای را برای تحلیل رابطة میان شهر، قدرت و مقاومت می‌گشاید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• "
• منطق فضایی اعتراض"
• سازماندهی جنبش‌های شهری"
• گونه‌شناسی تطبیقی"
• تمرکز فضایی"
• قلمرو مقاومت"
• ،"
• فضای شبکه‌ای"

موضوعات

• برنامه ریزی شهری

عنوان مقاله [English]

Cities Beyond the Stage of Events: A Comparative Study of the Logic of Spatial Organization in Twenty-First-Century Protest Episodes

نویسندگان [English]

• Hamid Ataei Shad ¹
• Sahar Nedae Tousi ²

¹ دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی

² Faculty Member, Department of Urban and Regional Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University.

چکیده [English]

Introduction and Problem Statement

In the first two decades of the twenty-first century, cities have increasingly become the primary stage for political and social conflicts. From the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street to the Gezi Park protests and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, these events share a fundamental urban character, unfolding in squares, streets, and public spaces. However, the shared urban setting does not imply a uniform method of spatial organization. Despite the "spatial turn" in social sciences, which posits that space is a social product and an active participant in social relations rather than a neutral container, most literature still treats space instrumentally. Existing research often categorizes space as a tool for mobilization, a subject of conflict (e.g., the right to the city), or a product of collective action. While these perspectives are valuable, they fail to explain the underlying "spatial logics" through which movements organize and exercise power. The central problem addressed in this research is not merely the presence of space in protests, but the diverse ways in which collective power is produced and reproduced through different spatial configurations.

Methodology

This research employs a qualitative comparative methodology, specifically utilizing Charles Tilly’s "diversity-finding" strategy to uncover shared patterns and differences across diverse contexts. The unit of analysis is the "protest episode," defined as a cohesive set of actions with temporal, spatial, and actor-based consistency. Thirteen global protest episodes occurring between 2011 and 2020 were purposively selected to ensure a wide range of political, geographical, and cultural backgrounds. These include prominent cases such as Tahrir Square (Egypt), Euromaidan (Ukraine), the Umbrella Movement (Hong Kong), and BLM (USA). Data were gathered from secondary sources, including peer-reviewed journals and academic reports, and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Through a continuous comparative process, spatial features were coded and categorized into conceptual clusters, leading to the development of a tripartite typology of spatial logics: Spatial Concentration, Territory of Resistance, and Networked Space.

Findings:

A Typology of Three Spatial Logics

1. The Logic of Spatial Concentration Spatial concentration is identified as the most prevalent logic, where protest power is generated through the density and co-location of activists in a central, symbolic urban point. This logic relies on three core features: high population density, geographical/political centrality, and the symbolic weight of the chosen location. Tahrir Square in 2011 serves as the archetypal example; here, the movement's power was derived not from geographical expansion, but from the massive concentration of people in a single square, which enhanced visibility, internal coordination, and media resonance. While this logic offers high cohesion and symbolic impact, it remains vulnerable to centralized state suppression and physical clearance, which can lead to the sudden collapse of the movement.

2. The Logic of Territory of Resistance Distinct from mere concentration, the logic of the territory of resistance focuses on "governing space" rather than just "occupying" it. In this model, the movement exerts control over a specific area, establishes its own rules, and limits state authority to create an alternative socio-political order. This logic is characterized by clear spatial boundaries, controlled access, and the creation of parallel infrastructures such as clinics, communal kitchens, and independent decision-making bodies. Episodes like Euromaidan in Ukraine and the 2019 Sudan protests exemplify this, where the occupation was transformed into a sustainable experience of spatial and social organization. Here, protest becomes integrated into daily life, and the movement’s power stems from its ability to maintain and administer a liberated territory.

3. The Logic of Networked Space The logic of networked space shifts the focus from a single point or territory to the relationships between multiple nodes. Power is produced through the connection, coordination, and replication of actions across scattered urban sites. This logic is defined by multi-centricity, spatial flexibility, and geographic dispersion. The 2020 BLM movement represents the most complete realization of this logic; following the death of George Floyd, protests erupted simultaneously in over 2,000 cities globally, with no single city serving as an exclusive center. The networked approach is highly resilient; because power is distributed across the entire network, the suppression of a single node does not lead to the collapse of the movement. The emergence of this logic is often a strategic response to intense repression in concentrated spaces and is facilitated by widespread access to communication technologies.

Discussion and Synthesis

The findings suggest that these three logics are not linear or evolutionary stages of protest development. Instead, they represent non-linear, strategic responses to structural conditions such as the intensity of state repression, the scale of demands, and technological infrastructure. For instance, a single episode can exhibit multiple logics simultaneously: Tahrir displayed both spatial concentration (at the square's center) and territory of resistance (in its internal governance). However, a historical trend is visible; the last decade has seen a significant increase in the prevalence of the networked logic. As movements face more sophisticated state surveillance and suppression, they increasingly adopt multi-centric and fluid spatial strategies. Nevertheless, elements of spatial concentration often remain as a sub-layer even in highly networked movements.

The matrix of "spatial roles" (tool, subject, product) further clarifies these logics. In the concentration logic, space is primarily a powerful tool for visibility. In the territory of resistance, space becomes a product as the movement actively produces a new social and political order. In the networked logic, the focus returns to space as a tool, but at a national or transnational scale of coordination.

Conclusion

This study identifies spatial organization as a fundamental mechanism for producing protest power. Its primary contribution is shifting analysis from the 'role of space' to 'spatial logic of power production'—density, control, and connection. This typology bridges macro-theories with empirical evidence, allowing systematic comparisons across diverse contexts based on spatial logic rather than identity or demands. Despite data limitations, it provides a framework for exploring logic transitions throughout a movement's life cycle. Ultimately, urban protests are processes that transform space into a mechanism for producing and reproducing collective power."

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• '
• spatial Logic of Protest'
• Organization of Urban Movement'
• Comparative Typology'
• Spatial Concentration'
• Territory of Resistance'
• ,'
• Networked Space'