Prof. Dr. Talja Blokland
Profil
Zusammenfassung
Prof. Blokland erforscht, wie Menschen in städtischen Nachbarschaften zusammenleben, Vertrauen aufbauen und sich zugehörig fühlen — besonders in sozial gemischten oder benachteiligten Vierteln. Sie verbindet dabei Stadtsoziologie mit Netzwerkforschung und untersucht, wie physische Räume, soziale Beziehungen und Identitäten zusammenhängen. Ihre Arbeit ist praktisch relevant für Stadtplanung, Wohnungspolitik und Strategien zur Förderung von sozialer Kohäsion in diversen urbanen Räumen.
Skills
Stammdaten
Identität, Organisation und Kontakt aus HU-FIS.
Forschungsthemen16
Eigenheim: Fakten und Interpretationen der Entscheidungen für Eigentumswohnungen und -Häuser in Deutschland und Berlin
Quelle ↗Förderer: Wirtschaftsunternehmen / gewerbliche Wirtschaft Zeitraum: 09/2013 - 10/2013 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Talja Blokland
Einstein-Zirkel: Large-Scale Organisation
Quelle ↗Förderer: Einstein Stiftung Berlin Zeitraum: 01/2016 - 12/2018 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Talja Blokland
Faith in the city
Quelle ↗Zeitraum: 09/2013 - 07/2015 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Talja Blokland
Mögliche Industrie-Partner328
Details nur für eingeloggte sichtbar
🔒 Das System hat 328 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden
Publikationen25
Top 25 nach Zitationen — Quelle: OpenAlex (BAAI/bge-m3 embedded für Matching).
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 233 Zitationen · DOI
Abstract Segregation along lines of race/ethnicity and class has created multi‐ethnic and rather class‐homogeneous neighbourhoods in various European cities, commonly labelled as ‘disadvantaged’. Such neighbourhoods are often seen as ‘lacking’ community, as local networks are crucial for belonging and mixed neighbourhoods are too diverse to provide homogeneous identifications. However, in contrast to the understandings of the sociology of community, people might still experience ‘belonging’, yet in different ways. This article argues that we have to focus on the under‐researched ‘time in‐between’ ( B yrne, 1978), the absent ties that Granovetter (1973) pointed to, to understand belonging, while moving away from a conception of the anonymous city and from the urban village. This article explores how absent ties affect belonging by empirically sustaining the notion of public familiarity: both recognizing and being recognized in local spaces. Using regression models on survey data from two mixed neighbourhoods in B erlin, G ermany, we analyse the importance of neighbourhood use for public familiarity as well as how it relates to residents' comfort zone: people's feeling of belonging and their sense that others would intervene on their behalf. Our findings indicate that research on neighbourhoods could benefit greatly from a careful consideration of the ‘time in‐between’.
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies · 158 Zitationen · DOI
Urban policies in various countries aim at integrating minorities into mainstream society through combating residential segregation. One strategy is to change the housing stock. Assuming that the middle classes leave certain neighbourhoods because they lack suitable dwellings, building more expensive dwellings is an important policy trajectory in the Netherlands. However, living in the proximity of other income groups is in itself insufficient to overcome racial, ethnic and class divides in social networks. The usual policy indicator for defining ‘middle class’, e.g. income, is not a very good predictor for the diversity of networks of people living in mixed neighbourhoods. What, then, is? The first step is to ask what distinguishes people who prefer diverse neighbourhoods. Are people who are attracted by the diversity of an area different from others? Next, we question whether people who like diversity have more diversity in their networks or contribute in other ways to a more integrated neighbourhood through their use of it. We use social network data collected in a mixed inner-city neighbourhood in Rotterdam to explore this. We argue that attracting people to an area because of its diversity may contribute to the economic viability of local businesses and possibly to the nature of interactions in public space. However, we can not empirically substantiate that a preference for a diverse neighbourhood translates into distinct practices or social networks that enhance the integration of ethnic minorities into mainstream society.
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 144 Zitationen · DOI
How is place‐making as a tool for the formation of social identities related to categories, networks and categorical networks? How do people use the built environment and hence, following Massey, create places in space? Such questions are asked to reverse the usual way of looking at urban neighbourhoods. The neighbourhood in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, where the ethnographic research for this article was conducted, is not taken for granted. The symbolic meanings and practical uses the neighbourhood has today and has had over the past 75 years are discussed in relation to class and social networks. Local networks, grounded in everyday activities, provided a sense of class‐based familiarity when the shipbuilding industry (1900–60) reigned. This did not necessarily produce communities as people imagined them, but it did produce quite local, and categorical, networks. However, such catnets on the local level can no longer be taken for granted, if they ever could. This article addresses how elderly people within a neighbourhood use the built environment to: (1) produce new local networks (by using local facilities as meeting points) and new social identifications with others; (2) imagine a community by developing a sense of ‘localness’ rather than ‘class’ as a shared category, although they have a similar class position; and (3) produce collective memories and, in the process of this production, format the neighbourhood symbolically. In doing so, they reduce the multi‐layered identities of earlier times to a one‐dimensional memory of the working‐class community which is equated with the neighbourhood. This enables this group of elderly people to make sense of their contemporary, changing social environment. Comment la fabrication d’un lieu peut‐elle façonner des identités sociales liées à des catégories, des réseaux et des réseaux catégoriques? Comment les gens utilisent‐ils l’environnement bâti, créant ainsi des lieux dans l’espace – si l’on en croit Massey? En posant ces questions, on inverse la manière courante d’observer les quartiers urbains. Le quartier de Rotterdam où a été réalisée l’étude ethnographique pour cet article n’est pas puis au tant que tel: les sens symboliques et les usages pratiques qu’il a aujourd’hui et a eu durant les 75 dernières années sont examinés en fonction des classes et des réseaux sociaux. Les réseaux locaux, fondés sur le quotidien, ont créé une certaine familiarité fondée sur les classes à l’époque florissante de l’industrie navale (1900–60); sans produire forcément des communautés telles qu’on les imagine, il en a résulté des réseaux très locaux et sectoriels. Cependant, ces ‘sectorieux’ locaux ne peuvent plus ?tre considérés comme naturels, s’ils ne l’ont jamais été. L’article montre comment les personnes âgées d’un quartier exploitent l’environnement bâti: premièrement, pour créer de nouveaux réseaux locaux (en utilisant les implantations existantes comme points de rencontre) et de nouvelles identifications sociales avec autrui; deuxièmement, pour imaginer une communauté partageant une catégorie basée sur la ‘localité’ plutocirc;t que la ‘classe’, m?me si elles sont d’une position de classe similaire; troisièmement, pour générer des souvenirs communs et, ce faisant, donner au quartier une configuration symbolique. Elles ramènent ainsi les identités antérieures, qui comportaient plusieurs niveaux, à une mémoire à une dimension de la communauté ouvrière, laquelle équivaut au quartier. C’est ce qui permet à ce groupe de personnes âgées de comprendre son environnement social contemporain en évolution.
Kooperationen2
Bestätigte Forscher↔Partner-Paare aus HU-FIS — Gold-Standard-Positive für das Matching.
‘Surface for Urban Innovation: The Politics of Designing Poverty in Colombia and Czechia — SURBANIN’
university
SFB 1265/1: Die Welt in meiner Straße: Ressourcen und Netzwerke von Stadtbewohner*innen (TP C04)
university