Click here to download

Mobility as lens for observing the neighborhood of Pilsen in Chicago
Author/s: Nunzia Borrelli 
Year:  2015 Issue: 113 Language: Italian 
Pages:  20 Pg. 103-122 FullText PDF:  189 KB
DOI:  10.3280/ASUR2015-113006
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

During last years, mobility concept is changed and its capacity to comprehend the urban transformation was widely discussed. The main aim of this article is to verify how the concept of mobility is capable to analyze and interpret the contemporary city changes.
Keywords: Mobility, population movements, accessibility, urban policy, cultural Consumption

  1. Anaya L. (2012). Changing Faces: Are Pilsen’s Changing Demographics Transforming the Culture of the Neighborhood?
  2. Betancourt B. (2014). For a Pilsen nonprofit, gentrification makes promoting the arts a double-edged sword.
  3. Betancur J. (2005). Gentrification before gentrification? The plight of Pilsen in Chicago.
  4. Bloom E. (2014). In Chicago’s Pilsen neighborhood, the face is changing.
  5. Borlini B. e Memo F. (2009). Ripensare l’accessibilità. Cittalia, Fondazione Anci.
  6. Borrelli N. and Kalayil A. (2011). Tourism and Planning in Chicago. The experience in Devan Avenue. Tourism and Hospitality: Planning & Development Journal, 8(4): 345-357.
  7. Borrelli N. and Davis P. (2012). How Culture Shapes Nature: Reflections on Ecomuseum Practices. Nature and Culture Journal, 7(1): 31-47.
  8. Borrelli N. and Davis P. (2013). Developing Capacity Building. Reflections on experiences in Chicago’s Field Museum. Museum Management and Curatorship, 28(5): 455-467.
  9. Cass N., Shove E. and Urry J. (2005). Social Exclusion, Mobility and Access. The Sociological Review, 53: 539-555.
  10. Castrignanò M., Colleoni M., Pronello C. (2012). Muoversi in città. Accessibilità e mobilità nella metropoli contemporanea. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  11. Clark T.N., Lloyd R., Kenneth K.W. and Pushpam J. (2002). Amenities drive urban growth. Journal of Urban Affairs, 24(5): 493-515.
  12. Clark T.N. and Lloyd R. (2001). The city as an entertainment machine. In: Fox Gotham K., ed., Critical Perspectives on Urban Redevelopment. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 357-378.
  13. Colleoni M. (2011). Mobilità e società urbane contemporanee. In: Colleoni M., a cura di, La mobilità territoriale nelle società contemporanee. Sociologia Urbana e Rurale, 94: 13-29 (numero monografico).
  14. Colleoni M. (2014). Mobilità Urbana. In: Vicari S., a cura di, Questioni urbane,Milano: il Mulino.
  15. Colleoni M., Bergamaschi M. e Martinelli F., a cura di (2009). La città: bisogni, desideri, diritti. Dimensioni spazio-temporali dell’esclusione urbana, Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  16. Colleoni M., Borrelli N. e Francesca Zajczyk (2012). Mobilità, accesso ai servizi e differenze di genere. In: Atti di Convegno I confini di Genere, 23-24 Gennaio 2012 Trento.
  17. Couclelis H. (2000). From sustainable transport to sustainable accessibility: can we avoid a new tragedy of the commons? In: Janelle D.G. and Hodge D.C., eds., Information, Place and Cyberspace: Issues in Accessibility, Berlin: Springer, 341-356.
  18. Curran W. and Hague E. (2006). The Pilsen building inventory project, DePaul University Department of Geography.
  19. Dijst M., Schenkel W. and Thomas I., eds. (2002). Governinig Cities on the Move. Functional and Management Perspectives on Transformations of European Urban Infrastructures, Ashgate publishing, Aldershot.
  20. Healey P. (2015). Civil Society Enterprise and local development. Planning Theory and Practice (accepted in publication).
  21. Joravsky B. (2006). Mum’s the word. Chicago Reader, May 12: 8-10.
  22. Keating D.A. (2008). Chicago Neighborhoods and Suburbs: A Historical Guide. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  23. Kaufmann V. (2011). Rithinking the city. Urban dynamics and motility. Lausanne: Routledge.
  24. Lutton L. (2012). Racial change in Pilsen: Mi casa? Tu casa?
  25. Martinotti G. (1993). Metropoli. La nuova morfologia sociale della città. Milano: il Mulino.
  26. Osti G. (2010). Sociologia del territorio. Milano: il Mulino.
  27. Park R., Burgess E. and McKenzie R. (1925). The City. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  28. Putre L. (2005). Zone sweet home. Chicago Journal, 9 May.
  29. Spinney R.G. (2000). City of Big Shoulders: A History of Chicago. Northern Illinois University Press.
  30. Saclarides K. (2010). Selling Chicago as a Global City: Redevelopment and Ethnic Neighborhoods.
  31. Sheller M. and Urry J., eds. (2004). Tourism Mobilities: Places to Play, Places in Play. London: Routledge.
  32. Sheller M. (2014). Sociology after the mobilities turn. In: Adey P., Bissell D., Hannam K., Merriman P. and Sheller M., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Mobilities. London: Routledge.
  33. Sternberg C. and Anderson M. (2014). Contestation and local trajectories of neoliberal urban governance in Chicago’s Bronzanville and Pilsen. Urban Studies, 51(15): 3198-3214.
  34. Urry J. (2000). Sociology beyond Societies: Mobilities for the twenty-first century. London: Routledge.
  35. Webber M. (2003). Neighborhood’s Lofty Ambitions. Chicago Sun-Times. 23 May.
  36. Wirth L. (1928), The Ghetto. Chicago: Phoenix.
  37. Zorbaugh H.W. (1929). The Gold Coast and the Slum: A Sociological Study of Chicago’s Near North Side. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Nunzia Borrelli, Mobility as lens for observing the neighborhood of Pilsen in Chicago in "ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI" 113/2015, pp. 103-122, DOI:10.3280/ASUR2015-113006


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content