This paper reframes the motto of the right to the city by examining the colliding practices of place‐making among diverse residents, such as displaced slum dwellers, rural migrants, and low‐income newcomers, in a resettlement colony in Delhi's periphery. Drawing from 13 months of ethnographic field research among the residents of a resettlement colony, Savdha, I identify and examine three broad practices and associated politics of place‐making among the residents and their implications for revisiting the motto of the right to the city: the politics of land commodification; the politics of patience, hope, and incremental homemaking; and the politics of mobility and temporality. Although scholars have sympathetically critiqued “whose” rights, “what” rights and “what kind” of rights “the right to the city” entails, scholars within the right to the city framework implicitly have spatially and conceptually fixed the “city” and practices of resistance in the gentrifying urban cores. Moreover, existing scholarship envisions the right to the city motto as an oppositional demand to reclaim and redistribute resources to co‐create an inclusive and emancipatory city. Moving beyond this conceptualisation of the “city” within the right to the city motto as an emancipatory and ideal one, I shed light on the “kind” of a city the diverse actors produce in Delhi's periphery. Refraining from suggesting a normative conceptualisation, I argue that the right to the city as practised on the ground is also a right to co‐create an ever‐emerging city with colliding trajectories of opportunities and constraints beyond an inclusive and emancipatory city, as generally perceived.

中文翻译：

---

“城市权”中的城市在哪里？德里外围移民定居点的冲突政治

本文通过考察德里周边移民定居点中流离失所的贫民窟居民，农村移民和低收入新移民等不同居民之间冲突的做法，重塑了城市权利的座右铭。我从一个移民殖民地Savdha居民中进行了为期13个月的人种学田野调查，得出并检验了居民中场所制作的三种广泛实践和相关政治及其对重新审视城市权利座右铭的影响：土地商品化政治；耐心，希望和逐步自制的政治；以及流动性和暂时性的政治。尽管学者们同情地批评了“谁的”权利，但“城市权”的“什么”权利和“什么样的”权利却是必要的，在城市权框架内的学者暗中地在空间和概念上将“城市”和抵抗实践固定在高档化的城市核心地区。此外，现有的奖学金将城市座右铭的权利设想为一种对立的要求，要求回收和重新分配资源以共同创建一个具有包容性和解放性的城市。除了将城市座右铭作为一种解放和理想的座右铭概念中的“城市”概念化之外，我还揭示了德里周边地区各种参与者所产生的城市的“种类”。我不建议采用规范性的概念化，而是认为，在实践中实践的城市权也是共同创造一个新兴的城市的权利，它具有超越包容性和解放性城市的机会和限制的冲突轨迹，这通常被认为是。