1.
A. Cuthbert. Chapter  6:  Urban Design and Spatial Political Economy. In: Companion to Urban Design [Internet]. Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203844434
2.
Martin D, McCann E, Purcell M. Space, Scale, Governance, and Representation: Contemporary Geographical Perspectives on Urban Politics and Policy. Journal of Urban Affairs. 2003;25(2):113–21.
3.
Sanoff H. Multiple views of participatory design. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR [Internet]. 2014;2(1):57–69. Available from: http://www.archnet-ijar.net/index.php/IJAR/article/view/177
4.
Watson V. Seeing from the South: Refocusing Urban Planning on the Globe’s Central Urban Issues. Urban Studies. 2009 Oct 1;46(11):2259–75.
5.
Schindler S. Towards a paradigm of Southern urbanism. City. 2017 Jan 2;21(1):47–64.
6.
Barry J, Horst M, Inch A, Legacy C, Rishi S, Rivero JJ, et al. Unsettling planning theory. Planning Theory. 2018 Aug;17(3):418–38.
7.
Doreen Massey. Politics and Space/Time. New Left Review [Internet]. 1992;196. Available from: https://newleftreview.org/I/196/doreen-massey-politics-and-space-time
8.
Rios M. Envisioning Citizenship: Toward a Polity Approach in Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design. 2008;13(2):213–29.
9.
Roy A. Who’s Afraid of Postcolonial Theory? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 2016 Jan;40(1):200–9.
10.
McFarlane C. Knowledge, learning and development: a post-rationalist approach. Progress in Development Studies. 2006;6(4):287–305.
11.
Cornwall A. Historical perspectives on participation in development. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics. 2006;44(1):62–83.
12.
A. Escobar. The making and the unmaking of the third world through development. In: The post-development reader [Internet]. London: Zed Books; 1996. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=92a6b119-10d2-e811-80cd-005056af4099
13.
Hickey S, Mohan G. Towards Participation as Transformation: Critical Themes and Challenges. In: Participation: from tyranny to transformation? : exploring new approaches to participation in development [Internet]. London: Zed; 2004. p. 3–24. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=1893885c-8336-e711-80c9-005056af4099
14.
Mitlin D. With and beyond the state -- co-production as a route to political influence, power and transformation for grassroots organizations. Environment and Urbanization. 2008 Oct 1;20(2):339–60.
15.
Rendell J. Only resist: Five particular qualities might characterise a specifically feminist approach to critical spatial practice, suggests Jane Rendell. Architectural Review [Internet]. 2018;243(1449):8–18. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=asu&AN=128870014&site=ehost-live&scope=site
16.
Miraftab F. Making neo-liberal governance: the disempowering work of empowerment. International Planning Studies. 2004;9(4):239–59.
17.
Derickson KD. On the politics of recognition in critical urban scholarship. Urban Geography. 2016 Aug 17;37(6):824–9.
18.
Irazábal C. Public, Private, People Partnerships (PPPPs): Reflections from Latin American Cases. In: Lehavi A, editor. Private communities and urban governance: theoretical and comparative perspectives [Internet]. Switzerland: Springer; 2016. p. 191–214. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=1224661&site=ehost-live&scope=site
19.
Gaventa J, Barrett G. So What Difference Does it Make? Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement. IDS Working Papers. 2010 Oct;2010(347):01–72.
20.
Roy A. Civic Governmentality: The Politics of Inclusion in Beirut and Mumbai. Antipode. 2009;41(1):159–79.
21.
Catalina Ortiz and Camillo Boano. The Medellín’s shifting geopolitics of informality : The Encircled Garden as a dispositive of civil disenfranchisement? In p. 189–207. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781317333562/chapters/10.4324%2F9781315659275-16
22.
Marcuse P. From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City. 2009;13(2–3):185–97.
23.
Sun X, Huang R. Spatial meaning-making and urban activism: Two tales of anti-PX protests in urban China. Journal of Urban Affairs. 2018 Mar 22;1–21.
24.
Rolnik R. Place, inhabitance and citizenship: the right to housing and the right to the city in the contemporary urban world. International Journal of Housing Policy. 2014 Jul 3;14(3):293–300.
25.
Bell B, Wakeford K. Expanding architecture: design as activism. New York: Metropolis Books; 2008.
26.
Miraftab F. Insurgency and Spaces of Active Citizenship: The Story of Western Cape Anti-eviction Campaign in South Africa. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2005;25(2):200–17.
27.
Winkler T. Black texts on white paper: Learning to                              resistant texts as an approach towards decolonising planning. Planning Theory. 2017 Nov 4;
28.
Al-Harithy H. The participative discourse: community activism in post-war reconstruction. In: Saliba R, editor. Urban design in the Arab world: reconceptualizing boundaries [Internet]. Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate; 2015. p. 39–50. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=3d19f9c2-7c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
29.
Carabelli G. Grassroots Movements and the Production of (Other) Space(s) - published in The divided city and the grassroots: the (un)making of ethnic divisions in Mostar. In Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. Available from: http://ucl.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=3192314340004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760
30.
Erfan A. Confronting collective traumas: an exploration of therapeutic planning. Planning Theory & Practice. 2017 Jan 2;18(1):34–50.
31.
Fawaz M. Hezbollah as Urban Planner? Questions To and From Planning Theory. Planning Theory. 2009 Nov;8(4):323–34.
32.
Lahoud A. Post-Traumatic Urbanism. Architectural Design. 2010 Sep;80(5):14–23.
33.
Thomas Abbot, Roxana Aslan, Riley O’Brien and Nathan Serafin. Embrace abolitionist planning to fight Trumpism [Internet]. Progressive City; Available from: https://www.progressivecity.net/single-post/2018/04/06/EMBRACE-ABOLITIONIST-PLANNING-TO-FIGHT-TRUMPISM
34.
Petrescu D, Petcou C, Baibarac C. Co-producing commons-based resilience: lessons from R-Urban. Building Research & Information. 2016 Oct 2;44(7):717–36.
35.
Carabelli G. The divided city and the grassroots: the (un)making of ethnic divisions in Mostar [Internet]. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. Available from: http://ucl.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=3192314340004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760
36.
de Souza ML. Together with the state, despite the state, against the state. Social Movements as ‘Critical Urban Planning’ Agents. City. 2006 Dec;10(3):327–42.
37.
Awan N, Schneider T, Till J. Chapter 3: The operations of spatial agency. In: Spatial agency: other ways of doing architecture [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2011. p. 69–82. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=491ebea7-5536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
38.
Mukhija V. Urban Design for a Planet of Informal Cities. In: Companion to Urban Design [Internet]. Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203844434.ch43
39.
Mattila H. Aesthetic justice and urban planning: Who ought to have the right to design cities? GeoJournal. 2002;58(2/3):131–8.
40.
Frediani AA. Re-imagining Participatory Design: Reflecting on the ASF-UK Change by Design Methodology. Design Issues. 2016 Jul;32(3):98–111.
41.
Appadurai A. Deep democracy: urban governmentality and the horizon of politics. Environment and Urbanization. 2001;13(2):23–43.
42.
Blundell Jones P, Petrescu D, Till J, editors. Architecture and participation [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2012. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203022863
43.
AbdouMaliq Simone , and  Edgar Pieterse. New Urban Worlds : Inhabiting Dissonant Times [Internet]. Polity Press; 2017. Available from: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/UCL/reader.action?docID=4983712&ppg=173
44.
Laura Roth, Kate Shea Baird. Municipalism and the Feminization of Politics [Internet]. ROAR Magazine; Available from: https://roarmag.org/magazine/municipalism-feminization-urban-politics/
45.
Loo S. Design-Ing Ethics: the Good, the Bad and the Performative. In: Design and ethics: reflections on practice [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2012. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f6e15cf3-5536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
46.
Hou J. Citizen Design: participation and beyond. In: Companion to Urban Design [Internet]. Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203844434.ch25
47.
Luansang C, Boonmahathanakorn S, Domingo-Price ML. The role of community architects in upgrading; reflecting on the experience in Asia. Environment and Urbanization. 2012;24(2):497–512.
48.
Wahby N. Institutions and Populism in the Global South-Lessons for the Brexit-Trump Era. City & Community. 2017 Jun;16(2):139–44.
49.
Umemoto K. Walking in Another’s Shoes. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2001 Sep;21(1):17–31.
50.
Lee Y. Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the co-design process. CoDesign. 2008;4(1):31–50.
51.
Choguill MBG. A ladder of community participation for underdeveloped countries. Habitat International. 1996;20(3):431–44.
52.
Frediani A, Boano C. Processes for Just Products: the Capability Space of Participatory Design. In: The capability approach, technology and design [Internet]. London: Springer; 2012. Available from: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-94-007-3879-9
53.
Boano C, Talocci G. Fences and Profanations: Questioning the Sacredness of Urban Design. Journal of Urban Design. 2014;19(5):700–21.
54.
Hirst PQ. Space and power: politics, war and architecture. Cambridge: Polity; 2005.
55.
View of Toward an Architecture of Dissensus: Participatory Urbanism in South-East Asia - Boano, C. and Kelling, E. (2013). Available from: https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/index.php/footprint/article/view/Boano/945
56.
Doucet I. Understanding social engagement in architecture. In: Karim F, editor. The Routledge companion to architecture and social engagement [Internet]. New York, NY: Routledge; 2018. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=3a3e354f-f5fd-e811-80cd-005056af4099
57.
Luansang C, Boonmahathanakorn S, Domingo-Price ML. The role of community architects in upgrading; reflecting on the experience in Asia. Environment and Urbanization. 2012 Oct;24(2):497–512.
58.
Till J. Architecture of the Impure Community. In: Hill J, editor. Occupying architecture: between the architect and the user [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1998. p. 34–42. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203983829
59.
Cleaver F. Institutions, Agency and the Limitations of Participatory Approaches to Development. In: Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books; 2001. p. 36–55.
60.
Forester J. Making Participation Work When Interests Conflict: Moving from Facilitating Dialogue and Moderating Debate to Mediating Negotiations. Journal of the American Planning Association. 2006 Dec 31;72(4):447–56.
61.
Russell B. Radical municipalism: demanding the future [Internet]. openDemocracy; 2017. Available from: https://www.opendemocracy.net/plan-c/radical-municipalism-demanding-future
62.
Siemiatycki M. The Role of the Planning Scholar. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2012 Jun;32(2):147–59.
63.
Fraser, Nancy. Rethinking Recognition. New Left Review [Internet]. 3:1103–24. Available from: https://newleftreview.org/II/3/nancy-fraser-rethinking-recognition
64.
Martens K. Participatory Experiments from the Bottom up: The role of environmental NGOs and citizen groups. European Journal of Spatial Development [Internet]. 2005;18:1–20. Available from: https://archive.nordregio.se/European-Journal-of-Spatial-Development/Archive/2005/index.html
65.
Watson V. Deep Difference: Diversity, Planning and Ethics. Planning Theory. 2006 Mar;5(1):31–50.
66.
Yacobi H. The NGOization of Space: Dilemmas of Social Change, Planning Policy, and the Israeli Public Sphere. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 2007 Aug;25(4):745–58.
67.
Yacobi H, Ventura J, Danzig S. Walls, enclaves and the (counter) politics of design. Journal of Urban Design. 2016 Jul 3;21(4):481–94.
68.
John Forester. Listening: the social policy of everyday life in Planning in the Face of Power. University of California Press, Berkeley. In: Planning in the face of power [Internet]. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1989. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=a080e248-73f4-e711-80cd-005056af4099
69.
Markus TA, Cameron D. Why language matters. In: The words between the spaces: buildings and language [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2002. p. 1–17. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=9f5a20ed-8b33-e911-80cd-005056af4099
70.
Fenster T. Cognitive Temporal Mapping: The Three Steps Method in Urban Planning. Planning Theory & Practice. 2009 Dec;10(4):479–98.
71.
Akhil  Gupta and Ferguson, D. Discipline and Practice:"The Field” As Site, Method, and Location In Anthropology. …  locations: Boundaries and grounds of a  … [Internet]. Available from: http://www.academia.edu/252003/Discipline_and_Practice_The_Field_As_Site_Method_and_Location_In_Anthropology
72.
McDowell, L (1992a), Doing gender: Feminism, feminists and research methods in human geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series 17 399–416. Available from: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/Doing_Gender.pdf
73.
Read C, Earnest J, Ali M, Poonacha V. Applying a Practical, Participatory Action Research Framework for Producing Knowledge, Action and Change in Communities: A Health Case Study from Gujarat, Western India. In: Tiwari R, Lommerse M, Smith D, editors. M2 Models and Methodologies for Community Engagement [Internet]. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2014. p. 91–105. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-981-4585-11-8_6
74.
Leivas M. From the body to the city: participatory action research with social cartography for transformative education and global citizenship. Educational Action Research. 2018 Sep 21;1–16.
75.
Amir S. Rethinking Design Policy in the Third World. Design Issues. 2004;20(4):68–75.
76.
Komarova M, McKnight M. ‘We Are Watching You Too’: Reflections on Doing Visual Research in a Contested City. Sociological Research Online. 2013;18(1).
77.
Rose G. Situating knowledges: positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress in Human Geography. 1997;21(3):305–20.
78.
Flowerdew R, Martin D. Methods in human geography: a guide for students doing a research project [Internet]. 2nd ed. Harlow: Prentice Hall; 2005. Available from: http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9781405898416
79.
Hamdi N. Chapter 12. Insiders Out and Outsiders: Practical wisdom and the co-Production of Knowledge. In: The spacemaker’s guide to big change: design and improvisation in development practice [Internet]. New York, NY: Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315773315
80.
Mitlin D, Bartlett S. Editorial: Co-production – key ideas. Environment and Urbanization. 2018 Oct;30(2):355–66.
81.
Sarkissian, W. and Bunjamin-Mau, W. et al. Designing and managing a workshop. In: SpeakOut: the step-by-step guide to SpeakOuts and community workshops [Internet]. London: Earthscan; 2009. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=55416db3-8436-e711-80c9-005056af4099
82.
Saba Golchehr. Data-driven design for civic participation : Introducing digital methods for on-going civic engagement for design in public space. :56–70. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315110332/chapters/10.4324/9781315110332-5
83.
Burgess J, Harrison CM, Limb M. People, Parks and the Urban Green: A Study of Popular Meanings and Values for Open Spaces in the City. Urban Studies. 1988 Dec;25(6):455–73.
84.
We Drew What We Imagined: Participatory Mapping Performance, and Arts of Landscape Making, • Sletto, B. I., (2009). Available from: http://www.iapad.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Sletto_CA_August_20091.pdf
85.
Freire P, Bergman Ramos M. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New revised edition. London: Penguin Books; 1996.
86.
Haraway D. Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies. 1988 Autumn;14(3).
87.
SARA KINDON. Participatory Action Research: Origins, approaches and methods. :35–44. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781134135561/chapters/10.4324/9780203933671-13
88.
Jeremy Till. Imperfect ethics. In: Architecture depends [Internet]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press; 2009. p. 171–87. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=730082ec-4e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
89.
Miessen M. Collaboration and the conflictual, Published in The nightmare of participation - p. 91-104. In Berlin: Sternberg Press; 2010.
90.
Cooke B, Kothari U. The case for participation as tyranny. In: Participation: the new tyranny? [Internet]. London: Zed Books; 2001. p. 1–15. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=c4bd2ae2-8a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
91.
Mouffe C. Agonistics: thinking the world politically. London: Verso; 2013.
92.
Kaminer T. Theories of participation, theories of contestation. In: The efficacy of architecture: political contestation and agency. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge; 2017.
93.
Moser CON. Community participation in urban projects in the Third World. Progress in Planning. 1989 Jan;32:71–133.
94.
Sandercock L. Re/presenting Planning’s Histories. In: Towards cosmopolis: planning for multicultural cities [Internet]. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 1998. p. 33–54. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=a57f9aa3-151e-ed11-bd6e-a04a5e5d2f8d
95.
Yacobi H. Social Exclusion, Housing Environment and Tolerant Planning: The Case of the Jahelin Bedouin Tribe. Hagar - International Social Science Review. 69-84. Hagar international social science review = Hājir. 2004;5(1):69–83.
96.
Abu-Orf H. Is planning possible in cities divided by violent conflict? International Development Planning Review. 2011 Jan;33(3):321–42.
97.
Bower R. Architecture and space re-imagined: learning from the difference, multiplicity, and otherness of development practice [Internet]. Vol. Routledge Research in Place, Space and Politics. New York: Routledge; 2017. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315678146
98.
Hamdi N, Goethert R. Chapter 2. Action Planning In Theory. In: Action planning for cities: a guide to community practice. Chichester: John Wiley; 1997. p. 23–59.
99.
Hamdi N. Chapter 3. Deciding how to decide. In: The spacemaker’s guide to big change: design and improvisation in development practice [Internet]. New York, NY: Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315773315
100.
Hamdi N. Chapter 6. In Search of a Community and Structure of Place. In: Small change: the art of practice and the limits of planning in cities. London: Earthscan; 2004. p. 58–72.
101.
Luck R. Learning to talk to users in participatory design situations. Design Studies. 2007;28(3):217–42.
102.
Environment and Urbanization. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/loi/eau
103.
Camillo Boano and William Hunter. Collaboration and the conflictual. In: The nightmare of participation: [crossbench praxis as a mode of criticality]. Berlin: Sternberg Press; 2010. p. 91–104.
104.
Hamdi N. Chapter 7. Participation in practice. In: The spacemaker’s guide to big change: design and improvisation in development practice [Internet]. New York, NY: Routledge; 2014. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315773315
105.
Petrescu D, Chiles P. Agency: alternative practices and alternative worlds. Architectural Research Quarterly. 2009 Jun;13(02).
106.
Hamdi N. Chapter 8. PEAS and the Sociable Side of Practice. In: The placemaker’s guide to building community. London: Earthscan; 2010. p. 141–52.
107.
Sandercock L, Attili G. Digital Ethnography as Planning Praxis: An Experiment with Film as Social Research, Community Engagement and Policy Dialogue. Planning Theory & Practice. 2010 Mar;11(1):23–45.
108.
Hamdi N. Chapter 9. Reasoning to Scale. In: The placemaker’s guide to building community. London: Earthscan; 2010. p. 160–153.
109.
Hamdi N. Chapter 11. Governance and networks: organizing from inside out. In: Small change: the art of practice and the limits of planning in cities. London: Earthscan; 2004. p. 107–15.
110.
Environment and Urbanization. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/loi/eau
111.
Mitlin D, Thompson J. Participatory approaches in urban areas: strengthening civil society or        reinforcing the status quo? Environment and Urbanization. 1995;7(1):231–50.
112.
Petrescu D, Petcou C. Tactics for a Transgressive Practice. Architectural Design. 2013 Nov;83(6):58–65.
113.
Mitlin D, Satterthwaite D. Empowering squatter citizen: local government, civil society and urban poverty reduction. London: Earthscan; 2004.
114.
Cowan R. Placecheck: a user’s guide. . Urban Design Alliance ; 2001.
115.
Robinson J. White women researching/representing ‘others’: from antiapartheid to postcolonialism? In: Writing women and space: colonial and postcolonial geographies. New York: Guilford Press; 1994. p. 197–228.
116.
Foucault M. The eye of power. In: Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Harlow: Longman; 1980. p. 146–65.
117.
Burgess R, Carmona M, Kolstee T. Contemporary policies for enablement and participation : a critical review. In: The challenge of sustainable cities: neoliberalism and urban strategies in developing countries [Internet]. London: Zed; 1997. p. 138–62. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=9c4bae9a-8a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
118.
D. M. Petrescu, K. Trogal. The social (re)production of Architecture in ‘crisis-riddled’ times. In: Petrescu D, Trogal K, editors. The social (re)production of architecture: politics, values and actions in contemporary practice [Internet]. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717180
119.
Jenkins P, Smith H, Wang YP. Post-1990 issues in planning and housing. In: Planning and housing in the rapidly urbanising world [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2007. p. 178–203. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ee5bfbd5-9536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
120.
Cooke B, Kothari U. The case for participation as tyranny. In: Participation: the new tyranny? [Internet]. London: Zed Books; 2001. p. 1–15. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=c4bd2ae2-8a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
121.
Blunt A, Dowling RM. Setting up home: an introduction. In: Home [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2006. p. 1–31. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=2394bfc2-9536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
122.
Lane BM. What is home? In: Housing and dwelling: perspectives on modern domestic architecture [Internet]. Abingdon: Routledge; 2007. p. 50–73. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f87a55cc-9536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
123.
Coole D. Experiencing Discourse: Corporeal Communicators and the Embodiment of Power. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2007;9(3):413–33.
124.
Kumar S. Conceptual specifications. In: Methods for community participation: a complete guide for practitioners [Internet]. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing; 2002. p. 23–52. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ca0786a4-8836-e711-80c9-005056af4099
125.
Hamdi N. Small change: the art of practice and the limits of planning in cities. London: Earthscan; 2004.
126.
Sundberg J. Looking for the critical geographer, or why bodies and geographies matter to the emergence of critical geographies of Latin America. Geoforum. 2005;36(1):17–28.
127.
Swyngedouw E, Wilson J. Insurgent architects and the spectral return of the urban political. In: Metzger J, Allmendinger P, Oosterlynck S, editors. Planning against the political: democratic deficits in European territorial governance [Internet]. New York: Routledge; 2015. p. 215–25. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=20930d20-33c9-e711-80cd-005056af4099
128.
Kindon SL, Pain R, Kesby M. Participatory action research: origins, approaches and methods. In: Participatory action research approaches and methods: connecting people, participation and place [Internet]. Abingdon: Routledge; 2007. p. 9–18. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781134135561
129.
Patel S, Mitlin D. Grassroots-driven development: The alliance of SPARC, the National Slum Dwellers Federation and Mahila Milan. In: Empowering squatter citizen: local government, civil society and urban poverty reduction [Internet]. London: Earthscan; 2004. p. 216–41. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=5b1d1c38-8436-e711-80c9-005056af4099
130.
Wates N. General principles A-Z. In: Community planning handbook : how people can shape their cities, towns and villages in any part of the world. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd; 2000. p. 11–21.
131.
Frediani AA, Boano C. Processes for just products: the capability space of participatory design. In: The capability approach, technology and design [Internet]. Dordrecht: Springer; 2012. p. 203–22. Available from: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-94-007-3879-9
132.
Zetter R. Market enablement or sustainable development : the conflicting paradigms of urbanization. In: Planning in cities: sustainability and growth in the developing world [Internet]. London: ITDG; 2002. p. 31–42. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=bea9ee93-8836-e711-80c9-005056af4099
133.
Cornwall A, Coelho VSP. Spaces for change?: The politics of participation in new democratic arenas. In: Spaces for change?: the politics of citizen participation in new democratic arenas [Internet]. London: Zed; 2007. p. 1–29. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=722bea86-8336-e711-80c9-005056af4099
134.
Glass J. Facing the Future by Designing in Resilience: An Architectural Perspective. In: Hazards and the built environment: attaining built-in resilience [Internet]. Abingdon: Routledge; 2008. p. 172–88. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ad954536-5536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
135.
Seymour W. Exhuming the Body: Revisiting the Role of the Visible Body in Ethnographic Research. Qualitative Health Research. 2007;17(9):1188–97.
136.
Ramirez R. Integrated Informality in the Barrios of Havana. In: Rethinking the informal city: critical perspectives from Latin America [Internet]. New York: Berghahn Books; 2010. p. 137–62. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=222f22f0-8536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
137.
Turner JFC. Issues in Self-Help and Self-Managed Housing. In: Self-help housing: a critique [Internet]. London: Mansell; 1982. p. 99–113. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c2ed8bb4-6536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
138.
Madanipour A. Introduction. In: Whose public space?: international case studies in urban design and development [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2010. p. 1–15. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=e4a879a0-5536-e711-80c9-005056af4099
139.
Dovey K. Home and homelessness. In: Home environments [Internet]. New York: Plenum Press; 1985. p. 33–64. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=8e4fc2f6-4f36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
140.
Eyben R, Harris C, Pettit J. Introduction: Exploring Power for Change. IDS Bulletin. 2006;37(6):1–10.
141.
Till J. Imperfect ethics. In: Architecture depends [Internet]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press; 2009. p. 171–87. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=730082ec-4e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
142.
Schuermans N, Newton C. Being a young and foreign researcher in South Africa: Towards a postcolonial dialogue. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography. 2012;33(3):295–300.
143.
Progress in Human Geography. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/publication/37137