Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilAppels à contributionAppels en coursVulnerable populations and territ...

Vulnerable populations and territories

Virginie Dejoux, Matthieu Gateau et Charles Rigaux

In our time, vulnerability is a 'suitcase' concept [Brodiez-Dolino, 2016] used in many different ways by and in the social sciences. In very general terms, as a total process (economic, social, political, demographic, etc.) of weakening a group, a society or an area, vulnerability refers to extraordinary situations and conditions of "pronounced risk compared to a reference situation (political, environmental, geographical, historical, etc.) which is characterised by normality". It therefore describes "the state of individuals or groups exposed to risks that often unfold along several synchronic dimensions (for example, the risks of illness, poverty and isolation are often linked) and whose nature may vary" [Gaimard et al., 2018: 11-12]. In other words, there are many different factors of varying natures which combine to cause individuals or groups to become more vulnerable and, in terms of social representations and perceptions, to think of themselves as such, thereby integrating patterns of behaviour and representations.

Talking in terms of vulnerability enables researchers to take account of the way in which this fragility is built up, in various sequences, which can take place on all scales, from the most micro to the most macro-sociological: individual, social group, territory, ecosystem, population, etc. Vulnerability is therefore a diachronic process whose contextualisation, essential to understanding it, is the responsibility of scientists, who can better grasp the plurality of conditions, forms and also issues (socio-political, for example) involved in its collective management and the solutions that need to be found, and sometimes invented, to counter its most obscure designs. So, at the level of one or more territories, the essential concept that interests us here, vulnerability can take on various forms and, once again, affect different sections of the population, first and foremost the most vulnerable, who often have multiple social handicaps. To understand this, we need to briefly recall that the notion of territory, in its contemporary sense, corresponds first and foremost to a political-administrative division, in other words to a social construct generating "territorial control", i.e. "spatial planning or structuring" [Kourtessis-Philippakis, 2011: 8] insofar as it is also to be considered as a "system, an organised space in which the various actors who make it up and bring it to life interact" [Gaimard et al., 2018: 11].

Much more than just a structured and developed geographical space, the territory is also experienced and felt [Di Méo, 1998]. It also has a strong historical dimension and very often specific social or cultural characteristics that are constantly changing. As a support for practices, representations and identifications for the individuals and groups it influences, it can be the subject of a strong sense of belonging and thus contribute to the construction of an individual's identity [Marchal, 2023]. Sometimes a place of attachment or anchorage [Rémy, 1996], but also, on the contrary, "mechanisms of social distancing" [Duvoux, 2018: 118] in the most segregated and enclosed areas, territories can be chosen or suffered. They can also constitute a set of resources or obstacles to the development of individuals and their most captive groups, or be identified as the place where public problems are defined and therefore as a "constitutive element of politics" [Duran and Thoenig, 1996: 583]. In short, the territory has many dimensions that are essential to the social life that takes place there, and it is therefore understandable that the phenomena of territorial vulnerability have multiple impacts that concern these various dimensions, sometimes to the point of jeopardising the entirety of one or all societies. In return, the territory itself can "create, maintain and exacerbate vulnerabilities or, on the contrary, mitigate them or even make them more bearable" [Gaimard et al., 2018: 14].

It goes without saying that the interactions between territories and vulnerabilities are numerous, varied and ongoing, constantly shaping or reshaping the contours of increasingly complex, interconnected modern societies, which are also threatened by various forms of vulnerability, whether caused directly and immediately by humans (armed conflicts, environmental destruction, lack of or unequal social policies, etc.) or indirectly (climate change, health crises, etc.). Through this call for papers, this issue of Espace, populations et sociétés therefore aims to shed light on the interactions between territories and vulnerabilities, essentially along three lines or dimensions relating to this questioning:

- One axis could focus on the generalisation of the rise in precariousness across the whole of France, involving populations which, until now spared, are now affected by forms of economic, social, family, professional or even health vulnerability. For example, with the effects of a never-ending economic crisis, the repercussions of the Covid 19 global pandemic, the continuing rise in inflation and the price of various energy sources (and the list goes on), and the context created by the wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, people are becoming increasingly fragile and precarious, and there is a growing risk of social disaffiliation and exclusion [Castel, 1995]. Here, isolated and/or elderly people, students, the long-term unemployed, people with disabilities and even captive individuals in certain areas are particularly targeted. The territorial dimension of these risks is therefore fundamental: they are not of the same nature in major national metropolises, in impoverished suburbs, in isolated rural areas or in intermediate zones such as peri-urban areas. Depending on the public services that are present (or absent), the public or private employers that may be located there, and the various communities in which people can become involved and which can in turn help them to adapt or simply survive these vulnerabilities, the territorial dimension therefore appears to be fundamental. It is in fact the source of many inequalities that need to be understood in order to gain a better understanding of the populations concerned and, perhaps from a social, health or socio-political point of view, to implement measures to support them and come to their aid in accordance with the principle of republican equality.

- Another focus could be on the territorial vulnerability engendered by climate disruption and the associated problems which, in one way or another, echo what a number of scientists, some of them members of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) set up in 1988, have been predicting for decades now. For some years now, it has been impossible to ignore the repeated climatic disasters (floods, storms, droughts, uncontrollable fires, drastic and widespread temperature rises, health risks with the appearance of viruses carried and transmitted by insects, etc.) that are affecting the whole of our planet. However, some areas are more affected by these changes, which are taking place with violence and are having a major impact on the most fragile, precarious and therefore vulnerable populations. The people we now refer to, sometimes clumsily, as 'climate refugees' [Dufoulon, 2013] are the most direct expression of this, and seem to herald major political, demographic, social, cultural and economic crises. Contributions focusing on situations of territorial, environmental or climatic vulnerability at international level are therefore welcome. However, work that focuses more on the scale of certain national territories (in the mountains, on the coast, in wine-growing areas or even simply in large cities where large housing estates are not spared) may also be included in this section. We could also suggest articles which, referring to situations of empowerment and resilience, focus on the initiatives taken by citizens, groups such as associations or NGOs (non-governmental organisations) to combat these disturbances and thus preserve natural resources but also, on a wider scale, life on earth. Studies analysing the interactions between these citizen initiatives and innovations and politics (with its various institutions), and even the controversies they generate, can also be proposed. At a time when politicians are advocating an 'ecological transition' [Gendron, 2015], the definition of which is by no means unequivocal [Juan, 2011], the need to achieve, or at least work towards, more sustainable development seems to have never been so urgent.

Ultimately, the aim of this issue is to bring together a body of work devoted to the different types of vulnerability in order to contribute to a better understanding of the interactions between them and the territories in which they occur, where they affect different sections of the population, both exhaustively and unevenly.

The expected contributions could be comparative studies between several national or international territories. Quantitative approaches, based on survey data, will be favoured, but contributions using qualitative data will also be considered. Proposals for articles may also develop a historical dimension or concern current social issues and their various dimensions (demographic, political, economic, etc.), as long as they address the issue of vulnerability and its territorial dimension(s) by basing themselves on contemporary situations and empirical data. Proposals for articles may, for example, concern particularly vulnerable populations that are grouped together in the same areas by choice or by force (migrants, political refugees, homeless people, etc.), populations whose vulnerability is increasing as a result of the fragility of their area (conflicts, effects of climate change, areas affected by massive waves of redundancies, etc.), or even the fringes of urban areas (urban fringes, rural fringes, etc.). ...) or fringes of the population whose progressive vulnerability implies new uses of the territory (elderly people living in detached houses, students in large cities, inhabitants of peri-urban areas or remote rural areas, etc.).

Schedule

- Deadline for submitting proposals for articles (title and abstract of approximately 1-2 pages): 15 October 2024

- Deadline for submission of articles to the Editorial Board: 15 January 2025

- Publication guidelines: https://journals.openedition.org/eps/3344

Contacts

Abstracts and contributions are to be sent to:

- Virginie Dejoux, PR en démographie, Université de Bourgogne, LIR3S (UMR 7366) : virginie.dejoux@u-bourgogne.fr

- Matthieu Gateau, McF en sociologie, Université de Bourgogne, LIR3S (UMR 7366) : matthieu.gateau@u-bourgogne.fr

- Charles Rigaux, Docteur en sociologie, Université de Bourgogne, LIR3S (UMSR7366) : charles.rigaux@gmail.com

Bibliographie

-Brodiez-Dolino, « Le concept de vulnérabilité », La Vie des idées, 11 février 2016 (en ligne). URL : https://laviedesidees.fr/Le-concept-de-vulnerabilite

-Castel R., « Les métamorphoses de la question sociale, une chronique du salariat », Librairie Arthème Fayard, 1995.

-Di Méo G., Géographie sociale et territoire, Paris, Nathan, 1998.

-Duran P. et Thoenig J.-C., « L’État et la gestion publique territoriale », Revue française de science politique, vol. 46, n°4, 1996, p. 580-623.

-Dufoulon S., « Colères des temps et réfugiés climatiques : pour une approche sociologique », VertigO - la revue électronique en sciences de l'environnement (en ligne), Débats et Perspectives, 2013. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/vertigo/13964

-Duvoux N., « Territoire », in Paugam S. (dir.), Les 100 mots de la sociologie, Paris, PUF, 2018, p. 116-118.

- Ferru M. et Chauchefoin P., (dir.), Territoires, Etat des savoirs et des pratiques, Atlantique-Éditions de l'Actualité Nouvelle Aquitaine, 2022.

-Gaimard M., Gateau M., Ribeyre F. et Bichet B., « Introduction : de la vulnérabilité au territoire », in Gaimard M., Gateau M., Ribeyre F. et Bichet B. (dir)., Vulnérabilités et territoires, Nancy, Kairos, 2018.

-Gendron C., « Sociologie de la transition : quelle société post-écologique ? », Cahiers de recherche sociologique, 58, 2015, p. 55–72.

-Juan S., La transition écologique, Paris, Erès, 2011.

-Kourtessis-Philippakis G. « La notion de territoire : définitions et approches » in Kourtessis-Philippakis G. et Treuil R. (dir.) « Archéologie du territoire, de l'Égée au Sahara », Cahiers archéologiques de Paris 1, Paris, La Sorbonne, 2011, p. 7-13.

-Marchal H., « Introduction. Territoire et identité, ou l’exigence de questionner deux notions encombrantes », in Marchal H. (dir.), Espaces, territoires et identités : jeux d’acteurs et manières d’habiter, Territoires contemporains, n°19, 2023 (en ligne). URL : http://tristan.u-bourgogne.fr/CGC/prodscientifique/TC.html

-Rémy J., « Mobilités et ancrages, une autre définition de la ville », in Hirschhorn M. et Berthelot J.-M. (dir.), Mobilités et ancrages. Vers un nouveau mode de spatialisation ?, Paris, L’Harmattan, 1996, p. 135-154.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search