Ethnicities

http://etn.sagepub.com/

Cities and ethnicities

Ash Amin and Nigel Thrift
Ethnicities 2002 2: 291
DOI: 10.1177/14687968020020030101
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://etn.sagepub.com/content/2/3/291

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Ethnicities can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://etn.sagepub.com/content/2/3/291.refs.html

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

GUEST EDITORIAL

Copyright 2002 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi)
Vol 2(3): 291300 [1468-7968(200209)2:3;291300;026713]

Guest editorial
Cities and ethnicities
ASH AMIN
University of Durham, UK

NIGEL THRIFT
University of Bristol, UK

INTRODUCTION
The articles in this Special Issue are concerned with the interaction between
cities and ethnicities.1 Cities have become sites of intense ethnic mixing,
although the exact nature and extent of that mixing obviously differ from
city to city in significant ways, leading to highly differentiated levels of
integration, senses of belonging and quality of life experience.2
Cities matter in the daily negotiations of race, ethnicity and cultural
difference yet the significance of place and the everyday has tended to
remain secondary in an otherwise rich literature on ethnic identities, race
and multiculturalism. Much of the discussion on belonging, for example,
has tended to focus on the clash or resonance between (global) diasporic
affiliations and national models of belonging, with less emphasis placed on
local modes of belonging shaped by, say, community cultures and senses of
place, and opportunities for autonomy and cultural mingling in the public
sphere at the local level. Similarly, discourses on racism and multicultural
dynamics (with the exception of some excellent work on local anthropologies of ethnicity) have tended to focus on the role of national articulations of political philosophy (liberal, communitarian, and so on), minority
rights, immigration and race legislation, institutional conduct, and general
attitudes and practices towards outsiders. An unwitting consequence has
been to underestimate the significance of local microcultures of inclusion
and exclusion, influenced by such factors as local class relations and

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

292

ETHNICITIES 2(3)

associated ethnic settlements, the policies of local authorities on housing,

education, planning and culture, and the balance of play between minority,
majority and fringe organizations such as racist groups.
In drawing this contrast, we do not wish to claim that the urban (or the
rural for that matter) is formed around localized influences and is somehow
distinct from social life situated in another sphere that we might call the
national or the global. We do not wish to reduce the cultures of cities to
local associations. Rather, our point is to underline spatial differentiation
and the particularities of cities forged from unique local histories and local
combinations of near and far connections.
In particular, we see cities as having two main roles in framing experiences of ethnicity. First, as Bonnett shows in this issue, in western thought
cities have been implicated centrally in symbolic attempts to racialize and
place modernity. During different periods, cities have been seen as markers
of white civilization, civic improvement and cultural progress, as sites of
cultural depravity and cosmopolitan degeneracy (contra the rural as the site
of historical and national purity and strength), or as places overrun by the
dark and dangerous working classes or foreigners. This record forces
recognition of how deeply the symbolic urbanization and racialization of
modernity have marked city life (for example, the demonization of black
inner city areas or of non-metropolitan and premodern cultures, the association of civic culture with whiteness, and so on). It also, because of such
coding, highlights how any attempt to combat racism and encourage
intercultural understanding must come to grips with the racialized urban
imaginary (for example, by rejecting assumptions that public spaces are
sites of white privilege and therefore only for temporary concession to
immigrant habits and cultures, or that urban planning must protect rational
or universal principles, usually read as white culture). The racial and ethnic
coding of urban life working as a metaphor for what it is to be modern
must be addressed in strategies to promote multicultures.
Second, cities more accurately their sites of habitual contact frame
the everyday experience of ethnicity, the prosaic moments and daily
rhythms of social life that have a decisive impact on racial and ethnic
practices (Back, 1996; Back and Keith, 1999). What is seen and said in
schools, neighbourhoods, streets, shopping centres, workplaces and public
spaces, what is made of the world at large through the filter of local
resonances, shapes understandings of self, and behaviour towards others.
The intensity of racial or ethnic coding of daily life has a crucial impact on
whether the others are seen as culturally compatible and capable of sustaining a common or shared sense of place. The everyday city provides the
prosaic negotiations that drive interethnic and intercultural relations in
different directions; one reason why we find so much local variation. Its
sites of banal encounter and embedded culture are central in any attempt
to foster interethnic understanding and cultural interchange (Amin, 2002).

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

AMIN AND THRIFT

GUEST EDITORIAL

No doubt there are many other ways in which cities are implicated in the
differentiated formation and experience of multicultures. In making such
claims, however, we neither want to imply that these kinds of differences
are leading to a joyous multiculturalism, nor that they are leading nowhere
(Hage, 1998). The very diversity of experiences that are now possible, albeit
shrouded in racism, are themselves constitutive and are leading to levels of
negotiation and experimentation often through the urban everyday
within so-called solidary cultures that are often as great as those between
cultures. Hence, James Tullys (1995) claim that our understanding of
cultures as separate, bounded and uniform looks increasingly out of
place. Spurred on by the multiple, overlapping experiences provided by
cities sometimes violent and vituperative, sometimes expansive and
enabling urban life is developing what Tully calls intercultures (as
opposed to multicultures) in which as much of the experience of cultural
difference is likely to be internal to a culture as external to it. Thus, cultural
diversity is seen as an increasingly tangled labyrinth of interweaving
cultural differences and similarities rather than a panopticon of fixed,
independent and incommensurable worldviews in which we are either
prisoners or cosmopolitan spectators in the central tower (Tully, 1995: 11).
Hence the often creative tensions in so many cities between an ethnic
identity white or non-white that is conceived of as stable and unchanging and as a base from which to foray out to negotiate the exigencies of the
city, and the often equal desire for an identity that provides the freedom to
question and challenge in practice inherited cultural ways (Smith, 2001).
Although these tensions are often seen as contradictory and irreconcilable,
we prefer to see them as moments in the formation of multiple identities,
as points of encounter in a historically conferred process of cultural negotiation, rather than as stable givens at constant war. Even the most vituperative retreat into ethnic purity and closure often masks myriad
hybridizations subtly at work under the surface, as we can see from the
borrowings of neo-fascists from black music or of Islamic or Hindu fundamentalists from secular western consumption norms.
In turn, this emphasis on identity as an ongoing process so characteristic
of work in the field over the last 20 years or so (for a review, see Sokefeld,
1999), and developed by McCrone and Ifekwunigwe in this issue, has
stimulated a whole series of works that are trying to rethink practical dayto-day politics. For example, moving beyond deliberative democracy and
the like, a number of largely North American political writers have been
trying to etch out what an ethic of generosity to others would consist of in
modern cities (Bennett, 2001; Coles, 1997; Connolly, 1999; Curtis, 1999;
Docker, 1999; Dumm, 1999; Orlie, 1997; Schoolman, 2001; Shapiro, 1999;
Thrift, 2002). These writers have been trying to develop an alternative
urban democracy based on an appreciation of the sheer richness of
ethical/political thinking as it is found in everyday life by emphasizing the

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

293

294

ETHNICITIES 2(3)

affective foundation of so much of this kind of thinking (for example, neighbourliness, associational life, recreation, civic duty). In turn, this appreciation of the roots of the political imaginary has led them to foreground the
visceral register as indispensable to more conceptually refined thinking:
The visceral register . . . can be drawn upon to thicken an intersubjective ethos
of generous engagement between diverse constituencies or to harden strife
between partisans. It can be and do all these things and others besides. And yet
modern secularism in the main and for the most part either ignores this
register or disparages it. It does so in the name of a public sphere in which
reason, morality, and tolerance flourish. By doing so it forfeits some of the very
resources needed to foster a generous pluralism. (Connolly, 1999: 3)3

In turn, these kinds of works, with their commitment to valuing the affective dimension, suggest that the rational secular order that is assumed by
most western states and cities may need some attention. The trick would
seem to be the ability to modify the secular ideal of public life such that
it is able to become more pluralistic in shape without simply becoming a
new set of authorities that multiplies the old model by giving it more
nodes:
. . . if the objective is to project your own perspective into the fray while also
decentering the political imagination of the ensconced contestants so that each
becomes an honored participant in a pluralistic culture rather then the
authoritative embodiment of it, then the positive possibilities expand. Now
partisans of several types might negotiate a public ethos of engagement drawn
from several moral sources. Here no constituency would be allowed to
represent authoritatively the single source from which all others must draw in
public life, even as each continued to articulate the strengths of the source
honours. For . . . secular and religious struggles to occupy the authoritative
center help to manufacture those reciprocal struggles of dogmatism discernible
in and around us. (Connolly, 1999: 6)

In other words, we need to be able to endorse a more complex public ethos

in cities, one in which the unalike and the heterodox are assumed right from
the start (Amin and Thrift, 2002). Of course, how this is done is a very large
part of the answer and it is fair to say that this literature is heavier on injunction than institutional detail. Either way, it indicates a new way of thinking
the multicultural city, in imagining an urban public sphere stripped of
pretences of whiteness and secular or rationalist universality, filled with the
promise but also the uncertainty of visceral engagement, lightly touched by
the ethos of hospitality (one of the original roles of European cities was as
sanctuaries for the stranger, as Derrida [2001] notes) and given over to the
practices of a variegated public. No engineering of identity or ethnic certitude, no fixed model of civic behaviour or citizenship, no ideal mode of
deliberation and social engagement, no blueprint of multicultural harmony,
only the vitality of a pragmatic and ethically engaged public.

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

AMIN AND THRIFT

GUEST EDITORIAL

THE ARTICLES
The articles that follow all take up or relate to the general issue of ethnicity in the city in a number of different ways. One of these ways is through
simply illustrating the extraordinary diversity of ethnic experience that can
be found in contemporary cities, a diversity which, at the same time, continuously reworks what counts as an ethnic issue and how this is framed in
the national imaginary. Focusing respectively on Scotland and England,
McCrone and Ifekwunigwe both acknowledge the strategic identifications
of race and ethnicity associated with cities (i.e. the urban as multicultural
or cities as factories suppressing difference), but they also note the disjuncture between the fluid and multiple identities common to all minority,
majority and mixed ethnic groups and the exclusions and variations at
work over issues of national belonging, with sharp differences at work
between minority and majority claims to Englishness, Scottishness and
Britishness.
Thus, it is significant that both Body-Gendrot and McCrone, in their
studies of France and Britain respectively, very quickly extend their
examination of identity politics to the national scale. For what is clear in
both countries is that the issue of ethnicity cannot be divorced from a
consideration of national citizenship. But, whereas France has an explicitly
assimilationist criteria for citizenship based around the universal and
centralized welfare state, Britain has to deal with a multinational polity
(Gagnon and Tully, 2001) and numerous unwritten codes, complicating
the markers of citizenship and multiplying possible allegiances and
resentments. These differences work their way into the urban culture of
each country, but what is also certain in both countries is that cities, through
their role in forcing encounters, are acting as a means of both bringing
these issues into focus and challenging conventional representations.
Body-Gendrot, in this issue (see also Body-Gendrot, 2000), shows this
process at work through the differences between banlieu youth cultures in
France, while Gale and Naylor reveal how English cities such as Leicester
and Preston have developed multicultural planning practices to meet the
needs of ethnic minorities, against the national grain of colour blind
modernist planning which in fact supports old country (and, therefore,
white-inscribed) planning practices.
What seems particularly crucial about current urban polities, therefore,
is that they must now take ownership of a growing machinery of interethnic negotiation which, through its practices and procedures, has itself
become a key means of cultural expression and identity formation. From
radicalized social work departments and faith schools to community arts
programmes and from multicultural festivals and events to planning
enquiries, this machinery has become an important way of working on

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

295

296

ETHNICITIES 2(3)

ethnicity in its own right. So Gale and Naylors examination of planning

disputes around sites of worship for South Asian communities is not just
about physical locations, but also about how these locations are used to
make claims and counterclaims about ethnicity. This is a very practical
means by which ethnicity is increasingly able to function independently as
a construct within the arts of government. Significantly, it also provides
effective and visible publicity for a politics of generous engagement and
hospitality, through an aesthetics of the built form that displays no guilt
and finds no danger in moving on from an old monumental vernacular of
Englishness/Britishness imbued with empire.
Perhaps one of the key elements of the formation of ethnic identities
within cities enabling or otherwise is the dynamic provided by commercial cultures of various kinds. Since at least the 18th century, ethnicity has
been a selling point and commercial cultures around the world continue to
hoover up the signs of ethnic difference as marketable opportunities. More
recently, ethnic markets within countries and cities have become large
enough to constitute sources of market demand in their own right in ways
that are interesting not least because, at least until full commercialization
sets in, they tend to replicate in the commercial domain the geographical
ties to home countries that are routinely found in the social domain. The
interaction between these developments is often brokered by cities, which
provide at least the initial pathways for difference to be negotiated. In turn,
as certain kinds of ethnic difference become commercially more reputable,
so the cultural capital of these groups is extended and, through this, it
becomes possible for a shift to take place in mainstream commercial culture
towards hybrid products and fashions, thereby allowing some escape from
the constraints of minority markets. Dwyer and Crang focus on British
Asian fashion design, first to illustrate the role of commodity cultures in
reproducing ethnicity and the role of ethnicity in shaping markets and,
second, to show how the process of urban brokering takes place between
design, casual work and retailers in London and a diasporic supply chain
stretching to the Indian subcontinent.
In the general focus on difference, we and the other contributors here
do not want to provide too sanguine a view of cities. Ethnic experience in
many western cities still provides plenty of opportunities for bruising
encounters with racism and ethnic cultural intolerance except for one
ethnicity, of course, and that is white. Bonnett considers in some detail the
historical infringements of this ethnic group through the partisan work done
for it by symbolic associations between whiteness and modernity as played
out through the meanings of cities and urban life as liberatingly white or
oppressively dark. We can take his reasoning a step further, however, by
noting how whiteness is multiplying its forms and procedures, perhaps with
less homogeneous or hegemonic implications.
Take the issue of body stance. The kind of physical power meant to be

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

AMIN AND THRIFT

GUEST EDITORIAL

implied by the rolling gait of many young, white, working-class men (itself
in part borrowed from black representations) contrasts with the casual but
smart, neutral gait of the young, white, middle-class man (increasingly
taking cues from gay culture) in ways that show two very different performances of whiteness on city streets. These performances may actually have
very little in common, even down to the way in which racial antipathy is
expressed. So whiteness too, like the minority ethnic identities considered
here, has to be understood as a fractured intercultural formation with very
little to share except perhaps a kind of confidence about its right to having
the world show up in a particular way (and, given the number of studies
that show many young, white, working-class men as beset by doubts about
their economic worth, sexuality, and so on, even this may be a dangerous
generalization). To reconcile this sense of fracture with Bonnetts metanarrative, we might say that whiteness is increasingly power by default.

CONCLUSIONS
We want to end this introduction by considering how we might give an
ethnicized inflection to Lefebvres (1996) notion of rights to the city.
Lefebvres notion was always vague, but we cannot help feeling that in the
matter of ethnicity it is also crucial. To begin with, one of the key ways in
which ethnicity is constituted is through the manipulation of urban space in
order to provide room for living, all the way from parcels of actual land or
protocols about who gets out of the way on the street to the smallest body
movements that betray an expanded or contracted body image. The point
is that different cities provide different resources for particular ethnic
groups to construct themselves in space, and these groups therefore do so
differently. None of this is meant to suggest that there are not powerful
interurban institutions of normalization and metanarratives of belonging
and worth. But it is to suggest that the kinds of differences generated are
more than incidental. There are different likes. Different cities have
different ethnic styles and therefore different demands for rights to the city.
As a result, some cities or parts of cities seem to be generating something
like a cosmopolitan sensibility in which a particular ethnic mix and associated institutional settlement are generating new rights to the city based on
cultural autonomy, interethnic dialogue and the very recognition of ethnicity as an urban priority, while others seem to be stuck in polarized games
of move and countermove that endlessly repeat the same old dislikes.
This turn amounts to more than a simple ethnic inflection to an otherwise traditional urban politics of distributed rights. We have already
suggested that an intercultural ethos signals a shift in political philosophy,
centred around the everyday, the pragmatic and the affective, but also,

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

297

298

ETHNICITIES 2(3)

crucially, a re-examination of what it means to be social in a multicultural

society. This involves making space for a moral cosmopolitanism (Hill,
2000) or a planetary humanism (Gilroy, 2000) that values the stranger, that
sheds tribalistic and community belonging, that welcomes engagement
with others not like ourselves as a basis for becoming someone else, freed
from yesterdays moorings (including the comforts of ethnic closure). There
are numerous small measures that cities can take in inculcating such a
politics of transformation, from uses of communal gardens and legislative
theatre or urban murals to public celebrations of cultural mixture and
change.
The other way in which Lefebvres notion of rights to the city needs to
be ethnically inflected is in the matter of the imagination. Cities provide an
enormous fund of material with which to fuel the imagination and construct
different forms of longing. The kind of symbolic violence done to groups
who cannot express or, in some cases, even formulate those longings in the
first place must be extreme. Surrounded by a semiotic environment of texts
and screens that are props for other peoples stories, it is difficult to be clear
how to frame demands for some degree of imaginative autonomy. But here
cities can provide a story of inspiration. The growth of new forms of ethnic
popular culture that are often hybrid and have sometimes made their way
into mainstream culture, creating new effects and allegiances as they do so,
shows how cultures can draw on reserves of imaginative energy which, in
some cases, have no very definite genealogy. Perhaps sometimes you really
do just have to sit back in wonder.

Notes
1 The articles originate from a seminar held on Multicultures and the Right to the
City at the Tate Modern in London on 20 April 2001. We thank Michael
Parkinson, Director of the ESRCs Cities Programme, for encouraging and
funding the seminar and also Andrew Brighton, Deputy Director (Programmes)
at the Tate Modern, for providing facilities and a lot more at no cost. We are
grateful to Stephen May and Tariq Modood for accepting this Special Issue and
for their guidance, and we are especially indebted to Craig Calhoun for the time
he gave to commenting on all the articles. Finally, our warm thanks to Trudy
Graham for organizing the seminar.
2 So, for example, having the identity of a young Pakistani man or woman in
Britain can have very different cultural resonances, everyday negotiations of
difference and means of expression not only in different cities in Britain, but also
in different neighbourhoods within the same city. There is ample ethnographic
evidence to support this statement. The lived experience of a young Pakistani
Briton is quite different in different parts of, say, inner and outer London, and,
in turn, varies markedly from the cultural practices of young Pakistanis in
Glasgow or inner Birmingham and from the anthropology of ethnic intolerance
and suspicion revealed by the civil riots in the northern English towns of

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

AMIN AND THRIFT

GUEST EDITORIAL

Oldham, Burnley and Bradford in 2001 (Alexander, 2000; Back and Nayak, 1999;
Dwyer, 2000; Kundnani, 2001; Saeed et al., 1999; Vertovec, 1996). To be more
specific, in Glasgow, young Pakistanis find themselves negotiating a shared
Scottish identity with the majority and a new sense of nationhood in a devolved
Scotland, while in inner Birmingham and Leicester, years of minority ethnic
organization and the efforts of a progressive local state have produced an
interethnic compromise and some cultural crossover. In some inner London
neighbourhoods, the sheer force of transnational mobilities and cosmopolitan
mixtures has even resulted in a kind of truce on ethnic difference, a situation that
contrasts sharply with the young Pakistani nightmare on the streets of a number
of white flight inner and outer London enclaves that are still rife with suspicion
and hatred of non-white Britons.
3 Paul Gilroy (2000) does something similar using the case of music as the visceral
register through which it might be possible to build new, more generous
identities.

References
Alexander, C. (2000) The Asian Gang. Oxford: Berg.
Amin, A. (2002) Ethnicity and the Multicultural City, Environment and Planning
A 34(6): 95980.
Amin, A. and N.J. Thrift (2002) Cities: Rethinking the Urban. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
Back, L. (1996) New Ethnicities and Urban Culture. London: UCL Press.
Back, L. and M. Keith (1999) Rights and Wrongs: Youth, Community and
Narratives of Racial Violence, in P. Cohen (ed.) New Ethnicities, Old Racisms.
London: Zed Books.
Back, L. and A. Nayak (1999) Signs of the Times? Violence, Graffiti, and Racism
in the English Suburbs, in T. Allen and J. Eade (eds) Divided Europeans: Understanding Ethnicities in Conflict, pp. 24383. Amsterdam: Kluwer.
Bennett, J. (2001) The Enchantment of Modern Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Body-Gendrot, S. (2000) The Social Control of Cities? Oxford: Blackwell.
Coles, R. (1997) Rethinking Generosity. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Connolly, W. (1999) Why I Am Not a Secularist. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Curtis, K. (1999) Our Sense of the Real. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Derrida, J. (2001) On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness. London: Routledge.
Docker, J. (1999) 1492: The Politics of Diaspora. London: Continuum.
Dumm, T.L. (1999) A Politics of the Ordinary. New York: New York University
Press.
Dwyer, C. (2000) Negotiating Diasporic Identities: Young British South Asian
Muslim Women, Womens Studies International Forum 23(4): 47586.
Gagnon, A. and J. Tully, eds (2001) Multinational Democracies. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gilroy, P. (2000) Between Camps. London: Allen Lane.
Hage, G. (1998) White Nation. Annandale, NSW: Pluto Press.
Hill, J. (2000) Becoming a Cosmopolitan. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010

299

300

ETHNICITIES 2(3)

Kundnani, A. (2001) From Oldham to Bradford: The Violence of the Violated,

Race & Class 43(2): 10510.
Lefebvre, H. (1996) Writings on Cities (trans. and eds E. Kofman and E. Lebas).
Oxford: Blackwell.
Orlie, M. (1997) Living Ethically, Acting Politically. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University
Press.
Saeed, A., N. Blain and D. Forbes (1999) New Ethnic and National Questions in
Scotland: Post-British Identities among Glasgow Pakistani Teenagers, Ethnic
and Racial Studies 22(5): 82144.
Schoolman, M. (2001) Reason and Horror. New York: Routledge.
Shapiro, M.J. (1999) Cinematic Political Thought. New York: New York University
Press.
Smith, Z. (2001) White Teeth. London: Penguin.
Sokefeld, M. (1999) Debating Self, Identity, and Culture in Anthropology, Current
Anthropology 40: 41747.
Thrift, N.J. (2002) Summoning Life, in P. Cloke, P. Crang and M. Goodwin (eds)
Envisioning Geography. London: Arnold.
Tully, J. (1995) Strange Multiplicity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vertovec, S. (1996) Multiculturalism, Culturalism and Public Incorporation, Ethnic
and Racial Studies 19(1): 4969.

ASH AMIN is professor of geography at the University of Durham and

author most recently of: Cities for the Many Not the Few (with Doreen
Massey and Nigel Thrift; Policy Press, 2000); Cities: Rethinking the Urban
(with Nigel Thrift; Polity Press, 2002); Placing the Social Economy (with
Angus Cameron and Ray Hudson; Routledge, 2002). Address: Department
of Geography, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK.
[email: ash.amin@durham.ac.uk]
NIGEL THRIFT is Professor of Geography at the University of Durham
and author most recently of Spatial Formations (Sage, 1996); The City AZ
(co-edited with Steve Pile; Routledge, 2000); Thinking Space (co-edited
with Mike Crang; Routledge, 2000); The Cultural Geography Handbook (coedited with Kay Anderson, Mona Domosh and Steve Pile; Sage, 2002).
Address: Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol,
University Road, Bristol BS8 1SS, UK. [email: n.j.thrift@bristol.ac.uk]

Downloaded from etn.sagepub.com at CAPES on July 14, 2010