Aotearoa’s trials and tribulations of UNCRC’s ‘play grounds’ in the past 25 years
Childhood Studies Colloquium
14 November 2014 9.30am – 4.30pm
Faculty of Education, The University of Auckland
Emeritus Professor Anne B. Smith, University of Otago
Date: June 24-26th, 2015
Location: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
Proposal Submission Deadline: October 1, 2014
Description: “In Relation: Children, Youth, and Belonging”
The Program Committee invites proposals for panels, papers, roundtables or workshops that explore histories of children and youth from any place and in any era. We will, however, give particular attention to proposals with a strong historical emphasis and that bear on the theme of this year’s conference.
SHCY Eighth Biennial Conference
“Relationality and the global circulation of children’s literature and culture”
June 24-26th, 2015
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
We invite papers for a prospective panel that explores the global circulation of children’s literature and concepts of childhood, particularly along paths determined by the processes of history and imperialization and colonization.
SHCY Panel Submission/CFP
This panel is interested in the long historical legacy of juvenile subjects as represented, and perhaps, created through the discourse of imperial law. We are particularly interested in a trans-Atlantic conversation that may include representations of renaissance English child subjects, colonial child subjects, or early American child subjects as legal manifestations of personhood and minor citizenship find respite in these juvenile bodies. This conversation will inevitably raise questions about what constitutes childhood through an imperialistic eye and long reaching legal precedence; the critical attention of which is often elided by idealistic, ideological, and national understandings of childhood. Papers that take up these critical questions by recognizing legal childhood and juvenile bodies as intersectional subjects in imperialist legal discourses, where race, class, gender, and citizenship define a person’s access to a privileged and/or exploited youth will be given preference. We encourage submissions that address the shifting legal identity of children as they move (or are moved) across geographic space, permeating national borders, and papers that consider the materiality of the juvenile body in relation to place(s) and to object(s).
4th International Conference on Geographies of Children, Young people and Families.
San Diego. January 12-15, 2015
Paper Session Organizers: Lia Karsten and Willem van Vliet
Session theme: Childfriendly cities: critical approaches
Many of the papers within children’s geographies end with some kind of recommendation for the building of childfriendly cities. But what do we mean by childfriendly cities? In this workshop we want to explore different ways of conceptualizing children, cities, childfriendliness and their interrelationships.
Policies aimed at childfriendly cities presuppose that cities are not childfriendly: cities have to change in order to become child-friendly. This supposition reveals an anti-urban way of thinking. It juxtaposes the urban jungle vs. the rural idyll.These contrasting connotations are very much based on the relatively poor provision of outdoor play facilities in urban environments and their assumed abundance in rural environments. But today, enrichment activities have become more prominent in many children’s everyday life. Will this emphasis on enrichment activities change the rural into the urban idyll?
Childfriendly approaches/policies/actions and the conceptualization of children as the ‘same’ as and as ‘different’ from adults. In modernist planning, childfriendly interventions often imply creating child-specific facilities and spaces: designated especially and ‘only’ for children. This approach views children as fundamentally different from adults. They are defined as vulnerable and in need of specific protection and provision. Age-specific playgrounds are a good example of this. Another way of creating childfriendly cities is by building inclusive cities in which children’s needs are taken into account without isolating them in their own domains. Wide sidewalks, as advocated by Jane Jacobs, are a good example. This second approach views children as essentially similar to adults as citizens of the city. The question thus arises: Which of these two approaches is better for creating child-friendly cities? This question, in turn, leads to an examination of different definitions of childfriendliness.
Childfriendly cities and children’s own definitions. What do children themselves consider childfriendly? Do their definitions differ from those held by adults? Further, children are not a homogeneous group. Do we find differences in children’s own definitions of child-friendliness across gender, age group, social class, racial and ethnic background, residential location? And how can we best support children’s participation in city planning and urban development to promote child-friendly outcomes??
This paper session aims to critically explore different issues related to childfriendly cities.
We invite researchers to send title and abstract of a maximum of 250 words by August 15 to both Lia Karsten (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Willem van Vliet (email@example.com ). We will reply before the 1st of September and intend to select papers for a special issue of the Journal: Children, Youth and Environments to be published in 2015-16.