The course develops a critical theoretical framework based on three key concepts: uneven development, "thinking from the South," and political ecology. Political ecology emphasises how all development is about social and environmental transformation with winners and losers that shape rural and urban landscapes and often with destructive environmental consequences. In parallel, we draw upon postcolonial thought to challenge from where development, sustainability, and urbanization can be understood, providing ample space to engage with knowledge centres, organisations, and civil society groups from cities and countries in the global South. This expands the places, experiences and researchers that can inform the theory and practice of development.

Pedagogically, the course is based on creating a community of inquiry between students and the teacher. Lectures are followed by group work as well as seminars and individual consultation hours with the teacher. This creates an intimate learning environment, making it safe to both ask and try to answer difficult questions. Group work means to do a case study and receive training in applying theory to understand "messy realities." You will also develop your essay writing skills with peer feedback and feedback from the teacher to support your growth as a writer and thinker.

The overall goal of the course is to provide a deeper insight into how the world's historically and geographically unequal development affects opportunities for mor just and environmentally sustainable development. After completing the course, the student should be able to:

• Provide an historical and geographical background to the concept of uneven development and its relationship to sustainable development.
• Describe the emergence of regional differences with a focus on countries in the global South (social, economic, and ecological differences).
• In a written essay and based on scientific literature, analyze, and discuss how infrastructure and technology affect various aspects of sustainable development in low- and middle-income countries.
• Discuss scientific methods for the analysis of social, ecological, and technical aspects of sustainable development with a focus on countries in the global South.
• To develop, in groups, a critical case study about the conditions for uneven development and sustainable development.
• Search scientific literature within the subject area of the course to use as reference material in an essay.
• Give a group oral presentation of a case study.

It is voluntary to prepare before the course. So, for those with time:

• Read in our Open Access book Grounding Urban Natures: Histories and Futures of Urban Ecologies published at MIT Press (2019). Read chapter 1 and then pick and choose from chapters 2, 3, 4, 8 and 12.
• Watch one of our ethnographic films, which is published under Films at Situated Ecologies Platform. Watch especially "One Table Two Elephants," on ecology and knowledge politics, and "Turning Livelihoods to Rubbish," on metabolism and the politics of recycling.

The actual course literature will be publisehd on the Canvas course web. But typical literature would include:

Cadena, Marisol de la. 2015. ‘Uncommoning Nature’. E-Flux Journal 65: 1–8.

Ernstson, Henrik, Mary Lawhon, and James Duminy. 2014. ‘Conceptual Vectors of African Urbanism: “Engaged Theory-Making” and “Platforms of Engagement”’. Regional Studies 48 (9): 1563–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.892573.

Ernstson, Henrik, and David Nilsson. 2022. ‘Towards Situated Histories of Heterogenous Infrastructures: Oral History as Method and Meaning’. Geoforum 134: 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2022.06.001.

Ernstson, Henrik, and Sverker Sörlin, eds. 2019. Grounding Urban Natures: Histories and Futures of Urban Ecologies. Cambridge: MIT Press. https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/4522/Grounding-Urban-NaturesHistories-and-Futures-of.

Escobar, Arturo. 1998. ‘Whose Knowledge, Whose Nature? Biodiversity, Conservation, and the Political Ecology of Social Movements’. Journal of Political Ecology 5: 53–82.

Guma, Prince K. 2020. ‘Incompleteness of Urban Infrastructures in Transition: Scenarios from the Mobile Age in Nairobi’. Social Studies of Science 50 (5): 728–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312720927088.

Kimari, Wangui. 2021. ‘The Story of a Pump: Life, Death and Afterlives within an Urban Planning of “Divide and Rule” in Nairobi, Kenya’. Urban Geography 42 (2): 141–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1706938.

Kimari, Wangui, and Henrik Ernstson. 2020. ‘Imperial Remains and Imperial Invitations: Centering Race within the Contemporary Large-Scale Infrastructures of East Africa’. Antipode 3 (52): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12623.

Kimari, Wangui, and Henrik Ernstson. 2023. ‘The Invisible Labor of the “New Angola”: Kilamba’s Domestic Workers’. Urban Geography.

Lawhon, Mary, Henrik Ernstson, and Jonathan D Silver. 2014. ‘Provincializing Urban Political Ecology: Towards a Situated UPE through African Urbanism’. Antipode 46 (2): 497–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12051.

Lawhon, Mary, David Nilsson, Jonathan Silver, Henrik Ernstson, and Shuaib Lwasa. 2018. ‘Thinking through Heterogeneous Infrastructure Configurations’. Urban Studies 55 (4): 720–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017720149.

Monstadt, Jochen, and Sophie Schramm. 2017. ‘Toward The Networked City? Translating Technological Ideals and Planning Models in Water and Sanitation Systems in Dar Es Salaam’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 41: 104–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12436.

Mulligan, Joe, Vera Bukachi, Jack Campbell Clause, Rosie Jewell, Franklin Kirimi, and Chelina Odbert. 2020. ‘Hybrid Infrastructures, Hybrid Governance: New Evidence from Nairobi (Kenya) on Green-Blue-Grey Infrastructure in Informal Settlements: “Urban Hydroclimatic Risks in the 21st Century: Integrating Engineering, Natural, Physical and Social Sciences to Build’. Anthropocene 29: 100227–100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2019.100227.

Nsangi Nakyagaba, Gloria, Mary Lawhon, Shuaib Lwasa, Jonathan Silver, and Fredrick Tumwine. 2021. ‘Power, Politics and a Poo Pump: Contestation of Legitimacy, Access and Benefits of Sanitation Technology in Kampala’. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, no. Published Online. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjtg.12381.

Parnell, Susan, and Sophie Oldfield, eds. 2014. The Routledge Handbook on Cities of the Global South. London and New York: Routledge.

Parnell, Susan, and Edgar Pieterse. 2016. ‘Translational Global Praxis: Rethinking Methods and Modes of African Urban Research’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 40 (1): 236–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12278.

Rademacher, Anne. 2009. ‘When Is Housing an Environmental Problem? Reforming Informality in Kathmandu’. Current Anthropology 50 (4): 513–33. https://doi.org/10.1086/604707.

Rademacher, Anne. 2015. ‘Urban Political Ecology’. Annual Review of Anthropology 44 (1): 137–52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102214-014208.

Roy, Ananya. 2016. ‘Who’s Afraid of Postcolonial Theory?’ International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 40 (1): 200–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12274.

Schindler, Seth, and J Miguel Kanai. 2019. ‘Getting the Territory Right: Infrastructure-Led Development and the Re-Emergence of Spatial Planning Strategies’. Regional Studies, October, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1661984.

Silver, Jonathan. 2014. ‘Incremental Infrastructures: Material Improvisation and Social Collaboration across Post-Colonial Accra’. Urban Geography 35 (6): 788–804. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2014.933605.

Smith, Neil. 1990. ‘The Production of Nature’. In Uneven Development: Nature, Capital and the Production of Space, 34–65. Oxford: Blackwell.

Watson, Vanessa. 2003. ‘Conflicting Rationalities: Implications for Planning Theory and Ethics’. Planning Theory & Practice 4 (4): 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935032000146318.

Watson, Vanessa. 2009. ‘Seeing from the South: Refocusing Urban Planning on the Globe’s Central Urban Issues’. Urban Studies 46 (11): 2259–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009342598.

Students at KTH with a permanent disability can get support during studies from Funka:

Funka - compensatory support for students with disabilities

A, B, C, D, E, FX, F

• INL2 - Peer review (UPP1) with worskhop, 0.5 credits, Grading scale: P, F
• PRO1 - Group Project with Presentation, 2.5 credits, Grading scale: P, F
• UPP2 - Essay, 3.0 credits, Grading scale: A, B, C, D, E, FX, F
• UPP3 - Short critical reflection on self-selected articles, 1.5 credits, Grading scale: P, F

Based on recommendation from KTH’s coordinator for disabilities, the examiner will decide how to adapt an examination for students with documented disability.

The examiner may apply another examination format when re-examining individual students.

Differentiated grading scale A-F.

All course components needs to be approved to receive the final grade. 

Obligatory attendance on seminars, workshop with peer-review, and the final presentation of the group project. 

• All members of a group are responsible for the group's work.
• In any assessment, every student shall honestly disclose any help received and sources used.
• In an oral assessment, every student shall be able to present and answer questions about the entire assignment and solution.