Atifragility and The Right to the City: The regeneration of Al Manshiya and Neve Tzedek, Tel Aviv-Jaffa


  • Gabriel Schwake Tel Aviv University



Henri Lefebvre’s concept of the Right to the City, expresses the right of the citizens to be part and to take part in their city’s creation. Lefebvre's theory was formed as a contra to “top-down” planning, which excluded the citizens from the process of urbanisation and led to the creation of alienated urban environments.
Complexity theorists criticised the "top–down" approach as well, largely due to its desire to simplify the city, in order to re-plan it rationally and efficiently. This simplification, created a “closed system”, which neglected various variables in the urban system, and sought to predict its unpredictable future development. The chase after the efficient city therefore leads to the formation of urban projects, which are not only alienated to their inhabitants, but that are also rigid and unable to adapt to the ever-changing nature of the city.
“Inefficient” urban systems, as Jane Jacobs had shown, have proven to be efficient after all, due to their diffused urban economy, which relied on several small-scale economic and social forces, enabling them to better adjust to unpredicted changes. Nassim Taleb called this type of behaviour Antifragililty, which describes complex systems that do not only remain unaffected by unpredicted changes, but also manage to take advantage of them.
Therefore, one could assume that if more individuals are able to take part and influence the city’s creation, then their Right to the city is more practiced, and the city, due to its fragmentation, is supposed to adjust better to unexpected changes.
In order to support this hypotheses, my research focused on two adjacent neighbourhoods in central Tel-Aviv: Manshiya and Neve-Tzedek. Both built in the 19th century. In 1954, they were declared as slums and designated for deconstruction. Manshiya was torn down in the 1960’s in a failed attempt to build the city’s central business district. Neve-Tzedek was not deconstructed but regenerated in 1980s-1990s.
My research asked: Was there a change in the granted Right to the city between the two projects? And how did this affect the neighbourhood's ability to adapt to unpredicted changes? To answer this question the research focused on the manner each project addressed five different civil rights crucial to the Right to the City: the right for habitation, the right to enjoy the city's infrastructure, the right to difference, the right to take part in the city's planning and the right to take part in the city's physical formation. This was then crosschecked with the manner each project responded to the social, economic and physical changes the city had undergone.
Manshiya's redevelopment was led by large-scale corporations, which excluded the citizens from the process of urbanisation, granted a minimal Right to the city and concluded in a rigid and failed mega-structure. Neve-Tzedek in contrast, was regenerated due to small-scale investments led by the local community, which granted a much larger Right to the city and enabled the neighbourhood to take advantage of the changes in the city, and to turn to one of Tel-Aviv’s most desired areas.


Alexandrowicz, Or. “Borders on Paper: The Erased History of Neve Shalom.” Teoria Ve Bikoret, 2013: 165-197.

Alexandrowicz, Or. “Civil Deconstruction, The Planned Deletion of Mashiya 1948-1949.” Iyonim betkumat Israel (Ben Gurion University of the Negev), no. 23 (2013): 274-314.

Berger, Tamar. Dyonesus in The Center. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuhad, 1998.

Fernandes, Edesio. “Constructing the `Right To the City’ in Brazil.” Social Legal Studies, 2007.

Gebhardt, Dirk, and Andrej Holm. “Initiativen fuer ein Recht auf Stadt.” VSA Verlag, 2011.

Gluckstein, Naomi. “Slum Quarters in Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv and Haifa.” Megamot, no. 3 (1961): 289-302.

Hägerstrand, Torsten. Innovation Difussion as a Spatial Process. Chicago: Chicago Univ Press, 1967.

—. What about People in Regional Science? Vol. 24. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 1970.

Harvey, David. Rebel Cities. London: Verso Publishing, 2012.

—. Rebel Cities. London: Verso Publishing, 2012.

—. The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1990.

Hatuka, Tali, and Rachel Kallus. “The Myth of Informal place making: Stitching and unstitsching Atarim square in Tel Aviv.” The Journal of Architecture 12, no. 2 (2007).

Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Live of great American Cities. Tel Aviv: Babel, 2008.

—. The economy of cities. New York: Vintage, 1970.

Jencks, Charles. The story of postmodernism. Chechister: John Willey & sons, 2011.

Khalidi, Walid. All That Remains: The Palestinian Villages Occupied and Depopulated by Israel in 1948. White Plains, Maryland: The Institute of Palestinian Studies, 1992.

Le Corbusier. The city of tomorrow and its planning. 8th edition. Translated by Frederick Etchells. New York: Dover, 1987.

Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1991.

—. Writings on Cities. Translated by Elenoere Kofman and Elizabeth Lebas. cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1996.

Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man: : Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. 2. Boston: Beacon Press, 1991.

Marcuse, Peter. “From critical urban theory to the right to the city .” City: analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, policy, action (Routledge), September 2009.

Margalit, Talia. “Land, politics and high rise planning: ongoing development practices in Tel Aviv-Yafo.” Planning Perspectives, November 2012: 374-397.

Margalit, Talia. “Multi-spot zoning: A chain of public–private development ventures in Tel Aviv .” Cities 37 (2014): 73-81.

Marom, Nathan. City of Concept: Planning Tel Aviv. Tel Aviv: Babel, 2009.

Mitchel, Don. The Right to The City, Social Justice and the fight for public Space. London: The Guilford Press, 2003.

Morris, Benny. 1948-A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.

—. The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge Univrsity press, 2004.

Nitzan Shiftan, Alona. “The Architecture of the Hyphen: The Urban Unification of Jaffa and Tel-Aviv as National Metaphor.” Edited by Maoz Azaryahu and Ilan Troen. Tel-Aviv, The First Century Aviv, The First Century Visions, Designs, Visions, Designs,Actualities Actualities Actualities (Indiana University Press), 2011: 373-406.

Popper, Karl. The open society and its enemies. Translated by Aharon Amir. Jerusalem: Shalem, 2003.

Portugali, Juval. Complexity, Cognition and the City. Springer, 2011.

Purcell, Mark. “Possible Worlds, Henri Lefebvre and the Right to the City.” Journal of Urban Affairs, 2002.

Rotbard, Sharon. White City, Black City. Tel Aviv: Babel, 2005.

Roy, Ananya. “Urban Informaility.” Journal of the American Planning Association 71, no. 2 (2002): 147-158.

Smith, John. Book Title . Abingdon: Routledge, 2012.

Souza, Marcel Lopez de. “Which right to Which City.” A journal for and about social movements, 2010: 315-333.

Taleb, Nassim. Antifragile, things that gain from disorder. Random House, 2012.

Tasan-Kok, Tuna. “Changing Interpretations of ‘Flexibility’ in the Planning Literature: From Opportunism to Creativity? .” International Planning Studies (Routledge) 13, no. 3 (August 2008): 183-195.




How to Cite

Schwake, G. (2016). Atifragility and The Right to the City: The regeneration of Al Manshiya and Neve Tzedek, Tel Aviv-Jaffa. International Planning History Society Proceedings, 17(1), 189–200.