Search

The multiplication of logistics establishments in the outer suburbia of large urban regions is embedded in a diversity of public actions in these spaces: transport facilities, land development and building permits. Thus, this economic development supposes a strong interdependence between economic and political spheres. This interdependence is at the heart of “urban regimes” approach (Stone, 1989) and echoes the concepts of “development regimes” (Stone, 1993) and “growth coalitions” (Logan, Molotch, 1987). Thus, this paper proposes to apply these approaches and concepts to the case of the outer suburbia of large urban regions concerned by the logistics industry development. This way, it calls for reopening the issue of the transposition of these theories from the American cities to the European cities (Le Galès, 1995) by linking the analysis of the public capacities of local governments with the analysis of the modalities of involvement of private economic actors in local public actions in the context of the financialization of commercial real estate and governance discontinuities. Eventually, through this lens, quite stable public-private coalitions which are dominated by the logistics property firms appear in the outer suburbia of the Paris city-region, which leads to a silent privatization of the production of logistics spaces.

Previous research done in the context of a PhD dissertation showed how gaining access to property in outer suburban areas can prove to be disappointing, even painful, to lower-middle-class families living on one income. The study highlighted a major gap between the aspirations of the middle class and the reality witnessed on the ground, a gap that often brought about a feeling of being stalled in life. The study is reexamined in this paper through an analysis of three suburban housing sectors. This contribution thus highlights growingly complex lifestyles tantamount to a recomposition of suburban societies. The influence of life experience and individual logics is shown through the limits and potentialities of the suburban experience as well as the integrative strength of suburban housing. Relations do emerge, however, in that as in previous surveys those with a low income also face more problems when settling in suburban areas. More generally, this reanalysis allows questioning anew both the evolution of suburban spaces – most notably those that, at some point, face stigma, precariousness and depreciation – and the role played by such spaces in reshaping metropolitan areas, particularly in terms of city-suburb relations.