{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017766497461928935, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001692047377326565, 'mean_word_length': 5.877906976744186, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ethnic Stability and Urban Reconstruction

This article investigates the role and influence of urban planning in ameliorating or intensifying deeply ingrained ethnic conflict. It is based on more than 70 interviews with urban professionals in Belfast (Northern Ireland) and Johannesburg (South Africa). Policy makers in Belfast have sought intergroup stability through neutral policies that protect the territorial status quo. Equity planning in post-apartheid Johannesburg seeks spatial reconstruction of a disfigured metropolis. In both cities, policy dilemmas challenge officials who are seeking to stabilize or reconstruct strife-torn cities. Hardening of Protestant-Catholic territorial identities in Belfast, which are deemed essential to urban peace, might constitute a barrier to long-term intergroup reconciliation. In Johannesburg, policy responses to crisis conditions and reliance on private economic forces may solidify rather than transcend apartheid geography. In ethnically polarized cities, a reconceptualized urban planning that is able to improve interethnic coexistence has a vital and difficult role to play in advancing and reinforcing formal peace agreements.