How does Work Shape Informal Cities?
In this paper I will discuss the design of favelas in Brazil. The aim is mainly to highlight how labor can be used as a design tool to address social and economic phenomena shaping the ‘slum’. This will be done by analyzing the informal aspects of ‘slums,’ the rising inequality and rural-urban migration patterns in Brazil. A critical analysis of literature will be compared to empirical data that were personally acquired from Brazilian slums (Cavalcanti, 2016) during the period from 2009 until 2016.
Overall, the objective will be to try and consider social aspects within a method of design. Research has shown that favelas have a different land status, different patterns of urban conglomeration and parcelling. However, when compared to formal urban planning the same logic of investment and housing commodification applies. Within favela societies, people sell, use and divide their properties according to noninstitutionalized rules, and their notion of what is shared, public or private is slightly different from that in formal urban planning environments. This leads to a greater presence of tighter, more close-knit communities. A block of houses may be a single house, with various owners sharing it (e.g. villas), the first floor of a house may be for one person and the second for another. In fact, most of the batidas de laje are made for other people (who rent the house, and thus for income generation purposes). The alleys and stairways are public spaces shared by all. Parcelling a house depends on the economic aim or need of a dweller. Finding a piece of land or a house to buy or rent depends on negotiations with the residents of a favela (Cavalcanti, 2009).
The right to “verticalizing” depends on the expertise of the masons who are responsible for building the roof and/or the economic resources of the property owner. The need for shelter is considered as a way to acquire land in the outskirts of the favela. The centre is often more expensive, but still targeted by people in need for shelter. Finally, when residents move to vertical or mass housing units they repeat the social practices that they do in the favelas. With the same logic, the price of rent, land and property in favelas is consistently rising, almost proportionately with prices in the cities. Residents generally compare the prices of rent within the favela itself. In 2014, a typical house for rent in a favela (50 m2) would cost 350 Brazilian reais per month (US$106.88)10 in the city of Maceió. In general, this is practically half of what one could ask in a middle class neighborhood within Farol, a neighbourhood where a typical house for rent (50 m2), would cost circa 600 Brazilian reais per month (US$183.22).11 Such discrepancies are slightly higher amongst people who live in big metropolitan areas such as São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, which makes it much more affordable for low-income groups to dwell in slums. In this scenario it may be observed that a capital incursion is developing within favelas: supermarket chains and products are expanding, real estate has arrived: people who received houses from the PAC (Programa de Aceleração do Crescimento) are illegally selling their tenure for higher prices (Brazil Investment Guide, 2013). Hipsters, creative classes and gringos are moving to favelas, in the process of which they contribute to the gentrification of land and goods. Apart from this, one may note that investment in hotels, museums, social activities, NGOs, UPPs (Unidades de Polícia Pacificadora) and other similar activities are constantly increasing.
The aforementioned notions express the fine line between considering the favela as an idealistic, unknown dimension with an abstract logic (this is a typical way to romanticize poverty), or stating that favelas are entirely articulated with materialistic and accumulative values. Between seeing the poor as bearers of opportities versus seeing them as heroic entrepreners (Roy, 2005, 148). The difference between these two views should be highlighted and, understanding the importance of labor to residents living in slums highlights these contrasting views from their convergency and divergency, offers a new epistemological frame to study informal settlements that is able to provide a deep insight on the logics of informal settlements.
The needs and patterns of favela communities have been studied by the author since 2008. The results of this paper come from an ethnographic study of the Favela Sururu de Capote in Maceió(fig. 3.1-3.2) as well as the social housing that has been conceived to shelter its removed inhabitants in light of the recent Brazilian urban challenges. This research shows how residents’ labor activities have transformed both public spaces and private homes in the favela and how practices of various scales and modes have been contributing to the distribution of urban inequalities and the growth of social informality.
Abrams, C. (1964). Housing in the Modern World. London: Faber and Faber.
Aravena, A. (2016). Reporting From the Front, Conference Urban Age by London School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Foundation at Venice Biennale, Venezia, 2016, July 2016. Retrieved from: https://LSECiti.es/u32c6138a. [Accessed 20 November 2016].
Berenstein Jacques (2001). Estética Da Ginga: A Arquitetura Das Favelas Através Da Obra de Hélio Oiticica. Salvador: Casa da Palavra.
Brazil Investment Guide (2013), Real Estate Speculation in Brazil´s Favela Communities [YouTube video posted on the 14 March 2013] Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIIOCQdpJAk. [Accessed 18 March 2016].
Brillembourg, A., Feireiss K., Klumpner, H. (Eds.) (2005). Informal City: Caracas Case. Zurich: Prestel Verlag.
Burdett, R. & Sudjic, D. (Eds.) (2011). Living in the Endless City: The Urban Age Project by the London School of Economics and Deutsche Bank’s Alfred Herrhausen Society. London: Phaidon.
Cavalcanti, A. R. C.(2016). Critical Roles of Architecture: The Endemic of Labor in the Favela Dwelling system: Towards an Architecture Autonomy, Presented at Critic|all Conference, Architecture Out-tonomy, Madrid.
Cavalcanti, A. R. C. (2009). Dos Calejados Pés, Os Passos Dos Filhos de Mãe Lagoa: A Invenção Do Espaço a Partir Dos Ritos Do Sururu (Graduation Thesis). Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Maceió, Brazil.
Castells, M. (1977).The Urban Question. A Marxist Approach. London: Edward Arnold.
Clos, J. (2016). The Case for Planning [Video, July 2016] , Conference Urban Age by London School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Foundation at Venice Biennale, Venezia, 2016, July 2016. Retrieved from: https://lseciti.es/u50c213d7. [Accessed 1st July 2016].
Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. London: Verso.
Deleuze G. Guatarri, F. (2001). A Thousand Plateaus: Captalism and Schizofrenia, Minneapolis MN (USA): University of Minessota Press. 202. Originally published in 1980 by Les Éditions de Minuit, Paris.
Fernandes, E. (2011). Regularization of Informal Settlements in Latin America. Policy Focus Report published by Lincoln Institute of land Policy. Retrieved from: https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/regularization-informal-settlements-latin- america-full_0.pdf. [Accessed October, 10, 2015].
Harvey, D. (2013). Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to Urban Revolution. London: Verso Books.
Kitchin, R, and Gill V. (2007). Key Thinkers on Space and Place. London: Sage, 2004.
Latour, Bruno. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor Network Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Neuwirth, R. (2005). Shaddow Cities: A Billion Squatters in the New World. London: Routledge.
Rojas. E. (2008, December, 3-5) Governance and City Making in South America. Presentation at the Urban Age South America, São Paulo. Retrieved from: http://downloads.lsecities.net/0_downloads/pdf_presentations/SaoPaulo/_conf/003_EduardoRojas.pdf. Accessed, February 20, 2014.
Roy, A. (2005). Urban Informality: Toward an Epistemology of Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, Spring 2005, 71 (2), 148: 147-158.
Roy, A. (2009). The 21st-Century Metropolis: New Geographies of Theory, Regional Studies 6, (6), 819–30. Doi: 10.1080/00343400701809665.
Sassen, S. (2016). Global Capital and Urban Land. Conference Urban Age by London School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Foundation at Venice Biennale, Venezia, 2016, July 2016 Retrieved from: https://LSECiti.es/u18fe1280. [Acessed 9 November 2016]
Simone, A. (2016). Feral Urbanism, Conference Urban Age by London School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Foundation at Venice Biennale, Venezia, 2016, July 2016. Retrieved from: https://LSECiti.es/u2201130f.[Accessed, November 9, 2016].
Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centers (2010). Dharavi.SPARC India. [Youtube Video, Published on March 17, 2010]. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUMMq7B_DDs. [Acessed, February, 4, 2012].
Turner, J. F. C. (1976). Housing by People: Towards Autonomy in Building Environment. London:
Urban Age. (2016). Shaping cities, la biennale di Venezia, 2016. Conference Urban Age by London School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Foundation at Venice Biennale, Venezia, 2016, July 2016. Retrieved from: https://urbanage.lsecities.net/conferences/shaping-cities-venice-2016.[Acessed 28 November 2016].
Winston, A. (2016). ‘Architects are never taught the right thing says 2016 Pritzker laureate Alejandro Aravena.’ Interview with Aravena, Dezeen. Retrieved from: https://www.dezeen.com/2016/01/13/ alejandro-aravena-interview-pritzker-prize-laureate-2016-social-incremental-housing-chileanarchitect/# disqus_thread. [Accessed November 2016].