Introduction
There is a difficulty in data collection when dealing with settlements of the urban poor due to the inconsistency in the definitions given to slums. For example, in Rio the definition of what constitutes a favela is not consistent throughout agencies and studies (Perlman, 2010). This makes it extremely difficult for the establishment of policies to deal with such informal settlements. Nevertheless, it is evident that there is a wide socio-economic divide between the rich and poor that exists in many developing nations today. This is exacerbated by the inability to cope with the rapid influx of rural urban migrants as the cities begin to develop.
Slums are part of progress and are inevitable
Poverty in cities reflect urban growth and opportunities, intranational migration from rural to urban areas are influenced by push and pull factors such as rural poverty and better prospects respectively. (Glaeser, 2011) The “Urban poverty paradox” as mentioned by Glaeser is that of the simultaneous increase in rural to urban migration with improvements in infrastructure, defeating the purpose of upgrading slums in developing countries. This requires governments to anticipate rural urban migration instead of giving into the seemingly self-defeating purpose of slum upgrading through eradication.
Developed countries like America had gone through the same situations faced by deveoping countries today
The extreme polarising effects segregating the rich and poor have been an issue for developed countries such as America during the 19th century. (Glaeser, 2011) The divide between rich and poor is not something that is new, rather, it is a phenomenon that has existed for centuries and will continue to exist for many more. As Glaeser mentions, the Americans who are appalled at the living conditions of Rios favelas are not aware of the fact that Irish immigrants lived in “shanty towns” like New Yorks Hell/s Kitchen in the 19th century. However, while slums represent progress, it does not justify inhumane living conditions, slums represent a lack of urban infrastructure to accommodate the rapid influx of rural migrants. The problem is apparent and inevitable but it should not be looked upon as “cancerous” to the urban population. It should be embraced and while the task of restoring slums in developing countries might seem daunting, it presents a more economical and socially just method for dealing with the urban poor.
Case study: Rio show the development of urban policies surrounding Rios poor
Urban policies surrounding the favelas in Rio have undergone a significant number of changes over the past few decades. Initially the policies were centered around “removal and resettlement” (perlman, 2010), this meant eradicating the favelas and relocating its inhabitants to locations that were far away from the city center and into single roomed barracks, core houses or “conjuntos” based on their level of income. This policy was enforced by a national level program to rid Rio of its favelas and was known as “CHISAM”. As Perlman mentions, this policy had cost the government dearly in terms of financial and political capital and was unsustainable, leading to the gradual decline in the eradication policy and a final halt to the “CHISAM” program. The program faced political opposition as housing was not able to match the removal of favelas, the relocation of people seemed unmanageable in terms of both administrative and financial capacity.
Once democracy was re-established in 1985, the policy to upgrade the favelas in Rio gained more attention as a third of the city’s electorate lived there. (perlman, 2010) ‘Favela Bairro’ was the first large scale favela restoration programme (1994-2000) which focused on the integration of the favelas into the city through the upgrading of infrastructure and promoting social health and education programmes. (Xavier & Magalhães, 2003) While the favella Bairro programme was effective in improving the quality of urban life for 168 favelas as of 2009, it has 852 favelas left to upgrade and its goal of incorporating the poor into the surrounding neighbourhoods was far from reach. As perlman (2010) mentions, policy can only do so much when there is a lack of “community pride and ownership”, and in the case of Rio, the people of the 168 favelas restored did not feel like they had a sense of ownership and things went back to the way they were before after the programme ended.
Lessons learnt that could be applied to other developing countries
Perlman suggests three ways in which policies could be shaped to incorporate the urban poor into the city- (i) place based approaches (ii) poverty based approaches and (iii) universal approaches. Place based approaches are effective in focusing on “territories of exclusion” or informal settlements of the poor such as favelas. This provides a more direct and realistic approach when dealingw with such a widespread problem without falling short on quality. Also known as “Bolsa Familia”, the poverty based approach provide financial aid to families that fall below a defined level of income. This is done through the use of a monthly stipend which helps low income families fulfil basic needs while encouraging them to invest in healthcare and education for future generations. The universal approach aims towards establishing basic individual rights for each citizen, this includes the right to safety, decent housing and protection under law. It aims to break the socio-economic disparities between rich and poor by emphasizing on basic rights to use public spaces, participate in the job market, and to be able to participate in discussions about the city’s future.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the prevalence of rural urban migration in developing countries today is not something new. As Glaeser (2011) mentions, developed countries have spent billions in countering urban diseases and vices. Cities attract rural folk because it presents opportunities for a better life not just for themselves, but for future generations. However, this does not mean that it is okay for people to live in inhumane conditions such as the favelas but calls for the government to adopt specific, strategic policies in order to anticipate and battle the “urban poverty paradox”.
Bibliography
Glaeser, E. (2011). Triumph of the city. [London]: Macmillan
Perlman, J. (2009). Favela. New York: Oxford University Press.
Xavier, H., & Magalhães, F. (2003). The case of Rio de Janeiro (1st ed., p. 23). Rio. Retrieved from http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/Global_Report/pdfs/Rio.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment