Not just passing through. Migrants in the City by Betzabe Urquiola

NOTJUSTPASSI NGTHROUGH MI GRANTSI NTHECI TY,TWO CASESINTURIN

Aut hor

Tut or

BETZABEURQUI OLAR.

CRI STI NABI ANCHETTI

A. A2016/17 POLI TECNI CO DI TORI NO /UNI VERSI DADCENTRALDEVENEZUELA

NOT JUST PASSING THROUGH. MIGRANTS IN THE CITY Two Cases in Turin

Thesis Double Degree Program in Costruzione CittÃ Accademic Year 2016-2017 UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DE VENEZUELA

Tutor Prof. Anna Maria Cristina Bianchetti

Candidate: Betzabe Urquiola Rodriguez S217389 I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Sincere thanks to everyone who was part of this. Special thanks to my tutor, Cristina Bianchetti, for the patience and for waking up in me the urge to know more. Eloy, thank you for always being available and willing. Laura Cantarella, Laura Martini, thank you for the right comment at the right time. Thanks to my parents and sister, for using the word together to support and love me. I would like to thank to my alma mater FAU-UCV that took me by the hand from the beginning and that prompted me to do what I do and to the Politecnico di Torino for this incredible and needed opportunity. Thanks to Rigoberto and DesirĂŠe, you showed me that good people are still out there. PS: the food was amazing,

This thesis is dedicated to Aida Butuc.

ABSTRACT The so called “Refugee crisis” (irregular mass migration) that has recently stricken Europe is a current issue which importance is evident since it agglomerates a series of factors that modify territories and generate geographies by its own. Some countries are more burdened than other since they are the target destination of a large percentage the displaced population. Southern countries as Italy and Greece feature a different situation as main entry points to Europe. There is an all Italian specificity that deserves to be revealed, playing a major role as a gateway country, the fluxes intertwined with other sources of irregular migration becoming a heterogeneous group of subjects gravitating through the territory. This triggered the question of how the dynamic of people, mostly in motion by forced displacement, affects the territory and change the city from within. Here a spectrum of informal practices is generated at a national level, but significantly relevant are the spontaneous solutions for refuge outside of government institutions’ intervention; small and precise solutions but that have a larger meaning and are able to profoundly mutate the city. The aim is to look at the radical conditions of mutation of population and urban spaces. This, through the specific analysis of two cases studied: Ex-Moi (Turin) and Campo Solidale (Saluzzo). These are two very different cases: one at the center of the city, one of the margins. The actors of the first are individuals that the city does not want to see. The actors of the second are laborers hired “by the piece” for seasonal jobs. The two cases are important because they demonstrate that it is not a detached phenomenon, intertwining with other conditions of deprivation. The Two cases help to understand a profound transformation of the city: the city no longer is the space for the construction of rights, as it was in the past in the Western world. The city was a reflection of citizenship and work. These places are within the city, but they are deprived of citizenship and work. This is why migration deeply changes the city. Not because new population comes into it, rather because the new population comes by changing the conditions of citizenship and work. Our technical skills can do little. But they can describe precisely this new city and can rethink a long tradition of studies developed to deal with transit and emergency situations.

III

Chapter I A World at War

Summary Introduction I Chapter: A World at War 1.1 A refugee Crisis....................................................................................... Socio-demographic data....................................................................... Origin, Routs and destinations............................................................. Reality Check..................................................................................... Dublin Regulation............................................................................... 1.2 Public Debate.......................................................................................... 1.3 An New urban Question............................................................................

14 21 21 27 29 39 49

II Chapter: Not just Passing Through 2.1 A Transit Country..................................................................................... 2.2 Italian Paradox......................................................................................... Countries of origins and routes............................................................. Gender and age................................................................................... 2.3 The reception system in Italy..................................................................... Asylum responses................................................................................

58 62 65 67 68 76

III Chapter: Permanent Temporalities 3.1 Which informality?.................................................................................. 84 3.2 Out of sight............................................................................................. 90 3.3 Cases Study............................................................................................. 119 Back to the ghetto: N5: Ex–MOI, former Olympic Villages. Turin........... 121 Wanted but not welcome: N7: Campo Solidale. Saluzzo..........................139 3.4 The Territorial Dimension of the public policies..........................................156 IV Chapter: “All lives matter” (welfare) 4.1 Eroded Italian Welfare.............................................................................. 162 4.2 Local actions to a global problem, refugees as social actors.........................167 4.3 Transit Architecture..................................................................................176 Heritage of Ideas................................................................................ 181 The places of transit habitat.................................................................185 Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 198 Bibliography........................................................................................................... 202 5

Chapter I A World at War

FOREWORD Analyze the European territory entails the acknowledgement of the mutations that crisis, in all orders, marks on it. Complex processes that rewrite the conflictual elements part of a global dynamic, transform, in all scales, the territory. A molecular logic is needed then to decompose the system in single elements that can be observed in a more accurate way, considering them as part of a whole that frame a context for the correct reading of the issue. The so called “Refugee crisis” that has recently stricken Europe is a current issue which importance is evident since it agglomerates a series of factors that modify the configurations of territories and generate geography by its own. A mass migration flux of people characterized by the heterogeneity of its composition (all considered as “forced migrants”), and a remarkable political discrepancy. The reference name then remains just an emblem of the critical state of its emergencial character. Irregular mass migration, in the broader scenario of political and economic crisis, is the structural issue regarding the phenomenon. The ramifications and manifestations of the broader “irregular migration crisis” are extensive, intersecting with national as well as pan-European politics, existing economic problems, xenophobia, fear of terror attacks, and much more. There is a clear interdependence between human activities and the spaces in which they take place, that re-draw new dynamics and configurations of the space. Cities have come to be seen as key mediators in global politics, the global economy and in the social and cultural tensions of living with diversity. In this sense, migration has been shown as one of the key forces influencing the city; both, within the country and from other countries are a fundamental element in understanding the physical configuration of the city and its many systems of power. Yet, within this frame forced migration it is still a case in particular. This crisis seems to dwarf in scale and complexity any other crisis that Europe has faced since the end of the Second World War. (Couldrey & Herson, 2016). In other words, Europe has been under siege of forced migratory flows. Asylum seekers (and camouflaged economic migrants) have been arriving since a long time ago, however it is only now that Europe is taking care and awareness of it. This triggered the question of how the dynamic of people, mostly in motion by forced displacement, impacts the territory reshaping the cities. Certainly, it occurs 7

different in each journeyed geo-political border but in a wider view, the recent trends directly related to the exodus from the Middle East and North Africa towards Europe remains the cornerstone of the argument. Some countries are more burdened than other since they are the target destination of a large percentage the displaced population. This research deals with this recent phenomenon as an imperative issue that it is changing the European territory, which strong impact on the territory involves urban planning, architecture; urban studies in general. Within the framework of territories in crisis, the aim of this thesis is to look at the radical conditions of mutation of population and urban spaces, through the analysis of some of the informal manifestations of the forced migration phenomenon in the city, to observe the metamorphosis of the territory and understand what the implications could be for the discipline. The topic is addressed by first making a reconstruction of the phenomenon of the “refugee crisis”. Thus, the phenomenon is framed within a broader context to clearly understand its nature and the dynamics of its process and consequences. Mass irregular migratory fluxes constituted by different and difficult to distinguish reasons towards a Europe in existential crisis are structural elements of what constitute the disruption of this exodus. The recent (if not current) “Refugee crisis” in Europe, can be traced back about 2011, with a spike in 2014-15. Even though the forms of persecution and displacements are now different, responses to the crisis falters in matters that should have been learned in lessons that history has given, and apparently there is little awareness or understanding of what to do. The second chapter deeps in the specific situation of Italy, where its condition as one of the main gates to Europe is a factor that generates particular transit dynamics within the territory, The weakness in the asylum administration, due to the aleatory condition of forced migrants into Italy, often ends up to informal or unofficial path of accommodation and integration. As diverse and dispersed as it is to describe these irregular fluxes to Italy, so are the manifestation on the territory, thus in the third chapter some situation of informality in certain cities are explored. A spectrum of informal practices is generated, but significantly relevant are the spontaneous solutions for refuge outside of government institutions’ intervention. “Living spaces as forms of resistance to the avoidance of their existential”. Two specific cases are deepened: the Ex-Moi occupation, Turin and Campo Solidale in Saluzzo. These are opportunities to have a closer look to theses manifestations 8

Chapter I A World at War

and how they mutate the city and within the city. Even though it is evident that this crisis forced designers to reconsiders their view of and within the city, the range of action becomes blurry through the socio-political discrepancy that by all means are priority issues. Our technical skills can do little. But we can describe precisely this new city. A city where new forms of living are produce which correspond to new social actors, a city that no longer is the space for the construction of rights incrementing the already existing social inequalities. These places are within the city, but they are deprived of citizenship and work. A gap remains where architecture can take place: Thus, once exposed the migration process in Italy and exposed its possible reach and consequences for our cities, in the fourth chapter a critical reflection is made to give it a focus within the architectural discipline to the phenomenon. In light of this, architecture can offer expertise on how to improve the physical conditions for people seeking sanctuary in unfamiliar and temporary environments and can rethink a long tradition of studies developed to deal with transit and emergency situations. It is noteworthy that, despite being a phenomenon whose impact is recent, it is a topic that is taking roots more and more in the urban studies research. These various empirical studies that analyze this phenomenon recognize the dimension of it is almost intractable and the need for a multidisciplinary approach.

Chapter I A World at War

he twentieth first century has witnessed unprecedented human displacements. According to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, the number of refugees and internally displaced people is 65 million, of which “more than half of all refugees of concern to UNHCR now reside in non-camps setting, including urban areas” (UNHCR Global Trends, 2015). However, “[...] Population movements in response to demographic growth, climatic change and the development of production and trade have always been part of human history. Warfare, conquest, formation of nations and the emergence of states and empires have all led to migrations, both voluntary and forced” (Castles and Miller, 2003). Since the World War II conflicts have continued to cause people to leave their homes and to flee to another place or country. Factors influencing the causes are always shifting, continually changing the paterns of migration; constantly adjusting according to circumstances in the countries of origin, transit and destination. Although it has long been a structural phenomenon of our societies it is still true, anyway, that the number of asylum applications has significantly increased in the past 5 years, from 236.000 in 2011 to 1.255.000 in 2015 (Eurostat, 2015).

On the Left: Cropped version of Sea Division, 2015 . Photo © Taiyo Onorato & Nico Krebs. 3,771 Migrant Fatalities in Mediterranean in 2015

1.1 A Refugee Crisis in Europe

Since the past 5 years irregular migration to Europe has frequently made headline, becoming a central issue for the member states of the European Union (EU’s states 1 ). This increased the public and political pressure on policymakers to address the flow of unauthorized migrants in each country. At the beginning of 2011, The Guardian published an updated interactive timeline on the topic of Arab Springs, monitoring the situation of the struggles and protests in 17 different Middle-East countries. In 2014 the number of migrants crossing the Mediterranean with the intention to irregularly cross a European border reached a record high when 267,344 people were detected at the EU borders. This is more than double the number of people who irregularly crossed a European border from the Mediterranean in 2013 (Frontex, 2015). The influx of refugees and migrants to Europe reached staggering new levels in 2015, dominating headlines and prompting stormy political debate. In the so called “the year of Europe’s refugee crisis” 2 over 1 million people (refugees, displaced persons and other migrants) have made their way to the EU, escaping conflict in their country and in search of better economic prospects, generating tension between the EU states and being the central topic of the public debate. However, if massive population displacements are not new in world affairs, why is it then considered a crisis? It is easy to think so when we see the impact and transformation of communities unready or unprepared to cope with this situation. But when we think about Europe’s resources, or when we compare those numbers with the EU’s population (743.1 millions), it doesn’t seem that much of an emergency. What it does seem to happen mainly it is an institutional dysfunction and lack of cooperation between EU members. “The Common European Asylum System is founded on the illusion of common, region-wide equivalence in matters such as reception, procedural guarantees and quality of decision-making, while Dublin (Regulation) 3 determines individual Member State

1 At the time there were 28 member state, however the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU in a referendum on 23 June 2016. 2 http://tracks.unhcr.org/2015/12/2015-the-year-of-europes-refugee-crisis/ 3 The Dublin Regulation establishes the Member State responsible for the examination of the asylum application. The criteria for establishing responsibility run, in hierarchical order, from family considerations, to recent posses-

Chapter I A World at War

responsibility, it contributes nothing to regional equity” (Goodwin-Gill, 2016). This crisis, in effect, seems to dwarf in scale and complexity any other crisis that Europe has faced since the end of the Second World War. Even though the forms of persecution and displacements are now different, responses to the crisis falters in matters that should have been learned in lessons that history has given, and apparently there is little awareness or understanding of what to do. The weakness in the asylum administration, due to the aleatory condition of forced migrants into receiving countries, often ends up to informal or unofficial path of accommodation and integration. On 7 March 2016, EU leaders announced a new agreement with Turkey, stating that bold moves were needed to close down people smuggling routes, to break the business model of the smugglers, to protect our external borders and to end the migration crisis in Europe. “We need to break the link between getting in a boat and getting settlement in Europe.” (European Council, 2016). This clearly states the hierarchical and unstable political dimension in dealing with current issues of the crisis, which is worsened by the management and the overcrowding of institutional assistance structures. This tension has been rising because of the disproportionate burden faced by some countries. The migration flow is impacting transit countries as well, such as Turkey, Greece, Libya and Italy, sometimes overwhelming national emergency response capacities. In mid-2015, the European Commission took a more comprehensive approach 4 to tackle the refugee crisis in Europe with its European Agenda for Migration, drawing on the various tools and instruments available at the EU level and in the Member States. Yet, this sudden arrival of millions of people has created a real-world testing ground causing a tension situation between EU’s state, sorely challenging the added value and legitimacy of the European Union in responding to the crisis. Therefore, within this context the increasing movement of the hazard population must generally confront human right

sion of visa or residence permit in a Member State, to whether the applicant has entered EU irregularly, or regularly. 4 The EU’s humanitarian and civil protection response supports refugees and their host communities in four ways: Providing emergency support within the EU, helping transit countries with humanitarian funding, putting the EU Civil Protection Mechanism at the disposal of Member States and neighboring countries and scaling up humanitarian aid for major crises .

End of Dreams sculptures, 2014. Photo ©: Eva Gluszak Castanga Part of Nikolaj Bendix Skyum Larsen’s project, End of Dreams in the bay of Pizzo Calabro in Calabria, South Italy

Chapter I A World at War

violation (in name of the control of immigration policies), mistreatment, exploitation and different types of exclusion, that later on bring consequent long-term lodging vulnerability and marginalization of different sources. The un-correspondence of the European legal framework it is in fact one of the main factors worsening the management of the situation, leaving de facto decisional and legislative power to single national governments and omitting a binding common strategy at the European level. Evidently, beside the political and jurisdictional discrepancy, there is a strong urban dimension that represents a large scale of challenges, to which cities will have to respond in a flexible and creative way, to be able to act quickly. By the end of the year 2016 at the European Unions headquarters diplomats and officials declare that the refugee crisis was over 5 , but the solutions only solved temporally the political problem, but not the humanitarian one, which can aggravate in the long run.

5 http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/18/europe-wishes-to-inform-you-that-the-refugee-crisis-is-over/

100–999 deaths

SYRIA 2011-Ongoin

AFGHANISTAN 2015-Ongoin

IRAQ 2014-Ongoin

1,000–9,999 deaths

NIGERIA 2003-2014

PAKISTAN 2004-Ongoin

UKRAINE 2014-Ongoin

10,000+ deaths

SOMALIA 2009-Ongoin

SOUTH SUDAN 2011-Ongoin

SUDAN 2011-Ongoin

Atlas of ongoing armed conflicts in the Middle East and Africa with violent deaths caused by conflints, 2015 Source: Global Conflict Tracker

EGYPT 2011-Ongoin

LYBIA 2011-Ongoin

D.R. OF CONGO 1996-Ongoin

NIGER, CAMEROON, CHAD 2009-Ongoin ISRAEL 1964-Ongoin

MALI 2012-Ongoin

PAKISTAN 2004-Ongoin

INDIA 1947-Ongoin

ALGERIA 2002-Ongoin

Chapter I A World at War

1.1.2 Socio-Demographic Data In the last five years the number of asylum requests has reached the highest mark over a decade: according to UNHCR statistical yearbooks, the number of refugees in concern of UNHCR passed from 10,5 million in 2010 to 9,9 million in 2012, but in mid2015 the number of refugees reached an estimated 15.1 million refugees, the highest level in 20 years. The yearly variation on people in concern of UNHCR, shows how far away these numbers have increased. Moreover, around one million irregular migrants and refugees arrived in Europe till 31 December 2015, three to four times more than in 2014(UNHCR, 2016). Nevertheless, it is needed to deepen the categorization of the registered numbers to understand the fundamental aspects of the migration emergency (refugees, asylum seekers, returned refugees). During the period from 2010 to 2014, the number of refugees remains more or less stable; it was in 2015 when the major variation was registered with a 74% variation in comparison with the precedent year. The main issue that comes out is the :variations registered in the annual numbers of asylum seekers; the trends of the years 2012-2013 and 2014-2015 it reach over 40% of variation, which constitute an alarming problem for national governments. The consequence of this trend lays on a prolonged “emergency situation “due to “the inappropriateness of both, reception and demands testing systems and their laboriousness” (Belloni, 2014). 1.1.3 Origins, Routes and Destinations Most asylum seekers arriving in the European Union (EU) in 2015 have come by irregular means via land or sea, transiting several other countries along the way. The main countries of origin of people applying for asylum in the EU are Middle-East or African countries of which Syria continues to be at the top, followed by Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo, due to ongoing violence and poverty. The predominant nationalities of the arrived vary from country to country, but in general are countries in which civil war, dictatorship, persecution, forced labor or diffused violence have been happening. Although, relatively the provenience is a main feature when it comes to the approval of asylum claim, because it may show that some are more likely to be economic migrants. 21

Chapter I A World at War

SYRIA

362.775

AFGHANISTAN

178.230

121.535

GERMANY

HUGARY

SWEDEN

476.510

177.135

IRAQ

162.450

First time asylum applicants in the EU-28 by citizenship in 2015. Source: Eurostat

66.886

KOSOVO

AUSTRIA 88.160

46.400

PAKISTAN

ITALY

83.540

ERITREA

33.095

NIGERIA

29.915

25.360

FRANCE

NETHERLANDS

BELGIUM

76.165

44.970

IRAN

44.660

19.575

SOMALIA

UNITED KINDOM 40.160

8.880

376.056

SENEGAL

OTHERS

FINLAND

DENMARK

32.345

20.935

The vast majority arrived by sea but some migrants have made their way over land, principally via Turkey and Albania. The International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) identifies five different migratory routes entering the European continent, four of which cross Saharan or Sub- Saharan Africa to enter Europe from the South-Southwest direction The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that more than 1,015,700 migrants arrived by sea in 2015, and almost 34,900 by land. The main migratory routs was the Western Mediterranean route towards Spain, but cooperation between Spain and Morocco has since kept migrant numbers comparatively low on this route and inclined to use the Eastern Mediterranean route to arrive on the Greek islands, mostly on Lesbos. The central Mediterranean route, considered the most dangerous journey, remained under intense migratory pressure in 2015, although the total number of migrants dropped about a tenth lower than the record set in 2014. Eritreans, Nigerians and Somalis accounted for the biggest share of the migrants (Frontex, 2016). Even though most refugees, especially Syrian, were hosted by neighboring countries such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, the number of asylum applications in Europe steadily increased between 2011 and 2015. Some argue that migrants have been seeking to settle preferentially in those national destinations offering more generous social welfare benefits and hosting more established Middle Eastern and African immigrant communities. Although Germany has had the most asylum applications in 2015 (with 441,800 applicants, or 35% of all applicants in EU states), Hungary had the highest in proportion to its population (17.7 asylum seekers per 1,000 inhabitants: 174,400 applications or 14%); as more migrants made the journey overland through Greece and the Western Balkans, followed by Sweden (156,100, or 12%), Austria (85,500, or 7%).In this regard, growing numbers of “would-be” migrants from an increasingly diverse array of origin countries are using the territory of neighbor countries as a gateway to their target destinations, and this is the case of Greece and Italy.

Chapter I A World at War

1.1.4 Reality check: Refugee Protection in EU Refugee law is an area of law that is regulated both globally and regionally. Before one can determine the uniformity between refugee law in international law and EU law there is need to determine the relationship between the two areas of law. However, one is not simply superior to the other. The “refugee” was first recognized in international law by the League of Nations in the 1920s.In 1948 the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with a more open and liberal model of welcoming and integration, to tackle the negative effects caused by the Second World War. But though it’s not an international treaty, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights constituted a fundamental pillar for the stipulation of international agreements, for the enactment of national laws and constitutions and for sub-nationals and regionals agreements for the safeguard of human rights. In view of the historical events that have characterized the first half of the last century International rights and asylum, in July 1951, the UN Convention 1 relating to the Status of Refugees entered into force in Geneva (with 145 ratifications and later accessions or successions), as form of international agreement on refugees, experimenting with innovative mechanisms of protection and assistance; it defines the parameters to recognize who is a refugee and who is not, and sets out the rights of individuals and the responsibilities of the country that grant asylum 2 . However, due to state sovereignty it is the states themselves that decide whether someone fits the definition of refugee or not. If the state finds that someone is a refugee in the meaning of the Refugee Convention she is given refugee status, which leads to certain rights. Nevertheless, it does not often translate into a linear and effective welcoming and integration process and “the topic of immigration is becoming more and more a problem tackled by authoritarian and securitarian measures” (Belloni, 2013).

1 Geneva Convention relating to the status of Refugees, opened for signature 28 July 1951, 189 UNTS 137 (entered into force 22 April 1954) [Refugee Convention]. 2 The Refugee Convention is built on three concepts: the refugee definition, the principle of non-refoulement and the refugee status. Together, these concepts make up the main framework for international refugee law.

The EU is developing a common European asylum system (CEAS) within the area of freedom, security and justice 3 . The goal is to establish an asylum system that works the same way in all states, so that an asylum-seeker will get the same reception, treatment and decision irrespective of which member state she first arrives to. The system is regarded as the most advanced regional system for international protection 4 . It is made up of regulations, that are binding and directly applicable in all member states, and directives, that are binding as to the result to be achieved. The central legal acts regarding asylum are the Dublin Regulation 5 , the EURODAC Regulation 6 , the Reception Conditions Directive 7 , the Qualification Directive and the Asylum Procedures Directive 8 . The directives set out minimum standards, which mean that member states can be more generous in national legislation. Likewise, the picture still remains fragmented and presents many contradictions, and there is a big discrepancy in the treatment and reception of refugees among the different Member States (in terms of law and practical management). In this sense, the political situation where Member States are usual to differently consider the political and humanitarian situations in asylum seekers’ country of origin, lead to the tendency to migrate towards Northern European countries for the so called asylum shopping 9 . Therefore, in the contradiction between freedom of movement of the Schengen agreement

3 Consolidated Version of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union, opened for signature 13 December 2007 OJ C 115/47 (entered into force 1 December 2009) art 67(2) [TFEU]. 4 Lambert, „Introduction: European refugee law and transnational emulation‟ in Lambert, McAdam and Fullerton (eds), The Global reach of European Refugee Law (Cambridge University Press, 2013) 1, 1. 5 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member state responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member states by a third country national or a stateless person [2013] OJ L 180/31. 6 Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of ’Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention [2000] OJ L 316/1. 7 Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection [2013] OJ L 180/96. 8 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection [2013] OJ L 180/60 [Asylum Procedures Directive]. 9 Used to describe when asylum seekers apply for asylum in several states or seeking to apply in a particular state after transiting other states.

Chapter I A World at War

and of national States sovereignty constituted to all extents the base for the 2003 Dublin Convention as the most repressive instrument against itinerant applications for international protection, linked to a national level of concerns with borders control and national security. 1.1.5 Dublin Regulation III “The Dublin regulation determines the EU member state responsible to examine an asylum application to prevent asylum applicants in the EU from ‘asylum shopping’, where applicants send their applications for asylum to numerous EU member states, or ‘asylum orbiting’, where no member state takes responsibility for an asylum seeker. By the first member state that an asylum seeker entered and in which they have been fingerprinted is responsible. If the asylum seeker then moves to another member state, they can be transferred back to the member state they first entered”(European Commission, 2016). According to the Dublin III Regulation, asylum seekers are expected to remain where the EU tells them. Yet asylum seekers, like all human beings, have their own desires, their own understanding of the factors governing their lives, and their own plans. Most of those that are arriving in Italy or Greece have no interest in staying-in because there is poor vision of asylum in decent living conditions for the majority and as a result they try to cross through the “borderless” Schengen area where internal border controls are supposedly abolished. But due to the Dublin regulation and the adoption of extraordinary measure of border control, it has produce and increasing concentration of asylum requests in southern Europe. Therefore it puts Member states at the EU’s external borders (mainly Italy, together with Greece) in the front line for asylum applications. Language, family ties, the existence of diaspora communities, social benefits or simply the myth surrounding the integration possibilities in some countries create the web of factors that asylum seekers consider when deciding which country they want to reach. Even in countries like Austria and France some asylum seekers will refuse to apply for asylum, and will do what they can to avoid the mechanisms in place that would oblige them to remain in a country not of their choosing. As a result of this, tensions arise 29

A man struggles to board a train headed to the Croatian capital Zagreb... Photo ÂŠ SergueĂŻ Ponomarev / World Press Photo Reportage sur la crise des migrants en Europe, 2015

Chapter I A World at War

between Member States. This has led many to criticize the Dublin rules, even UNHCR 10 as unequal in preventing legal right and well-being of asylum seekers for placing too much responsibility for asylum seekers on member states on the EUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s external borders; leaving them in a prolonged and cyclic â&#x20AC;&#x153;emergency situationâ&#x20AC;?, instead of devising a burden-sharing system among EU states. For instance, in 2015 Greece will receive more than 600,000 refugees coming from countries including Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq through Turkey. Yet Greece could never manage to process two or three hundred thousand asylum applications per year, nor realistically integrate all those who would be granted international protection with the current eligibility rate hovering at 50%. The fact that EU member states try to outsmart each other and the regulations they have agreed on together is the ultimate proof that the current asylum system does not and cannot work. Making matters worse is the fundamental incompatibility of the Dublin Regulation with the Schengen Agreement. Full implementation of one does not allow full implementation of the other. In practice, both are being circumvented as the number of irregular migrants arriving in Europe has rapidly increased. It seems that this method is being used by Member States to avoid and discharge their responsibilities in the examination of asylum applications. This led, finally, to an uneven distribution of asylum demands and asylum seekers within Member States. In addition, it is important to highlight that generally migration cannot be stopped, without massively violating the human rights of the migrants. It may be deflected and rerouted, for a time. But European efforts to stop irregular migration will fail on a massive scale given the push and pull factors at work, such as survival needs on the part of the migrants and labour market needs on the part of European countries. (Bundy, 2016)

10 http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?docid=49c0ca922

5 3. 240 Hu

ng ar y

2. 09

1. 69 0

Ger man y

48. 475 ny Ger ma

n ede Sw

85 31.

11.040

Austria

n ede

64 29.

Austria

341.795

14.420

341.795

Italy

Fra n

Italy

10.00 5

40.32

Fra nc e

ds an

2011

.57

0 31.91

26.915

1 5.1

23 .6

m Belgiu

U .K

erl

z erla nd

d an

0 26.08

24.340

2010

57 .3 2 5

th Ne

1,322,825

Sw it

erl

th Ne

5.4

m Belgiu

U .K

Sw i t zer lan d1

52 .72

Total Arrivals 2010-06

Number of asylum application by destiation country Source: Eurostat

2010-12

2011-06

.71 0

43.

Austria

18 .8 9 Hu

ng a

ng ar y

Ger ma

2. 15 5

126

77. 48 5

ny Ger ma

n ede Sw

8 50

n ede Sw

17.415

Austria

373.550

Italy

17.33 0

Fra nc e

17.505

26.62

Fra nc

d an s1 65

3. 0

5 21.02

28.795

2013-06

66 .2 6 0

rl the Ne

m Belgiu

8.4

3. 0

2012-12

U.k.

5 28.07

28.795

.40 5

2012

ze r lan d2

d an

m Belgiu

U.K.

ze r lan d

Sw it

61 .4 4 0

rl the Ne

Sw it

284.980

2012-06

.2 6

284.980

Italy

2011-12

2013

2013-12

.51 0

2.4 16

e Sw

28.035

Austria

den

88.160

Austria 1.393.880

662.165

Italy

Fr a nc

64.63

Italy

83.53 5

Fra nc e

d an s

2015

.9 44

5 44.66

40.150

39 .45 0

.4 9 24

2015-06

erl

2014-12

Number of asylum application by destiation country Source: Eurostat

m Belgiu

d an

U.K.

ze r lan d

erl

2014

76 .16

th Ne

Sw it

64 .31

th Ne 0 22.71

32.790

23 .55 5

m Belgiu

U.K.

Sw i tze rlan d

2014-06

7. 13 0 ng ar y Hu

ng ar y

n ede Sw

2014-01

Ger man y

42 .7

Ger ma

476

20 2 .64 0

18 81.

2015-12

.15 0

29 .4 3

ng ar y Hu

88.160

stria

n ede

Austria

.86

39.495

1.239.915

Italy

83.53 5

123.3 7

Fra nc e

d an s

18.38

38.790

0 .71 20

m Belgiu

U.K.

27 .14 5

2016-06

erl

z erla nd

2015

75 .9 4 5

th Ne

Sw it

6.1 6

745 Ger man y

2.4 16

2016-12

2016

2016 Data

Plenty of lifejackets in the shots of Lesbos Europes new borders. Photo: ÂŠ Rasmus Degnbol

Chapter I A World at War

1.2 Public Debate: sensationalist journalism The so-called “refugee crisis” is nothing more than the tip of the iceberg of a major phenomenon: Forced Migration. However, this it is just its most visible facet; not so much because of its impact and volume but by the media attention that has been given to it. The ramifications and manifestations of the broader “migration crisis” (irregular migration, to be more specific) are extensive, intersecting with national as well as panEuropean politics, existing economic problems, xenophobia, fear of terror attacks, and much more. This crisis, yet, seems to dwarf in scale and complexity than any other crisis that Europe has faced since the end of the Second World War (Couldrey & Herson, 2016). In other words, Europe has been under siege of forced migratory flows. Asylum seekers (and camouflaged economic migrants) have been arriving since a long time ago, however it is only now that Europe is taking care and awareness of it. Yet, some state that while the high number of migrants and refugees arriving in Europe in 2015 has increased pressures and tensions, this is not a crisis beyond the capability of Europe to manage together as a Union; 86% of the world refugees are in developing countries. The European story was there to be told, but media failed to alert their audience or to challenge the readiness of the European Union and its member states to deal with the crisis that was about to break upon their shores. On the other hand, scholar from all over the world deepened into the issue but the public debate was very heterogeneous and disruptive, where the argument where sometimes full of discrepancy. Newspapers across Europe and the United States have been dominated by images, both heartening and horrifying, of Europe’s worsening refugee crisis. In reality, the crisis is not acutely European, but rather a global crisis felt most dramatically in Syria’s neighbors. But as unprecedented numbers of migrants and refugees stream into Europe, the union has been confronted with a two-part challenge. Media face a constant balancing act, to give voice to the refugee community and to reflect legitimate concerns over migration in the community at large. However it also propels the creation of myth and misleading fact about the issue. Media stories build the main (or most accessible) information related to the crisis, more often being sensationalist journalism increasing the drama and diverting information. The problem is that on so many occasions media have failed to hold the European Union and its members to account. Without media challenging mainstream 39

Angela Merkel named TIME’s 2015 Person of the Year, for her leadership in handling Greek debt and Europe’s refugee crisis. She is the fourth woman ever to be named Person of the Year by TIME magazine Photo ©: AP

Chapter I A World at War

Spiegelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 2015 cover with Angela Merkel: Mutter Angela. Merkelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Refugee Policy Divides Europe

Hungary closed its border with Croatia Photo ÂŠ: Attila Kisbenedek, 2016

Chapter I A World at War

discourses in a critical way, coverage of migration risks remaining as polemic. Moreover, irregular immigration since 2015 has consolidated its place as the most important issue facing the EU for Europeans, and has become the first concern at the national level (equally with unemployment). This awakened the need for a more formal public debate to discuss the phenomenon which should have serve as bases for the construction of approaches and orientations towards it. A heartbreaking image of a lifeless child on a beach in Turkey has gripped the world’s attention, igniting calls for European countries to aid the thousands of refugees fleeing conflict. However, this attention also leads to false narratives surrounding the socalled ‘migrant’ crisis. The idea that Europe has been swamped by migrants has cemented into the public mind, mainly due to two reasons, one is definitely media narrative and the other is the misused of certain languages by political parties. In most countries the story has been dominated by two themes: numbers and emotions. Most of the time coverage is politically led with media often following an agenda dominated by loose language and talk of invasion and swarms. At other moments the story has been laced with humanity, empathy and a focus on the suffering of those involved. What is unquestionable is that media everywhere play a vital role in bringing the world’s attention to these events; journalists are responsible not just for accurately reporting political discourse but also for weighing the impact of what they publish. In Europe migration and refugee issues have shaken the “tree of European unity” with hundreds of thousands trekking by land and sea to escape war and poverty. In Italy, a frontline state where the Mediterranean refugee tragedy first unfolded saw the deathliest year in 2015 with 3,771 dead and missing. As mentioned before, beside the Syrians who have fled their homelands making their way to Europe, political instability in Libya has not decreased, and so it continues to be both a source and a channel of irregular flows to Italy via the Central Mediterranean route, which is the most dangerous rout. Due to this the eyes of the world where put on this geographical point and later on, the pressure caused incentivized a couple of rescue operation by the Italian government. Italy has been at the heart of the story. The reality of covering migration in Italy’s mainstream media has seen a range of approaches reflecting a complex political context amidst a cascade of events and circumstances which has produced markedly different editorial biases in newspapers. As the crisis developed it became clear that while the government puts its focus on rescue 43

Nothing captures Western hypocrisy on refugees like these British tabloid front pages Photo ÂŠ: The Vox, 2015

Chapter I A World at War

efforts, for the media it was the human side of the story that attracted greater attention. At the same time there was no lack of alarmist discourse about immigration, with the number of arrivals described as an “invasion” and the use of the language of war, typified by the front page of the Milan newspaper Il Giornale on 24 August, 2015: “Immigration chaos. Invasion by land. The landings continue but the alarm is now mainly on the Macedonian front: thousands of refugees push to enter Europe. It is an endless emergency.” European media struggled to strike the right note in the tone and the language of discussion of the crisis. A debate emerged on whether the EU faced a “refugee” crisis or a “migrant” crisis. In August 2015 Al Jazeera said: “There is no ‘migrant’ crisis in the Mediterranean. There is a very large number of refugees fleeing unimaginable misery and danger and a smaller number of people trying to escape the sort of poverty that drives some to desperation” 1 . A web search of the media in early October showed that most of TV and online organizations widely used the term “migrant crisis”; for instance, BBC, The Guardian, The Independent and EUobserver. The name “refugee” crisis is misleading since it an issue that involves many others type of figures. Experience has taught that in order to protect the integrity of the international protection framework, status determination systems must be put into place to distinguish between people who have a genuine need for protection and those whose claims for asylum cannot be established. Criminal networks operate across the Mediterranean Coastal regions, thus in 2015 a robust international response was tried to be put into place to end trafficking and smuggling operations. If the European media have struggled to get the terminology right, they have also provided widely-contrasting national perspectives, often driven by governmental and political policy objectives. For instance, one of Europe’s leading tabloids the German daily Bildt surprised many both in Germany and abroad when it launched a high-profile “We Help” campaign with its positive message of welcome to the hundreds of thousands of refugees clamoring to get into Germany after Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that

1 Why Al Jazeera will not say Mediterranean “migrants”: http://www. aljazeera.com/blogs/editors-blog/2015/08/ al-jazeera-mediterraneanmigrants-150820082226309.html and earlier in April the Guardian described the different terms: http://www.theguardian.com/globaldevelopment/2015/apr/22/migrant-crisis-smuggling-traffickingpoliticians-dont-seem-to-know

the government would open its doors to all Syrian refugees. This contrasts with the hatespeech of many media in the Western Balkans, Hungary and other East European countries where tens of thousands of refugees were met with political hostility and physical barriers were erected to slow their route march to northern Europe. In Britain the story has also often been politically-driven and focused, sometimes without a sense of scale or balance: this has been particularly evident in reportage of the plight of refugees in Calais, where a growing number of asylum seekers had been gathering in camps. The situations in Calais and the Mediterranean provided a contrast of approaches to media reporting. A number of articles, from media linked to politics of the right and left, often displayed a knowledge and understanding, although limited, of the complexities of European migration, with mention of European directives, regulations, or UN definitions of refugees. The public debate tends to be largely influenced by the media; however, the public debate about the European refugee crisis is much more consolidated intellectually. The discourse within the refugee crisis was a global issue that constructed an ongoing debate the goes much more beyond the media coverage but still it seems influenced by the government’s agenda. Various events stimulated the gravitation of the speech for or against the arrival of forced migrants to Europe, sometimes radically against the welcoming of migrants but others it sifts towards a more sympathetic and paternalist discourse. New approaches and orientations to managing this crisis were the main topics discussed in high-level international meetings as well as in the European Council. As big as the phenomenon, so it were the discussion platforms on many research institutions and many journals of geopolitics, sociology, international relationships, anthropology, and so on issued important numbers concerning the topic with a wide interest in constructing accurate statements about it. The main researches on the causes and consequences of forced migration were carried out by the Refugee Study Center (RSC) in the University of Oxford’s Department of International Development, which allowed shedding light on debates which allowed improving policy and practice for people affected by forced migration, provide a forum for the voices of displaced people. The RFS through the “Force Migration Revie” magazine allows authors from around the world to analyze the causes and impacts of the displacement; debate policies and programs; share research findings; reflect the lived experience of displacement; and present examples of good practice and recommendations for policy and action. Here and in many other research 46

Chapter I A World at War

programs were also discussed many issues in the urban dimension of the impacts of befall of this phenomenon on cities around the world. This topic also extends to more specific fields concerning urban topic. For instance in the 2016 Venice Biennale questions the role of architecture with respect to refugees in European cities. There were pavilions that make cases for the refugee crisis as part of their exhibition, focusing on housing and integration of refugees and asylum-seekers, for instance the pavilions of Austria, Greece, Germany and Finland. Likewise, in the Oslo triennale of Architecture give space for discussion about reception and integration of refugee, as for example the section called “After Belonging” and the project “OPEN transformation” which make an attempt to experiment of new spatial forms with a bottomup approach.

The Jungle of Calais, Photo ÂŠ: Anna Pantelia 2016 48

Chapter I A World at War

1.3 An Urban Question!?

When we talk about refugees and displaced population, the popular image of camps comes to mind, where people are hosted and assisted by humanitarian organizations, often not having any control over their present and future fate. However, in the 21st century forced migration is urbanized and unending 1 . This is especially evident in countries where refugees are legally permitted to live in such areas, as in many Western countries (UNHCR, 2015). Urban areas are hubs where many resources and opportunities are available, and they offer access to diverse social networks, but also anonymity. Living in urban areas may therefore be seen as a support path to socio-economic integration, but it poses challenges as well: refugees often have to face many struggles that citizens also experience, for example those related to urban poverty, but they also encounter material, symbolic and legal obstacles due to their immigration status 2 , often in addition to racism, xenophobia and discrimination (Buscher, 2011; Jacobsen, 2006; Landau, 2006; Malkki, 1995; Pred, 2000; Zetter, 2007). Immigration is a political issue par excellence, especially when it comes to forced migration, given that it is regulated by political decisions made at the local, national and supranational level within a current strengthening of a modern States sovereignty. Unlike regular migration, the impact of irregular new comers in the city is not as visible in variables such as city population, labor markets, economies, housing market, and neighborhoods. However, social and economic variables play a key role in the shaping of the different reactions of opening or closing to immigration. Many of these are issues redefined in relation to the juxtaposition of â&#x20AC;&#x153;pro or against immigrantsâ&#x20AC;?. Therefore, conflicts concerning migration of refugees assumed a consistent relevance in socio-spatial terms. These conflicts effect on and through the spatial factors (density, dimensions, population diversity, and segregation. Uitermark) experiencing long-term economic, social, political, and environmental impacts.

1 More than half of the 10.5 million refugees globally lived in urban areas as of 2012 (UNHCR, 2013) 2 Refugees who live in urban areas are often confronted with a wide range of legal, administrative, financial, cultural and social barriers in their exercise of such rights and in their efforts to live a dignified and productive life.

The undefined space on refugee research it has been often tried to fill through the analysis of diverse variables such as the study the of gender characterization and the crescent number of female migrations, their evolution and their emancipation from family migration processes (Andall, 2003); the progressive categorization and stereotyping of migrants in western societies common language; the integration of refugees (and particularly of asylum seekers) into seasonal work or black labor market and their difficult tutelage (Avola, 2009); repatriations, circular or secondary migrations (Angenendt, 2007; Reyneri, 2007); victimisation of asylum seekers and legitimisation of persecution (Ambrosini, 2008) to force entrance possibilities in a determined country. However, on the socio-spatial debate of emergence migration, the repercussions and consequences that these fluxes cause on urban contexts and the new challenges that European cities’ governance would have to face are not often taken into account. At first sight, the fields of public lodging and dependence on State’s assistances and aids are the most critical and perceivable aspects at the urban dimension. Their presence increases the demands for education, health services, and infrastructure such as water supply, sanitation, and transportation. The impacts of the refugee presence are both positive and negative (UNHCR, 2004). However, the relationship between forced migration and the city is a much more profuse subject see (Darling, 2016). The dynamics between positive and negative issues is complex and varies depending on several factors, including the political economy of hosting countries, urban-rural interactions, and the nature of host-forced migrant relations. Furthermore, even when a refugee situation creates economic opportunities for both the displaced and their hosts, there can be winners and losers in each group. A focus on the dynamics of forced migrants’ experiences on the city is engaged with the political purposes, within a constant urban “negotiation”. Hence, these new fluxes generate repercussions and consequences that manifest within the city, on the urban contexts which represent new challenges that European cities’ governance would have to face and many of the challenges it poses fall in the line with existing debate about contemporary urbanism. The city is thus the space of co-relation where forced migrants tend to reify the nation-state and its consistency, coherence and authority; as Darling describes: “the city as an ensemble of authorities, legalizations and claims…a space for refugee politics” (Darling, 2016). Yet, until certain extend, this causes and effects can be externalized in measurable and in spatially visible features. Therefore, 50

Chapter I A World at War

new migration geographies arise, as well as new urban hybrid spaces, between integration and acknowledgment and marginalization and invisibility. In this sense, on aspect of the spatiality upon the question of ‘forced migration’ are the array of varying statuses inscribed in the administrative categories through which mobility is regulated: “The lack of formal recognition of refugee status or citizenship afforded to urban refugees has therefore been argued to exacerbate their vulnerability and has ensured that forced migrants merge into a larger pool of both undocumented migrants and citizens seeking to make a living in informal economies” (Nevin, 2013). As a consequence, irregular migrants find themselves in challenging situations with deprive conditions and thus become the most vulnerable population. It is also possible to recognize in Europe the implementation of “mechanism and spatial devices 3 ” which aim to establish and maintain differences and control their presence of the space. Urban refugee’s camps and centers represent a very good example of those “governmental rationalities” 4 , to quote Foucault, the aim of which is the implementation of “exclusion and inclusion processes through space”. Thus, this is seen as an important instrument of preventing forced migrants’ integration into “host” societies by prolonging their “on hold” status and therefore, they occupy a “gray space” between legality and illegality. As a consequence of inhibiting forced migrants from a legal status, the rights they could be formally entitle to by law, and also those while waiting 5 , are omitted. This complex and multilevel mechanisms of control show how these legal and administrative devices shape a specific frame of constraints within which different coping strategies may be attempted. Accesses to accommodation, and housing, and economical inclusion represent the more critical aspects of the social and spatial segregation. Housing conditions are central to shaping the sense of belonging, security and personal wellbeing,

3 Spatial devices of control and protection. Secchi B. (2013), La città dei ricchi e la città dei poveri, Laterza, Roma-Bari. 4 Gordon, C (1991). ‘Governmental rationality: an introduction’, in Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon and Peter Miller (eds) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, pp. 1–48. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 5 In the meantime, and until the claimant receives the response about his/her request, the State is responsible for providing social welfare, accommodation, education and professional training to support their socio-economic inclusion.

and they have a crucial role in access to health care, education and employment (Netto, 2011). The spatial fragmentation of forced migrants disables their possibility to live inside static and secure geographical boundaries, forcing them to seek a space for survival by any means, informal or illegal. Mainly, housing and economic support are the main needs that influence the interaction host country- forced migrant. The city becomes the soil where constellations of legality, illegality, formal and informal set of practices are “negotiated”. A place where displaced population are viewed as “spontaneous” groups who lack the legitimacy to be there, positioned as a “problematic” counterpart of helpless population. Thus, it poses a (not so new) challenge that urban planners and policy makers must properly include in national urban agendas. The so called “Refugee crisis” that has recently stricken Europe is a current issue which importance is evident since it agglomerates a series of factors that modify the configurations of territories and generate geography by its own. A mass migration flux of people characterized by the heterogeneity of its composition, all considered as “forced migrants”, and a remarkable political discrepancy. By now, refugees’ flows join the wider migration movements that have beset EU during the last twenty years. Moreover, the disruptive jurisdictional and political state of the situation together with and apparent lack of strategies, leads to spontaneous (or illegal) solutions to “fight” the weaknesses of local and national policies, but creates vulnerable and unassimilated communities that too often slide into marginalization and once again this complicates the legal status of the forced migrant. The consequent effects of this vicious circle triggered the question of how the dynamic of people, mostly in motion by forced displacement, impacts the territory reshaping the cities. Certainly, it occurs different in each journeyed geo-political border but in a wider view, the recent trends directly related to the exodus from the Middle East and North Africa towards Europe remains the cornerstone of the argument. Nevertheless, it would be naïve to say that we are facing a new urban question 6 by its own (and more so given the urgency of humanitarian aspects) rather an issue less taken into account in the urban discourses. An urban question which “imposes to urban planning

6 “We are facing a new urban question, which is no secondary cause of the crisis that today cross the main economies of the planet” Secchi B. (2013), La città dei ricchi e la città dei poveri, Laterza, Roma-Bari.

Chapter I A World at War

to take on the responsibility of understanding this ‘modernity problem’ and to propose newer, effective solutions, through a more qualitative multidisciplinary approach from the very initial phase of problem setting” (Belloni, 2011). Through the forced migrant’s urban question it becomes clear the unfolding of social injustices on the form of spatial injustices (Secchi, 2013) where the continuous process of hybridization and the new population register an increment of the social inequalities. This issue, according to Secchi, will be in the near future part of a common problem for the metropolis (even if developed in different periods and different from each other yet, still contemporaneous) that with all possibilities they will have to face, and together with other issues constitute the new urban question (Ibidem). The Refugee crisis, especially the Syrian Refugee crisis, has cast a spotlight on an issue that has grown over several decades, that of forced migration. However, it is prudent to note that urban discussions on forced migration are neither new, nor novel. But the scale and complexity of the problem makes it difficult for scholar to study it with a clear exploration of the urban dimension of it (Darling, 2016).

Chapter II Not Just Passing Through 1

Amsterdam London

Brussels Calais

Paris

Lyon

Sanre Marseille

Leyenda: City Port Hotspot Sites Rout by Land Rout by Sea

Central and Eastern Mediterranean migration routes and transit cities. Source: Italian Ministry of Interior. Parassita magazine

Stockholm Copenhagen Hamburg Berlin

Frankfurt

Viena Munich

Slovenia

Trieste

Serbia Milan Bologna Croatia

Genova

Istambul

Ancona

emo

Tehran

Macedonia Idomeni

Baghdad

Thessaloniki

Rome

Bari Brindisi

Naples Salerno

Taranto Patras Crotone

Izmir

Athens

Cagliari Palermo Trapani Agrigento

Reggio Calabria

Bodrum

Catania Pozzallo Tunes

Khartum

Cairo

Guiba

Mogadishu

Tripoli Lampedusa

Sabha Tamanrasset

Agadez Nâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Djamena

2.1 A Transit Country? 1

Hundreds of thousands of refugees, and smaller numbers of economic migrants, are arriving on the shores of south and southeastern Europe. Most of those arriving in Greece and Italy have no interest in staying in either of these two countries. Migrants who try to cross it face the consequences of conflicting national interests and the dishonest implementation of European laws. Despite this, most of people try to move on irregularly, hiding from registration centers and moving across the country clandestinely. However, when around September of 2015 some European countries started to tighten border controls it made this situation more chaotic, forcing refugees, whether fingerprinted or not, to stay in Italy. For instance, Austria and Germany have attempted to isolate themselves from the refugee crisis in the Mediterranean by increasingly monitoring their borders and putting pressure on Italy to help them keep migrants out. Since Italy is unable to cope with a so high number of arrivals 2 , refugees are able in most cases to avoid this practice. In some cases, however, often by force, the fingerprints are taken and once arrived in northern countries they are sent back in Italy or the first country in which they were obliged to release their fingerprints. Therefore Italy, as well as many north African and Eastern countries, can be considered as a transit country 3 or just short stay of refugees since it’s not considered a country of asylum. In fact, for some people who arrived in Italy it is not important that the state considered them refugees, but that the country hoped for resettlement accept them as soon as possible. Although the term ‘transit migration’ has a long history dating back to the movement of refugees out of German occupied Europe during the Second World War,

1 Marconi, Giovanna, 2010. Not Just Passing Through: International Migrants in cities of “Transit Countries”. SSIIM paper No. 6. 2https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2016/06/13/is-italy-the-new-greece-new-trends-in-europesmigrant-crisis/ 3 Country concerned by migratory flows passing through. With the expression, it is therefore defined as the country (or countries) other than that of origin crossed by a migrant to get to your destination country

Chapter II Not just passing Through

only recently it became a matter of relevant concern for the discourse on international migration. The countries crossed by migrants during their journey and the routes used to reach their desired destination were not necessarily part of the scenario taken into consideration (Marconi, 2001). The use to which I refer may be traced to its appearance in policy documents from the early 1990s onwards to refer to largely irregular migration into the European Union (EU). It is now used, almost exclusively in a European context, to refer to actual or potential irregular migration in the broader vicinity of Europe, to the east, south-east and south (Düvell, 2006) Despite there is no single and commonly agreed category or definition for transit migration in international policy or international law, this transitoriness introduced new paradigms of different aspects of international migration, i.e. permanent vs temporary, forced vs free, legal vs illegal, assimilation vs multiculturalism (Ibidem). However, according to Aspasia Papadopoulou, transit migration shouldn’t even be considered as a migrant category since: “It is a phase that cut across migrious migrant categories: irregular migrants, asylum seekers, refugees granted asylum, regularized migrants, students, trafficked persons may all find themselves in the condition of transit at some point” (Papadopoulou, 2008). The subject in study is very complex since the condition of transit is highly dependent upon migrant’s “personal intention” of using a national territory as a gateway towards another. Therefore, the transitional aspect is impossible to pinpoint, unless the migrants themselves voice a desire to move into the territory of a different state. However, since legal entry channels are today extremely limited, illegal ways to cross borders will be necessary, thus it is highly improbable that transit migrant show up at such (M Collyer; F Düvell; H de Hass, 2012). Information extracted a posteriori 4 on “transit experiences” just capture a glimpse of the whole picture. But this stage of emigration becomes more restricted when it comes to forced migration, especially in European countries, since staying or continuing their journey it’s merely not a matter of choice, as , leaving the “would-be” transit country often ends up not

4 When transit through a certain country has already happened.

being so easy nor affordable. Furthermore, transit migration not only has become a growing concern for the European Union and the United States (Marconi, 2001), but it is also increasingly central in the migration policy-making. However, the problematization of “what happens on the middle” is patently not functional to understand and to cope with the effects and the impacts the presence of temporary migrants has on the cities and societies of the so called “transit country”. But rather it is an instrument to stop the last crossing towards their final destination. Certainly, a high level of territorial mobility is characteristics of the dynamics of forced migration and despite the willingness of refugees and asylum seekers to continue towards norther countries, places of transitions turn into “concrete” livability and “transit” is hence transformed into an insecure type of long-term settlement. Inherently, this condition affects the struggle for integration into society and the way in which the process of inclusion and exclusion are institutionalized (Newman, 2006). Categorizing external neighbors countries as “transit countries” it is used as an strategy of to legitimize putting pressure on the persuade them to collaborate in filtering migration flows and readmitting intercepted irregular migrants (Marconi, 2010) and as a consequent increasing clandestine and illegal situations. Stricter border control and gatekeeping efforts made by transit countries merely channeled undocumented migration to other routes, forcing migrant to choose longer and more hazardous routes to reach their destination. Since each new enhancement of border control raises the difficulties and cost of travel and makes smuggling fare higher, many migrants in transit get stranded for long periods, hence, transit is transform into and insecure type of long-term settlement. Mainly living in cities in which main urban areas are crucial hubs of the transitional territories networks also serving as a way to remain invisibles 5 Some of the main urban areas in transit countries become the starting point of the process of resettlement of the ongoing population, given that it is there where they stablish more solid networks. But the lack of awareness of this situation and the absence

5 “Thus, a vicious circle in which institutional invisibility feeds intentional invisibility and vice-.versa […] hence, they are not taken into consideration as part of the urban population in local policy-making and are de facto excluded from the “right to the city”(Marconi, 2010).

Chapter II Not just passing Through

of adequate immigration policies increase precarious living conditions and problems of social, spatial and economic exclusion. Lacking the very right to be there, foreign residents are more vulnerable than the local poor to social and spatial exclusion as well as severe exploitation, harassment and infringement of their human right (Marconi, 2005). Ostanel observed, with reference to migrants in cities of â&#x20AC;&#x153;transit countriesâ&#x20AC;?, that they adopt an intentional invisibility behavior because they are under constant fear of apprehension, internment or deportation, and then have to devise unconventional practices of incorporation into the local society (Ostanel, 2010). This intentional invisibility boosts the vicious circle that feeds institutional invisibility, which deprives them of the right to have rights and negatively affects not only the use of places and spaces, but also the access to the services provided in a given territory. Therefore, the transit terminology is used here mainly as shorthand for more significant changes describe within the relativity of its meaning, which deserve a detail attention to understand boarder repercussions on the geopolitical fabric 6 .

6 Te effect on the territories through where they travel and the cities where they settle is vast and clearly, this makes it important for architects and urban planners to include the transitional caracter of forced migration in research and analysis on processes of social-territorial transformation

2.2 The Italian Paradox As previously mention the main landing places in Italy are marked as crossroads for transitional migratory routes, but also the first contacts for migrants with urban centers in continental Europe, as well as the starting points for further migrations among the Member States. However, many times these places become the internment of a failure plan to reach the aspired destination. In the Italian debate on immigration issues, the phenomenon of landings is definitely one of the most debated by the public and by the media. During 2015, in particular, the attention was focused on the theme of â&#x20AC;&#x153;refugeeâ&#x20AC;?: where to accommodate applicants, avoiding conflicts with the local population and waste of resources 1 . Yet, Italy is the only EU Member Country without an organic legislation on asylum matter 2 (Marchetti, 2008:23); therefore, this institutional dysfunction leads to a paradoxical situation where, in a framework of economic crisis, a country that used to be a major area of emigration, a similar influx might threaten the efficiency of a national asylum system with limited financial resources. Which leads to unbalances at national level of the refugeesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; geographical sphere, characterize by the polarization of accommodation and by the inadequacy of the system. In order to fully understand the refugee crisis in Italy and its impact, it is essential to develop a rooted perceptive of the context of Italy as a hosting country. According to Eurostat data, of the 1.255.600 estimated first time asylum seekers that applied for international protection in Europe, 1.015.078 (source: UNHCR) arrived by see through the Mediterranean routs. Of which just 153,842 foreigners were rescued or landed on the shores of Italy as of December 31, 2015; 9% less than in 2014, with 170,100 people

1 Ministry of interior: Report on Reception of Migrants and Refugees in Italy, 2015 2 There is no specific Italian law protecting the right of asylum, but the legal system in this field has been evolving during the last 20 years, reaching a greater consciousness in the last decade with Law no. 189/2002 and its following modifications, and the legislative decrees no. 251/2007 and no. 25/2008, through which a more organic asylum framework has developed, even though it still needs improvement (Centro Studi e Ricerche IDOS, 2009).

Chapter II Not just passing Through

that landed (Source: Sprar), and even less than the number of landings in Greece in just the first 4 months of 2016. Why is then called an “unprecedented crisis”? Moreover, the Mediterranean is also confirmed to be a very dangerous route: there were about 3,771 victims last year. Then in 2015 the refugees, particularly Syrians, have used more the “Balkan” route, considered more safe and economical i.e. concerning migrant smuggling networks. Of the total of arrivals in Italy the claims for asylum were 83,245 (+136% compared to 63 655 in 2014). Meanwhile in other European countries, like Germany it’s registered the highest number of first time applicant with 441,800 claimants 3 (Source: Eurostat). This tells us about two key aspects of the migration emergency. Firstly, the weakness of the reception system in Italy, even if the number of arrival decreased, it seems rather “difficult” to Italy to cope with the situation. The second aspect concerns the gap between arrivals and asylum claim 4 , which is relatively low but confirms that forced migrants have as a final destination other countries with better welfare and quality of reception. But that indeed is the issue. The “numbers” on their own are not that shocking, what counts is context and what happens next. Reacting to the emergency does not only centers on the “temporary” of a reception camp and often only implementing ad hoc measures of assistance, but what it’s also needed is the acknowledgment of the long term responses to these challenges. Yet, after their immediate needs, the EU seems to lack clear policy objectives to stimulate long term solutions for the displaced around the world.In the meantime, it seems that the Italian juridical framework is extremely fragmented and incomplete; lacking stable and organic provisions which could manage forced migration fluxes. Italian authorities act in a distracted and indifferent manner in front of this situation and responses have little to do with human rights. Therefore a wise policy on asylum cannot be limited to acting only on the side of the reception of asylum seekers (arisen obligation from the implementation of EU directives), but it must take action to support the process of social and economic

3 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/7203832/3-04032016-AP-EN.pdf/790eba01-381c-4163-bcd2a54959b99ed6 4 Asylum application represent 46% less than the arrivals registered in the shores of Italy (Eurostat).

Chapter II Not just passing Through

inclusion of those which the Italy has recognized a right to protection. In particular in Italy that, like other southern European countries, does not have a well develop welfares system. 2.2.1 Countries of origin and routes Regarding the countries of origin of asylum seekers there is a difference between the Italian and European situation. It is important to emphasize the profound changes of the geography of departures and migration routes; in particular, as regards to Italy, it is noticeable the accentuation of the countries of sub-Saharan Africa range between the nationalities that use the central Mediterranean route, thus with a greater complexity of problems related to the assessment of applications international protection, reception and integration (Gruppo di studio sul sistema di accoglienza, 2015). Smuggling networks remain well established in Libya, where migrants gather before crossing the sea. Among the asylum seekers in Italy in 2015 override those from African countries, the first five nationalities are Eritrea (38,612), followed by Nigeria (21,886), Somalia (12,176), Sudan (8909), Gambia (8123), showing how the geography of migratory departures is changing profoundly in comparison with 2014. Following the central Mediterranean rout, boats are also landing on the shores of Apulia and Calabria, which mainly depart from Greece and Turkey. Although not a major point of entry for irregular migrants, the open sea route to southern Italy remains a source of particular concern to border authorities. Large cargo ships started to sail with Syrian families on board from Mersin, Turkey, directly to Italy. A related data is the fact that asylum seekers from North Africa are not among the most important national groups to have applied for asylum in Europe. But it is imperative to highlight that even if the majority of the countries of origin are affected by poverty and are not officially in war, the regulations regarding international protection require that each case is examined specifically, considering whether to return home poses a risk to the person. Consequently, given the complexity of the phenomena and their interconnection is very difficult to distinguish between “forced migrants” and “economic migrants” observing only the country of origin.

Chapter II Not just passing Through

2.2.2 Gender and age If we observe the composition of applicants for asylum by gender and age, it is evident that Italy presents a rather unique situation in Europe: a low proportion of women (14%) and minors (10.7%), significantly lower than the average 5 . Of these almost 10 thousand women and children arrived in Italy in the last twelve months, the highest number is represented by the Nigerian with 3,915 appearances which corresponds to 21.9% of migrants from the African country. In second place there are Ukrainian women who represent half with 2,325 (49.7%) of applicants for asylum in Italy in Kiev. Among other national groups the gap between men and women is abysmal. From Pakistanis arrived in the last year the males are almost 10 thousand equal to 98.6%, Gambian refugees 8,435 (98.9%), the Senegalese 6,395 (98.3%) and those of Bangladesh even 6,170 men and only 40 women asylum seekers, or 0.6%. The gender composition certainly depends on the nationality of origin, and especially migratory strategies that citizen of each individual country use. For instances, those fleeing from the war in Syria, escapes with the whole family, because the danger is for everyone. Those fleeing from military service, such as young Eritreans, run by itself, so it is easier for young men who are the majority of migrants.

5 In the period between December 2014 and November 2015, the Eurostat certifies that asylum seekers in Europe were 1,242,155 and among them there are 339,955 women, or a percentage equal to 27% of the entire population of the refugees arrived.

2.3The reception system in Italy As previously mentioned, the Italian legal system is still, after 70 years, lacking a law implementing the constitutional right to political asylum in the Republic. Therefore it lacks a systematic and complete law guaranteeing this right and that guarantees it in a homogeneous and stable way on the national territory (Pepe, 2012). The Geneva Convention is the basic text of the Italian legislation and establishes the essential minimum standards for the treatment of refugees 1 , leaving Member States any discretion to grant more favorable treatment. In Italy fundamental obligations in ensuring international protection are provided also by art. 10 of the Italian Constitution: “The legal status of foreigners is regulated by law in conformity with international provisions and treaties”. Moreover, the evaluation of international protection of asylum-seekers is now entrusted, through administrative channels, to the Territorial Commission for the Recognition of International Protection. (Ministero dell’Interno). The right of asylum is regulated by national laws and European directives. The terms ‘asylum seeker ’ and ‘refugee’ refer to different legal statuses. Asylum seekers are people who have requested asylum and are awaiting decisions on their cases. They are not allowed to work until their cases are processed or six months after the submission of the requests for asylum. In the meantime, and until the claimant receives the response about his/her request, the State is responsible for providing social welfare, accommodation, education and professional training to support their socio-economic inclusion. Taking a closer look to the legal framework, three main laws regulated the matter of immigration through the time in Italy, while two legal instruments directly acknowledge international and European Directives in asylum matter. A first attempt in the adaptation to international guidelines and to communitarian directives in the field of immigration was law n. 39, so called Martelli law that dates back 28 February 1990, providing the definition of the status of refugee, organization of migratory flows from abroad, clarification of

1 The acceptance for asylum seekers and refugees is a fundamental right which corresponds to the legal obligation for EU Member States to “ensure a decent standard of living and comparable living conditions in all Member States” (European Directive 2003/9 / EC).

Chapter II Not just passing Through

entrance and rejection procedures, residency permit in Italy. However, after substantial changes occurred on the international geo-political assets in the 1990’s, a reform of the immigration law became necessary in Italy. In 1998, legislators Livia Turco and Giorgio Napolitano fostered a new, broader law concerning the whole matter of immigration, which flowed into the so called Consolidated Act on the Matter of Immigration (Testo unico delle disposizioni concernenti la disciplina ell’immigrazione e norme sulla condizione dello straniero). Later on, promoted by two influential personalities of the Italian right scene at that time (ministers Umberto Bossi and Gianfranco Fini) the law 30 July 2002, n.189 introduced important modifications to this legislative instrument. At this point, the legal body was leaned towards a more controlled and repressed framework. In November 2007 and in January 2008 two Legislative Decrees (DL 251/2007 and DL 25/2008) were issued: they acknowledged European norms in asylum matters and tried to conform concretely to the diverse procedures applied by each Member State in examining demands and granting international protection, aiming at a unique shared model. On the sole topic of asylum, the current legal framework (that is, the combination of the diverse clauses and provisions concerning asylum in the legal framework mentioned above) is mainly disciplined by the law n. 286/1998 (Bossi-Fini Law), which predicted concretely the creation of seven (currently ten) Territorial Commissions for the acknowledgment of refugee status. To the present day the legal framework has been object of continual modifications, which are intended to improve the binding processes of migrants’ reception. In the 2016 new modifications were updated related to the aspects of Expulsion and Identification Center (CIE) and the implementation of hotspots. However, many authors (Belloni 2013, Bolzoni 2015, Gargiulo 2015) agree with the fact the Italian juridical framework seems very fragmented and incomplete, lacking in stable and organic provisions which could regulate forced migration fluxes, in “normal” situations and during emergencies (a fact widely proved by the most recent happenings related to the so called Emergency North Africa). Such legislative disorder translates on the decisional and administrative aspects into an overlapping of competences, roles and different actors involved, producing incomprehension and misunderstanding, conflicting the relations between refugee and institutions. The act of concealing and making themselves invisible, hiding in the recesses a city offers; the spatial dispersion, with regards to the Territorial Commission of competence for the examination of the asylum 69

Chapter II Not just passing Through

request, towards regional or local labor markets; the progressive criminalization of sustenance activities, and the consequent stigmatization of migrants which may follow: all these issues may be directly related to the difficulties to refer to one single and effective legislation for the regularization and integration process of migrants at the national level. Moreover, in the analysis of the reception system what emerges in a clear way is the variety of the centers in which it is conformed, differentiated by the nature of the entity manager (institutional or private social), to the objectives (first or second reception), for the approach (welfarist or formation), of nature more or less coercive integration, for the national or local nature of the network system within which the reception center is entered, the structural characteristics (collective centers or individual units), for the type of services provided, as well as for the accommodation capacity. The reception system in Italy is managed by the Italian Interior Ministry and is based on different types of structures (Image x): 4 reception centers (CPSA, Cda, Cara), 5 Centers for Identification and Expulsion (CIE), 1,861 temporary structures, 430 Protection system projects asylum seekers and refugees (Sprar); which by virtue of the different functions have differentiated organizational models, expense and permanence times. Just arrived in the Italian territory, asylum seekers that present themselves to the authorities are accommodated in first reception structures - governmental centers and after submitting the application for asylum, the Local Government assesses the request and ensures the availability of places in the system of protection of asylum seekers and refugees (SPRAR). In case of unavailability in the facilities they are arranged in the identification centers or CARA, for the time strictly necessary to acquire the availability in a reception center. When the immigrant becomes an Asylum Seeker, he/her enters a protection program which, independently from the final decision, should last up to six months. In this period asylum seekers can be lodged into reception accommodation infrastructures, access health assistance facilities and enter the labor market. However, this scenario does not always becomes real, since reception places are no sufficient to satisfied the number of asylum seekers, there are delays in the answer â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s procedure to the requests, migrants may choose to move away of the reception centers since the conditions of the structure sometime are not adequate, not even under basic housing standards. Similarly, this situation repeats for those who already have a humanitarian protection status. 71

Chapter II Not just passing Through

The Italian reception system has been characterized by a progressive emergency logic because the institutions have little money to be able to think about a real integration and support project for all (Molfetta, 2008) and the facilities are constantly over crowded. But concerns about Italyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s response to refugees extend beyond the financials. In the face of rising numbers of migrants, Italy has struggled to maintain humane conditions for these people and human right violations take place in these processes. Furthermore, insufficient is not only the reception system integration, but also the bureaucratic path and the timing related to the reality of asylum seekers who obviously also cause serious delays on reception, negatively influencing each other. It was attempted to deal with the emergency mode in which the receiving system operates with the national operational plan of July 10, 2014 focused on the search for a more flexible system toward the needs of those entered the circuit of the reception system. In this sense, on June 17, 2015 was approved the National Operational Plan that among the various objectives seeks to monitor the receiving system and raise the quality standards offered at different facilities. With regard to the duration of the examination procedure, the LD 142/2015 provides that the Territorial Commission for the Recognition of International Protection (CTRPI) interviews the applicant within 30 days after having received the application and decides in the 3 following working days. When the CTRPI is unable to take a decision in this time limit and needs to acquire new elements, the examination procedure is concluded within six months of the lodging of the application.

Chapter II Not just passing Through

2.3.1Asylum responses As reported in the latest UNHCR report, in 2015 Italy has received 86.722 asylum applications; a 54% over the total 153.842 arrived, with a variation of response of 5% to 7% applications per month. Of 86.722 examined claims (including some from previous years) the 60% have received a denial. However, 38% were positive decisions, divided as follows: 5% of the persons were granted refugee status; 13,1% a subsidiary protection, a 21,9% a residence permit for humanitarian reason. It is evident like today Italy presents a situation that inevitably exposes the difficulties and problems of the Italian policies on immigration, recently centered on the profile of asylum seekers and refugees. As indicated, the lack of legal status has serious negative consequences on both the hosting state as well as the refugee. The limited legal status of a refugee means that they lose their most basic freedom of movement, presents challenges to registering with the UNHCR, leaving the refugee without access to the most basic service. This eventually increases the risk of abuse and exploitation. Whereas for the hosting state, the lack of legal status among present refugees, entails to misguided assessments and in return inefficient response plans, producing more economic burdens. Therefore, it is possible that this phenomenon can be explained, not only with attraction mechanisms to other EU countries on the basis of family ties, community or economic, but is also strongly connected with shortage of reception paths immediately after the recognition of protection and the lack medium-term plans for social inclusion in Italy. One of the main problems concerns the timing of the acceptance or not of the asylum application. Whereas each question must be analyzed individually (the country of origin is not the only parameter), it is important to ensure reliable and rapid time to consider the request. The State finds ways to postpone decisions on the legal status excluding refugees from a citizenship, which make them invisible and propends to â&#x20AC;&#x153;abandoningâ&#x20AC;?. Another issue that affects the reception system concerns the numbers, i.e. how does a reception system that has a maximum of 99.096 places (of which 71.382 are first-aid reception, then of very short duration) do to receive an average of 150.000 arrivals each year? Therefore due to the shortage of available places, especially in major urban areas, creates a situation of serious social marginalization of a large part 75

Chapter II Not just passing Through

of international protection beneficiaries, whose request for assistance, often unheard, falls immediately on service the management of socio services of the territory. The State’s obligation to provide immediately to provide asylum seekers “material reception conditions to ensure a standard of living adequate for the health and livelihood” can in fact be affected by structural limitations (such as primarily the lack of jobs reception) that produce a failure of reception effect. Given the situation there have been created alternative forms of reception (in addition to the SPRAR network) in a more informal way, fragmentizing ever more the reception system. Despite this, what it is even more noticeable is the informal solution out of any governmental institution management. There are increasingly common survival and precarious solutions in the city’s “non-lieux”, in informal spaces, degrading and marginalized areas, at high risk of deviancy and recruitment by organized crime. In these marginal areas of the city there is a high number of “invisible refugees”, deprived of any right, left prey to distorted information and abandonment. In this spaces, thus, there is a waiting condition and exile for the forced migrants, where the reception areas “are envisaged as exception spaces 2 within which the foreigner lives in a condition of suspension of the rights 3 ” (Turano, 2016).

2 Giorgio Agambe, State of exeption, 2003 . 3 Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer. Sovereign power and bare life, 1995

Chapter II Not just passing Through

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

“D ove vivono?”

“Quelli residenti in Italia fittano delle case. Se abitano qua, non hanno problemi. Ma ci sono anche quelli che...Ora ti faccio vedere. Svolta a destra alla prossima.” Imbocchiamo un stradina. Procedendo, l’asfalto si tramuta in pietrisco, poi in terra. Mi dic di fermarmi. Scendiamo dall’auto e proseguiamo a piedi per un uliveto. Poco lontano una baracca, simile a quelle che ho visto a Nardò, ma più grande e isolata. Un cubo di tela, legno e plastica di una ventina di metri quadrati. Intorno non c’è tracci di servizi igienici, non c’è un pozo. “Hotel superlusso”, esclamo e lui ride. “Di catapecchie come questa ce ne sono parecchie. Qui ci entrano in dieci.” “C’hai vissuto anche tu?” “Si, fino all’incidente” dice abbassando la vista sulla gamba malandata. “Ogni anno aumentano, perchè aumentiamo noi.” [...] La domanda di braccianti è talmente flessibile che anche le condizioni abitative ne risentono. La baracca che abbiamo visitato può essere edificaa e demolita in un’ora, quasi senza lasciare traccia, ma perchè un immigrato possa viverci deve essere stato condotto sul posto da qualcuno. Sagnet, Y. Palmisano, L. (2015) Getto Italia. I braccianti stranieri tra caporalato e sfruttamento (pg. 53) Roma: Fandango Libri

On the Left: Home to go, 2001 . Photo © Adrian Paci. Peter Blum Gallery, New York.

3.1 Which Informality? From the moment the forced migrants arrive to the Italian territory it becomes clear the different stages of informality in which the subject is immersed, within the reception system. Due to the constant emergency optic in which it has been addressed 1 ; generated by the apparent jurisdictional fragmentation and the technical incapability 2 , there are informal stages through the process of inclusion. The implementation of the “hot spot” that has generated an increasing number of clandestine and refused entries to immigrants “with the order to leave the territory of the State within 7 days”, leaving them private of access to the asylum system, which has only increase the population of the informal settlement and other marginalization situation. According to the Italian Ministry of Interior the national reception system has not been able to cope with the increasing number of international protection requests with the existing ordinary structures of first and secondary reception, having to recourse to the formation of alternative structures of extraordinary order. The situation gets even more critical by the extension of the period of stay within the structures, which can go from 9 to 18 months. Hence, if the number of the ordinary reception structures active is 430 and their capacity reaches to about 21800 per year it could only accommodate 43600 .i.e. only a 50 % of the total asylum applicants on 2015 3 (86.722 Asylum application since January 1 st to December 31 st 2015). Already in 2011, with the activation of the program “Emergenza

1 The Italian reception system, until 2014, was not well structured neither predisposed for the rise of the migratory fluxes (Ministry of Interior, 2015). 2 The weakness of concrete actions under the territorial reception projects, particularly those in temporary and extraordinary. “The CAS is operated mostly by people with no experience in conservation programs and integrated reception for asylum seekers and refugees, most importantly in the absence of clear and uniform guidelines for the entire national territory”. ( Medici Senza Frontiere, 2016) 3 The programmatic document of the Interior Ministry “Italian Roadmap” of September 2015 foresees an increase in ordinary places for first reception to the amount of 15,550 by the end of 2016 and secondary reception (SPRAR) to the amount of 32,000 in the first months of 2016 and at least 40,000 in 2017.

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

nord Africa 4 ” it was necessary to increase the reception places, recurring to the creation of 26.000 extraordinary places. Early in 2014, the extraordinary reception centers 5 (CAS) were opened, managed by the Prefecture and by the end of 2015 “there were almost 80,000 places in these structures, more than three times those ordinary”. However the reception models, based on macro-structures on the outskirts of the city, does not achieve basic standard nor allow concrete opportunities of integration, thus, these characteristics of the structures often are risk factors for the worsening of discomfort conditions. Hence, here it is evident the phenomenon of permeability by which a major portion of forced migrants 6 , in each step, drips out the system to the informality: some, by motu proprio and others forced by the inconsistency of the legal framework implementation and by the inefficiency in the management of the system, evading or being excluded from the regular channels of the process. For instance, those that applied or are waiting to apply but due the duration of the legal procedures and the incapacity of the institutions don’t have any kind of protection, and migrants to whom is roughly denied the access to the asylum procedure and reception measures provided for asylum seekers with “hotspot” procedure. Secondly, the ones that are forced to go out without their process of social inclusion (housing and work) had been accomplished 7 . Likewise, there is a third type of subject that constitutes this vulnerable population: those who have moved away voluntarily from governmental first reception centers to evade identification procedures and “Dublin

4 The Prime Ministerial Decree of 12 February 2011 declared “the state of emergency in the country in relation to the exceptional influx of citizens from the countries of North Africa”, to be managed by the Civil Defense through the ordinance n. 3933 written by President of the Council of Ministers. Since January 1, 2013 all operations have become again part of the ordinary management of the Interior Ministry competence (OPCM n. 33 of 28 December 2012). 5 According to the latest figures from the Interior Ministry, of about 100 000 migrants and asylum seekers received nationwide, 70 percent is housed in a Cas (extraordinary reception center), and just 22 percent in a Sprar (for System asylum seekers and refugees) 6 “Just over 5% of the number of asylum seekers completes the procedure for determining refugee status. The majority goes away of the centers, scattering illegally on Italian territory” (Perriccioli, 2005). 7 32.8% of outgoing beneficiaries has abandoned the reception of its own initiative, 30.1% on account of delay, 4.9% was removed, 0.3% chose the option of voluntary assisted return(source: ANCI, Italian Caritas, Cittalia, Fondazione Migranti, SPRAR, UNHCR, report on international protection in Italy in 2015).

A group of young people from Eritrea look out from the door of the Reception Center in Pozzallo, blocked with a van to prevent people from escaping. Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

regulation”. It’s enough to see the number of landings in Italy and compare them with the number of people present at the reception center to understand it. Therefore, it is this resultant informality to which attention is paid, which is followed by the formation of those physical and spatial manifestation of the lack of structured reception solutions, in the seeking of “informal sanctuary” (see chapter 1). These are form as the result of the occupation of public or private places (out of the state’s institution and or at the margins of the law) meant for “temporal shelters”.

First phase IRREGULAR STAY

Second phase ASYLUM SEEKERS

Migrants do not have any access neither to public nor to private accommodation, any possibility to get health care or to enter the labour market.

Migrants can be lodged into reception accommodation infrastructures, access health assistance facilities and enter the labour market.

Hot spot

First line of reception

Travel to the EU

Tries to continue journey to norther countries

Irregular Stay

Hiding from authorities

Lack of places Waiting times

Self-coping strategies

Stages of informality Based on Belloniâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Timeline showing the different status of forced migrants and related accessibility to public service

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Third phase PENDING CASE Within 20 days of the request, a temporary residence permit is issued with valid until the recognition of refugee status. *

Fourth phase (a) REFUGEES Migrants can access public accommodation, health care and enter the labour market. Their rights are comparable to those of natives, except from the right to vote. **

Extraordinary reception

Final decision Second line of reception Waiting times

Expiration residence permit

Social/Ethnic Networks * Little more than 5% of the entire number of asylum seekers completes the procedure for determining the refugee status. The majority it moves away from the centers, scattering illegally on the Italian territory.

es (Belloni, 2013)

**Fourth phase (b) REJECTED ASYLUM SEEKERS Cannot access reception accommodation infrastructures, enter the labour market or be provided with health care. The denial for international protection brings them back to the moment 1, when they arrived in the hosting country but did not entered yet any international protection programme.

Informal Solutions

3.1 Out of Sight As well as in an international level, in the Italian context, a large part of the refugee research consists on reports by human rights organizations (Medici per I diriti umani, Medici senza frontiere, LasciateCIEntrare), which document and expose human rights abuses with the intention of compelling governments to protect refugees and promote their wellbeing. There are few studies of non-humanitarian fields that address the current issue of forced migration that contribute to a theoretical understanding of the dynamics of it. Therefore, the resorting to the type of source previously mentioned to try to describe the implications in the field of architecture is complicated, but to the extent of this research is relevant. On April, 2016 Doctors without borders released a report called “Fuori Campo” where they denounce the life conditions in the reception and expulsion centers in Italy and that outside of the reception system at least 10.000 people, between asylum seekers and refugees live in informal settlement with unacceptable conditions. The study is the result of a research conducted in 2015 through a nationwide mapping of informal settlements inhabited mostly by refugees never entered the reception institutional system, or come out without their process of social inclusion had accomplished. The problem of informal settlement is usually considered as a problem of developing Countries, and when we think about slums we think about Brazilian favelas or African endless shantytowns. Nevertheless, according to the report by Medici Senza Frontiere 1 (Doctors without Borders) the resulting map of the research shows an Italy field from south to north of these survival practices, inside and on the edge of the city. However, this case is different from what it is commonly known as informal settlement; the refugee’s illegal occupation is much diversified and each situation has built settlement with different characteristics. Therefore, the term “Informal Sanctuary” it is used here to

1 On April, 2016 Doctors without borders released a report called “Fuori Campo” where they denounce the life conditions in the reception and expulsion centers in Italy and that outside of the reception system at least 10.000 people, between asylum seekers and refugees live in informal settlement with unacceptable conditions. The study is the result of a research conducted in 2015 through a nationwide mapping of informal settlements inhabited mostly by refugees never entered the reception institutional system, or come out without their process of social inclusion had accomplished.

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

describe this specific case of settlements (see chapter 1). On the report Fuori Campo (out of sight) the settlements subject of the analysis are define as “those living situations with a prevalent population type of the above mentioned, characterized by forms more or less accentuated of self-management by the resident population and no payment of rent” 2 . The picture depicted by the report “Fuori Campo” is full of slums, occupied buildings, tents and outdoor sites, “tolerated” or ignored by local authorities, which are present in both urban and in rural areas; the living conditions are described as unacceptable; “in half of the sites there is neither water nor light, even where there are women and children” ( Medici Senza Frontiere, 2016). People subject of this report, mostly asylum and of international and humanitarian protection, are about ten thousand, occupants in eleven Italian regions from north to south: the most important sites that can be mentioned are Turin, Rome, Naples, the provinces of Foggia and Bari, but also Trieste, Udine and Gorizia. Even if the number is rather exiguous, it is more than enough be a warning for what it may happen to one hundred thousand migrants currently hosted in the government centers and to those who will arrive in the coming months. Some of the settlements have existed for years, ignored by the institutions, even if most of the occupiers have some form of international or humanitarian protection: Regularly on the territory. The increasing number of immigrants it’s what makes this situation more concerning because they, too, at the end of the hosting period, “could go to feed the pockets of marginalization of which informal settlements constitute only one of the manifestations.” Once again the outcome of the research “Fuori Campo” depicts a paradoxical situation between finding a refuge and the jurisdictional state of those in the search. A situation that ends up transforming into invisibility and exclusion for many asylum seekers; particularly arising in urban centers 3 . Waiting to get international protection, but

2 (Medici Senza Frontiere, 2016)

“58% of refugees live in cities. The traditional image of refugees living in sprawling tents no longer tells the true story of refugee movements in the 21 century. Most refugees now make their ways to the cities as refugee camps present extremely poor living and security conditions.” http://urban-refugees.org/

Homeless

Reception Center

Hospitality

Hotel

Non-EU immigrants

$ Squats

Accommodations offered by the employer

Renting

Buying

Housing typology of non-EU immigrants Source:Immigrati e senza casa : i problemi, i progetti, le politiche. Antonio Tosi, 1993 92

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

especially after obtaining it, most of the forced migrants find themselves to survive in the street or in a destitute condition of marginalization in their informal accommodation solutions. The refugee dilemma, on one hand complicates any path of autonomy; on the other hand raises the risk of falling prey to illegal circuits and exploitation. In some cases, implemented government policies have exacerbated their invisibility and exclusion by creating legal barriers that isolate them from the national population and livelihoods. Displaced people are commonly characterized by an uncertain physical stay with a diffuse mobility and transnationalism path based on “economic survival strategies” which cannot accurately be illustrated. Due to the socio-economical precariousness it is almost impossible for them to settle in a more stable way. Also, the aspiration to reach other European countries increases the mobility and instability of the process of settlement and integration of refugees. Hence, the type of settlements depicted in the studied could be considered of a transit nature of which, in a broader spectrum, have diverse itinerancy levels according to the legal state of the population and the migration plan 4 , yet several, unfortunately, end up being long term accommodation for many. Given that situations and context vary significantly, the socio-spatial implications are different in each case and the economic, social and political impact manifest in particular ways. Therefore, the cases exposed are just a small representativeness of a wider phenomenon, yet allow depicting a reality that the national government should recognized. According to the map, the location of the informal settlement disperse through the urban fabric, but mainly concentrates in the norther part, and it corresponds to the main urbanized cities. It is no surprise to find that the majority of the refugees’ informal settlements are in the main urban centers and metropolitan regions, since according to UNHCR more than half (58%) of the world refugee population under their mandate now lives in urban settings, since in the metropolitan areas there are higher opportunities for social and work inclusion and presence of communities of origin. Nevertheless, it is also noticeable that there are some settlements in the innermost part. In the southern part the patters of the location corresponds to the main entry point and in some of the cases i.e. the settlement of Bari, Foggia and Crotone, to the location of the first-time reception centers,

4 Some of the forced migrants have declared to intent to reach certain countries, even if their migration plan becomes irrelevant due to the difficulties and legal barries.. 93

Triesteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Silos settlement. Photo ÂŠ Francesco Bruni, 2015

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

nonetheless, there are also settlements in cities in rural areas associated to agricultural activities. On the northern parts instead, the cities with a presence of forced migrants in these informal settlements could be associated to an exit point to the northern part of Europe, although the north-eastern cities are also related to arrivals from the Balkans routs (Udine, Gorizia and Trieste). The mapped informal settlement are defined on the document as “(…) those housing situations with prevailing population of the type indicated above (refugees and asylum seekers), characterized by more or less accentuated forms of self-management by the inhabitants and no payment of rent. There were excluded from the frame population settlements with a number of foreign exclusively linked to seasonal agricultural work” In total there have been reported 35 settlements across the territory in 19 cities of which: “the investigation revealed the existence of two different types of settlement. On the one hand those in outdoor locations, of migrants just entered in Italy and waiting for access to the asylum procedure and reception system provided by law; on the other, those in disused buildings, containers, slums, present in Italy for several years, of those that never entered the reception system or exit without having concluded an effective process of social inclusion.” It is imperative to mention the unbalance distribution of the examples, which have an over exposition in the south and non on the eastern central area. Hence, this emphasizes the figurative character of the map, which it’s aimed to highlight a current situation that has not been attended as it should by the public actors. It is noticeable, that the data collection period is short and that also corresponds to the months with the highest number of landings in Italy in 2015. Nevertheless, this increasing number of arrival it was only the trigger for the research, since it would have passed very little time for these new immigrants to settle in these places. Due to this, the distribution of refugees by arrival period is mainly composed of those who arrived in 2011 in accordance with the “Emergenza Nord Africa”. Likewise, the estimated population varies significantly for each settlement, stablishing a minimum and a maximum number of inhabitants. The total population, estimated with a minimum and maximum value, goes from 6030 to 8840, not a really high number in relation with the arrivals but, given the uncertainties and difficulties on the research of it, is enough to be considered as a sample to determine a pattern to decipher a first approach to the situation of the informal settlement. 95

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

It is imperative to mention the unbalance distribution of the examples, which have an over exposition in the south and non on the eastern central area. Hence, this emphasizes the figurative character of the map, which it’s aimed to highlight a current situation that has not been attended as it should by the public actors.These settlements have been formed as a result of occupation of degraded properties in disuse and are mainly self-managed by the inhabitants themselves with, generally, a reduced contribution (usually limited to the first phase of occupation) by activist groups engaged in disputes for the right to housing. These settlements have a prevalent population of people that already obtained the refugee status and are present in metropolitan areas, as well as peri-urban and rural areas. The majority of the occupation date back to when the program of extraordinary reception “Emergenza Nord Africa” was closed. The outdoor settlements consist in unplanned practices of occupation of the public space while waiting for access to the government center and to the asylum procedure or outgoing transit from the government center escaping to the identification procedures. They stayed in parks and public squares, subways, rails of the railway stations, wooded areas. Overall, the majority of assessed households reside in tents or “makeshift shelters” with no services, having to resort to public services. Moreover, this informal urban phenomenon, have a form of management of absolute spontaneity to more structured organizations, defined by some self-representativeness activities and practices of resistance which develop in the interstices of the city as well as in large unoccupied facilities.According to the report, the settlements assessed were divided into 5 categories i.e. buildings, shacks, container, farmhouses and tents (figure xx); and all concern about the general living conditions which represent a high level of vulnerability. Water and sanitation infrastructure and service provision was found to be severely inadequate across all settlements. They are characterized by their inability to access or effectively use a whole range of basic facilities and resources which would improve well-being and puts people them in a position where they need to take advantage of all available opportunities, even if illegal. Particular groups and individuals often suffer a disproportionate ‘disadvantage’ because of their identity, which is physically represented in urban contexts by the extremely precarious and marginalized conditions of these informal settlements.

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

100

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

101

102

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

103

104

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

105

106

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

107

108

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

109

Code: N6. Brescia Occupation Casa dei diritti Don Gallo Photo Â© PadovaOggi, 2016

110

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Code: C3. Rome Palazzo Salaam or Hotel Africa Photo ÂŠ SĂźddeutsche Zeitung, 2015

111

Code: C4. Rome Occupation in Via Triburtina. Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

112

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Code: S1. Foggia Ghetto in Rignano Scalo. Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

113

Code: S2. Foggia Occupation in Ex Daunialat. Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

114

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Code: S3. Foggia Occupation in Borgo Mezzanone. Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

115

Code: S4. Bari Occupation in Ex Set. Photo Â© Alessandro Penso, 2015

116

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Code: S5. Bari Occupation in Ferrhotel, Photo ÂŠ Alessandro Penso, 2015

117

118

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Cases Study

hese are two very different cases on the same region: one at the center of the city, one on the margins. The actors of the first (Ex-Moi, Turin) are individuals that the city does not want to see. The actors of the second (Campo solidale, Saluzzo) are laborers hired â&#x20AC;&#x153;by the pieceâ&#x20AC;? for seasonal jobs. The two cases are important because they demonstrate that it is not a detached phenomenon, intertwining with other conditions of deprivation and reflex two extremes poles of the posible destination path to which migrants, either in their legal or illegal state, can fall in (informality seems to be the natural outcome in which to land). They are absorbed by the system and are led to a condition of marginalization, segregation and exploitation that takes place due to their vulnerability; generated by the gaps of the legal framework in which they are. The Two cases help to understand a profound transformation of the city: the city no longer as the space for the construction of rights, as it was in the past in the Western world. 119

Occupation in Ex Moi, Turin. Photo Â© Alessandro Penso, 2015

120

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Back to the Ghetto N5: Ex–MOI, former Olympic Villages. Turin The area of Ex-Moi was born with the objective to house the athletes of the Winter Olympics 2006, therefore it was part of the extraordinary urban planning strictly related for big events and financed through public spending. The project is coordinated by Benedetto Camerana that won the competitions against other four projects presented. The building are organized in a very simple way through a checkerboard system open to the hill, the buildings of six or seven floor are repeated and the design of the common public spaces is completely directed to the pedestrian. At the end of the Olympics the project expected the conversion to residential use, but this was never performed and buildings, which after a short time sat abandoned, become the symbol of speculation and enormous waste of public money, reflecting the local bad politics of construction and management 1 . Due to the uncertainty of the public actor towards the site’s fate, some of the buildings sat abandoned for seven years. Then, the property of the area changed from the Municipality of Turin to a private foundation (Fondazione Città di Torino), which is now owner of more than 50% of the quotations (Belloni & Pallotta, 2016). Saturday, March 30, 2013, about two hundred refugees from North Africa emergency occupy some of the Ex-Moi buildings or the Olympic Village in Turin. After two years of erratic management, in early spring 2013, the Piedmont region decided to conclude this experience closing the centers that had housed migrants and offer €500 per person. After a few weeks of poor accommodation then a group occupies the Ex-Moi buildings. So it began the occupations days in apartments and rooms that were once of the greatest athletes from all over the world during the Olympic Games in Torino 2006. Once again it is home to dozens of nationalities, but now the village’s residents include more than 1200 refugees and migrants from Libya to Somalia who are squatting two of its

1 “[…] some questions such as the low quality of building materials, the structures’ instability, the unsustainability of building techniques as well as the missing reuse of buildings came out and became public”. (Belloni & Pallotta, 2016)

121

5km

122

Sc. 1:100000

100

200

300

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

123

400

Residential

Ex commercial

Commercial Public Librery

Commercial Sport facilities Public School

Leisure

Occupied Buildings Students residence Public housing Physical barriers

124

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

buildings; 1200 forced migrants 2 from near 30 different ethnics. Many among the migrants are families (15% are women and more than 30 children under 10 yeard old live inside the building). Some have found a job, some others have not been able to get one, but survive by selling metal or other materials found in rubbish bins. On 7 th of April the occupation includes a third building. A few weeks later, the occupation involves four of the buildings. A dialogue starts with institutional policy to ensure at least the residence and then the basic services. Today, it is the site of one of the largest housing occupations Turin has ever seen. According to Belloni and Pallotta “the subjects are autonomous political activists, untied or independent from social centres or from Turin’s antagonist scene (nonetheless, the squatting is strongly supported by different social centers and by the local movement against evictions)” (Belloni & Pallotta, 2016). The occupation is in one of the southern part of Turin, in the Lingotto district, between the streets Zino Zini and Giordano Bruno, an area that once was the industrial core of Turin. Towards the east side, alongside the railway tracks, and to the west it borders some residential and commercial buildings, while approaching to the complex it seems that the air changes, the occupied buildings seems to be confined by an invisible barrier and even some of the buildings are enclosed by a wall that completely separates them from the rest; like the are hiding from the city within the city. It is evident the overcrowding conditions inside the buildings; “[…]from the area set up for a kitchen / common room to the stairs, the mattresses of migrants are placed everywhere” (Turano, 2016). Due to overcrowded and precarious conditions, the inhabitants of the occupied buildings find themselves pushed to interact with the outside, making use and even appropriating of the public spaces between the buildings and in the surroundings (1). The occupied buildings are in bad conditions; several structural problems such as water pouring from ceilings , lack of electricity, hot water and heating system, make everyday life challenging. The former MOI area is more than just a place to sleep; inside the four squatted buildings the refugees have manage to develope two small shops seeling african and italian food, a pop-up barbershop, a Senegalese restaurant, and a sort of classroom where people go to socialize and learn italian.

2 Medici Senza Frontiere report, Fuori Campo. Richiedenti Asilo e Rifugiati in Italia: Insediamenti informali e Marginalità sociale, 2016.

125

Open comon spaces Occupied Buildings Open-Closed relations 126

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

These “illegal” settlements are tolerated by the authorities to some extent; it serves their purpose to conceal the state’s short response behind the vital support offered by local and international activists who work there. An informal border surrounds the four buildings; police maintain watch from 8am to 8pm, and the marines patrol the area four times a day. Unrest, there seems a mutual tolerance between the police and local government, the students on the resident (2) and users of the hostel (3), and the irregular migrants. Broadly speaking, these neighbors seem to coexist peacefully; in the buildings occupied there is a system of rules established by the occupants to ensure as much as possible the principles of good cohabitation (Turano, 2016). A mutual tolerance of shared spaces has made it possible for forced migrants in Turin’s Olympic village to find some modicum of stability in their daily lives. It is by no means ideal; tolerance is not acceptance, nor does it guarantee support or the observance of human rights. From a broader perspective the implication on the urban space of this occupation oscillate between segregation and tolerance; not only it alters the urban landscape but also reshapes the content and context of social divisions and conflicts (Hall, 2004). Two set of interrelated and at the same time opposite processes occur: congregation and segregation (Knox & Pinch., 2010) and in this case it can be considered as a self-segregation. This has as a result a space that can be like a modern spontaneous ghetto which further relates to wider social processes that can be schematically described by another mainstream binary, that of integration vs. exclusion. This situation is also exacerbated due to the spatial configuration and location of the settlement; bordered by the railways tracks. The political discussions about this occupation have been quite intense, but still without positive results for refugees and their families. In January 2015, an eviction order was issued by the judiciary, waiting to be executed as soon as a solution was found for the relocation of the most vulnerable segment of the squatting population (women, children and sick and disabled persons). At the time of writing there were pending eviction procedures. The presence of women and children is mediatically and politically significant and works, in this case, as a deterrent against forced evictions and as a encouragement for the squatting (Belloni & Pallotta, 2016). In June 2015 new plans were announced to redevelope the abandoned marketplace into a research and thecnology center for the city’s universities. In March of 2016 The Guardian published an article talking about 127

2 1

1- Common spaces appropiation 2- Hostel 3- Students residences 128

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

the occupation called “Occupy Turin: refugees find a home in Italy’s abandoned Olympic Village” were they describe the situation and according to Nicoló Vasile, an Italian activist intervied in the article says it has “become a symbol for the protests of migrants and refugees in the city”. More over, Vasile declared in the article that the goal of occupying the Olympic Village was also to “make the local government understand that these people were not alone, that they were not abandoned, that they were united, that they have rights, and that they are retaking those rights, retaking them with the occupation”. The occupation of buildings by the Refugee it is not a new event that only interested the City of Turin, as for now, from about ten years in other cities there are places abusively occupied too, for instance the so-called Salam Palace in Rome, or the Most Recent Casa Don Gallo in Padua. This occupation can be seen as the intersection of different social movements, the local movements for the integration of forced migrants and of grassroots movements for the right to adequate housing 3 , leading to the revitalization this underused hosing settlement as a collective answer to the fulfillment of a need and or the claim of a right. the prospect of a structural solution to the housing problems requires the development of policies for the house in which the public body is no longer the only actor. It was was necessary to the start of new social housing projects and supportive cohabitation, always with a view to guarantee a social and cultural mix of the neighborhood. The different organization, among which the Solidarity Committee for Refugees and Migrants work like a “third” accommodation service and it takes care of maintaining the notion of common goods and spaces (the buildings, social life and collective activities inside them).

3 “Associations, students and activists who organize classes with the support of former teachers volunteering, the trade unions base confederation (USB) and the Association for the Juridical Studies on Immigration (ASGI) take care of the legal matters and keep contacts with other refugees’ claims all across Europe, while institutional subjects such as the Job Centre promote professional formation and education; there are even military units to guard the neighborhood. Finally, squatters organized themselves into the Solidarity Committee for Refugees and Migrants, an independent committee composed by some Italian activists supporting and helping the squatters in their daily activities and restoration works.” (Belloni & Pallotta, 2016)

129

Source: Urbanism Course – 2nd year – Architecture Bachelor Degree, Polytechnic of Turin. Academic Year 2015-2016. 130

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Average tenants per apartment Age range of tenants Geographical areas of origin

19-29 years old

10 - 35years old

5- 80years old

Europe

Africa

Italia

Economic availability of residents

131

E. Giambone Street, former Olympic Village Photo ÂŠ Author, 2016

132

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Space appropriation in the courtyard. Photo ÂŠ Author, 2016

133

Surveillance unit patrols from 8am to 8pm. Photo ÂŠ Author,2016

134

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Neglected playground. Photo ÂŠ Author, 2016

135

Rights manifestations on the balconies. Photo ÂŠ Michele Dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Ottavio, 2014

136

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Eviction order for the Ex Moi. Photo ÂŠ Oscar Serra, 2015

137

Gate of the encampment Photo ÂŠ: Saluzzo Migranti, 2016

138

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Wanted But not Welcome N7: Campo Solidale . Saluzzo “Saluzzo, nel cuneese, è il secondo territorio del sistema viticolo piemontee assurto agli onori delle cronache nazionali sull’immigrazione. Anche qui, come nelle terre intorno a Canelli, vige il sistema di pagare i braccianti stranieri con voucher giornalieri, la cui entità in denaro è nettamente inferiore al lavoro effetivamente svolto. [...]Sono parecchie decine le imprese coinvolte nell’uso della manodopora straniera, un numero che non si può desumere dagli elenchi Inps, ma dalle rilevazioni sul campo effettuate dai sindacati.” Sagnet, Y. Palmisano, L. (2015) Getto Italia. I braccianti stranieri tra caporalato e sfruttamento (pg. 53) Roma: Fandango Libri Saluzzo is a small town and former principality in the province of Cuneo, built on a hill overlooking a vast, well-cultivated plain. It is known by being an agricultural land (as well as the municipalities that surround it), however the local workforce is not enough for harvesting the fruits and it requires the simultaneous use of thousands of employees. Where agriculture is prosperous and manufactures products of high nutritional quality, it is simultaneously present the indecently remunerated work and held in brutal conditions and often para-slavery, forms of severe labor exploitation, and it mainly involves migrant workers. Thus, there is a situation considered being very similar to that on Rosarno 1 , where more than a hundred African men camp every summer looking for work in fruit picking. According to Carita’s report 2 , where there are asylum seekers the salary for hour in the agricultural laborers is lowered by about 50% compared to the already low wages

1 Rosarno is a comune (municipality) in the Metropolitan City of Reggio Calabria in the Italian region of Calabria, where Doctors without borders denounced the conditions of foreign workers in agriculture. 2 Progetto presidio Report by Caritas Diocesana, Nella Terra di Nessuno. Lo sfruttamento lavoratio in agrucoltura, 2015. In the northern regions the exploitation problem it is less perceivable in comparison with the southern regions and the only intervention by the Diocesana in this region it is in Saluzzo, aimed primarily to improve the existing poor housing conditions of the laborers.

139

500m

Sc. 1:50000 140

150

250

350

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

141

Institutional

Leisure

Commercial Residential

Industrial

Residential Residential

142

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

received by those who are not applicants for humanitarian premises, as in Saluzzo 3 . This highlights the intertwining of the so-called system of Mafia Caporale 4 with the phenomenon of forced migrant arrivals; fed by the vulnerability of people in process of inclusion (formal or informal). Which, if desired, it can be considered as a next step to the condition of exclusion and segregation exacerbated by the national reception disruption (Wanted but not Welcome). In Saluzzo, the influx of migrantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; laborers (mainly Africans) began in 2009, with a presence almost unnoticeable. The following years, the influx increased almost to eighty, with a much greater visibility, since the immigrants had made a shelter in the perimeter of the train station, within a few freight cars in disuse. At this point the intervention by NGOs and the municipality had already started but only being able to provide shelter to around fifteen migrant workers. By 2011 the arrivals where near to two hundred and it became even more difficult to find accommodation for everyone. In 2012, the situation appeared even more critical, because now the seasonal workers were almost four hundred. The spaces occupied the year before were no longer sufficient, and the cardboards were also placed in the outer space of the Railways shed. However, the place was not safe, and to prevent accidents the Municipality convinced migrants to move to a large tent mounted in the Forum Boarium; a shed located in the outskirt of the town, where only two toilets and two showers were available. In 2013, the Coldiretti was willing to providing 120 beds in container for the immigrant workers, located for the most part in Saluzzo and to a lesser extent in the neighboring towns (these structures were exclusively reserved for regularly employed workers). However, with the continuous rise of arrivals some seasonal workers returned to camp outside the Forum Boarium, the same site already occupied the previous year. In

3 The case of Saluzzo it is also mentioed in the book Ghetti Italia, I braccianti stranieri tra caporalato e sfruttamento, 2015. 4 In the book Ghetto Italia, 2016, Palmisano renamed illegal hiring (caporalato) as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Mafia Caporaleâ&#x20AC;?. It makes reference to the labor exploitation, as a widespread condition that often oppresses women and men, mostly immigrants from different continents, but also increasingly involves citizens of the European Union.

143

Open comon spaces Tents area Open-Closed relations 144

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

a short time it had already been formed an encampment of dozens of people in the front street of the shed. Still, new African laborers came to crowd the slums of the Forum Boarium and when the presences had already exceeded one hundred the police arrived to execute an eviction order made by the municipality. With the intervention of NGOs and church organizations it was possible to provide around 200 accommodations in nearby building own by the municipality. Nevertheless, the number of those who were left without any accommodation is unknown, but impressive: probably 400 or 500 people, who were sleeping under plastic sheets or in cardboard shacks without sanitary services. Later on, with the help of the Caritas Diocesana it was possible to set up a camp for 200 people, today known as “Campo Solidale”, and to rent some containers for the sanitary services and built a large structure equipped for a mensa-like space. It is an informal encampment tracked down the edge of the city where the workforce finds accommodation. It currently accommodates more than 315 migrant workers and it is still part-managed with the help of Caritas Diocesana 5 . Most of the workers come from Mali, Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire, as well as about twenty others, with nationalities outside the sub-Saharan Africa. For the most part these are young people between 25 and 35 years old. They are all in possession of a residence permit, mainly for humanitarian reasons. Currently, the camp is on a death end street in front of the shed of the Forum Borarium, but differently from earlier years, the camp is only there for some month every year, making and itinerant use of it. From July to the beginning of September the street transform from public to private, through direct investigations it was evident that migrants take over the street and they even have very restricted control of it, if you don’t work there you don’t go to that street; a form of self-exclusion (Yvan Sagnet; Leonardo Palmisano, 2015). This can be similar to the case of Ex-MOI villages, where as well as physical barriers there are also invisible barriers, as a form a confinement and exclusion from the rest of the city. The surrounding area is mixed, mainly residential, however since it is an agricultural village there are many warehouse and plantations too. Although the number

5 By the time of the visit to the camp, Caritas Diocesana organized a variety of events which were aimed at promoting integration with the citizens of Saluzzo.

145

4 3

1 1- Entrance commo space 2- Storage and service 3- Mensa like space 4- Sanitary services 146

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

of dwellers is practically high their presence seems almost imperceptible or at least they are tolerated by the saluzzesi. However, since is locate far from the city center, dweller migrants depend on the service of the city having the need to take a at least a daily quick bike ride to the downtown market, money transfer and telephone agencies and so on. Just outside the camp there is a small trailer and the adjacent space is used by the squatter as space for economic and social exchange (1). Past the half-gate, demarking the entrance to the camp, there are two a lines of tents, one in front of the other. Near the entrance there was build a roof for common spaces (2) as well as in the end of the street (3), this one bigger and more frequently used. There are four containers for services at the end of the street (4). The “Campo Solidale” settlement it is not a case that concerns immediately the phenomenon of what it is called here “informal sanctuary”, however it is used to explain the mutations of it. Hence, the relevance of this fact is that, although the phenomenon of the exploitation of agricultural workers is an issue that exists by itself, it is a very probable destination path to which migrants, either in their legal or illegal state, can fall in (informality seems to be the natural outcome in which to land). They are absorbed by the system and are led to a condition of marginalization, segregation and exploitation that takes place due to their vulnerability; generated by the gaps of the legal framework in which they are.

147

148

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

149

Tent at the end of the street Photo ÂŠ Author, 2016

150

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Common spaces Photo ÂŠ Laura Cantarella, 2016

151

152

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

153

Migrants walking towards the municipality Photo ©: Fabio Corbeddu, 2015 While I was walking on the city’s center I saw some of the “braccianti” biking in the surroundings, mainly going to the supermarkets and other food stores, then I saw the same face again when I arrived to the camp.

154

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

Cooking dinner in the camp Photo ©: Anna Lami, 2015 “Al Foro Boario i ragazzi si riuniscono in un angolo del campo vicino ai fornelli; c’è chi frigge le frittelle, chi aggiusta bici, chi cucina per la cena; qualcuno lava i vestiti nell’unico lavandino, altri giocano intorno a un tavolo”

155

3.4 The Territorial Dimension of the public policies From these two cases studied emerge different aspects of the implications of forced migration related phenomena. Firstly, it is evident through the observation of the informal housing dimension the continue arrival of forced migrants to a territory not ready to cope with it. The forms of temporary housing (informal sanctuaries) exposed here, show new spaces and organization where it is possible to recognize some of the dynamics of migrant’s informal settlement and the transformation in the social geography (new population categories). In the informal settlement of (forced) migrants, and even regular ones, it can be perceived that they become (passive) agents of urban transformation, mainly through processes of daily negotiations of urban symbiosis (Hatziprokopiou, Frangopoulos, & Montagna, 2016). To reflect on these contexts allows understanding the morphological and political changes of the city, where the urban landscape is transformed through the appropriation and production of informal living spaces, generating conflicts and negotiations. These last two mentioned make possible, to certain point, to concretize the right to the city in the form of appropriation of urban space and housing rights, however this places show the the spatial exclusion through the fragmentation of urban space evidencing the disparities of access to the benefits of urban life (Balbo, 2009). It is relevant to highlight that these modes of informal production of the space often become established forms of living; what they (the forced migrants) though as temporary ends up being a long term “solution”. The cases here studied are likewise examples of the third sector action on the multiplication of informal (non-institutional) strategies of welfare production (informal welfare), which attempts to tackle the deficiencies of the public sector. “Within the current context of the Italian economy the erosion of welfare has become a chronic and normalized issue in ‘ordinary emergencies’ ” (Rossi, 2014). A deficiency that is in part worsened by the reduction of the public spending on social protection, together with the gaps and contradiction of the welfare policies. It does not only make reference to the accommodation aspects (access to housing) but also to job placement and management and integration. Hence, the cases exposed demonstrate that this is not a detached phenomenon, showing the intertwining of the phenomenon with other conditions, those of the current 156

Chapter III Permanent Temporalities

growing unemployment, black market labor, the problems of the right for housing, the structural phenomenon of evictions and the alarms of clandestine immigration. The two cases exposed mirror how the access to an adequate housing is almost always connected to the exclusion from the local labor markets and to long-term unemployment. Changing perspective and especially visible in Saluzzo, it can be argued that some effects such as labor market marginalization and the concentration of immigrant employment demands on the black labor market (particularly into the agricultural, construction or personal care assistance sectors) actively concur to increase the uncertainty of asylum seekers in ensuring a certain grade of stability and worsen their dependence on public assistance programs. These occupations make an attempt to denounce the deficiencies of the reception and integration processes, not due to the lacks of the accommodation system, but rather in response to problematic situations which arose after the institutional accommodation. Therefore, role of the public actor is key for the understanding of the problem of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;new populationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;sâ&#x20AC;? marginal life conditions and consequence for the city. In contrast with the existing urban poverty it creates geopolitical tensions between the national reception accommodation policies and local answers to the completion while accessing territorial services, housing among others. The spatial exclusion of asylum seekers and refugees are an effect of specific spatial control policies or of discrimination and social estrangement, which provokes the formation and proliferation of poverty pockets in urban areas. Yet, the inhabitants of these occupations search in cities new ways to claim space and voice (which securitization and control dictate the creation of such devices and policies). The two focused insertion contexts have proved more than ever the diversification of the manifestatio: a big city and even in countryside in need for labor. These occupations showed different settlement dynamics, which change along to the specific needs of the reason behind the occupation, besides the fact to find refuge, Moreover, These figures and minute transformation reflect a sort of mutation of the city and the territory and imposes, to certain extent, a disciplinary reconsideration; a matter that is starting to reflect in the urban and architectural debates.

157

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

160

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

“ ndividuare i bisogni, le forme antiche e nuove di povertà, i fenomeni di marginalità e le situazioni di conflitto presente nella nostra società complessa costituisce la premessa indispensabile per cercare come costruire condizioni di cittadinanaza fruibili da ciascuno e da tutti. La consapevolezza che ogni persona, proprio in quanto tale, ha diritto ad essere “riconosciuta” e a “parteccipare” alla vita sociale e politica chiede di progettare un tipo di città in cui tutti e ciascuno possano trovare quanto è necessario per vivere in modo dignitoso e per essere protagonisti del lore stesso vivere. Si tratta, percio, di costruire una citta che sia davvero ‘dell’uomo’ e ‘per l’uomo’ ”. Martini, C. M. (1990). Una cultura veramente umana per l città. in F. Totaro, Città e diritti di cittadinanza (pgs. 15-17). Milano: Franco Agneli Libri.

161

4.1 Eroded Italian Welfare Architecture is directly implicated in this humanitarian crisis in a broader sense; providing shelter is, after all, a primary onus of the disciple. Even though it is evident that this crisis forces designers to reconsiders their view of and within the city, the range of action becomes blurry through the socio-political discrepancy that by all means are priority issues. Acknowledging this crisis as part of the New Urban Question puts before us the need recognize new categories of the social corpus and to look within the city these new spatial forms and unusual housing practices. As Bifulco and Vitale point out “[…] this emergency of new actors and new problems is, indeed, transforming the social policies and reframing the current urban question in Europe” (Bifulco & Vitale, 2014). Hence, approaching the issues of forced migrants in the city as a design problem without the proper context can be problematic; “once the problem is structured including its complexity, it facets and peculiarities, the solutions comes along” (Quatto, 2016, pg. 10, quoting Governa 2013). Instead of focusing on arbitrary solution based on approximated assumptions the work tries to focus more on understanding accurately the actual situation, so a proper answer can be given. On this chapter it will be discussed the interrelation of the existence of these informal sanctuaries with the process of erosion of the Italian welfare services (a chronic and normalized phenomenon within the current context of the Italian economy), showing how the legal and administrative mechanisms shape a specific frame of opportunities and constraints within which different coping strategies may be attempted. The scenario depicted through the analysis of the territorial implications shows that the role of the public authorities is key in understand the factors that propel the existence of these informal manifestations. Since, it is due to the, already mentioned, deficiency in providing welfare state that negative externalities of the different reception accommodation systems emerge. The arbitrariness of the government’s action directly influences the accessibility to some parts and services of the cities, whether of public or private nature. In sight of the economic crisis the prospect of public expenditure has been reduce along with the quality of social wellbeing provided. For instances, the most adopted solution has been the declaration of an emergency situation and a further fragmented and

162

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

deregulated management which characterized it 1 . Likewise, significant are the influences and cooperation of the third sector with the public social services, which is fundamental in the assistance and provision of informal welfare. A countless number of social actors try to fill the formal system’s gaps; however, due to the lack of coordination, evaluation and support, the services provided result inefficient and ineffective. Under international laws, refugees fall under the protection of the host state, which must grant them a specific set of rights. However, these rights need to be supported by specific national and local policies and by concrete practices to be actually enforced. Regardless of the rights refugees are formally entitled to by law, there is often an absence of policies to enforce these laws concretely, and local legal and administrative provisions often create barriers to the full enjoyment of those rights. In the Italian case, the legal framework lacks clarity: despite its accession to the 1951 Refugee Convention and subsequent international laws, Italy still lacks an organic law on the right of asylum. Therefore, the legal framework is structured by the reference to more general immigration laws (see chapter II, par. 2.3) and by the reception of European directives. Second, national laws need to be supported by local policies that specify refugees’ and asylum seekers’ concrete entitlements and the ways municipalities should enforce them. Thus, the role of local authorities becomes crucial, as they are central to detect needs and implementing laws and policies in the local setting. Therefore, as extreme solutions to this deficiency squatting and other informal housing options emerge (Sanyal, 2009). This is manifested through the observation of the main laws concerning immigrant’s social policies which shown a gap between the national legal framework and its local implementation that creates major disruptions in the integration path. This is also evident in the last two cases studied, which showed that the deficiency or lack of housing and labor policies concerning immigrants could cause challenging situations for people in vulnerable conditions. According to Belloni, the current legislative framework and the partnerships’ structures analyzed in the actors’

1 In February 2012 The North-Africa emergency started and closed in March 2013, with which many norms and regulations were released to tackle the massive arrivals of emergency migrants from Northern African regions.

163

Migrants from of Eritrea in a refugee camp close to a railway station in Rome. Phote ÂŠ Massimo Berruti for The New York Times, 2015

164

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

network for the implementation of refugees’ reception accommodation projects 2 (in line with the European financing mechanisms and the current trend for funds allocation) “points out a progressive and alarming de-responsibility of institutional subjects. In particular, the side of national States for what concerns legislative aspects, and by the side of public regional and local authorities in the policy and projects’ implementation phase” (Belloni, 2013) an issue defined as “hollowing-out” (Jessop, 1994). Beside the already challenging circumstances refugees and asylum seekers have to face, the Italian national system seems particularly oriented towards addressing short term needs, as those related to asylum seekers waiting for a formal status approval, and less towards fulfilling those of refugee or with other humanitarian permits. Even for those who have the opportunity to spend a few months within the formal reception system, no official and specific policies are in place to support their subsequent access to permanent housing into the private housing market or public housing system after the status has been acquired 3 . In terms of accommodation, the national reception system is shown as undersized and not able to meet the housing needs of all asylum seekers present in the country (see chapter II).Therefore, as soon as the 6 to 12 months of reception end, they should find accommodation by themselves. Moreover, as previously mentioned, access to housing is considered to be an essential step on the integration path and a precondition for the full enjoyment of social and civil rights as well as social services (Bolzonia, Gargiulob, & Manocchia, 2015). Hence, as many authors (Bauman, 2011; Huysmans, 2000; Tosi, 2012) highlighted, there is a link between destitution of migrants and degrade of some urban areas; a link that must be found into those interstitial spaces, where coping strategies arise to tackle the exclusion from institutional welfare policies, such as the recurring situation in Italy. In this situation, to have to face such barriers and difficulties

2 The relationships among the actors at the diverse institutional and territorial level of the networks are often hierarchical, vertically organized and subsidiary; it has been opted therefore to maintain the pyramidal structure that the networks assume, distinguishing the different levels of “territorial relevance” (from an international to a local scale) and the roles that the actors play into each network.

3 Only a few countries, for example the United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands, have specific policies to support refugees’ access to permanent housing after the status has been acquired, and even in these cases, the outcomes in terms of spatial and social integration are controversial (Korac, 2003; Netto, 2011; Phillips, 2006; Robinson, Andersson & Musterd, 2003; Valenta & Bunar, 2010). 165

often leads to social weakness, and may involve discrimination and social, in addition to spatial, segregation (Buscher, 2011; Jacobsen, 2006; Malkki, 1995; Zetter, 2007). In such context, different coping strategies and attempts at self-empowerment may form. Even if some organizations (such as churches, non-profit organizations and NGOs) offer some help, a number of refugees difficult to quantify precisely are left aside and stay in Italy without any kind of formal support (Bolzoni, 2009; Manocchi, 2012). In these circumstances, refugees may take action and determine their own stories. It is her when squatting and other informal housing options may emerge (Pruijt, 2013); as those situations seen in the cases showed before. It is therefore important to argue the empowering and productive form of refugee agency that, even with different resources, strategies and outcomes, reaffirms their active presence in the host society (Agier, 2005; Korac, 2003; Malkki, 1995). However, in the case of asylum seekers and refugees, the emphasizing of their agency should not be read as an excuse for the lack of policies (korac, 2013). Rather, it suggests that it is important to consider both dimensions, in addition to their interactions, when addressing these issues (Bolzonia, Gargiulob, & Manocchia, 2015). According to this, the social-economic situation of refugees and asylum seekers in Italy presents myriad critical issues not (yet) properly and deeply analyzed in the reference literature. The first thing forced immigrants lose is their home, and in its wider symbolic value, this implies the possibility of disintegration at more levels. It is enough to mention this to introduce it to the existing housing issues (questione abitativa) and to take a particular attention to reconsider Italian and European policies aimed to overcome sharp housing deprivation situation of Italian residents and immigrants. The Two cases help to understand a profound transformation of the city: the city no longer understood as the space for the construction of rights, as it was in the past in the Western world. The city was the reflection of citizenship and work. These places are in the city, but they are depriving citizenship and work. It is because of this, then, that migrations deeply change the city. Not because come into it new populations, but because come in changing the conditions of citizenship and work. This plural articulation of individuals and places potentially expands and certainly complicates the concept, and its boundaries, of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;right to the cityâ&#x20AC;? (Lo piccolo, 2012).

166

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

4.2 Local actions to global problems While the legal framework that decides who is or is not an irregular migrant is set at the European and national levels, the challenges of dealing with those who have become illegalized and/or marginalized by this framework are felt locally. As mentioned, denying access to fundamental rights and basic services in cities threatens community cohesion and jeopardize the well-being of the city population (as a whole). By contrast [...] spatial and social inclusion of immigrants comes under the notion of “a right to the city” advocated by multilateral organizations and referred to by various scholar (Broen, Kristiansen, 2009; Harvey 2008; Purcell 2008; Goldblum 2006) who share the assumption that every citizent, ‘by exercising rights and fullfilling duties like every other citizen, helps build a civilization’ (Mayor, 1999)” 4 . The presence of “new urban populations” who experience marginal life-conditions brings back to question the role of the public actor in contrasting urban poverties. Generally speaking, this contribution insists on the geopolitical tension between the national reception accommodation policies and local answers to the completion while accessing territorial services, housing among others. I n Western Europe, current public debate conceptualizes urban diversity under dichotomous categorizations; such as, formal/informal, legal/illegal; a process that often obscures their connections and interdependency. (Rossi, 2014). However, in a period of economic and social crisis, that has more than doubled the number of poor and produced a serious deterioration of the population in financial difficulties and in poverty, the share of social spending has been reduced. In this context, the deficiency of minimum levels of social protection shows all of its seriousness, transforming the right of supporting poor people into a variable dependent on public budgets, currently cut by the austerity policies and directed to a new market-oriented solution. Resulting in the externalization of asylumoriented services towards third subjects, which constitute de facto the key-factor (but often also one of the major criticalities) of reception accommodation and integration policies of

4 The notion of the Right to the city was first proposed by French sociologist Henri Lefebvre (1968) who emphasized that urban policy is the by-product of on-going, conflict and negotiation among urban stakeholders for the allocation of public resources.

167

Humanity is not for Sale Source: Comitato SolidarietĂ

168

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

asylum seekers and refugees. In this framework, the third sector test new strategies and develop new functional self-representations to their relocation in the changed scenario of the Welfare Community. Activism for ‘the home-struggle’ is de facto functioning as an informal; an alternative to Institutional barriers and Welfare degradation, compensating the institutional vacuum of formal government policies. The combined intervention of local movements for the integration of refugees and asylum seekers and of grassroots movements for the right to adequate housing and entering the labor marked calls for policies that consider refugees as social actors rather than just policy objects in order to facilitate their integration into society (Bakewell, 2010; Zetter, 2007). Hence, it suggest the search strategies, lines of actions that would be able to define a more democratic governance approach that could definitely animate popular movements, symbolisms and practices to foster bottom-up urban transformations, reduce spatial inequalities inside urban regions and the unbalances in accessing both public and private livelihood assets from urban poor. Such approach could be done through rethinking the relationship between formal and informal practices. Towards more hybrid and balanced solutions that recognize the interrelations between the two. In the last two years in Italy there have been different experiences related to the reception and inclusion of forced immigrants and experimentations of new spatial forms and ways to understand the city. For instance, the Sicilian village of Sutera, decided to open the town’s doors to refugees after the tragic Lampedusa shipwreck in October 2013, in which 366 migrants died. Like many in rural Italy, Sutera was dying; its population fell from 5000 in 1970 to 1500. With the project its population has surged by 200 after the local mayor agreed to take in some of the thousands of migrants. Unlike in other Italian towns and cities where migrants are placed in vacant buildings on the edge of town and left to fend for themselves, in Sutera each refugee is entrusted to a local family charged with helping them to integrate. The situation in Sutera shows that a local initiative to welcome forced immigrants can be very effective and also have a positive economic impact. As natural, not everyone agree with the arrival of the immigrants to the town and there have been some opposition from part of the residents. Moreover, given the economic reality of life in the town it means that most of the immigrants will only find a short-term 169

home there. Other villages like Satriano and Sardinia have imitated Sutera, finding that arrival of migrants provides an opportunity rather than a problem. Two other very important academic experiences put into practice the roll of the urban planner with the local authorities. In May of 2016 a workshop of three days was held in Lampedusa, called “Practical Plans: Global migrants and local development In Lampedusa “. On request and with the support of Giusi Nicolini, Mayor of the Municipality of Lampedusa and Linosa, the workshop was organized by Marco Cremaschi, Director of the Town Planning Cycle, as part of the planning series of the Urban School of Political Sciences in Paris (École urbaine Sciences Po Paris). The workshop manage to achieve a dialogue between members of the European Parliament, the mayors of communities on the forefront, such as Lampedusa, Ventimiglia and Grande Synthe, policy makers and scholars, along with the students of the Cycle d’Urbanisme at Sciences Po, aimed to discuss how to reconcile the global priorities of reception of migrants and refugees with the local need for development; and how to sustain integrated policies for communities. Students of the Cycle d’Urbanisme and inhabitants worked together in order to design new scenarios for the sustainable development of the island, producing projects and proposals on urban rehabilitation, the reception of immigrants, landscape conservation and tourism development. All the analyzes and reflections resulting from the workshop also fed an exhibition at the Pavillon de l’Arsenal, thus fueling the public debate on the relationship between local and global in a specific territory. The second experience called “Architecture and Refugees: design solutions to reduce segregation, improve welcome policies, accommodate refugees in urban space” was and international workshop, organized by HousingLab department from Sapienza University of Rome and Emergency Architecture & Human Rights from Denmark EA&HR. DK. Students and teachers from the two universities worked fully for a week in the subject of reception of refugees in Italy. The workshop aimed to reflect on the role that the architect can take before the immigration emergency in Europe and to identify housing solutions to facilitate integration in the Italian cities. “The findings represent an interesting starting point for a search path that based on the hypothesized strategies will continue in a confrontation with social workers in the industry and the administrations involved” (Carrano, 2016 ). In the workshop three working themes and related proposals have been identified with solutions in 5 different locations: Sassari, Roma, Lampedusa, 170

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Augusta and Manduria. The addressed case studies have been inspired by to some common guiding principles to the design: “(1) Promoting a concierge model based on the idea that the first step in the integration depend on the possibility for each individual to have a “home”, a place in which to identify. (2) Think of reversible infrastructure areas and changeable over time with respect to the kind of reception and adaptable to different uses even after the emergency. (3) Promote relations with the fabric of the city avoiding areas too marginal. (4) Enter space-based services and integration of different activities that create employment opportunities as well as exchange among residents” (Carrano, 2016 ). Through these experiences it is shown some of the possible alternative paths aimed at improving the situations in different stages of the reception of refugees and asylum seekers in Italy, they mirror the relation between welfare and the city. The proposals that are defined next attempt to suggest the recovery of some of link between general policies and actions concretely feasible. These dashed gidelines could, in addition, bear effectively also new architectural projects, interpreted as verification devices: -Facilitate the means for the connections and interrelations between the government, the third sector and the residents with humanitarian title, to establish, by mutual consent, the scope and limitations of both parties to ease the implementation of solutions. In a sense, directed towards an institutionalization of (informal) coping strategies. -Promote the direction of the law towards greater autonomy of decision-making at the local level to achieve “ad hoc” implementations of the law in terms of its resources and constraints. Social organizations may facilitate refugee integration: the recognition of bottom-up practices and favour local autonomies and municipalities. -In regard to the dimension of housing, the facilitating of a social network with the local community through the provision of a platform for social connections that could assist a participant in legal matters and later on to obtain housing, through the arranging of activities for both asylum seekers and members of the local community. -Related to the physical expression of the welfare policies, the promotion of adequate “public arenas” where citizenship exercises can take place. That is, through the formation of space-based services connected to the city’s fabric avoiding too marginal areas, where different need can be attended and propel opportunities for the inclusion and emancipation of the immigrants. 171

Alex Omoregbe believes Sutera is beautiful, but no place to build a life. Photo ÂŠ Emily Kassie. Italy, 2016

172

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

The migrant boats cemetery. Photo credits Unkwnon Lampedusa 2016 Exhibition at Arsenalle Pavillions

173

Taking notes Photo ÂŠ SciencesPo Workshop in Lampedusa, 2016

174

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Scketches of Project “Root” Photo Lucas Alcaide De Wandeleer, 2016 Workshop 5x5 architecture and refugees, Rome Sapienza university

175

4.3 Transit Architecture The contribution of architects and urban planners in the migratory crisis that is investing and has invested the territory from the past centuries is that of giving specific physical dimensions to welfare policies; giving them concreteness, representing the new dimensions of well-being (Secchi, 2012). In a sense, a contribution that is fundamental, but the role is stratified by other levels of policy configurations that are part of the construction of the city. Our technical skills can do little. But they can describe precisely this new city and can rethink a long tradition of studies developed to deal with transit and emergency situations to develop solutions relevant to these needs. In this sense, this part makes a reflection on the inhabited space by forced migrants and its possible interrelation with a spatial concept suitable for their inclusion within the city. We, architects and planner, take permanence as a default condition of buildings. How could we not if the historical concept of architecture as described by Vitruvius in “De Architectura” identifies “durability” (firmitatis) as one of the three principles for good buildings. The term itself derives etymologically from the Ancient Greek word architektón. Here, the ambiguous word techné can be described as art, technology or tectonics, the science of structures, which implies ideas of weight, stability and durability. The tradition of architecture, as it is commonly understood, in fact, takes the moves from social and cultural contexts whose needs are to have a permanent and durable shelter. It is thus entrusted with the organization of space in sound and massive structural solutions, made from resistant and durable construction materials. On these assumptions, “the man has transferred its needs to the project of the city, seeking continuity, stability and sense of belonging in both form and function attributed to the spaces and setting up the transitional dimension as a sporadic practice type” (Anzalone, 2008). However, today, the architectural profession finds itself in a condition of a deep recession, and with it, the city is in a crisis as a settlement urban model, configured according to current times of fast unexpected mutations, “full of confusion, diversity, evocations, activities […] lacking points of view of controls from which to unified it and manage it” (Anzalone, 2008). As a result, the practice has shifted towards projects of more temporary, transient or non-conventional building forms. Even more so, when considered 176

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

the rescue of populations affected by natural disasters or by man-nature events. Hence, there is a clear incompatibility of the urban features with the more and more frequently changing living needs. In this sense, however, the transitory living concept stands in contrast to that of permanence that instead define, generally, the natural tendency of the majority of individuals to establish his residence and the base of their work, cultural, religious, recreational activities in organized and stable settlements. It is in particular situation when the notion of stability is questioned and requirements that go beyond the attachment or the need to possess a dwelling comes out clearer to light. Therefore, it is within this logic that the inhabited space by forced migrants is prefigured, under transitoriness criteria, which make up the physical space which hosts their different activities. Moreover, within the transit logic, the temporary term is not only referred to the settlement duration for the specific emergency ad-hoc response but especially to characteristics of flexibility, adaptability and the settlement evolution. In light of a different dynamic of settlement, according to a subject on the move: in transit (by de facto). Poses diverse and ambiguous forms of habitation: disruptive practice on the space. Architecture is temporary, not by definition but by nature; it is just a matter of how ephemeral it is. Not only temporary by its economic recession or quality of construction (technology). It recognized a need for socio-politic relaxation, diaphanous flexibility, and innovation. Still, on the core, improve the physical conditions for people seeking sanctuary. Transit architecture is not just about the temporality of the structure, it can also mean a temporary use of space and temporary user. In light of this, architecture can offer expertise on how to improve the physical conditions for people seeking sanctuary in unfamiliar and temporary environments. Developing design solutions and innovative spatial configuration of transitional spaces for displaced populations and their host communities,

177

“Foreruning the Future, the car becomes a MOBIL HUMAN SPACE“. Next stop Randall’s island. Mario Bellini’s Kar-A-Sutra. First shown at MoMA in 1972 as part of the museun’s exhibition “Italy: The New Domestic Landscape.

178

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

The Challenge for conventional images of the built environment. Calais, france, march 2016. © henk wildschut. In the MoMA’s exhibition ‘insecurities’ global displacement and shelter. Explores how architecture, art, and design have addressed contemporary notions of shelter, as seen through migration and global refugee emergencies.

179

The ever-changing world of Archigram. Image ÂŠ Archigram, 1960 On the swinging streets of 60â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s London, when the world was colored in a kaleidoscope of psychedelic colors

180

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

4.3.1 Heritage of Ideas To investigate the field of artifacts for temporary living means to investigate a legacy of ideas and products generated over the years, in Italy and abroad, which are configured as resources for industrialized logics, adaptation and conversion, designed to satisfy a culture of living for the time. The complexity of the transitional housing phenomenon has been analyzed highly in the last century. It represents the intersection of practical needs with the aspiration, sometimes utopian, toward an extreme simplicity in living and an innate desire for freedom and exploration. The architectural production in the literature has expressed temporality through suggestive researches and specific products for transitional settlements aimed at defining a living dimension related to a pre-defined cycle of stay. The historical narration could be divided in 3 main parts, through the investigation of the fields and practices that gave rise to building transformations the historical overview shows strategic and typological research lines that relives the transferring of the object’s performance (housing unit) to the context (urban space) and in particular cases from a housing emergency to a “new domestic landscape”. By the end of the 50’s, when the daily life of many individuals, stable in a determinate place, assumes changes due to many movements against the consumption system, with the scope of transform the reality and to change the needs of the persons. The international situationist movement is the one that search the most to take the critic to urbanism and architecture immediately after the period after the second war. Its polemics are directed to mass media and to television since as they are manufacturers from boring city and try to overcome the rational functionality with accurate architectural ideas. The situationist prefigured the fusibility to create cities with a dynamic environment in relation to the “states of behavior” with spaces created to fight the bourgeois idea of happiness and comfort. Their goal becomes to model the architecture to dream, through an unpredictable playful space, against a city made up of static spaces. Thinking of a temporary space, the mobile and dynamic, free of banality. With the end of the crisis of the sixties, it determines a critical reflection on the 181

Mobile Housing Unit (prototype) Marco Zanuso 1972 Photo ÂŠ MoMA

182

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

development and establishment of new technologies. It is possible to identify within these cultural positions, areas of research that seek to resolve these political and socio-economic crises. The strategy is the self-construction: It is a trend that defines the possibility of involving the individual in the construction of their home, through reading technologies, easily removable structures, transportable, and sometimes furniture. This method envisages new forms of nomadism, which start from the desire to occupy and temporarily abandon soils without a trace of self, without being intrusive in the territory. During the period studies are directed toward finding an individual freedom, the satisfaction of instinct nomadic and desire an independence from the static housing models. The evolution of utopias for a global city in constant transformation moves through the design experiments of the seventies up to identify themselves increasingly in metropolitan visions. The futuristic and mechanized category search light weight, transportability and flexibility of the use, utilizing pneumatic structures. It was an impressive field of research that offers various solutions on the theme of the ephemeral such as Fun place, no plan, City on the Move project. The project experiences extend the time dimension with the meaning of â&#x20AC;&#x153;passage from one placeâ&#x20AC;?, giving the space occupied a variable configuration on an urban scale. Contemporary architecture goes beyond the idea of object as stable and permanent elementary unit, addressing such complex subject matter in units constantly evolving

183

Refugee Housing Project Thumbnail, Maiking Heimat, Germany arrival country request (Construction site) Photo ÂŠ Carsten Costard, Mainz, 2016

184

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

4.3.2 The places of transit habitat In the cases of these transit spaces, the concept of temporality can be related to either the physical space (building) or the use of the space. Here, the highest level of temporariness is definitely provided by the complete reversibility of the construction process and lower level of temporality is given by the fulfillment through the requirements imposed by variable uses over time. Therefore, besides the narrative of the historical background, the following research was responsible for classifying and tabbing some examples that, for different reasons, have seemed significant to the understanding of the matter. The selections of the works mainly focus of projects in the European context, however it doesn’t discriminate some international works that were considered relevant for the relation with the concept. It includes projects meant for emergency situations, but not only, also there are projects focused on the technology of the material. There are 6 example, from recent years, and mainly made as a response for the migrant housing shortage, the program of the projects varied from mainly housing to work spaces. In the classification of projects cataloged two categories have been identified: that related to the configuration of the building, open or close system; and the type of intervention, transformation or new building. These two families describe the two paths in which the repertory of examples can be organized showing this particular case of temporality and identify the main dichotomy of the cases studied. It was drafted an analytical sheet summary, which describes the main characteristics of the object in question as well as a synthetic judgment of some requirements that characterize a suitable projects. The aim is therefore to identify requirements that define the variability of the activities, and the effective technological concept in function of the variables time and resources. The scope of the requirements is the is an attempt to concisely communicate certain principles aimed to achieve of space that can become places generators of sociality 1 . The requirements in consideration are: flexibility, compatibility, transportable, Easy construction, repurposed, low cost, environmental compatibility. Subsequently information about the project state and estimated duration is given. Moreover, the structure is ordered by the main material, which is evidentially related to the construction system, and lastly there is given a notion of durability; entirely relative to the application of the projects to the matter of transit architecture.

1 Z. Bauman, In Search of politics, London: Goldsmith’s College, 1999. In Bauman the term sociality takes the place of “society”, as the consideration for the dialectic between what is unique, different and what is shared.

185

Flexibility It is referred to the transparency of the spaces allowing altering its configuration and the easiness to equip related to the needs of usability. A quality achieve mainly by the concept of transformation and evolution of the space, either of the building itself or with in the complex of it. Also, it refers to an expansion capability not as an unexpected addition but as a natural and planned extension.

Expansible Mobil Evolutivity

Compatibility This refers to three aspects of environmental compatibility and not necessarily it should accomplish all three. Bioclimatic compatibility and effective achievement of sustainable aspects, from an engineering installation point of view. In relation with the landscape, in compliance with the morphology of the soil, vegetation and built environment. The artefact also has to consider the visual impact in relation to the context and the specificity of anthropological settled population.

Bioclimatic Energy efficiency Image

Transportability It is related to the question of strategy. It is valuated a relative ease of transport assessment. This is estimated in function of the capacity of disassemble and lightness of product. The type of means which may require to transport it is also taken in consideration.

Lightweith

Dis-assemble

186

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Easy construction It considers the assembly of the structure and the type of equipment possibly required for the movement at the site, type of labor (specialized, non-specialized) and the estimated time of mounting. Whereas, if the project it is done using prefabrication system; referring to the whole and not the individual elements commonly standard in the market

Pre-fab system

Installation

Repurposed

Related to the subsequent use or uses, considered in the planning phase. But according to the level of flexibility, it could also be unforeseen later destinations. It takes special attention to the benefits of different users over time.

Adaptability

Multipurpose

Low-Cost Efficiency This quality is exclusive only to the case studies of which this information is provided by the commission. It could also be estimated through the accomplishment of the previous characteristics. Functional

187 x

Project State: Planing

Stimate Duration: High 188

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Hess / Talhof / Kusmierz Architekten und Stadtplaner Office Building Conversion Appartments for refugees Location: Munich, Germany Year: 2016 Open system / Close system

Transformation / New Building

An 8-story office building in Munich is being converted into a residential building to receive refugees. The buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ground fl oor will be used as a common area with lounges, meeting rooms, and an administrative area. The structure of the upper fl oors enables the fl oor space to be divided into individual apartments with private kitchens and sanitary areas. This ensures private and individual living and therefore decent accommodations for the residents. The mix of different types of apartments within the building (from mini-apartments to family homes and larger shared apartments) produces a variety of living situations, making the building responsive to the different needs of the residents. A sustainable, fl exible, and continuously evolving esidential use of the building is possible; it can also serve as an integration home by being mixed with social or student housing. 189

Project State: Built

Stimate Duration: Low 190

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Refugee Center Julien Beller Social Design Location: Paris, France Year: 2016 Open system / Close system

Transformation / New Building

In Calais the French state is dismantling the Jungle, but it is not yet clear where it is going to put its 10.000 inhabitants. In Parin on the other hand Mayor Anne Hidalgo has openend (in October, 2016) the firts reception center for 400 refugees intended to be integrated into the city; in a former train depot at Porte della Chapelle. To design these new temporary construction and spaces Hidalgo turned to an architect, Julien Belier, who has a lot of experience in â&#x20AC;&#x153;urban acupuntureâ&#x20AC;?. He specialisess in non invasive interventions which aim to help, care for and make safe those structures that already exist. His philosophy is the idea of everyone feeling involved in the construction of the polis, of the city being a site of collaboration with civil society, pubblic assitance and residents. The center is temporary, after a year and a half the area will be used for something else. 191

Render of exterior view / Photo: ÂŠ Narges Mofarahian

Project State: Idea

Stimate Duration: Medium 192

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

â&#x20AC;&#x153;AGRIshelter" Narges Mofarahian Project Winner of the International Competition: "What Design Can Do" Year: 2016 Open system / Close system

Transformation / New Building

A durable, biodegradable shelter to address the pressing need to provide suitable, temporary accommodation for refugees in new countries. The plan encourages prospective residents and communities to be involved in creating accommodation re-using locally found materials and in reclaiming and greening the built environment. The jury welcomed the project and its utopian thinking preferring this as a model than all too familiar dystopias. The project is part of a thesis research, that explores urban typologies as well as practical concepts at detail scale The main factors that this proposal includes are: turning the Reception Sites that are often Isolated, to Attractive green urban networks for a better effective integration by bringing regular activites; constructing shelters with good quality but low environmental impact by using biodegradable materials; involving everyone who wants to join, especially refugees themselves, in the process of construction of the shelters through self build emergency housing. 193

Project State: Ideai

Stimate Duration: High 194

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Anneloes de Koff / Pieter Stoutjesdijk ComfortCity - The 'Gap' Location: Nederland Year: 2016

Open system / Close system

Transformation / New Building

ComfortCity uses digital production techniques to provide diversity, quality of life and a humane standard of living. The multilayer ComfortCity is realized using a flexible modular system of removable elements in empty halls. This building system acts as a framework for the various forms of living and working, which helps to promote daily activities and integration. The houses create a city-in-city effect thanks to their multilayer composition, and are arranged around a compact hub of facilities; a ComfortCabinTM. The houses are placed on a grid, as is the support structure of the removable steel frames. They are put into position by professionals, after which the residents can be involved with the design. Due to the portable wall and floor components, the houses can be adapted to suit the cultural background and composition of the group. All building components and integrated connections can be produced from sheet materials using a computer-controlled (CNC) milling machine, and can be transported or stored in a compacted manner. 195

Project State: Built

Stimate Duration: High 196

Chapter IV All Lives Matter

Catalytic Action Playgrounds for Refugee Children Location: Bar Elias, Lebanon Year: 2015

Open system / Close system

Transformation / New Building

Within humanitarian responses, programmatically, children often become invisibleâ&#x20AC;? (Marc Sommers). This project seeks to challenge this notion and expand the remit of what is deemed necessary in emergency situations. We believe that children have a right to an education, to feel safe, to play and to develop confidence in themselves. CatalyticAction are advocating for a design that questions the definition of a playground in an emergency response. The innovative process lies within not simply providing playing facilities (swing, slide, etc.) but rather in exploring opportunities that enable these children to design the playground themselves. This makes each playground specific for its context, time and people. The playground has been designed with the input of the children themselves; having completed exercises that allow them to express their own ideas. The playground is a space where the children can play, rest and feel safe; a space of security in the vulnerable environment it is. 197

CONCLUSION

It is quite clear that the city today is the place where the impact of the general socio-economic crisis many European countries are going through its heaviest, and that the city is the place where the geographies of injustice and privilege not only are most evident but also need to be addressed (Soja 2010, Secchi 2010). The influx of refugees and migrants to Europe that reached staggering new levels in 2015 is a significant event that has marked the European territory and it is and issue undoubtedly new within the urban planning discipline. But, the phenomenon of new forced migration is pushing an update to the way we think the dynamics of settlement. Displacement of populations, who are forced to cross borders into other territories in conditions of insecurity and uncertainty leave marks on the territory and create new forms of settlement. With the aim of looking at figures and landscapes that can affect the architectural thinking in the coming years as part of the new urban issue, this thesis explored the recent immigration crisis that has hit Europe and its repercussions on the territory. Even though, this issue is part of a wider disciplinary category, in this research I explored a complex phenomenon that seems almost unmanageable trying to gather its so many slopes to then be able to understand the its character and main elements. Through the observation of the phenomenon I attempted to show some contradictions, legal discrepancies, some impetuous characters of it that allow to reconstruct the dimension of the physical implication and the way in which it falls on the territory, both through the recognitions of the phenomenon of marginalization and conflictual situations in some cities and through two specific case studies. The outcome of this research is the production of a few small convictions that I judge still crucial to argue about the consideration that this field of research imposes to urban planning as part of the “new urban question”, to assume the responsibility of understanding this “modernity problem” which could propel the production of newer, effective solutions, through a more qualitative multidisciplinary approach from the very initial phase of problem setting. These considerations are structure within three levels: on the lexical level, on the public policy level and on the architectural discipline level.

198

To begin with, within the lexical level it is prudent to note that urban discussions on forced migration are neither new, nor novel. But the scale and complexity of the problem makes it difficult for scholar to study it with a clear exploration of the urban dimension of it. Of course, to pretend to make a contribution to the field with only a year of research can sound pretentious. Even more so, when many specialize researchers on the field have stated that every approach seams reduced in comparison with the wide and complicated spectrum of categories within the issue. What it is intended to do next is a proposition of conceptual guidelines, in the form of notions, to be included and which cannot be used superficially within urban discourse. Not as new theories rather an appropriation of existent terms to a different context from which they were made for, those of: Irregular migration, Informal sanctuary and Transit Architecture Irregular migration: a complex and diverse phenomenon (Düvell, 2009); there is no clear or universally accepted definition of irregular migration. It is define by the International Organization for migration as: “movement that takes place outside the regulatory norms of the sending, transit and receiving countries” (IOM, 2011). The term can be seen as an attempt to group a heterogeneous array of migration processes. The main focus of the term is irregular flows and entries, mostly related to an element of coercion as the cause of the movement. Mainly, it takes place in violation of the law and/or at the margins of society. Hence, there are diverse profiles 1 of “irregular migrants” (all of nonEU origin) such as: irregular staying, asylum seeker or with recognized refugee status and seasonal or in transit modality of staying. From these considerations, the articulations of some or all of the parameters compose the migrant taxonomy in focus. Informal sanctuary: Latin: sanctuarium. A container for holy things (or people). Extended meaning used for any place of refuge for short periods. Informal sanctuary is intended here as the physical and spatial manifestation of the lack of structured reception solutions. Form as the result of the occupation of public or private places (out of the state’s institution and or at the margins of the law) for temporal shelters with

1 “But these variables overlap and do not help to identify clear and mutually exclusive categories. Moreover, not only the contours of the different subsets are porous, but evolve over time” (Antonella Sarlo, Maurizio Imperio, Flavia Martinelli, 2011) 199

the prevailing population of the type indicated above (Irregular Migrants). These are characterized by more or less accentuated forms of self-management by the inhabitants and no payment of rent, having poor physical infrastructure, inadequate or inexistent access to sanitary services, with a higher level of vulnerability that the urban poor population. Transit Architecture: In light of a different dynamic of settlement, according to a subject on the move: on transit (by de facto). Poses diverse and ambiguous forms of habitation: disruptive practice on the space. Architecture is temporary, by definition and by nature; it is just a matter of how ephemeral it is. Not only temporary by its economic recession or quality of construction (technology). It recognized a need for socio-politic relaxation, diaphanous flexibility, and innovation. Still, on the core, improve the physical conditions for people seeking sanctuary. Transit architecture is not just about the temporality of the structure, it can also mean a temporary use of space and temporary user. Moreover, on the second level, that of the public policies emerge the importance of the third sector; of all the associations that meet the political shortcomings and reconstruct an emergency (informal) welfare. From the different situation exemplified and specially the two cases study it is evident the relation between welfare policies and the city as a socially relevant matter which reflect a deficiency or discrepancy in the provision of services, that can be may be due to a lack of the same or their incorrect localization and relation between the actors that put it into practice. The proliferation of marginality and exclusion pockets in urban areas where forced migrants dwell emphasize the problematic frame between public policies in welfare and social affairs with urban planning and spatial management. The missing stance on the issue of forced migrations by several institutions confirms somehow an increase in alternative, bottom-up measures claimed by local NGOs and citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; movements. Specifically related to the two focused occupations, these can be seen as the intersection of different social movements, the local movements for the integration of forced migrants and of grassroots movements for the right to adequate housing as a collective answer to the fulfillment of a need and or the claim of a right. Lastly, is undeniable that this phenomenon which generates in the territory practices and uses of space spurge to question about the repercussion within our disciplinary field. Where it appears relevant the different episodes happened within the field (the two workshops one by SiencesPo and the one by La Sapienza University of 200

Rome) that are primarily cognitive moments and moments of enrichment of the public debate on the issues related to space, which try to understand how this phenomenon changes the city and the territory. This becomes as a solid ground for public administration entities for the development of policies for the cities. These are topics that translate into the production of new space assets. The contribution of architects and urban planners in the migratory crisis that is investing and has invested the territory from the past centuries is that of giving specific physical dimensions to welfare policies, giving them concreteness representing the new dimensions of well-being (Secchi, 2012) .In a sense, fundamental, but a role that is stratified by other levels of policy configurations that are part of city building.

201

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ambrosini M., Marchetti C. (2008). Cittadini possibili: Un nuovo approccio all’accoglienza e all’integrazione dei rifugiati, Milano: FrancoAngeli. Ambrosini M. (2015), Sociologia delle migrazioni, Bologna. Il Mulino. Balbo M. (2009). Social and spatial inclusion of international migrants: local responses to a global process, SSIIM Paper Series, Università IUAV. Venezia Belloni, G. (2011). UNSETTLED Solidarity networks, coping strategies, resistance in contemporary urban areas The case of 300 african refugees between Itay and Hamburg. Hamburg, Germany: HafenCity University. Belloni, G. (2013). UNSETTLED. Solidarity networks, coping strategies, resistance in contemporary urban areas. The case of 300 African refugees between Italy and Hamburg. Hamburg/Milano: HCU Hamburg/Politecnico di Milano unpublished master thesis. Belloni, G., & Pallotta, G. S. (2016). GRASSROOTS CULTURE AS THE KEY FOR THE REVITALISATION OF URBAN PERIPHERIES: THE CASE OF REFUGEES SQUAT IN TURIN’S FORMER OLYMPIC VILLAGE. Turin, Italy: Track 2_Imageries of cities: The role of cultural policies and activisms in self-representation of cities and citizens. Bifulco, L., & Vitale, T. (2014). Da strutture a processi: servizi, spazi e territori del welfare locale. Sociologia Urbana e rurale, 2003, XXV (72), pp.95-108. Bolzonia, M., Gargiulob, E., & Manocchia, M. (2015). The social consequences of the denied access to housing for refugees in urban settings: the case of Turin, Italy. Turin: International Journal of Housing Policy. Caritas Diocesana (2015). Progetto presidio Report, Nella Terra di Nessuno. Lo 202

sfruttamento lavoratio in agrucoltura.

Centro Studi e Ricerche IDOS. (2009). The practices in Italy concerning the granting of non-EU harmonized protection statuses. Rome: Italian National Contact Point. Darling, J. (2016). Forced migration and the city: Irregularity, informality, and the politics of presence. SAGE. Düvell, F. (2006). ‘Crossing the fringes of Europe: Transit migration in the EU’s neighbourhood’. Oxford: Centre on Migration, Policy and Society. Gruppo di studio sul sistema di accoglienza. (2015). Rapporto sull’accoglienza di migranti e rifugiati in Italia. roma: Ministero dell’interno. Harvey, D. (2010). La crisi della modernità. Il Saggiatore. Translated by Maurizio Viezzi. Harvey D. (2012), Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution, Verso Books, New York. Hatziprokopiou, P., Frangopoulos, Y., & Montagna, N. (2016, FEBRUARY 15). Migration and the city. City. analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, policy, action, 52-60. Korac M. (2001). Politiche, agency e dialogo interculturale. Esperienze dei rifugiati dei conflitti jugoslavi in Italia, in “Mondi Migranti, 3/2009”, pp. 127-150.Milano: FrancoAngeli Korac M. (2003). Integration and How We Facilitate it: A Comparative Study of the Settle ment Experiences of Refugees in Italy and the Netherlands, SAGE Journals, in So ciology, Vol. 37, n.1, pp. 51-68. London Lo piccolo, F. (2012). Welfare o diritto alla città? Sguardi e voci plurali nell’esercizio di forme di cittadinanza attiva. In S. Munarin, & V. Martelliano, Spazi, Storie e Soggetti del Welfare. Sul ruolo delle politiche di welfare state nella costruzione della città` (p. 89-98). Roma: Gangemi editore. 203

M Collyer; F Düvell; H de Hass. (2012). Critical Approaches to Transit Migration. Population, spaces, and place, 407-414. Marcetti C., Solimano N.(2000) Immigrazione. Convivenza Urbana. Conflitti Locali, Angelo Pontecorboli Editore (Firenze, 2000). Marchetti, C. (2006). Un mondo di rifugiati: Migrazioni forzate e campi profughi. Bologna: EMI – Editrice Missionaria Italiana. Marconi, G. (2001). Not Just Passing Through: International Migrants in cities of “Transit Countries”. . SSIIM paper No. 6. Medici Senza Frontiere. (2016). Fuori Campo, richiedenti asilo e rifugiati in Italia: insediamenti informali e marginalità sociale. Ministry of interior, (2015) Report on reception of migrants and refugees in Italy. Rome Molfetta, C. (2008). La lotta dei rifugiati Accogliere invece di sgomberare. Munarin S., Tosi M. (2014). Welfare Space. On the Role of Welfare State Policies in the Construction of the Contemporary City. Roma Netto, G. (2011). Strangers in the city: Addressing challenges to the protection, housing and settlement of refugees. International Journal of Housing Policy, 11, 285-303. Nevin, A. M. (2013 ). Ambivalence and citizenship: Theorising the political claims of irregular migrants. Millennium, 41: 182–200. Newman, D. (2006). The lines that continues to separate us: borders in our borderless world . Progress in human geography, vol 30, No. 2, pp 143-161. Ostanel, E. (2010). “Practice of citizenship, practice of resistance: Mozambicans in Johannesburg South Africa. SSIIM paper series No. 3 . Papadopoulou, A. (2008). Transit migration: the missing link between emigration and 204

settlement. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Perriccioli, M. (2005). La temporaneità oltre l’emergenza : strategie insediative per l’abitare temporaneo. Roma : Kappa . Pruijt, H. (2013). The logic of urban squatting. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37, 19-45. Refugee Study Center. (2015). Destination: Europe. Oxford: Forced migration review. Rossi, A. (2014). Evictions, urban displacement and migrant re-appropriation in Turin (Northern Italy). Planum. The Journal of Urbanism, n.29 vol II/2014. Secchi, B. (2012). Esperienze di Welfare. In S. Murarin, & V. Martelliano, Spazi, Storie e Soggetti del Welfare. Sul ruolo delle politiche di welfare state nella costruzione della città` (p. 21-24). Roma: Gangemi editore. Secchi, B. (2013). La Città dei Ricchi e la Città dei Poveri. Roma-Bari: Laterza. SPRAR, (2015). Rapporto sulla protezione internazionale in Italia. Roma Tosi A. (1993), Immigrati e senza casa. I problemi, i progetti, le politiche, Milano FrancoAngeli Turano, S. (2016). Lo spazio dei rifugiati nella città europea. Torino. Thesis: Bacheloor degree in Architecture and Construction City. Torino: Politecnico di Torino. Uitermark J., Nicholls W., Loopmans M. (2012), “Cities and social movements: theorizing beyond the right to the city”, Environment and Planning A, 44: 2546–54. UNHCR, (2015). Asylum Levels and Trends in Industrialized Countries Yvan Sagnet; Leonardo Palmisano. (2015). Ghetto Italia, I braccianti stranieri tra caporalato e sfruttamento. Roma: Fandango Libri. 205

Webography Forcer Migration Review http://www.fmreview.org/ Frontex http://frontex.europa.eu/ UNHCR http://www.unhcr.it/ International Organization for Migration http://www.iom.int/ Amnesty International https://www.amnesty.org/ Ministero dellâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Interno http://www.interno.gov.it/it Doctors without Bordes http://www.medicisenzafrontiere.it/ Italian Council for Refugees http://www.cir-onlus.org/

206

UNI VERSI DAD CENTRALDE VENEZUELA