What is the slum? 2,0BIL.
The word “Slum” started to be used in english in the first half of 19th century and the meaning was the expression for poor communities in parts of London. Nowadays it is a definition for a poor community from improvisated, ilegally built dwellings, which can be mostly found at the sub-urban metropolis areas. Theis image changes according to the geographic position, mostly poor people live there. Dwellings change from simple houses to the good situated structures with plumbings, electricity and other services. Irish expression 'S lom é (pron. s'lum ae) means znamená "bleak or abandonned place."
Rocinha 2010-99% houses from bricks and concrete.99% have installations.
0,9BIL.
?
Rocinha 1968-50% houses from wood and metal, 50% from bricks and concrete.Par tial installations
New York 1920 demolition of the last slum
0,1BIL. 1910
1930
Dharaví in 2005 opposite to the favelas the positive progress is much more slower.
Dharavi, India 1960
Rocinha 1930-99% houses made from wood and metalNo installations.
1950
1970
1990
2000
2010
2030
Increasement of the world slum population
7 myths about slums ( by Adam W. Parsons ) For anyone who takes an interest in the problem of slums, a few basic facts will soon become clear. Firstly, the locus of global poverty is moving from rural areas to the cities, and more than half the world population now lives in urban areas for the first time in human history. Secondly, most of the world’s urban population, most of its largest cities and most of its urban poverty is now located in Africa, Asia and Latin America – the so-called developing world. Thirdly, the growth in slums since the 1980s is both formidable and unprecedented (even though urban slums have existed in Europe since the Industrial Revolution), and the number of slum-dwellers worldwide is expected to continually increase in the decades ahead. Beyond these facts, there seems to be little awareness about the reality of slums in the popular imagination. Thanks to the tireless work of many activists and non-governmental organisations over many decades, the issue of global poverty is now high on the international policy radar – but the issue of slums, which forms a major component of poverty in urbanising cities, still fails to register in most people’s concerns. Much may be written about informal settlements in academic books and journals, but the depiction of slums in popular movies and literature also serves to reinforce a number of long-held prejudices against the urban poor. The complacent indifference expressed by many governments and middle-class citizens to the struggles faced by the millions of people living in slums can also lead to other forms of discrimination or ‘myths’ about the solutions to inadequate housing. As popularised by many publications in recent decades that highlight the common misconceptions about global poverty, conventional thinking on development issues in the West is often characterised by many assumptions, clichés and rationalisations about the very poor who live in distant countries. In challenging some of these core myths, we are able to move beyond a response to poverty motivated by guilt or fear, and instead focus on the structural causes of powerlessness that result in insecurity and deprivation. The following ‘myths’ about slums aim to give a general perspective on a range of key issues related to human settlements – including the impact of economic globalisation, the role of national governments, the significance of the informal sector of employment, the question of international aid, and the (little mentioned) controversy surrounding global slum data and development targets.
Megacities population growth
Los Angeles 4M 12,9M 14,2M
New York 12M 16,5M 17,6M
Káhira 2,1M 10,5M 14,4M
( cities with more than 10mil. )
Dhaka 0,4M 10M 19M
Karachi 1,1M 11M 20,6M
Mexico City 3,5M 17,6M 19M
Mumbai 2,8M 16,9M 27,4M
Calcutta 4,5M 12,5M 17,3M
Tokyo 6,2M 27,7M 28,7M Shanghai 4,3M 13,9M 23,4M
Jakarta 2,8M 9,5M 21,2M
Sao Paulo 2,3M 17,3M 19M
Buenos Aires 5,3M 12,2M 13,9M
Dhaka 1,7M 11,7M 19,4M
1950
2000
2015
Myth 1 : There are too many people
Myth 2 : The poor are to blame
It is easy to believe that urban slums are a consequence of too many people living in cities, or too many poor people migrating from rural to urban areas for governments to contend with the strain on housing. But the real problem is rooted in outdated institutional structures, inappropriate legal systems, incompetent national and local governance, and short-sighted urban development policies. From a wider perspective, the resurgence of a non-interventionist ideology in recent decades has weakened the role of national governments, and de-prioritised the importance of the state in planning for a more equitable distribution of resources in cities. Crippled by debt, forced to prioritise loan repayments over basic services such as healthcare, and held in thrall to the so-called Washington Consensus policies that demanded a withdrawal of government from almost every sphere of public life, it has been impossible for initiatives by the state or international agencies to keep pace with the rate of urban slum formation since the 1980s. In the simplest terms, the existence of slums is not an inevitable consequence of overpopulation, but a result of the failure of policy at all levels – global, national and local – and the adoption of an international development paradigm that fails to prioritise the basic needs of the poor.
Many people continue to blame the poor for their conditions of poverty. According to this deep-seated myth, the people who live in slums are antisocial, uneducated and unwilling to work, or else they would not be living in such conditions of squalor. In contrast to such popular prejudices, however, anthropologists and development practitioners have long observed that the poor are not a burden upon the urbanising city, but are often its most dynamic resource. While achieving considerable feats of inventiveness in self-help housing on an individual basis, the collective power of urban poor groups has produced exceptional results in building new homes and upgrading existing slum housing – as reflected in official development literature which recommends “participatory slum improvement” as the best practice for housing interventions in developing countries. Yet for every example of a successful community-led upgrading scheme, there are as many examples of slum clearance operations and forced evictions. This constitutes one of the most crucial questions in the fight against urban poverty: will governments together recognise and support the ability of the poor to organise and help develop an inclusive city, or will they continue to view slum-dwellers as being ‘anti-progress’ and a threat to established institutions?
Myth 3: Slums are places of crime, violence and social degradation A long-standing prejudice against the urban poor is the widespread view of slums as places of social degradation and despair, and of slum-dwellers as perpetrators of violence and crime. Although high levels of crime may occur in many informal settlements in developing countries, the popular depiction of life in slums often fails to acknowledge the deeper causes of insecurity and violence – including the links between levels of crime and incidences of poverty, inequality, social exclusion, and youth unemployment. These causal factors (and most importantly, the responsibilities and failures of state institutions) often go unacknowledged in films and media reports about slums. Many squatter settlements in the South also exhibit a communal solidarity that contradicts these negative stereotypes, along with innumerable examples of self-sacrifice, altruism and community service that serve as a laudable example for mainstream society. This is not to glorify or sentimentalise the urban poor and their self-help housing, as many slums can be equally characterised by the opposite qualities of ruthless individualism and petty-exploitation. But too often the stereotypical view of squatters as something ‘other’ – whether it be criminals, idlers, parasites, usurpers, prostitutes, the diseased, drunks or drug addicts – is the most common and misguided response to those who live in poor urban communities.
Myth 4: Slums are an inevitable stage of development There is an underlying assumption to much of the debate surrounding slums and urban poverty: that the poor will get to our standard of living eventually, just so long as they follow our prescribed free market approach to development. Yet the policies for industrial growth followed by developed countries were not based on a laissez-faire ideology of free trade and state non-intervention, but instead used protectionist strategies for key industries in the earlier phases of development – which calls into question the neoliberal policy recommendations made to developing countries since the 1970s. The mainstream ‘science’ of economics is also based on the assumption that perpetual growth is the foundation of progress, even if common experience raises doubts about the environmental and social side-effects of unfettered capitalism. Furthermore, we can ask if it is acceptable to consider the appalling conditions and human abuses that defined cities all over Europe during the nineteenth century as an inevitable, even if disagreeable, part of progress in a rapidly industrialising city like Mumbai or Chang Hai. If not, our only choice is to consider alternative goals and more holistic models of development that prioritise social objectives ahead of the profit imperative and GDP, with a more equitable distribution of resources on the national and global level.
Myth 7: There will always be slums
Rural population Urban population
29%
1950 - 0,8 BIL. Few writers on urban development issues imagine a ‘world without slums’ in the future. In the polarised debates on urban poverty, both the ‘slums of hope’ and ‘slums of despair’ viewpoints tacitly accept the continued existence of slums. Part of the problem is one of semantics, as it is difficult to conceive of an end to ‘slums’ when the language used to describe them is limited and generalised. The UN’s Millennium Development Goal on slums – to “significantly improve the lives of 100 million slum-dwellers by 2020” – also implicitly accepts the existence of slums as an enduring reality, as achieving this (unacceptably low) target would hardly result in cities without slums. If urbanisation trends and cities are to become socially inclusive and sustainable, the development model that sustains them must be wholly reformed and reimagined. In the widest sense, a world without slums and urban poverty cannot be realised without a transformation of our existing political, economic and social structures. A first step lies in recognising the possibility of achieving a new vision of human progress based upon a fundamental reordering of global priorities – beginning with the immediate securing of universal basic needs. Only then can the twin goals enshrined in the Habitat Agenda of 1996 be translated into a concrete programme of action: “adequate shelter for all” and “sustainable human settlements development in an urbanising world”. The hope not only rests with the mobilisation of sufficient power through political organisation in the South, but also with the willingness of those in affluent societies to join voices with the poor, to sense the urgency for justice and participation, and to strengthen the global movement for a fairer distribution of the world’s resources.
Rural population Urban population
46%
2000 - 2,8 BIL. Rural population Urban population 2030 - 4,8 BIL.
60%
Proportion of the population living in rural and urban areas.
Myth 6: International aid is the answer There may be more aid projects for improving the living conditions of the urban poor than ever before, but the current system of donor assistance has clearly failed to stem the tide of growing slum formation. The first problem is simply one of scale; urban poverty reduction is one of the lowest priorities for aid donations from most multilateral agencies and wealthy countries. A greater problem is the difference between the kind of assistance that is needed to ameliorate slums and the forms of action that are currently provided by international aid institutions. In particular, most official development assistance agencies have failed to develop relationships with slum residents and their representative organisations, and rarely assign any role to urban poor groups in the design and implementation of aid programmes. The priorities of aid agencies and development banks are also unlikely to favour the kind of redistributive policies that are central for giving the poor local control over the housing process. Although additional financial resources are imperative for upgrading slums in developing countries, it is doubtful that aid can successfully address the crisis in urban housing unless there is a transformation of the goals and priorities of the major donor countries and the institutions that govern the global economy.
Slums Urban population
Slums Urban population
Slums Urban population
3%
27%
41%
Proportion of the population living in slums on the total urban population.
Myth 5 : The free market can end slums Many proponents of economic globalisation maintain a rigid faith in the power of market forces to end slums. Get the inefficient government out of the way, remains the assumption, and the beneficent power of the market mechanism and private capital will act as the levers of economic growth and widespread affluence. But after several decades of relying on the market as a cure-all for the ills of the twenty-first century, the increasing number of urban residents living in slums is sufficient evidence that the ‘growth-first’ strategy for development isn’t sustainable. Employing market forces as the arbiter of resource distribution is socially exclusive, not inclusive, and it does not function when there is a need to produce certain types of goods or services such as housing for the poor or welfare services for low-income groups. The deregulation and privatisation of public services also serves to directly undermine social welfare provision, and further compromises the ability of public agencies to meet the needs of those who cannot afford the market price for housing, healthcare, education and sanitation. In short, the efficiency-oriented, growth-led and internationally competitive strategies of the ‘world class city’ have failed to combat the problem of slums, and are more likely to exacerbate urban poverty than act as a solution in the future.
entry
Concept :
entry
- Don‘t destroy! - Evolution not revolution - Job - small business in the community framework - Construction- reiforce the stability - Installations - one main colector - Education - accentuate the importance of the school - Public health - improve for everyone - Verticalisation - problem with space - vertical construction - Public space for free time spending - No physical barriers between city and favela - Respect the opinion of the people - Urban agriculture - growers on the roofs - Culture and sport - more support for local people
Only 15% people are not satisfied with the life in favela. Today‘s entries to the space.Bad communication block the fast reaction in case of fire or in case when the doctor nedd to get fast to some place.
Selected dwellings, pushed-up of one floor in the example of one community.
entry entry entry entry
entry entry
How to achieve so we could bring in to the space new elements like schools, public health, etc. without being destroying the existing structure? Pushing-up the dwellings of one floor we will get the space for :
4 points of regeneration: - new entries for easier communication - new ground floor with the area for a small bussiness, public services and animal breeding - natural products production - new public space on the roofs - safer and more stable construction forced by steel profiles
In the last few decades, the economy in formal, planned cities has been changing from being dominated by a few large companies to being dominated by networks of many smaller actors. This trend has been described by Laubacher and Malone of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who observed how companies, after a period of centralization between 1950 and 1970, have started downsizing in the 1990s, and are now disintegrating into networks of more independent operational units, smaller companies and freelancers. Clusters of smaller networks, they explain, have proven to be more flexible and responsive in relation to changing circumstances and demands, and are consequently more competitive and resilient. 2 This shift from a more centralized to a more decentralized economy has also been described by Chris Anderson in his book The Long Tail 3. He describes a graph that shows the distribution in market share of economic actors, a graph that is characteristic for its long tail. It shows that a few powerful actors typically dominate the market with their products and services, whereas the majority of actors serve the market by selling smaller quantities of niche products. The influence of both groups in the market is roughly equal, but shifting in time: it shows that the majority of smaller actors is gaining influence.
This graph is a simplification and roughly represents the urban reality in Brazil, where the network economy is established, and where the slum problem is aimed to be resolved in 2050. In other countries, where circumstances are less favorable, the curves may be gentler, and the window of opportunity larger.
X
X
X
X
No possibility for other horizontal expansion in Rocinha. The boundaries are the city and the mounains.
Favela is growing in vertical sense.
Original 1 - floor dwellings could become 3 or 4 floors housings.
Rio de Janeiro centre Brazil
Rio de Janeiro
Rocinha 0m
Rio de Janeiro - city centre with the marked position of the Rocinha slum which has the strategic position near the Ipanema beach and residental district of Sao Conrado.
Position of the favela Rocinha on the hillside relief of the Rio de Janeiro city.
1000m
2000m
Urbanistic scheme of the whole favela Rocinha with the marked segment of the solved area of 300 x 300 metres.
Ground plan of one solved community. These new epicenters were found on the empty spaces, so we didn‘t destroy any original dwelling. With this solution we will get naturally spreaded system of small centers which will add to the places missing functions for education, public services or medical support.
0m
50m
100m
150m
200m
Difference between arrangement of public space in Rocinha and city centre of the Rio de Janeiro.
Cities of the 21st century have almost the same structure. There are main centers where is concentrated industry, commerce, bussiness or historic heart with important institutions. Because of these, they are very easily vulnerables. Every kind of attack can negatively influent the fonction of all the rest. Also, there is an effect when some parts are overfulled - like industrial or commercial centers, while the others are almost abandonned. On the other hand, the favela is keeping almost the same density and housing structure so this negative effect doesn‘s take place there.
High dwelling density, which is copying the terrain coordinates and minimal open space almost without any allowed car entrance are the basic rules caracterizing the arrangement in favela. Life is getting place on the little streets and there is a rule that “living room is the street and street is the living room”.If in the context of the city the basic social element is your own house, in case of favela is the whole community.
Favela Rocinha doens‘t have any specific centre neither any government. The fonction and organisation scale keeps being the same no matter how big the area is. The basic element is every single house and together they make a complex, which is very difficult to hurt. The whole complex is like an organic substance and in case some part is damaged, there is no way to cause danger to the whole favela because all the small units are working together. Also all the public services and other facilities are regurarlly dispersed in the area so the distance to get them are much more lower then in nowadays citites.
Wide boulevards are taking alot of space in the cities at the expense of pedestrian zones, public spaces and parks. Modern cities became “slaves” of car transportation, which is stealing more and more space. While in favela is very easy to get almost everywhere by walking, in the city we are too much dependent on the transportation and also frequent column cars finally make the time to reach your final destination even longer then using a bike or walk.
Time availability between each communities ( by foot 5km/h )
3min
3min
3min 2min
100m
2min
75m 1min
50m
3min 2min 1min 2min
3min
1min 1min 1min 2min
1min
2min
2min 1min
3min
3min 3min
0m
100m
200m
300m
nature job job
services
shop shop nature services
Dependence of individual small subjects on the big one in the city centre. On one side advantage to concentrate a lot of services in one place, on the other hand high possibility of velnerability in case of some faillure. If this would happen there is much bigger community of people who could be affected by this than in favela.
Connections between individual communities in Rocinha.
Structure in favela is based on dispersion of the typical urban big subject to the big amount of small elements. In case of loosing one of these, there is only a local failure which can be solved without any problems by the neighbours. The ingenious connection reminiscent the atomic structure where each element cooperate together in all directions contrary to the city where it works in only one direction.
With a car transport progress in the city, the distance between individual subjects has been getting larger, because by car even the long distance doens‘t take so much time. At the beginning it was an advantage but today, the car is only an element spending time in traffic jam. In many cities, pedestrians or bicyclists were totally pushed out from the daily traffic. People are passing most of their free time at home because culture and other free time activities are by walking too far for them.
In the favela, almost all the services and facilities are regurarly dispersed and even a slow walking to get to them is faster then do the same operation by car in the city. Most of the dwellers have their small bussiness at home so they don‘t have to spend time in traffic. Park and space for the free time activities is placed on the roof so they don‘t have to go far away to achieve nature. Favela is also one big park, place for a work and for living.
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE GROWER 19M2
Zone for relaxing and free time activities.
OUTDOOR SPACE 134M2
PLAYGROUND
OPEN AIR CINEMA 30M2
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE GROWER 32M2 FRUIT AND VEGETABLE GROWER 19M2
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE GROWER 16M2
OPEN AIR THEATRE 37M2
Zone for living.
RESTAURANT AND BAR 49M2
Zone for services and commerce. SHOP WITH HOME UTILITIES 12M2
MEDICAL CENTRE 110M2
MATERNEL SCHOOL AND EDUCATION CENTRE 79M2
POTTER SHOP 16M2 FOOD MARKET 22M2
ANIMAL BREEDING 16M2
DROGISITC SHOP 32M2
MOTO TAXI 38M2
POLICE/FIREFIGHTERS 34M2
First floor can be used like a space for the domestical animal breeding and the natural products can be sold later on the plaza market for the neighbours in the community.
Green roofs will be used also like a space for a vegetable or fruit growers. The sunny weather will allow the whole year season. Later, the products can be sold on the plaza market for the other people from the community.
B
A'
A
0 1
B'
3
5
10
20M
B
A'
A
0 1
3
5
10
B'
20
B
A'
A
0 1
3
5
10
B'
20
3
2
1
After the massive immigration from rural areas with a dream to get a better job in the city which had begun in the 30's of 20th century, the forest disappeared under the structure of new favela dwellers.
At the beginning of the 20th century, still the hillside terrain of Rio de Janeiro was covered by deep National forest park.
Newly built ground floor will offer spaces for missing services for the community like basic medical facilities or education rooms. Also these areas will serve for a small local commerce, for example to sell homegrowed natural products or animal breeding.
Second and third floor will serve for living. Disposition is changed so it is adapted to the contemporary standards including sufficient hygienic support.
Today's unused areas on the roofs will change to the ralexing public space. It can be used like a park, gardens for vegetable or fruit growers, playground for the school children and public or place for cultural events. These includes open air cinema, theatre or small space for music.
>1930
<1930
cinema
church
View..
Cristo
Axonometric view to the function scheme of the roof area. If the narrow ground streets will serve mostly for communication, the upper public space will be the zone for relaxing and freetime activities. The sunny weather will allow whole year season using.
park
garden
playground
Model Today the majority of the dwellings in Rocinha are without any plaster or facade finishings. During the regeneration we would use the traditional brazilian way of using coloured facade materials. This means ornamental glazed tiles, usually with religious motives or perforrated brics which are very helpful to bring the fresh air inside the interior during hot summer in Brazil.
0m
25m
50m
75m
Segment of the favela Rocinha with dimensions of 300 x 300 metres which is a typical example how these slums in Rio de Janeiro got born. The dwellings are growing on height layers of the hillside terrain, sometimes with an extreme nivel differences. This is the reason how the knotty structure got born without any rules but a lot of liberty in.
85m
300m 300m
B
A'
A
B'
0
1
3
5 10
20M
0
1
3
5
10
20M
Original house construction is made like a concrete frame with the thickness about 140 mm filled with bricks. Because of savings, the facade is usually kept without any finishing surface or plaster. Ceilings construction is made from filigran beams with the final concrete layer. In the interior mostly we can find glazed tiles which have the refreshing qualities during the high summer season.
In the first stage of regeneration we would take off the brick wall and reinforce the concrete construction with steel U-profiles. Also the house foundation will be improved so the whole construction will be more stable.
In the last stage we would like to make a facade. In Brazil, most common are the glazed tiles with specific drawings and ornaments or typical structured or perforred bricks which will bring to the interior fresh air.
Facade section detail. Scale 1/20
Detail of construction from top view. Scale 1/10