Favela Upgrade in Brazil: A Reverse of Participatory Processes

Abstract

This paper looks at three different Brazilian cities: Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Belo Horizonte to understand the different models of favela upgrade, the opportunities and the challenges that each model entails. The recent ‘left-turn’ on Latin American politics created several opportunities for architects to help improve the informal sector that comprises a significant portion of every major city in the continent. In Brazil, the Lula government invested billions in the infrastructure upgrade of the infamous favelas. This paper will argue that the two traditional contractual models, the construction bidding (by metrics and values) and the commission by ‘reputation’ (opaque political process of choice), are not sufficient. A third model based on popular participation was tested in the early 2000s but it was gradually marginalized as the country speeded up investment in preparation for the FIFA World Cup in 2014 and the Summer Olympics in 2016.

Notes

1. It has been difficult to find precise quantitative data on Favela-Bairro, with different authors using very different numbers. The sums presented here were taken from Conde and Magalhães, 2004, 147–155.

2. After serving his term (1993–96), Ananias supported the election of his deputy Célio de Castro in 1996 despite the opposition of part of PT. Castro, from PSB (Socialist Party) kept most of the key personnel from the previous administration and continued most of Ananias' initiatives during his first term, being re-elected in 2001. However, he suffered a stroke in November 2002 which left him incapacitated and his deputy Fernando Pimentel, from PT, took office. Pimentel was then elected to a full term in 2004, continuing with basically the same policies. In 2008, Pimentel supported Marcio Lacerda from PSB who was elected despite opposition from part of PT. Lacerda's policies have diverged widely from the previous ones and the relationship between City Hall and population has been tense and mistrustful.

3. Companhia Urbanizadora de Belo Horizonte (Belo Horizonte's urbanization company).

4. It is striking to note that city maps from as late as 1982 do not register the existence of major favelas and instead show approved parcelling projects as if it was empty land ready to be developed.

5. PLAMBEL was created in 1975 to articulate a metropolitan urban policy beyond the municipal limits of Belo Horizonte but was disenfranchised after the 1988 constitution gave individual mayors much more autonomy. The autarchy was dismantled in the early 1990s and its well-trained technicians were absorbed by different departments, mostly at the state level.

6. While this article was being reviewed large scale street protests erupted in Brazil (June 2013), showing how disturbing those authoritarian urban practices have become.