Work, Slums, Housing and the Architecture of the Modern City: Challenges and Alternatives to House the Poor in the Developing World

The series of lectures offers a didactic divulgation of the findings of a decennial research performed by the author in the informal settlements of Brazil (favelas), aimed at investigating the spatial genesis of the social needs of the underprivileged people living in informal settlements (Cavalcanti, 2017; Cavalcanti 2018b).

The research has discovered that the working activities of the residents are the primary shapers of space in informal settlements (Cavalcanti, 2017, 2018a; 2018b) and intends to disseminate this finding and its implications to students of architecture, academics and practitioners dealing with informal settlements. In informal settlements, labour shapes, plans and governs spaces inside houses, where phases of production, commercialization of products and advertisement of activities take place (Cavalcanti, 2017; Cavalcanti, 2018b; 121-155). The layout of self-constructed alleys of the favelas are also shaped to allow the logistics and practicalities of working practices of residents or may serve to host activities of commerce and services, such as bars, grocery shops and repair services (Cavalcanti, 2018b; 121-155). Working activities in the fabric of favelas are strategically emplaced by residents to enhance visibility and attract customers (Cavalcanti, 2017). In this regard, most of them are concentrated in the margins of the favela with the formal city, a preferred location to attract clients coming from richer neighborhoods (Cavalcanti, 2017; Cavalcanti, 2018b). Spatial planning subordinated to working logics is, in this regard, a consequence of the genesis itself of the informal settlement as a spatial entity in a city. In many favelas, their genesis is due to migration processes of residents living in the countryside, seeking for a job in the city (Cavalcanti, 2017). In spontaneous spatial aggregations or in vacant terrains, residents seek for work opportunities, in proximity with natural resources (i.e. a lagoon, a sea) or infrastructures (i.e. a shopping mall, street market) (Cavalcanti, 2017). Labour, for unprivileged people living in the favela, also means self-esteem, dignity and hope (Cavalcanti, 2018). Indeed, labour is so important for the residents living in informal settlements that, in recent history of resettlement and redevelopment programs in Brazil it has represented a challenge for the current housing approaches (Cavalcanti & Li Piani, 2019).

Current design models and housing approaches are all mainly aimed at improving the hygienic, infrastructural and sanitary standards of the existing slums (Cavalcanti, 2017; Cavalcanti, 2018b). However, they still fail in the attempt to ameliorate the living conditions of its residents (including improving their socioeconomic standards). It is observed that most of the housing projects around the world that are emplaced for the resettlement of residents originally living in informal settlements are often soon ‘mischaracterized’ by residents, with an early decay of the initial formal design requirements and standards, often leading to so-called ‘re-favelization’ processes (term sometimes used by architects to describe the ‘mischaracterization’ of buildings). These housing approaches are actually the result of a warped and outdated adoption of entire canons of modern architecture (that has emerged in the context of industrialized societies) in economies with vocation for commerce and services (Cavalcanti, 2018b; Cavalcanti & Li Piani, 2019). These approaches are not confronted with respect to different economic systems and non-fully industrialized contexts, such as those of developing countries, that in their turn, are characterized by economies of service and commerce. These housing approaches are still characterized by a compartmentalized planning, denoted by a mass zoning which separates work from dwelling and social housing in peripheral areas of the city (Cavalcanti, 2018b; Cavalcanti & Li Piani, 2019). Such contrasts, for example, to a historically mixed urban form of pre-industrial and non-fully industrialized societies, which still characterizes the urban fabric of developing countries.

The experimental empirical evidence about the importance of labour in the spontaneous planning of the space by people living in favelas who fight for survival and subsistence is the new contribution of the author in academia. The primary needs of the poor were not addressed in literature and no housing solutions can be successful for the poor (and the for the whole city) if the primary priorities of the poor are not addressed (Cavalcanti, 2018b). Labour is the housing right that residents conquer every day and which primarily governs the logics of space in the favela (Cavalcanti 2018a).

To unveil these needs, new methods of investigation and approaches were suggested in (Alsayyad and Roy, 2004), claiming for the study of space of informal settlements from the cartographies of livelihoods and ethnographies of everyday life, that go beyond technocratic knowledge and spatial determinism and that seek for housing solutions that are sensitive to the failures of current housing models instead of aiming for reproducing exemplary blueprints (Alsayyad and Roy, 2004). Indeed, only an in-field research approach could unveil the spatial logics of the unprivileged and understand their housing needs. For this reason, the author has decided to perform field research being included to live in a favela of Alagoas State in Brazil, to investigate the social dimension that influence the spatial decisions of the poor.

Three important contributions and reflections to the theory and historiography of global modern architecture are explained by this series of lectures. They are crucial to address within the context of self-constructed neighbourhoods and slums.

The first challenges the historical modern definition for ‘slum’ developed over the years (i.e. see UN-Habitat definition for slums), according to theories of prominent scholars and books, showing that they do not address the complexity of informal settlements (Cavalcanti, 2018b). The second contribution frames the housing projects currently delivered to the poor as an outdated legacy of modernism, addressing the many deficiencies and challenges in improving life conditions due to the lack of attention on the labour practices of residents (Cavalcanti 2017; Cavalcanti 2018b; Cavalcanti&LiPiani, 2019). Finally, the third contribution is understanding labor as central argument in the theory of urban informality, understanding its effects to both ‘structuralist and legalist definitions of urban informality’ to both ‘L.A School of Urban Sociology and the Chicago School of Sociology’ as Alsayyad claim, because cities and informal urbanization are not currently defined by Chicago or LA theories, but rather by forms of urban informality and new urbanities which constitute a way of life established by neoliberalization of markets (Alsayyad, 2004). In the interpretation of the author, the definition given to ‘workers’ living in informal settlements, and the slum itself, must be understood beyond the parochialism implied by different schools of thought. They tackle specific forms of urbanization under liberalization, and the inherent diversification of labour, individualization of forms of work which is important to understand and discuss. All these three challenges will be shortly described below.

Firstly, the findings of the research challenge the current definition of informal settlements. According to modern definition, informal settlements are defined as temporary dwelling spaces for the poor working class living in cities: they are an entry door for the poor in the city (see Abrams, 1964). From the findings of the author instead, the informal settlements can be defined as spaces where the poor stay long periods of life in order to work (Cavalcanti, 2017). It is an organic part of the city, born from the same necessities and constituencies of any other part of the city, but it is constrained by scarcity conditions and shortage settings(Cavalcanti, 2018b). These lectures will seek for alternative definitions for the concept of slums as it was framed by modern theorists by books, based on the theorization of the observed spatial relationships with labour in informal settlements, from its genesis up to its persistence.

Secondly, the course will challenge the modern strategies and approaches for housing the poor currently emplaced in many settlements of developing countries, and based as purely dwelling units dislocated from working activities (Cavalcanti, 2018b, Cavalcant i& Li Piani 2019). These housing approaches are the result of a warped and outdated adoption of entire canons of modern architecture, that has emerged in the context of industrialized societies, and that has become crystalized even in different economics systems(Cavalcanti, 2018b, Cavalcanti & Li Piani 2019). Such approaches are not confronted with respect to different economic systems and non-fully industrialized contexts, such as those typical of developing countries that in their turn, are characterized by economies of service and commerce(Cavalcanti, 2018b, Cavalcant i& Li Piani 2019). Consequently, these housing approaches still result in a compartmentalized planning which separates work from dwelling. Such contrasts, for example, with a mixed urban form of pre-industrial and non-fully industrialized societies, which characterizes the urban fabric of developing countries, and that of slums in the global south (where work occurs inside or in between small-scale housing)(Cavalcanti, 2018b, Cavalcanti& Li Piani 2019).

Thirdly, the course shows examples of specific local contexts. The historiography of labor, informal work, and informal settlements (Lewis, Reynolds, Moses, Hart, Mazumbar, Bromly, Portes, Annis & Franks, De Soto, ILO, apud Alsayyad 2003), showing how labor of the poor living in informal settlements plays a pivotal role in current liberalization of markets, and diversification of work, which demands for new forms of housing to attend the demands of the poor. It shows who are the workers, which are the places, and the settlements ruled the work of the poor living in the global south. It shows how labour plays a central role in the shaping process of urban informality.