This blog represents urban informality as a tool to address the challenges of "unplannable" and exceptional order of formal urbanization. Informality is often associated with squatter housing, street hawking and disguise level of social, economic and cultural order within an organized setting. The relationship between informality and designers is often complicated. On the one hand, informal spaces have been perceived as unplannable; on the other hand, there has been a series of attempts to improve and integrate such spaces. The divide here is not between formality and informality but rather an acceptance of informality as a new way to revitalize our cities today. This blog is written by Kshitija Bhakre, architect and urban designer who graduated from Kamla Raheja Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture. Her research dwells in ‘Legitimising Informality’ where it addresses the critical challenges of Formal-informal in metropolitan cities and sets underlying principles in designing for cohesive and inclusive design measures.
Informality, a unique driving force that outgrows the norms of regulation and shapes one of the most spontaneous facades of humanity. As urban enthusiasts, informality has meant more than illegality or stigmatic response to poverty, and neither it evokes the desperate need for formalization. This also leads to more demanding questions such as why does transforming cities usually envision an urban formalization and rooting out its homogenous informality? If cities need formalization, then why haven’t the recent redevelopments transformed our cities for the better? Does urban informality pose a severe problem? Does it need to be managed at all? In the quest of finding these answers and understanding the depths of the topic, I took up research on urban informality for my master’s program in urban design.
“The recovery of sprawl to vibrant spaces is literally our generation’s greatest challenge” – Steve Mouzon, Architect and urbanist.
I am born and brought up in Mumbai, a city where the lines between the stark opposites are seldom visible and where the planned roads and sidewalks are ornamented with makeshift shops and restaurants. Informal is not a sight in Mumbai, it’s the very life in it and celebrates it nonetheless. The city of 12.5 million people has nearly 42% of it living and working in informal settlements (census 2011), a number which outranks populations of various developed countries in the world. John Thackara, a bioregional designer and an advisor of sustainable future, categorizes these settlements as an example of DIY urbanism also termed as Tactile urbanism (development implemented by individuals or small groups which do not require major capital or state’s approval). Informality is a deregulated self-help system that redefines its relationship with the formal (Lehmann, July 2020). These settlements have thrived all the development stages of Mumbai, the eras which have left behind many facades of the city, the well-regulated and thoughtfully planned rise of the city. The strata of formality have always addressed a fraction of this city, the trajectory created by the state’s vision. The current development cannot address the large influx of settlers arriving into the city from all over the globe in masses every day, every year.
If looked closer into these informal developments, the relationship between humanity and sustainability becomes cohesive. Needless to say, this symbiotic relationship is driven by necessity rather than choices, because these developments are built with what is readily available and can be reused or recycled. The adaptability of the development is also spectacular to analyze as these developments change in shape, form, and materials over the seasons. This enables us to actively understand the implications of informality not only in space but more importantly in the very lives of the millions living and thriving in it. By embracing the paradox of planning for informality, we can elevate these sustainable values and strengths of the community into our development projects. (Gehl Blog, Feb 2018).
Current Planning Paradigm & the Middle-Class
The rise in the standard of living and aspirations of the middle-class has also resulted in the growth of the informal sector in the past three decades. This class is dependent on the products and the services offered by the informal sector due to affordability and lack of accessible service provisions by the formal state. Urban informality is a fragmented system, and more reliant on social networks than the formal one, but it also plays a key role in the functioning of the city. The current planning process in our cities follows the Functionalist Paradigm, based on traditional formal instruments of the discipline. A rigid master plan with a set of rules, setbacks, and the urge to simplify urban complexities as merely a design-led activity. It completely neglects the human dimension and is not sufficiently flexible and resilient to deliver sustainable outcomes (Lehmann, July 2020). These blanket strategies further get undermined and become obsolescent, hence creating places that are unable to deal with the informal activities. Therefore, there is a need for a new “integrated approach” to master planning aimed at addressing the unpredictable nature of development and accommodating elements of change. For example, a particular land use gives rise to certain supplementary or complementary activities and when these activities are not planned for, they pop up informally on the streets adjacent to that land use, which might result in the condition of chaos. Unmanageable chaotic conditions on streets often target these informal activities, making them most vulnerable in any transformation approaches.
“The ‘unplannable’ is a welcomed exception to the formal order of urban planning. The use of public space changes over time and urban informality is closely linked to the unplanned, dynamic use of public urban space. Consequently, numerous public spaces are linked to temporal informal activities such as pop-up markets and demonstrations, or as spaces for particular celebrations. Informal spaces are often perceived as ‘unplannable’, as informality tends to occur in a deregulated rather than an unregulated realm.”- (Lehmann, July 2020). Ananya Roy argues that the 'informal' does not necessarily represent an unregulated and illegal sector where state regulations are absent. Rather it is a form of deregulations, ambiguity and exemptions, where the law itself is open-ended and is subject to multiple representation and interests. She proposes seeing informality as a mode of urbanization where formal planning processes are themselves informal (Roy, Feb 2009). Paradoxically, Ker-Hsuan, Chien provides a concept that informality is not the state’s withdrawal from governing buildings or land uses. Instead, it is the result of detailed calculations that aim to maximize political support among the citizens and at the same time assure that local redevelopment projects are delivered. He suggests thinking of urban informality as a transformation process of how government relations have transformed along with the change of the motives that once sustained it (K Chien, April 2019). The evolution of urban informality over the years by various scholars acknowledges “informality” as an essential aspect of our planning approaches. But it remains insufficient to resolve issues between urban informality and the unplanned, due to a lack of understanding of the relationship between informality and spatial appropriation (Lehmann, July 2020). Hence, I decided to focus my research on urban informality and its spatial manifestation in public spaces.
Urban Informality and Public Spaces
In the previous blogs, different authors have established the importance of a public realm and the dynamic nature of public spaces, crucial to enhance and enrich our everyday experiences. In Indian cities, the idea of a place has not been traditionally defined by architects or urban planners, but by the people themselves with their experiences and everyday realities. The vitality of a public place is determined by various informal processes that manifest spatially on them. These informal processes exhibit the ability of citizens to shape the shared landscape and satisfy community needs in the absence or limitation of formal space structuring. The space in front of a retail store is utilized by a small vendor to run the business that benefits the retail owner, small vendor and the neighbourhood. These informal activities also act as “eyes on the streets”. Instead of marginalizing and labeling the citizens of informal sectors as illegal or encroachers, the “creative capacity” of these citizens and their inclination for survival and work can be considered as an opportunity through a different perspective. Hence, urban informality protects the marginal from social, economic, geographic, and political exclusion and when not seen as a taboo, this diversity and inclusivity can benefit society in preparing our cities with resilient communities.
One of the most important dynamic public spaces is our urban streets, they adapt over time to support environmental sustainability, socio-cultural and economic significance. Western and low-density cities often rely on informal spaces and activities to function, enabling a mix of possibilities that allow for vibrant and unplanned to occur. But in the megacity of Mumbai, the scenarios are quite contrasting. The high density and chaos of our streets result in degrading the experience of the user and thus evicting the social dimension of that particular street. The present trends of urbanization and regeneration aim at aspiring “world-class” streets as an effort to beautify cities but tend to neglect the social dimension. This often leads to extensive and invasive control over public places and streets with surveillance and eviction of informal activities. This diminishes the quality of public space and restricts the spontaneity of informal interactions. According to China Daily, (2019), Chinese public spaces have face recognition technology that can positively identify human faces within seconds. Such exorbitant control and surveillance are detrimental to the vitality and quality of the cities.
Seth Schindler argues, local governance comprised of middle-class associations, regulatory authorities, and service providers, “legitimize” the work of informal actors and their capacity to use urban space and provide services. State actors may seem to impose order through legal channels, they are often joined by or pitted against organized non-state actors, like middle-class associations who also have a position on informality. He suggests the need to analyze and theorize local governance regimes, comprised of state and non-state actors, whose combined priorities will sanction and institutionalized economic activity, land use and service provisions, and its attendant status as formal or informal (Schindler, 2017).
Legitimizing Informality for Inclusive Development
Cities in India have street guidelines primarily for national and state highways, with very little emphasis on urban roads and streets. Several street design guidelines are proposed by organizations like the Institute of Transport and Development Policy (ITDP), National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP), UTTIPEC, and even Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM). Few of these guidelines suggest the provision of “Hawker Zone” on streets to make them inclusive, but it is only limited to the allocation of a zone meant for hawking and vending without addressing the dynamic relationship between various informal processes and the formal sphere. As an integrated approach towards inclusive development, we need to legitimize informality on our streets. This can be done by enhancing the creative capacity of the formal sphere to make it flexible and resilient towards the unpredictable nature of our community development.
Informal processes that manifest on our urban streets include activities like eating, waiting, passive/ active recreation, strolling, pick-up/drop-off points and vending/hawking. These activities when analyzed together with different categories of formal sphere like land use, street network design, public transport network, building form, and street elements, provide interesting inferences that impact the quality of our urban street.
Land use or building use of the property determines the form of activity incorporating the street. For example, educational land use like colleges give rise to activities like eateries, auto pickup/drop off, paan & cigarette stalls, waiting, passive recreation, and stationary stall resulting in high density on streets as compared to residential land use where, activities like vegetable vending and general store flourish informally, resulting in low to medium density on the street.
Street network design impacts the usability of our streets. Large plot sizes with street networks promote dependency on private vehicles as compared to the smaller plots with fine-grain fabric that enhances social connectivity and pedestrian usability.
Public transport networks with diverse transit systems and including feeder transit networks connecting the mass transit stations also impact the usability of the street. Further reducing the dependency on private vehicles and cars.
Building form impacts the activity density of our streets. The openness of the front facade and the building use at a public access level determines the type of activity or the use of space in front of it.
Street elements like the sidewalk width, bus stop design and location, impact the functionality of the street.
For the integrated development approach of our streets, there are ten elements identified, that characterize a typical urban street in India. They are, Right of Way (ROW), Street Trading, Sidewalks, On-Street parking, Planation, Street utilities and Amenities, Vehicular lane, Street Edge, Residual space, and Building Frontage. The lack of design and creative capacity of these formal street elements obstructs pedestrian and vehicular movement making it unpleasant for use. These inferences suggest intervening streets with Tactile/ DIY approach along with the involvement of various stakeholders like local residents, user groups and commuters, at neighbourhood and street level. This approach allows the stakeholders to appropriate the streets and public spaces, based on the needs and requirements of that particular neighbourhood. At the governance level, the following policy interventions should be implemented to support Tactile/DIY urbanism.
Formal redevelopment mechanisms should support mixed-use development and compatibility of uses both horizontally and vertically.
The concept of the shared zone should be introduced on the private plots adjoining the urban streets. This will allow the integration of complementary land use activities and a semi-public space to flourish without obstructing the pedestrian movement. The acquired land area can be compensated by additional FSI or TDR.
Variation in setbacks can create interesting pockets to enhance the pedestrian realm.
Along with the governance policies, innovations in the design of formal street elements like street infrastructure, amenities, and furniture are necessary to make our streets inclusive.
Lastly, designing the formal sphere to enhance the creative capacity of space, can maintain the quality relationship between the Formal and Informal sphere, thus managing the conditions of chaos and acceptance of informality. Legitimizing informality on streets is an important attribute in transforming them as public spaces for people as well as corridors of movement, making them inclusive and vibrant.
I hope you liked this blog. Share your views on this topic that is really of dear and near to our urban concerns and complexities. Stay tuned for more blogs, New topics, new urban concerns and most importantly let's come together to give back our cities with a safe, liveable and healthy environment.
View more:
Fernandes. (2006). India's New Middle-class: Democratic politics in an era of economic reform. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.
K, Chien. (2019). Polarizing informality: Processual thinking, materiality and the emerging middle-class informality in Taipei. SAGE, Volume 51, Issue 6, page(s): 1225-1241.
Lehmann, S. (July 02, 2020). The unplanned city: Public space and the spatial character of urban informality. Emerald open research 2020, School of Architecture, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
ความคิดเห็น