Informal settlements and space: what could a government report tell us about their geography?


Recently, data regarding the perseverance of informal settlement has been gathered in Chile by the current government. Graphic 1 and Map 3 shows several hundreds of informal settlements recently mapped.  According to this source, informal settlements tend to concentrate around specific regiones in Chile, close to the largest urban agglomerations, and within the economic macro-region of the country (circled in blue). Although the concentration of poblaciones (informal settlements) in specific regions of Chile is clear, they are also scattered within, around and in the outskirts of the city itself. This provides evidence of a spatial relation between the economic macro region and development of informality (expressed as settlements). It also suggests a relation between urban development processes and social exclusion processes. The dispersal of settlements around large urban areas could also be related, as suggested by César Leyton y Cristián Palacios[1] as an outcome of current policies of deviation, which bounce-off the attempts of pobladores to access the city. According to the authors, it perpetuates policies which were directed at pobladores (informal settlement dwellers) as a form of ordering the city according to class during the Pinochet military coup. Today, the dispersal of poblaciones may resemble a form of reducing migration pressures by providing housing out of the areas where major rent potentials can be obtained.

In a post from last year, Valeria asked what Informality means. Looking back at my answer, I do have some modifications to make. I still sustain that a good simple approach is Informal is whatever is not formal. Nevertheless, Valerias question is a central one to various authors. Much of the work done today to approach the issue of increasing numbers of poorer areas of the city is identifying the “external” factors which induce them. Indeed, Roy (year), Robinson (year), Sugranyes (year) and many other authors all sustain an view that the term “informal” is a social construction. Indeed, by focusing additionally on these agents apparently outside the place where less resourced groups live evidences quite a different cause of poverty.

“Informality” as Sugranyes mentions, may be a term that we can agree upon to talk about the same thing. But it also comes usually from a group which has access to power and resources. Therefore, the outcome may eventually end up reinforcing the traditional and conservative policies directed towards the poorest in society. unfortunately, this approach makes sense and it is a valid interpretation to why “informality” is expanding.this approach may be ore helpful in clarifying how, those in power, define what is part of their world and what is not. .

It is relevant, therefore, to disclose in what ways this relation is built, or constructed. And my current PhD work goes towards looking at the institutional construction of this relationship. I’ll edit this answer the coming days, but main ideas are in place…

[1] Becerra, M. Las olvidadas erradicaciones de la dictadura. Retrieved 2013/09/26 from:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s