Environmental inequalities in Brazilian Federal District eastern

Environmental inequalities in Brazilian Federal
District eastern urban fringe
By
1
Clarissa F. Sampaio Freitas and Lucia Cony Faria Cidade2
Prepared for presentation at the
2009 ISA-RC21 Sao Paulo Conference
Inequality, Inclusion and the Sense of Belonging
August 23-25, 2009, Sao Paulo, Brazil
1 Faculty of Departamento de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, Universidade Federal do Ceará.
clarissafs@yahoo.com
2 Faculty of Programa de Pós-Graduação em Geografia – GEA/IH; Centro de
Desenvolvimento Sustentável – CDS; e Núcleo de Estudos Urbanos e Regionais –
NEUR/CEAM. cony@unb.br
1
Introduction
For many decades uneven development has been an object of intensive debate, much of
which elicited the growing role of the dominant accumulation process as a producer of
inequality. As privileged places for the generation of wealth, cities tend to parallel the
tendency of the system to breed unevenness. In large urban centers across the world, albeit
at varying levels, the appropriation of the natural and of the built environment tends to follow
similar directions. While the large disparities in Brazilian cities are widely known, the modern,
planned capital, Brasilia, has nurtured an image of the Pilot Plan and nearby areas as a
space of high environmental quality and a relative social homogeneity. The existence of
satellite towns and distant popular settlements, however, challenge this idealized picture. Not
only social differentials are wide, but also the access to equipment and services, not to
mention housing standards, is highly disparate. Within this scenario, a selective territorial
planning, largely based on environmental restrictions, seems to contribute for the widening of
inequality. In tune, this paper aims to briefly analyze the role of planning regulations in the
reproduction of inequality in the Brazilian Federal District, with a specific interest in the São
Bartolomeu river basin. A brief review of similar processes elsewhere places the analysis in
perspective.
In cities in developed countries, the term environmental inequalities suggests that urban
amenities - such as parks, and specialized urban services - and disamenities - such
brownfields, and waste disposal facilities - are not evenly distributed. Based on a study of
North American cities, Hurley´s work has become the benchmark of the literature on the
subject. The author identifies a pattern where low income and black neighborhoods are more
affected by environmentally-related disasters than the average of the city they are located.
The research findings support the existence of a “clear pattern that exposes the way class
and race have conditioned the relationship between urban population and the environment”
(HURLEY, 1997, p. 243).
In third world cities, the term environmental inequalities indicates not only the uneven spatial
allocation of amenities and disamenities, but also differential levels of exposure to
environmental hazards - such as floods and landslides. A significant distinction between
urban areas in rich and poor countries is that, while in the former urban services are
reasonably distributed throughout the city, in the later access to basic urban services is not
guaranteed for all residents. In a book chapter dealing with the ecology of slums, Davis
argues that in third world cities, as opposed to cities in developed countries, it is unlikely to
see slums, which frequently have no potable water or toilet, protected by expensive public
works projects or covered by insurances (DAVIS, 2006). In the same direction, Evans and
2
his collaborators suggest that the unregulated land market of third world cities plays an
important role in excluding the socially vulnerable groups, which end up with no alternative
other than illegally occupy unsuitable sites (EVANS, 2002). The work of Evans is particularly
interested in civil society movements and their role in counterbalancing this exclusionary
mode of producing the city, which has environmental degradation as a by-product.
In the Brazilian scenario, Torres (1997) has introduced the concept of environmental
inequalities in a study about vulnerable areas in São Paulo. He identified a significant
coexistence of low-income residents at the riverbanks in the eastern portion of the city. The
concentration of low-income groups in these sensitive areas makes them subject to periodic
floods. These, in turn, compound their social vulnerability, which is related to their ability to
cope with natural hazards or socioeconomic threats. Since Torres´ work, other Brazilian
researchers have come to similar conclusions about other Brazilian metropolises
(DECHAMPS, 2008). Nonetheless, while Brazilian researchers on this field consistently
identify the phenomenon of environmental inequalities and their negative effects upon
vulnerable groups, they tend to overlook the social processes that create such unevenness.
Theoretically, the spatial coexistence between favelas and sensitive ecosystems has been
explained by an uncontrolled capitalist mode of producing the city, which leaves no room for
affordable neighborhoods in suitable well-located areas (MARICATO, 2004). In a clear
convergence with Maricato´s assertion for the Brazilian reality, Hurley states that the entire
environmental history of Saint Louis can be read “in terms of the relative success of certain
groups in controlling nature often at the expense of their neighbors” (1997, p. 242).This
argument is also close to Smith´s assertion that the relevant question is not whether we, as
human beings, are able to control nature, but it is more important to understand how we
produce nature and who controls this process (SMITH, 2008, p.89). It seems that there is a
common ground between both national and international contexts: the political-economic
logic that allows powerful groups to control the urbanization process and the city´s relation to
nature. Despite the distinct levels of magnitude that the environmental inequality
phenomenon takes in different contexts, the socio-economic forces behind the processes
that produce it have some similarities.
It is possible to control nature to benefit certain groups at the expense of others in a number
of ways. In urbanized areas, the allocation of urban infrastructure is certainly a way that
usually guarantees a peaceful relation with ecosystems. Illegal subdivisions, however, have
more difficulties in accessing urban infrastructure than legal ones, thus becoming more prone
to natural hazards. Furthermore, through establishing city limits, defining land uses and the
urban typology of legal settlements, planning policies are able to reserve the best areas for
3
certain groups at expense of others. In planned cities, such as Brasilia, this process of
reproducing environmental inequalities through planning policies seem to be very clear.
Brasilia, the Brazilian capital city, was founded in 1960 under modern principles which
represented the essence of Lucio Costa’s famous blueprint, the Pilot Plan. With most of its
land owned by the State and totally embedded within the Paranoá Lake basin, the Pilot Plan
has been protected by successive territorial plans. Planning regulations were reinforced by
the establishment of the area as part of the world’s Historical Heritage by UNESCO in 1987.
Occupation - mainly by government buildings and high income residential superblocks
enmeshed with green spaces and local commerce - has been rigorously kept at controlled
levels of density. From the beginning, the originally designed area was deemed insufficient to
house both the programmed neighborhoods for government workers and the swarms of
unexpected new dwellers, construction workers who decided to remain in the new promising
capital city they built. These were soon relocated to satellite towns, precarious settlements
conveniently located in areas relatively far from the modern Pilot Plan. The main criteria for
allocating these new towns was the protection of the quality of the water in Paranoá Lake,
thus the new towns were located outside the limits of Paranoá basin.
From the end of the 1980s onward, illegal settlements have emerged at the periphery of the
satellite towns, in areas with high level of sensitiveness. New towns were also created in
sensitive sites, which point to a selective process of environmental protection within the
Federal District Territory, one that tend to picture the central area as the most sensitive
spaces. This suggests that the historical restriction to occupation of the central areas seems
in fact to have become a strategy to reserve expensive land for future developments of high
income apartment buildings. The development of new neighborhoods within the Paranoá
basin, such as the Sudoeste and the soon to be established Noroeste, are vivid examples. At
the same time, the historical choice to exclude low income groups from the best serviced
areas within the São Bartolomeu river basin, suggests that the government is at least
adopting a double standard of environment protection.
In the framework of a planned capital city where the State is an important agent in the
urbanization of a territory with distinct levels of environmental fragility, this paper is
particularly interested in the role that land use regulations have played in reproducing the
process of environmental inequalities within the São Bartolomeu River basin. The research
questions to what extent planning regulations were able to reproduce the process of urban
exclusion, illegality and environmental degradation at the Environmentally Protected Area of
São Bartolomeu River Basin.
4
In order to answer such question, the paper has the following structure: The next section
introduces the theoretical perspective used by the analysis, based on the production of
space literature. Section 02 investigates the urban dynamics resulting from the different
agents in the urban development process of the São Bartolomeu APA. Section 03 explores
the role of planning regulations and zoning ordinances, in regards to the process of urban
development of the studied area. Section 04 investigates the local pattern of environmental
inequalities, meaning the contrast between low-income occupation of sensitive areas and
abundance of vacant but unaffordable plots in suitable sites.
1.0 The production of space and urban inequality
A theoretical perspective that has consistently been used to understand the social processes
that produced urban inequalities in both national and international context is the literature on
the production of space. Dwelling on Léfèbvre and its views on the relation between space
and social processes, authors such as Gottdiener, Smith and, in Brazil, Villaça use the
Marxist notion of production – conferring value to the products through human labor – to
explain intra-urban differentials (GOTTDIENER, 1997; SMITH, 2008; VILLAÇA, 1998). Unlike
other types of produced goods, urban land is, for the most part, produced not by individual
capital, but by State action. In addition, the State´s responsibility for the provision of urban
infrastructure and services puts their distribution and accessibility at the center of the urban
question.
The land market is far from being a “perfect market” that leads to optimum prices of goods.
Each plot of land is highly distinct from the others, especially in its physical relation to
different parts of the city. This is the reason why, within the city, the location of each urban
plot determines, to a great extent, its price. By providing urban services, particularly roads
and transportation network, the State is able to alter the pre-existing land prices and thus the
pattern of inequality. The fact that land prices are determined by investments made by public
agencies ends up enabling land speculation, in a process of private appropriation of the
product of collective labor. Thus, if public investments – financed by taxes paid by all urban
residents - benefit a few urban properties, their owners may be considered as having
speculative gains3. The production of space framework leads to a perception that urban
inequalities are not a mere reflex of the unequal social structure of society; space is also an
active agent capable of altering the existing patterns of social inequality.
3 With the approval of the Statute of the City in 2001,Brazilian urban legislation devised some legal instruments to
allow municipal planning policies to fight land speculation but so far it have had limited results.
5
For some authors, the spatial allocation of urban infrastructure within the city by
governmental agencies tends to favor mainly the productive sectors. This could explain how
State action tends to further preexisting social and spatial inequalities (SMITH, 1996). Other
authors emphasize that this tendency is not unchallenged (GOTTDIENER, 1997). An alliance
between State and the productive sectors, particularly real estate agents, is necessary in
order for this unevenness to occur. In some instances, this alliance came to be known as
pro-growth coalition4. Even though Gottdienner recognizes that State interventions on the
urban pattern of differentiation tend to favor well-off groups, he states that this alliance
cannot be taken for granted because neither State, neither capitalist groups are monolithic
blocks. That is why the pattern of inequalities is contingent upon the correlation of political
forces of each specific case.
In relation to the political aspect, the rising acceptance of environmental protection as an
important objective for planning policies has been able to change urban politics worldwide
(WHILE; GIBBS; JONAS 2004; TOPALOV, 1997). The social effects of such changes,
however, remain unclear. Whether the environmental perspective contributes to foster the
pre-existing pattern of socio-spatial inequalities, or helps to fight the unevenness trend
remains to be seen. In the case of the Federal District´s eastern urban fringe, studied in the
next section, it seems that the logic of capital accumulation in the urbanization process has
not been challenged by the rise of environmentalism. On the contrary, the environmental
rhetoric has been used to support measures capable of nurturing the production of
environmental inequalities.
2.0 Urban dynamics in the São Bartolomeu River Watershed
Environmental Protection Area (APA)
Since the years before the construction of the new capital, which was initiated in 1955, the
Brazilian government initiated a process of land expropriation in the Federal District. This
was of particular interest in areas comprising the designed part of Brasilia, known as the Pilot
Plan. But, differently from other areas located close to the Pilot Plan, a great part of its
eastern fringe has not been expropriated. This portion coincides with the São Bartolomeu
River´s Watershed.
4
This term was popularized by the work of Logan and Molotoch (1987)
6
Illustration 01 – São Bartolomeu APA in the Federal District urban context.
Source: DISTRITO FEDERAL, CODEPLAN, 2005. Adapted by authors.
São Bartolomeu is the largest river within the Federal District. Since the first planning
documents in the 1970s, it was identified as the most appropriate source of potable water for
the growing urban population of the Federal District. Because of a dam construction project
which intended to use the river´s water, the initial Federal District urban plans have not
allowed the city to expand in the eastern direction. In order to guarantee good quality of
water at the dam it was necessary to control the urbanization on its watershed. In 1983, the
legal instrument chosen to perform this function was a new type of Conservation Unit (UC)
called APA (Área de Proteção Ambiental) (BRAZIL, 1983). This instrument was chosen
because the APA did not require expropriation of land, unlike the other Conservation Units
existing in Brazil at that time (BRAZIL, 1988).
Despite the legal restrictions to urbanization, the area has witnessed a rapid population
growth. From 1988 to 2000, it presented an annual population growth rate of 18%, which is
about 9 times the rate for the average of Federal District in the same period. This rapid
population growth represents an urban sprawling tendency also detected in other Brazilian
metropolises. It is comprised by an urban periphery of low income settlements with limited
access to urban services and fast growth rates. But this periphery is not homogeneously
precarious. Generally there is one sector of the city that attends the demand for high income
neighborhoods with large plot sizes and proximity to natural amenities (VILLAÇA, 1998). At
7
the Federal District, the São Bartolomeu APA has presented both sprawling tend
tendencies, one
from the medium and high income sectors, and the other from low-income
low income residents.
Illustration 02: Urban context of the APA in 1983.
Source DISTRITO FEDERAL, CODEPLAN, 2005.
2005 Adapted by authors (The
he road network correspond
to 2005).
At the time
me of the creation of the APA, in 1983,
1983 there were no significant urban settlements
within the APA limits. However the tendency to occupy the area with urban uses had already
been detected. The first studies about the APA´s territory had identified 28 illegal
subdivisions, and two small communities:
communities the Vale do Amanhecer (5000 inhabitants) in the
northeast portion of the APA, and the São Sebastião village (about 1,500 inhabitants) in the
southwest portion (BRAZIL,, 1988).
8
By the same time (early eighties) there were three legal settlements at the APA´s outer
borders: the cities of Planaltina and Sobradinho and the Lago Sul neighborhood. The later is
probably the highest income neighborhood of the Federal District. It was designed by Lúcio
Costa with big plot sizes, dead-end streets, and large green spaces. The city of Planaltina
dates from the XIX century, but it became a peripheral city with the construction of the Pilot
Plan of Brasília. The large distance to the central area turned the city into a dormitory
settlement that houses those that could not afford better locations within the metropolitan
context of the Federal District. Planaltina has witnessed high pressures of illegal expansion
due to low prices of the housing options available at the informal real estate market. The city
of Sobradinho is located midway from the Pilot Plan and Planaltina. It was one of the first
three cities built by the Brazilian Federal Government to house the local working class far
from the Pilot Plan5. It has average quality of urban services and middle-income population.
Other important surrounding settlement was the village of Paranoá. It was an illegal
settlement by the time of the creation of the APA. The invasion was located very close to the
APA´s western boundary.
The expansion of these surrounding neighborhoods toward the APA was not as natural, or
as unavoidable as public discourse tends to picture. What is commonly conceived as a
chaotic process can be explained by some key public investments in the area, such as road
network expansion and the creation of new cities within or very close to the APA.
In some sense, one can argue that the apparently disordered urbanization process of the
APA was put forward with the acquiescence of local State. Indeed, even though the illegal
settlements were built by private agents, the public investments put forward in the area
played a key role in channeling the city in that direction. In this respect, the best example is
the 3rd bridge over the Paranoá Lake. The operation of the Juscelino Kubitschek Bridge
started in 2003 and constitutes an important new urban development vector in the eastern
direction.
But long before the construction of the bridge other investments were responsible to foster
urban development of the area. The expansion of the infrastructure network toward the APA
was required by the construction of two new satellite towns, Paranoá and São Sebastião.
The former was built in 1989, in an area that touches the APA´s western boundary, to house
the illegal settlers of the Paranoá invasion. The later, São Sebastião, was built in 1991, in an
area located at the heart of the south west portion of the APA. It was initially meant to house
5
This policy of creating settlements in peripheral sites, distant to the Pilot Plan, to house the working class
adopted the name of satellite towns. Today this term carries a stigma of bad quality areas, with problems of
violence and degradation due to lack of economic activities and bad quality urban services. But the peripheral
towns have distinct degree of such problems, and the first ones like Sobradinho, tend to have better services than
those more recently created, like São Sebastião.
9
part of the 7,620 inhabitants living at a risky area at the riverbank of two tributaries of São
Bartolomeu River. The place would be inundated if the dam planned by the 1988 ordinance
had been constructed. The city was initially projected for 35,000 inhabitants but current
estimations are around 70,000 in 2009 (FREITAS; GOMES 2009).
In these 21 years since the creation of the APA, we can see a clear disjunction between the
advertised public intentions of limiting the urbanization of this territory and the real pattern of
public investments in the area. To worsen the situation, the rising legitimacy of regularization
policies at the national (and international) context allowed Local State administrations to
signal that all illegal settlers already installed, irrespective of their income level, had the right
to regularization. Through a series of regularization bills, local administrations had
successively extended the deadline to define who had the right to legalize their property
(BATTELLA, 2003).
Although the urbanization of the area seems not to make sense if looked through the lenses
of the public interest, at least two relevant agents of the process of producing the city took
clear advantages of it. The first group is comprised by the owners of illegal subdivisions, and
the first buyers of the illegal plots, who have had speculative gains with the transformation of
the rural land in urban neighborhoods thanks to the expansion or the infrastructure network.
Among these property owners we can include the local government´s real estate agency
(TERRACAP), whose land had increased values due to expansion of urban networks and
services to the satellite towns created by the government to house low-income population.
The second group of agents who profited from this apparently chaotic urbanization process is
comprised by public officials, who had political gains by regularizing some of these
settlements in the name of the “right to the city”. However, the regularization policies
implemented by the local State include a considerable amount of empty plots, for the most
part located in high and middle income subdivisions. This make public policies benefit high
and middle income population that live in illegal settlements not by necessity but by choice.
Many of these houses are located in plots larger than 500 square meters, and can cost as
much as five hundred thousand Reais (about 250,000 U$)6.
It is thus necessary to identify two types of urban dynamics: one from the low income
population, with high-density and explosive growth paces, concentrated at the periphery of
the satellite cities of Paranoá, Planaltina, and São Sebastião. The other from the high and
middle income strata, concentrated at the periphery of Lago Sul, particularly at the Taboca
basin, extending northward. It has high indexes of vacancy although it consumes much land
6
This information
www.wimoveis.com
was
taken
from
several
housing
advertisements
such
as:
10
because of its plot sizes and low density and also due to the disconnection between the
subdivisions (Table 01).
Illustration 03 – Informal subdivisions by income level at the APA
Source: SITURB e DISTRITO FEDERAL, SEDUH, SUPAR, 2006
Table 01 – Informal subdivisions at the São Bartolomeu River watershed APA, 2006
Subdivisions
7
Low-income
Medium and
8
income
high
# of plots
already
occupied
38.367
#
of
plots
previewed by
subdivisions
41.337
9.848
22.626
Vacant
plots
2.758
Percentage
of
vacant
plots
7%
Total
population in
2006
160.440
10.460
46%
41.113
Source: SITURB e DISTRITO FEDERAL, SEDUH, SUPAR, 2006
7
Low-income subdivisions: 0 a 5 minimum wages
8
Medium and high income subdivisions: more than 5 minimum wages
11
Illustration 04 – Segregation pattern and population distribution at the APA
Source: DISTRITO FEDERAL, CODEPLAN, 2005 and BRAZIL, IBGE 2000.
The next section contrasts the urban dynamic described here with State´s regulatory
measures taken in this twenty six years period since the creation of the APA.
3.0 Regulations: successively redefining the legal limits of the city
After the creation of the APA in 1983, the São Bartolomeu area has passed through three
key episodes of defining the possibility of urban uses within its polygon: one in 1988, the
second in 1996 and the third in March 2009. Illustration 05 puts these main regulatory
measures within the timeline of urban development of the area. It describes some key public
investments in blue, some indicators of population growth in green, and the State´s
regulatory measures in red.
12
1983 - Creation of APA
1984 – 90 illegal subdivisions mapped by local governmentt
1988 – 20 000 inhabitants
1988 – First Environmental Zoning Ordinance
1989 – Creation of Paranoá “Satellite City”
1991 – Creation of São Sebastião “Satellite City”
1994 – 105 illegal subdivisions mapped by local government
1996 - Second Environmental Zoning Ordinance
1997 – Approval of Urban Master Plan PDOT 1997
2000 – 158.036 inhabitants
2003 – JK Bridge
2004 – Invasion of Itapoã
2006 – 146 Informal settlements mapped by local government
2009 – Approval of current Master Plan
Illustration 05: Timeline of urban development in the São Bartolomeu APA
Source: FREITAS 2009
In 1988, based in a study of the natural features of the APA territory, and based on the
project of building a big dam at the altitude 865m of São Bartolomeu River, the first
environmental zoning ordinance of the APA decided that no new urban use would be allowed
in the area. This ordinance has had virtually no effect in changing the local urban dynamics.
At that time the APA was managed by Federal Government´s environmental agencies, what
made the agreement of Local Government unnecessary. Actually, the local government in
the Federal District was created at that same year of 1988. Before that, all decisions
concerning the Federal District´s territorial planning was responsibility of the Federal
Government. Besides, at that time, environmental and urban policies had no connections in
the sense known today. The fact that shortly after this regulation, the local government built
two new cities to house low income populations within or very close to the APA reveals this
disconnection between urban and environmental policies, and also between local and federal
policies.
13
Illustration 06 – Second environmental zoning of the APA ( In red the area designated for urban uses)
Source: DISTRITO FEDERAL, CODEPLAN, 2005 and DISTRITO FEDERAL,1996 (Adapted by the
9
authors).
In 1996 the first environmental zoning ordinance was reviewed. An ordinance that is
commonly known as re-zoning was approved, designating around 5% of the APA´s territory
for urban uses. The polygon where urban uses were allowed was decided based on a
second option of using the river´s water, since the first option of construction of a big dam
turned out to be unfeasible in the urban scenario of 1996. The second option comprises the
9
The bill creates other zones that were not included in this map in order to facilitate the
reading of the map.
14
construction of two smaller dams: a first barrage at the same point of the 1988 big dam, but
in a lower level, and the second at the confluence of São Bartolomeu River with Paranoá
River. This second option would inundate a far smaller territory, allowing the urbanization to
occur at sites with higher altitudes.
The first urban zoning of the APA did not include all illegal settlements existing in 1996. The
ordinance suggested that those settlements not included within the urban area had to be deconstituted, a measure that was never taken. The urban area is located mainly at the areas
with higher altitudes adjacent to the western boundary of the APA. This site corresponds to
the area with higher real estate values due to greater proximity to the Pilot Plan and the Lago
Sul. The ordinance also includes two discontinuous smaller portions and allocates them to
urban uses, one close to the recently-created city of São Sebastião and the other at the
periphery of the city of Planaltina. These last two portions are the spaces where low income
residents might have fewer difficulties to occupy because of their distant location in the intraurban context and consequently low-prices.
The 1997 Federal District´s Master Plan incorporated this urban polygon within the APA as a
“controlled-use urbanization zone”. According to the 1997 master plan, this zone is “designed
predominantly for residential purposes, characterized by low-density occupation, in which the
expansion of urban use shall not be encouraged, mainly for reasons of environmental
restrictions.” (DISTRITO FEDERAL, 1997) The urban plan adopted uncritically the lowdensity urban typology suggested by the environmental ordinance, not considering that the
density suggested (60 inhabitants per hectare) is fairly unaffordable for low income groups,
which correspond the majority of the housing deficit in the Federal District. This is particularly
true if the land has a good location and thus higher prices, as in the case of the area close to
Lago Sul.
As the continued illegal process of urban developed ensued, the 1996 plans of constructing
the two dams were also abandoned. In 2009 a new Master Plan was approved in the Federal
District. Local government political propaganda frequently described this plan as an
instrument that would allow the regularization of the illegal subdivisions. This advertisement
supports the argument that the illegal development process brings political gains for public
officials. In fact, the 1996 local administration also used the same kind of propaganda.
15
Illustration 07 2009 Master Plan zoning for the APA
Source: DISTRITO FEDERAL, CODEPLAN, 2005 and DISTRITO FEDERAL, 2009.
The 2009 plan enlarged the urban polygon within the APA´s territory by 500%. Currently the
area where urban uses are allowed corresponds to as much as 25% of the APA´s polygon.
This expansion of the urban boundary toward the river is unjustifiable if one considers that a
great part of the urban zone defined in 1997 was not occupied yet. This is particularly true at
the most expensive sites, which have had rapid valorization in the 12-year period since 1997.
Contrasting to this scenario of vacant plots on the best located sites, the two discontinuous
portions of the urban zone close to the satellite towns of Planaltina and São Sebastião
presented astonishing levels of population growth. A third area close to the satellite town of
16
Paranoá, also presented a high level of population growth, due to a big invasion known as
Itapoã, established in 2004. In 2006 estimates, this area has about 50,000, mainly low
income, residents. In all these tree fast growing areas most of the subdivisions have
densities far greater than the legally allowed.
The 2009 Master Plan classifies the urban area in two different zoning categories: the
“controlled-use urbanization zone – II10 (ZUUC-II)” and the “urban contention zone11 (ZCU)”.
As in 1997, the environmental restrictions are the only reason for limiting the density of the
urban settlements. The “controlled-use urbanization zone – II” adopts various limits to urban
density, but the undeveloped sites of this zone have maximum densities that range from 50
to 150 inhabitants per hectare. The “urban contention zone” adopts a maximum density of 15
inhabitants per hectare and a minimum plot size of 800 hundred square meters.
This new Master Plan seems to make the same mistake as the old one: to adopt restrictive
measures that are unaffordable for a great part of urban residents. The plan makes no effort
to making sure that the spaces provided with infrastructure are accessible to the current
housing demand. By doing that, it pushes the low-income groups to illegal settlements with
no infrastructure. To worsen the situation, the illegal subdivisions that are affordable to low
income groups tend to occur not only in distant and left-over spaces, but also in
environmental sensitive ecosystems. The next section will develop this topic.
4.0 Environmental inequalities
Even though the construction of the planned dam was not put forward, the APA was never
questioned. One main reason for the civil society greater acceptance of the restrictions
imposed by the environmental regulation is the fact that the use of the river´s water remains
as a possibility. The other reason is that part of the APAs territory in fact constitutes a site
with a high level of environmental sensitiveness, and thus with a high ecological value. The
rise of environmentalism is in great part responsible to the political legitimacy of protecting
the APA territory.
As we saw, the planning measures adopted - expansion of the infrastructure network and of
low-density developments - has proven to be inadequate for the public interest for its socially
regressive effects. The uneven urban development, supported by the previously described
10
11
Zona de Uso Controlado II
Zona de Contenção Urbana
17
planning measures, has not only had negative social effects but also negative environmental
effects. Low densities as the main mechanism for protecting the environment has proven to
be extremely flawed because it contributed to induce high-density, low-income, illegal
settlements at remaining areas, which tend to be located at environmentally sensitive sites.
Based on the work of Anjos (2008), Barreto, (2008), Ribas (1988), and SEMATEC; IEMA;
ENGEVIX; IBAMA (1996), Freitas (2009) identified three degrees of environmental sensitivity
within the APA territory. According to the data collected, there is a plateau in the most
accessible areas capable of absorbing urban development without environmental
despoliation. In illustration 07 the orange spots correspond to these sites with lower levels of
sensitiveness. They were classified as land systems 01 and 02 by the official environmental
survey of the APA (IEMA, ENGEVIX, IBAMA, 1994). It is thus a most appropriate area for
urban development according to the natural features criteria. The yellow spots have an
intermediary level of environmental fragility corresponding to land system 03. These areas
are less suitable than the first type particularly in relation to the risks of floods due to its
physiographic features (frequency of steep slopes and proximity to rivers). It is also less
suitable in socioeconomic aspects because it is located farther from the central area of
Brasilia, thus requiring a greater extension of infrastructure networks. The gray spots are the
areas least suitable for urban development. It has steep slopes, inadequate soil types, high
percentage of flood plains, and shallow aquifers among other things. It corresponds to the
land system 04 and 05.
As we overlaid the 2000 census data on this environmental assessment, we can detect a
concentration of population on the yellow spots, which are not the best sites to occupy. In
contrast, the orange area that corresponds to the best-located and best-suitable sites
remains with a high index of vacancy in 2000. That might be a result of pure speculative
retention of the best areas by its owners. But, allied with the rising prices of this land, the lowdensity requirement of the urban regulations helped to reproduce this scenario of urban
exclusion, land speculation and environmental degradation. We can thus affirm that within
the APA territory the phenomenon of environmental inequalities takes the form of the
contrast between the abundance of vacant plots at the best located and more suitable
orange spots and the low-income illegal developments at sites with higher degree of
environmental sensitiveness, the yellow spots.
18
Illustration 08 – Levels of environmental sensitiveness at the APA
Source: Lei Complementar 17 de 1997; IBGE 2000 and SITURB.
One of the sites that concentrate high density and low income illegal settlements in less
suitable sites is the periphery of the town of São Sebastião. As the planned central area of
São Sebastião has become unaffordable for some groups, the periphery started to be
occupied by illegal settlements. These tend to occupy sites with dangerous proximity to the
rivers (such as Bairro João Cândido and Morro da Cruz in illustration 09), and/or proximity to
steep slopes (such as Vila do Boa and Quadra 12 do Morro Azul in illustration 09). Some of
these spaces are also environmentally unsuitable because they concentrate numerous
spring waters. In these spaces, the socio-environmental problems are not only related to the
lack of infrastructure, (ranging from basic water and sewer networks to storm water
management and trash collection), but also with the occupation of unsuitable sites, spaces
with the highest level of environmental sensitiveness, the gray areas at illustration 08.
Contrasting with this problematic reality, we have some well-located and fairly suitable sites,
perceived as fragile ecosystems thanks to real state publicity, and also thanks to state
19
regulations. Not by coincidence these sites concentrate middle and high income
neighborhoods.
Illustration 09: socio-environmental problems at the periphery of São Sebastião.
Source: FREITAS 2009
It is important to mention that this paper does not question the restriction to urbanization in
the name of the environmental protection. It does question, however, to what extent the
environmental sensitivity really exists in order to justify the restrictive measures. In the case
of the first urban zone created in 1997 the answer to this question is negative for the most
part. The majority of the 1997 urban zone is located at the more suitable orange sites. In
itself, the pattern of environmental fragility in the territory of the 1997 urban zone did not
require restrictive measures. This is particularly true if we consider that, within the Federal
District context, there are higher densities in legally developed towns - such as Riacho Fundo
II and Taguatinga - located at ecosystems with similar features. The restrictive measures
adopted at the urban zone of São Bartolomeu APA contributed to push the low income
population to less suitable sites.
It is difficult to assess the effects of the 2009 Master Plan because of its very recent date of
approval. But as the strategy did not change it is fair to expect results similar to the 1997
Plan. Considering that the new plan pushed the urban boundary outward without certifying
that the vacant plots in suitable sites are occupied by housing units affordable for the existing
20
levels of demand, the plan seems to have legalized a leapfrog development. And it did that
using a kind of environmentalism that selectively protects some sites at the expense of
others. The analysis suggests that the environmental rhetoric helped the urban boundary to
grow without filling up all the empty spaces within the existing limits.
Contrary to the other urban zones, the “urban contention zone” - that allows a maximum
density of only 15 inhabitants per hectare - is in fact located in an environmentally sensitive
site. One could argue that this restriction might be reasonable given the natural features of
the area. But why was this zone put in this area rather than in the other more suitable sites
that remain rural in the 2009 plan? What has this spatial allocation decision to do with the
speculative gains of some private owners? Why enlarge 5 times the urban limit, in the first
place, given that the pace of population growth in the Federal District - as in most Brazilian
metropolises – is diminishing?
5.0 Conclusion
The analysis leads us to perceive that the urban development dynamics of São Bartolomeu
APA has not only resulted in social inequalities but it has also fostered environmental
degradation.
The regulations adopted have been able to reproduce this uneven dynamic. The particularly
restrictive planning model that adopted high and expensive legal urbanization standards in
areas with relatively low levels of environmental sensitiveness, contributed to a concentration
of poverty and environmental risk at more sensitive areas in the periphery. The restrictive
measures have made suitable land unaffordable for the majority of urban dwellers, who tend
to occupy less suitable areas - such as riverbanks and steep slopes - nurturing a vicious
cycle of environmental degradation and social exclusion.
Maricato´s assertion that environmental disasters are due to the lack of opportunity in the
legal real estate market is generally taken as a reality impossible to change (2001). However
if researchers were able to link the urban environmental problem with the problem of
inequality in terms of access to urban services, and urban space itself, they could contribute
to fight this uneven logic of producing the city.
The Statute of the City, a Brazilian Federal Bill approved in 2001, introduced some
instruments capable of inducing an inclusionary planning model (BRAZIL 2001). However in
21
most Brazilian municipalities, it lacks political legitimacy to implement such instruments,
particularly those that directly fight real estate speculative gains, which are obviously not at
the best interest of some powerful sectors. The environmental movement, a powerful ally that
could support such measures, sees the Statute of the City with some restrictions, since it has
legitimated regularization of illegal occupation in fragile ecosystems.
We believe the dilemma of putting regularization policies against the environmental
protection goals is a false conflict since it is a particularly uneven urban development process
that produces both the socio-spatial exclusion and the environmental degradation. At the root
of both problems lie the inability - and the unwillingness - of the State to regulate the land
market to favor socially vulnerable groups.
6.0 References:
ANJOS, R. S.. Dinâmica Territorial: Cartografia - Monitoramento - Modelagem. Brasília
DF: Mapas Editora & Consultoria, 2008.
BARRETO, R. Identificação das áreas susceptíveis a eventos extremos de chuva no Distrito
Federal. Brasília, 2008. (Mestrado em Geografia), Universidade de Brasília.
BATELLA, T. Seminário urbanístico MPDFT. Brasília, 2003. Não publicado.
BRAZIL. Decreto Nº 88.940, de 07 de novembro de 1983. Dispõe sobre a criação das
Áreas de Proteção Ambiental das Bacias dos Rios São Bartolomeu e Descoberto, e dá
outras
providências.
Disponível
em:
<http://www.ibama.gov.br/siucweb/mostraDoc
Legal.php?seq_uc=73&seq_tp_documento=3&seq_finaliddoc=7>. Acesso em: 21 jun. 2009.
BRAZIL. IBGE. Censo Demográfico 2000. AGREGADOS POR SETORES CENSITÁRIOS
DOS RESULTADOS DE UNIVERSO - 2ª edição. Rio de Janeiro, [2006]. Disponível em
ftp://ftp.ibge.gov.br/Censos/Censo_Demografico_2000/Dados_do_Universo/Agregado_por_
Setores_Censitarios Acesso em 02 ago 2009.
BRAZIL. Lei No 10.257, de 10 de julho de 2001. Estatuto da Cidade. Disponível em:
<www.planalto.gov.br>.
BRAZIL. Lei Nº 9.262, de 12 de janeiro de 1996. Dispõe sobre a administração da Área de
Proteção Ambiental (APA) da Bacia do Rio São Bartolomeu, localizada no Distrito Federal, e
dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 15 jan. 1996.
BRAZIL. Ministério da Habitação, Urbanismo e Meio Ambiente. Secretaria Especial de Meio
Ambiente. Caracterização e Diretrizes Gerais de Uso da Área de Proteção Ambiental
da Bacia do Rio São Bartolomeu. Brasília: SEMA, 1988. 1 mapa. Escala 1:100.000.
22
BRAZIL.
Secretaria
Especial
do
Meio
Ambiente.
Instrução
normativa
sema/sec/cap/nº002/88. Zoneamento da Área de Proteção Ambiental da Bacia do Rio São
Bartolomeu (APA do São Bartolomeu). Brasília, 1988.
CAMPOS FILHO, C. M. Cidades brasileiras: seu controle ou o caos. São Paulo: Studio
Nobel, 1999.
CODEPLAN. Coletânea de informações socioeconômicas: R.A. XXVIII – ITAPOÃ.
Brasília, 2006.
COMPANS, R. A cidade contra a favela: a nova ameaça ambiental. In: ENCONTRO
NACIONAL DA ANPUR, 12., 2007, Belém. Anais do... Belém: [s.n.], 2007.
DAVIS, Mike. Planeta favela. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2006.
DESCHAMPS, Marley V.. Estudo sobre a Vulnerabilidade Socioambiental na Região
Metropolitana de Curitiba. Cadernos Metrópole (PUCSP), v. 1, p. 191-219, 2008.
DISTRITO FEDERAL. Lei nº 1.149, de 11 de julho de 1996. Dispõe sobre o rezoneamento
ambiental da Área de Proteção Ambiental da bacia do rio São Bartolomeu. Diário Oficial do
Distrito Federal, Brasília, 12 jul. 1996.
DISTRITO FEDERAL. Lei Complementar nº 17, de 28 de janeiro de 1997. Aprova o Plano
Diretor de Ordenamento Territorial do Distrito Federal - PDOT e dá outras providências.
Diário
Oficial
do
Distrito
Federal
de
29.01.1997.
Disponível
em:
<http://sileg.sga.df.gov.br/default.asp?arquivo=http%3A//sileg.sga.df.gov.br/legislacao/distrita
l/leiscomp/LeiComp2001/..%255CLeiComp1997%255Clc_17_97.html>. Acesso em: 21 jun.
2009.
DISTRITO FEDERAL. Lei Complementar nº 803, de 25 de abril de 2009. Aprova a revisão
do Plano Diretor de Ordenamento Territorial do Distrito Federal — PDOT e dá outras
providências.
Diário
Oficial
do
Distrito
Federal
de
27.03.2009.
Disponível
em:
<http://sileg.sga.df.gov.br/default.asp?arquivo=http%3A//sileg.sga.df.gov.br/legislacao/Distrit
al/LeisComp/LeiComp2009/lc_803_09.htm> Acesso em: 21 jun. 2009.
DISTRITO FEDERAL. CODEPLAN. Sistema de Informações Territoriais e Urbanas SITURB. Brasília, 2005.
DISTRITO FEDERAL; IPDF. Plano Diretor de Ordenamento Territorial: Documento
Técnico. Brasília, 1997.
DISTRITO FEDERAL; SEDUH; SUPAR. Diagnóstico preliminar dos parcelamentos
urbanos informais do Distrito Federal. Brasília, jun. 2006. Disponível em:
<http://www.semarh.df.gov.br/sites/100/155/00000050.pdf>. Acesso em: 16 jun. 2009.
EVANS, Peter, ed. Livable Cities? Urban Struggles for Livelihood and Sustainability .
California, USA: University of California Press Ltd. 2002
23
FREITAS, Clarissa F. S. Proteção Ambiental e Direito à Cidade no processo de expansão
urbana do Distrito Federal: até que ponto existe um conflito? Brasília, 2009. (Doutorado em
Arquitetura e Urbanismo. Universidade de Brasília.
FREITAS, Clarissa F. S. GOMES, Viridiana Gabriel. Cap. 4.7 Aspectos Urbanísticos. In
Relatório de Impacto de Vizinhança do Parcelamento do Solo ADE São Sebastião.
Texto não publicado. 2009.
GOTTDIENER, Mark. A produção social do espaço urbano. São Paulo: Edusp, 1997, 2a
edição, 310 p.
HARVEY, D. Justice nature and the geography of difference. Massachusetts: Blackwell
Publishers, 1996.
HURLEY, Andrew. “Floods, Rats and Toxic Waste: Allocating Environmental Hazards
since 1945” in Andrew Hurley, ed. Common Fields: an Environmental History of Saint Louis.
(Missouri Historical Society, 1997)
LOGAN, J. R.; MOLOTCH, H. L. Urban fortunes: the political economy of place.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.
MALAGUTTI, C. J. Loteamentos clandestinos no DF: legalização ou exclusão? Brasília,
1996. Dissertação (Mestrado em Arquitetura e Urbanismo)-Universidade de Brasília.
MARICATO, E. Metrópole periférica, desigualdade social e meio ambiente. In: VIANA,
Gilney; SILVA, Marina; DINIZ, Nilo (Org.). O desafio da sustentabilidade: um debate
socioambiental no Brasil. São Paulo: Fundação Perseu Abramo, 2001. p. 215-232
O CERCO da periferia: o que fazer com a miséria que cerca as nossas cidades. Veja, São
Paulo, 24 jan. 2001. Disponível em: <http://veja.abril.com.br/240101/p_086.html Acesso em
21/01/2008>.
RIBAS, O. Critérios e diretrizes de planejamento e desenho urbano para a asa nova
norte. Brasília, 1988. (Mestrado em Arquitetura e urbanismo)-Universidade de Brasília.
SEMATEC; IEMA; ENGEVIX; IBAMA. Revisão e atualização das diretrizes gerais de uso
da área de proteção ambiental da bacia do rio São Bartolomeu: relatório final. Brasília,
1996. 4 v.
SMITH, N. Uneven development: nature, capital and the production of space. [S.l.]:
University of Georgia Press, 2008 (1984).
SMITH. N. The new urban frontier: gentrification and the Revanchist City. London:
Routledge, 1996.
TOPALOV, C. Do planejamento à ecologia; nascimento de um novo paradigma de ação
sobre a cidade e o habitat? Cadernos IPPUR, [S.l.], ano XI, n. 1-2, jan./dez. 1997.
TORRES, H. G. Desigualdade ambiental na cidade de São Paulo. Campinas, 1997. Tese
(Doutorado)-IFCH; Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
VILLAÇA, F. Espaço intra-urbano no Brasil. São Paulo: Studio Nobel, 1998.
WHILE A, JONAS A. E. G; GIBBS, D. The environment and the entrepreneurial city:
searching for the urban `sustainability fix' in Manchester and Leeds. International Journal
of Urban and Regional Research, [S.l.], n. 28, p. 549-569, 2004.
24