Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Eckstein 1990). Charles Abrams' (1964) topic was
also influential, for he stressed that urban land costs
were soaring, thereby pricing the poor out of the
market. But he believed that sufficient land was
available if only it could be appropriated by public
sector intervention. He noted that in the
conditions of a housing shortage, the bulldozing
of houses represents a curious policy.
Thus the perspective concerning self-help
housing swung from negative to positive in the late
1960s to the early 1970s. Gradually, there was a
change in perspective concerning informal sector
housing and employment. It was argued that the
poor were not indolent, dishonest and disorganised
but generally, quite the reverse. The major change
in attitudes was to be precipitated by the
experiences of two academics-cum-architectural/
planning practitioners who were working in Peru
in the late 1960s. The first was William Mangin, an
American anthropologist, and the second John
Turner, a British architect-planner. BothTurner and
Mangin advocated self-help housing as a positive
force in developing world housing provision. One
of the most important papers was written by
Mangin (1967), the title of which conveys the
essence of the overall argument presented by the
two authors: 'Latin American squatter settlements:
a problem and a solution'.
In his work, Mangin described most of the then
dominant views on low-income residents as
myths. They were not disorganised, a drain on the
urban economy, populated by criminals and
radicals, nor were they made up of a single
homogeneous social group. Rather, Mangin
stressed that most squatters were in employment,
were socially stable and had been residing in the
city for a considerable period. Illegal occupancy
of land gave them the opportunity to avoid paying
high rents and at the same time allowed them to
build their own homes at their own pace.
In like manner, Turner worked for over eight
years in Peru and for a considerable proportion of
that time was involved with self-builders in
various
barriadas
. His partly autobiographical
account (Turner 1982:99-103) is very informative
in this connection. His overall attitude is clearly
summarised in one concise quotation:
Like the people themselves, we saw their
settlements not as slums but as building sites.
We shared their hopes and found the pity and
despair of the occasional visits from elitist
professionals and politicians quite comic and
wholly absurd.
(
ibid.
: 101)
Turner argued that all that had to be done to assist
self-builders was to approve rough sketch plans
and to distribute small amounts of cash in
appropriate stages. Turner observed that the
economies of self-help were founded upon 'the
capacity and freedom of individuals and small
groups to make their own decisions,
more
than on
their capacity to do manual work' (
ibid.
: 102). As a
consequence, Turner articulated the Churchillian
cry 'never before did so many do so much with so
little' (
ibid.
: 102).
The most positive message promulgated by
Turner was that if left to themselves, low-income
settlements improve gradually but progressively
over time. Thus houses that were originally
constructed from straw matting later acquired
walls, services and paved streets. In the
terminology of Stokes, they were clearly slums of
hope, characterised by in situ improvement and
the general upward social mobility of their
populations (see also Turner 1963; 1967; 1968a;
1968b; 1969; 1972; 1976; 1982; 1983; 1985; 1988;
1990). This was referred to as the process of
consolidation. By such means, the use value of the
property, reflecting its utility as a basic shelter, is
slowly transformed into higher exchange values,
reflecting the market valuation of the dwelling.
The major policy implication of Turner's work
was that governments are best advised to help the
poor to help themselves by facilitating
spontaneous self-help, and by fostering and
facilitating aided self-help, or what has become
known as
'
ASH'. There are three principal forms
of ASH: (1) the upgrading of existing squatter
housing; (2) the provision of site and service
schemes; and (3) core housing schemes, where the
shell of a house is provided on a site. Examples of
these schemes are provided in Martin (1983) and
Potter and Lloyd-Evans (1998: Chapter 7).
