“… los sistemas no se comparan partiendo de su fuerza genérica -medida en términos de racionalidad, justicia o destino pautado-, sino partiendo del volumen de conocimiento que procesan, cosa equivalente al nivel de información requerido para hacerlos funcionar” (Escohotado 20001)

Urban green spaces are essential for the well-being and environmental health of city residents. However, in Lima’s informal settlements, access to these spaces is often limited, contributing to socio-environmental inequality 2. This text explores structural solutions to bridge this gap. Urban green spaces are not just the result of natural processes but are deeply intertwined with social, political, and economic factors (Heynen et al. 2006)3. Heynen et al. also highlights that the production and distribution of these spaces often reflect broader patterns of inequality, demonstrating how environmental benefits and burdens are unevenly distributed across different urban communities.

In Lima, the distribution of environmental benefits and burdens across different urban communities is significantly influenced by factors like socio-economic status, urban planning, and political decisions. Wealthier areas tend to have better access to green spaces and environmental amenities, while poorer neighborhoods often face greater environmental burdens like pollution and lack of greenery. This disparity reflects broader patterns of urban inequality in Lima, where socio-economic factors play a crucial role in determining the quality of the urban environment experienced by residents.

Market-driven principles in the supply of housing is contributing to the proliferation of informal settlements. In these areas, residents typically engage in self-help housing practices, reflecting both a response to economic conditions and a form of self-governance. This observed order in society arises spontaneously, not through central planning but through individuals pursuing their own interests within a framework of common rules. In the context of self-building, individuals are creating and improving their homes and public spaces based on personal needs and resources 4.

This spontaneous order of informal settlements in Lima is driving the lack of sufficient green spaces. This deficiency not only affects the quality of life but also exacerbates environmental problems like pollution and heat islands. Potential activities to reduce this disparity can be summarized as follows:

  • Community Engagement and Empowerment: Encouraging community-driven initiatives where residents participate in creating and maintaining green spaces.

  • Government Policies and Funding: Implementing policies that prioritize green space development in informal settlements, backed by adequate funding.

  • Public-Private Partnerships: Leveraging partnerships with private entities to invest in green infrastructure.

  • Innovative Urban Planning: Adopting urban planning strategies that integrate green spaces into housing and community design.

  • Education and Awareness: Raising awareness about the benefits of urban green spaces and how to sustainably maintain them.

Thus, addressing the disparity in green space distribution in Lima’s informal settlements requires a multi-faceted approach involving continous community participation, governmental support, and innovative urban planning. This not only enhances the urban environment but also promotes social equity. This approach addresses the spatial and temporal trajectories of housing development in Lima’s peripheral areas, considering the dynamics of urbanization from the bottom-up.

However, the last suggestion on raising awareness about the benefits of urban green spaces and promoting sustainable maintenance practices is problematic; it can be seen in the context of Foucault’s concept of governmentality5. In this way, promoting green spaces is guiding public behavior in the name of discourses like environmental sustainability and community well-being. This form of power often operates through subtler means such as shaping norms, influencing choices, and setting agendas. By guiding behavior, especially in a way that aligns with certain policies or “societal goals”, authorities or corporations can subtly steer the actions and attitudes of individuals and communities. This guidance can be seen as a form of ‘soft power’ that operates through persuasion, education, and the creation of incentives, overall related to the above mentioned form of housing supply.

Referencias

  1. Escohotado Antonio. 2000. Addenda a ‘Caos y Orden’. Empiria. Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales 3, pp. 151-166. ↩

  2. Peña Guillen, Victor (2022). Mercantilização de Parques: o SbN na produção de Espaços Verdes em Lima. Revista LABVERDE, 12(1), 161-182. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2179-2275.labverde.2022.189374 ↩

  3. Heynen, N., Perkins, H. A., & Roy, P. (2006). The Political Ecology of Uneven Urban Green Space: The Impact of Political Economy on Race and Ethnicity in Producing Environmental Inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Affairs Review, 42(1), 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087406290729 ↩

  4. Wallace JM. Urban Anthropology in Lima: An Overview. Latin American Research Review. 1984;19(3):57-85. doi:10.1017/S0023879100021488 ↩

  5. Daniele Lorenzini. 2023. Foucault, governmentality, and the techniques of the self. In: Handbook on Governmentality (William Walters and Martina Tazzioli Eds.). pp. 22–37. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839108662.00008 ↩