Since the 1950s, the majority of Latino-American cities have experienced a demographical growth and a major extension of their urban area. Some writers had even talked about the “monstrous cities”. In about half a century, from 1950s to 1990s, the demography of the cities boomed from 13 million inhabitants to 60 million. Following the recession of the 1980s, the city, that was the polarized center of all the economical activity of the country, suffered from the effect of the financial crises, and the repercussions affected mostly the vulnerable population. They also led to aggravation of housing problems. Soon after, the housing logics of Latin American cities distinguished itself from the logic followed by other world cities by social spatial segregation.
In fact, with the onset of globalization, urban segregation became a recurrent issue in Latin American literature, and more generally, in international publications. The picture of favela standing at the feet of luxury buildings has become an iconic view of Latin American's cities for the rest of the world, and this kind of pictures such as the one represented in picture 1, commonly symbolizes those cities in scholar manuals of geography as well.
Sao Paulo, as many other cities predominantly in Brazil and Mexico, is a good illustration of the topic. Ever since its establishment in the 16th century, Sao Paulo experienced major transformations, notably with the development of the coffee industry, and is now involved as the main business hub in Latin America. Despite all of these successes, urban development has raced ahead of urban planning and the city has turned into a highly segregated place in spatial terms, with a radial-concentric urban structure, rich population concentrated in the center and poor located in peripheral areas.
We may therefore wonder why this world city still faces the same problems of inequality as other developing cities. Based on three main articles and many social and urban indicators, we will initially define segregation in Sao Paulo in order to assess and analyze it. Then, we will focus on the main socio-economic problems that might explain segregations, and compare different literature on the subject. Finally, we will examine its evolution, the consequences of the lack of urban and social policies before discussing a few solutions.
Segregation should be understood as the gathering of a particular group in a given area – race, ethnicity, income. Brazilian urban sociology originally mistook the theme of segregation for the concepts of poverty, inequality and the lack of access to the basic public services. Residential segregation is therefore not a major theme in the Brazilian social debate, nor is it used as a basis for public policies.
First of all, this misunderstanding in comparing poverty and segregation can be explained by a certain evolution of both concepts.
[...] Social inequalities in Sao Paulo In fact, social exclusion and spatial segregation constituted the reverse of the process of economic growth, industrialization and acceleration of urbanization. The poor were ejected to the periphery whereas the rich lived in luxurious districts . Finally, we might wonder why governments do not intervene in the regulation of urban and social problems, and what should be done to ameliorate the peripheries conditions. First of all, the legal status of the residence is a key element; as a matter of fact, the inadequate access to urban services by inhabitants of the periphery and shantytowns in illegal settlements is attributed to the difficulties faced by the State to expand services to illegal areas that do not comply with urban regulations. [...]
[...] Based on three main articles and many social and urban indicators, we will initially define segregation in Sao Paulo in order to assess and analyze it. Then, we will focus on the main socio-economic problems that might explain segregations, and compare different literature on the subject. Finally, we will examine its evolution, the consequences of the lack of urban and social policies before discussing a few solutions. Segregation should be understood as the gathering of a particular group in a given area race, ethnicity, income. [...]
[...] However, unlike other places such as the USA, the segregation in Sao Paulo rarely concerns ethnicity and race in the scale of the survey of 2000, as poor areas tend to be ethnically mixed whereas the rich ones are mainly In fact, the data for São Paulo shows a low level of segregation between blacks and whites in the scale of survey areas for 2000: a dissimilarity index of which is very low vis-a-vis that of American cities.[3] Nevertheless, the issue of ethnical segregation is a very controversial one. [...]
[...] There are two ways of considering urban segregation in Sao Paulo. The first and most common one in the scholarly literature, which emphasize the spatial distance between the two worlds is shown in picture 1. Morumbi, the Paraisopolis Favela The second, and most controversial one, is the image of opposed social worlds; this view corresponds with the patterns of urbanization consolidation around the 1940s that dominated the city up to the 1980s. During this period, Sao Paulo urbanized and expanded dramatically due to the spread of auto-construction[8]. [...]
[...] Second, fear of crime and violence which grew from 1980s to 1990s in the center encouraged the moving out of the upper class.[10] In fact, with an overall annual murder rate of more than 60 per people in the last 1990s, Sao Paulo turned into one of the most violent cities in the world. Most of the outrageously high number of cases of police abuse and killings happen in the peripheries. But Violence is also spatial. Neighborhoods in the peripheries had a murder rate of 110 per 100,000 people compared to less than 15% in the city central districts. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
