![Sample our Urban Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110826/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Urban-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper deals with the conflict over urban land between the City of Rio de Janeiro and the residents of Vila Autódromo, a slum neighbouring the area that would become the centre of activities for the 2016 Olympic Games. The work was based on an action research that lasted five years, accompanied by interviews and fieldwork starting from the third year. City Hall launched a series of initiatives that involved practices of intimidation and different forms of violence to implement an urban project. The residents, in turn, resorted to legal and technical support, producing an abundance of critical material regarding the compromise of social rights and the democratic experience. The case of Vila Autódromo shows that City Hall, through its agents, was able to deal with the ambiguities and imprecisions in the law to pursue its goals. It also demonstrates that resistance can sometimes stall and thwart the reproduction of violent structures, even if at great cost.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge our intellectual debt to the guest editors of the Special Feature, as well as the editors and reviewers of CITY. We express our thanks to them for their attentive and patient reading and for the comments received. We also thank Sahar Ansari for translating the text.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 That year the Strategic Plan for the City was launched. The document was prepared by the local Commercial Association.
2 The case of Vila Autódromo was discussed in volume 24 of City. The article by M-Keivani, Omena de Melo, and Brownill (Citation2020) also analyses another case in Rio de Janeiro, the favela of Providência, to reflect on the meaning of local resistance to development projects and the possibility of such initiatives and confront durable inequality.
3 As Rolnik (Citation2015) observes, low-income families living in the city are placed in a fragile situation when the areas they occupy are located in the way of major events.
4 The first group is called State, Work, Territory and Nature (Estado, Trabalho, Território e Natureza—ETTERN). It is housed at the Instituto de Pesquisa e Planejamento Urbano e Regional (IPPUR) of Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ).
5 The second group is the Center for Housing and Urban Studies and Projects (Núcleo de Estudos e Projetos Habitacionais e Urbanos—NEPHU), an organ of the Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF).
6 Plano Popular da Vila Autódromo—PPVA.
7 Bhide and Maharaj, in this Special Feature, also report experiences of popular participation in the face of threats of displacement and violence engendered by neoliberal interventions in cities.
8 Associação de Moradores e Pescadores da Vila Autódromo—AMPVA.
9 An example of improper information provided by the City Hall was that the evacuation of Vila Autódromo would be necessary for the completion of works for the Olympics. That would be the reason for the pressure exerted on the residents. It turns out that in the original project, the Community would remain in the area. Incorrect or misleading information distorts reality to influence decisions. It was the case of the advice received by several residents, that the City Hall had a limit on properties and financial resources, and for this reason, it would only benefit those who decided first. This information sought to speed up family decisions, but when it started to circulate, it had no legal backing, and there was still no expropriation process. Even if there was, by law, there is no expropriation without advance payment of indemnities. City Hall often provided residents with inaccurate information. The change in the original design of the Olympic Park implied the production of information to justify the need to evacuate the residents of Vila Autódromo. At first, municipal technicians claimed aesthetic and environmental damage. Confronted by the community, they found another reason: the connection between two public transport lines, the Transcarioca to the Transolímpica. A third reason was the implementation of access roads to the Olympic Park. Finally, municipal initiatives showed contempt for the rights of residents, despite the fact that they had titles over the occupied areas. In these cases, Brazilian legislation is clear: expropriation follows market values; the expropriation needs to meet the purposes of public utility.
10 Part of the residents legally occupied the neighbourhood. They received from the state government the Concession of Right of Use (CDRU), renewed in 1996 for the next 99 years. Another party had guaranteed permanence since 2005, due to the declaration of Area of Special Social Interest (AEIS) promulgated by the municipal government. This implied the recognition of the occupation and the insertion of the neighbourhood in the municipal housing policy.
11 The approval and implementation of the Olympic project in Rio de Janeiro took place without social control. Firstly, due to the commitments signed with the International Olympic Committee, which did not include public consultation or control mechanisms on the part of society. Then, due to pressure and unofficial agreements with entrepreneurs in the real estate and tourism sectors. For these reasons, the implementation of the project was the critical moment when the social perception of public decisions could rapidly change. The lack of transparency in the process gave rise to doubts, criticism, and tensions. These could trigger reactions that would jeopardise the conclusion of the works and shake the political support of the Mayor.
12 Outside the auditorium, clashes between the unyielding security guards and the rebelling (uninvited) residents and their supporters escalated, as they tried to force their way in. The tension resulted in a physical scuffle between one of the residents and the mayor’s security guard.
13 Núcleo de Terras e Habitação, NUTH.
14 Similar to what happened in Durban, Maharaj (Citation2023), in preparation for the FIFA games (2010), the State instrumentalized the space for popular participation and pushed for the displacement of those who resisted.
15 The analysis of the choices reveals that, in practice, residents with better income and/or prestige benefited more in the negotiations. The portion of the residents who agreed to move to Parque Carioca responded to the profile required by the Federal funding programme for the segment of the population earning from zero to three minimum wages. Cash trading took place, in general, with families that had a monthly income above that amount. In these cases, the existence of documentation of the property, the level of the construction standard of the house and even the degree of public recognition of the family component were considered as variables in the prices offered by the City.
16 Stigmatisation is a mode of structural violence in Vila Autódromo, as also in Mumbai (see Kundu and Satija Citation2023). In addition to denying the rights of residents, it contributes to razing the area and unlocking the value of the land.
17 Residents began to decline interviews to newspapers because they considered that their testimonies were being misrepresented: ‘we no longer speak to Globo’, said one of the members of the Community Association when explaining the letters of clarification in responses to articles published in the mainstream press. Social networks and some alternative communication channels were the community's means of expression.
18 Margins imply uncertainty and vagueness concerning state action protocols. Gupta calls these conditions ‘blurred boundaries’ (Citation2006).
19 Commitments to the International Federation of Association Football, FIFA and the International Olympic Committee—IOC served to justify the relaxation of rules that govern the contracting of works, urban development and social and human rights.
20 Rua Plano Popular da Vila Autódromo—PPVA.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Pedro Novais
Pedro Novais is an architect and urban planner and associate professor at the Instituto de Pesquisa e Planejamento Urbano e Regional at the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro—IPPUR/UFRJ. Email: [email protected]
Camilla Lobino
Camilla Lobino is a sociologist and professor at the Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro—IFRJ. Email: [email protected]