Taylor Canseco
PLN 371
Rajinder S. Jutla
Term Paper
Squatter Settlements: The Worlds Largest Unknown Population In talking to many of my peers around the Missouri State campus, I wanted to know what people thought were some of the worlds largest populations. While gathering several answers, the questions asked were never necessarily specific. Answers ranged from religious populations, ethnic populations, and country populations. The reason for the questionnaire was so that people could be informed about one of the worlds largest populations; the residents of squatter settlements all around the world. With the world population nearly reaching 7 billion, almost 1/6th of these people have found a way to live in illegally built cities. While some of these cities have found ways to create peace and fluency, such as the Favelas of Brazil, many have planning issues that planners hope to one day solve. Although they are not the typical modern day cities, squatter settlements have formed some of the most fluent new urban ways of life around the world. Louis Wirth, author of one of planning’s earliest journal articles “Urbanism as a Way of Life” (actually a sociology journal), stated that there were three basic principles when it came to defining urbanism. Population size, density, and the heterogeneity of an area is how new urbanism is built. In this paper we will use these three principles, rational thinking, and the basic planning process to view how over 1 billion squatters around the world have built such astonishing cities, and how people work to study these places; From areas such as Turkey, who use ancient laws to build cities, to areas surrounding Delhi that deal with adaptation to squatter life. We will also be reviewing quotes from the book The Illegal City: Space, Law and Gender in a Delhi Squatter Settlement to get a better understanding of how resident of these areas deal with their everyday struggles of being part of the some of the largest urban areas in the world. Lets start by getting a better understanding of Wirth’s three principles of new urbanism. For starters, urban areas can only be considered urban areas if the population size seems to be large enough to call the area urban. With population size, comes an issue that must be addressed so that the population does not get out of control. People will adapt to people around them that are most like them, causing the problem of segregation among citizens in an area. What this does is weakens the sense of community which is what we see in many cities today. Planners work to address these issues by organizing cities that are dense to make a more communal area, leading us to the second principle of density. Density is described as a number of people in a given unit of area. Today we see cities go two directions to address density; they build up, or they build out. One of the best and worst qualities of a city is to create competition between residents. An easy way to view density of a city is survival of the fittest. The third and final principle is heterogeneity among individuals. The root word ‘hetero’ or different is the key component of what makes a city. People migrate to cities from all different origins, creating the most diverse and exotic places in the world. This reverts us back to the issue of people grouping with people like themselves. The major issue derived from these main points is what Wirth described as “the leveling effect”, or seeing no advancement in social and business interactions. Planners need to work together to overcome these obstacles, as well as grow from them. Although some squatter settlements have found means of success, some have become growing problems in the world we live in. Ayona Datta, author of The Illegal City, has highlighted how a settlement in Delhi deals with the law, problems, and future visions of these cities. While Sebnem Eroglu, author of Beyond the Resources of Poverty: Gecekondu Living in the Turkish Capital has also outlined daily life in a squatter home surrounding the capital city of Ankara. The object of this paper is to view planning, or the process in which we make well-informed rational decisions, in a way that can improve the way of life for over a billion people around the world. Although squatter settlements may not be the general way a person perceives a city, they are ultimately some of the most complex, dynamic, and diverse cities the world has to offer. As part of the planning process planner’s review issues, gather their information, implement a plan, and review their results. This is how our first author evaluated the squatter area of Ankara, Turkey. To start our first area of discussion we will deal with one of the largest forms of squatter settlements on the Eastern Hemisphere. In an areas of Turkey there is an old term known as ‘Gecekondu’ meaning built overnight (Eroglu, 2011, pp 1). Turkish residents overnight build these areas without any kind of taxation from government or any kind of repercussions when the sun rises. What is built in the night stays forever.
Unlike some settlements, areas of Ankara have not found a way to increase economic growth in the area of poverty. As well as a decline in economic growth, the area also struggles to meet the basic food and non-food needs. The purpose of the book is to understand socio-economic behavior in the poor households of Ankara (Eroglu, 2011, pp 2-5).
As a planner I would like to view these problems as issues beyond my control. To think something of this magnitude can be fixed with on master plan is irresponsible. Taking a rational approach to solving these problems is why planners learn to solve problems piece by piece using the planning process. Looking deeper into how households in the Ankara area responded to poverty, it can be broken down into different classifications. This process can be broken down to four areas including income generation, income allocation, consumption and investment (Eroglu, 2011, pp 18-20). After evaluating and discussing these four areas in further detail, Eroglu concluded that it is a unifying key for areas to respond in a progressive manner (pp. 20). This part of the planning process included collecting new information in the areas of poverty.
The second part of the process included new techniques that households implemented in order to establish a new framework. In order to put new techniques to work, you must go back and review what was not working in the first place. After reviewing previous plans and constructing tests that would better help the area, an idea of a plan to be implemented can be constructed in the area. Such things evaluated included internal resources such as time, bodily resources, and labor resources; it also included external resources such as social capital, public resources, and institutional entitlement (government) (Eroglu, 2011, pp. 28-35). Finally, an overview of the research can be reviewed to determine what will bring success. Eroglu concluded his implement stage by listing out several independent variables and their hypothesized effects on deprivation (Table 3.1, pp. 54).
The third and final area of focus that I wanted to discuss pertains to one of the final parts of the planning process. After reviewing all of the collected findings, Eroglu determined that experiences of deprivation were more associated with ‘primary’ poverty, rather than forms of ‘secondary’ poverty. What this meant was that poverty was less likely to be caused by decisions and practices concerning income allocation, as when men control the money and spend it on themselves rather than on family (Eroglu, 2011, pp 224). The main conclusion that was found in the book was that the capacity of resources controlled the outcome of an area. Planners need to establish communication between government and pedestrians in order to create a thriving area, regardless of if a piece of land has a title to it or not. I thoroughly enjoyed how the author of this book took the time to examine individual households rather than view settlements as a whole. Recommendation for reading more into this book is high on my part and I believe important for planners to read and understand.
The second book, The Illegal City, takes a more direct look at the abstract problems of the Delhi squatter settlement and does not try to find a solution. Rather than discussing the planning process, we will review the main points of the book and then turn our attention to the three urban principles discussed earlier.
As a short introduction to The Illegal City, a side note for the reader is that most of the laws and depictions of violence in the book are a reflection of what squatter settlements are like. The biggest bridge for planners in dealing with squatter settlements is the feud between squatters and government. Who has the upper hand is a question that puts planners in a moral showdown between what/who is right or wrong. Although the government may have certain rights over land, individuals regardless of social and economic status have rights that are to be met. Getting both parties to cooperate with one another is a matter of utmost importance and is key in finding ways to better these large amounts of people.
Squatter settlements lose most of their arguments due to the meaning of the word squatter. Squatting is occupying a piece of land or area that is unoccupied or abandoned. Although squatters may think they have rights to be there, governments usually own the land occupied by squatters and see them as illegal uses of land. In The Illegal City, Datta discusses the subject of law and space. “Indian Constitution is constructed with a relationship between law, space and subjectivity by spatializing and differentiating legal subject hoods across public and private life,” (Datta, 2012, pp 20-21). Essentially Indian law gives the government the power to create laws and rules against groups of enumerated social populations (squatters). Cases about discrimination and citizenship in India that surround ‘justice’ are continually contested in court and have often times proven to be ruled in favor of marginalized groups. Space and subjectivity of groups have been previously decided by Indian law, but have been a large part in the growth of marginalized groups in the country.
Leading into the next chapter, the arguments between the two groups often led to urban development violence. “Authors of the Indian constitution were dead set on getting rid of social inequalities through law but left the responsibility of formulating policies around economic inequalities on the sate,” (Datta, 2012, pp 31-32). What that meant was that any kind of poor structures were to be dealt with by national and urban developers. After the establishment of the National Planning Commission in 1947, several five year plans were implemented in a long attempt to rid the country of refugee/squatter unplanned settlements. In 1956, India passed the Slum Areas act, giving the word ‘slum’ an actual meaning (Datta, 2012, pp 34). Therefor, ‘slum’ in India could range from historic neighborhoods, urban villages, and to squatter settlements such as Jhuggi Jhorpi.
Today there is a difference between legal and illegal slums in India. A major issue separating slums from legal spaces is the use of resources such as water, sewage, and land. A resettlement colony was given the legality by the government after the camp had been situated. One of the major problems was that those who were not in the resettlement colony were living on the same land that the resettled were using to defecate on. Thus, rise of tension was apparent when questions of what constituted ‘public’ land (Datta, 2012, pp 56-57). Residents of the squatter camp claimed that the area was their urban infrastructure, while the government considered them to be nothing but a problem that needed to be removed.
Now to discuss the three principles that were mentioned earlier, starting with population size. In this situation the size of the population is a major contributing factor as to why squatter settlements are becoming a large problem. With a population of over 15 million people, Delhi is one of the largest cities in the Eastern hemisphere and has several problems involving squatter settlements. A major concern in squatting settlements is health implications, and in any area that has a population the size of Delhi, something must be done in order to maintain peace and cleanliness throughout the city.
Right into the second principle, density is a major problem in an area such as Delhi. Although the city is quite large, density plays a key factor in everyday life of the city. Concerns such as lack of shelter are a driving reason for the development of squatter settlements. Aside from that, major health concerns become an apparent and urgent issue that the city must deal with. A number of other concerns and issues arise with the density presented in this area, which leads planners to a difficult path of where to start first and how to address each issue.
The third and final principle stated was the heterogeneity present in Delhi. In the squatter areas of Delhi, there are several branches of religion as well as several cultural backgrounds that make up the demographic of the city. Although this can be a good thing while trying to build a city that is urban and advancing, it can also cause problems and social segregation among its millions of citizens. These three components are something a planner should always keep in mind when traveling to new places. The better a planner understands the area of study, the more prepared he/she will be in trying to help contribute to the city.
Throughout this paper, I want to leave the reader with a few key principles to take away from this short essay. The first being that Wirth’s three urban principles are a key factor in education of a certain area. Study the area, understand the surroundings, attempt to gain a grasp of why the city is the way it is that way you may apply your knowledge to the area.
The second thing I wanted to show the reader is that the planning process is there to guide you along the way of fixing things that need mending. Take things step by step and make sure you have done previous research on a subject to ensure the same mistake is not made twice, or even made at all. Although the planning process may not have a concrete definition, it is important for all planners to step back and take things step by step to ensure all parties/concepts are addressed in a certain plan.
My final principle to take away from this is that rational decision-making is key in not making mistakes. If a planner ever feels like he/she is getting ahead of himself, they probably are. It is important to slow down and ensure that the decision you are making is the right one and one that you feel confident about bring to the table.

Works Cited
Eroglu, S. (2011). Beyond the resources of poverty Gecekondu living in the Turkish capital. Farnham, England: Ashgate.

Datta, A. (2012). The illegal city space, law and gender in a Delhi squatter settlement. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.