Urban environment, spatial fragmentation and social segration in Latin America: Where does innovation lie?

To “review the urban question” in terms of sustainable development, the premise is formulated that improving infrastructures, equipment and services to preserve the natural and built urban environment is costly and generates expenses of all kinds—at economic and social levels. Without the introduction of equalisation mechanisms, these expenses will increase inequalities between different parts of the urban population. As confirmed by 2 Latin American case studies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and La Paz Bolivia, the quality of urban environment depends directly on improving living conditions for the resident population. The aim is to assist the poor in developing a rubbish disposal service for the families living in the informal settlements of La Paz, or to extend water supply to the poorer areas on the outskirts of Buenos Aires. The collective benefits of these “innovations” are self-evident. However, understanding the environmental issues involved, and evaluating the social impact of these innovations, means examining what motivates their implementation. The first difficulty was in finding financial and economic information on the global cost of the new technologies, due to the lack of managerial culture and the discretional attitude of private enterprises and public administration. A second observation is that the social dimension of the environmental upgrading process in Latin America cities has been neglected by the main urban decision-makers. In all the contexts, the evolution of the projects’ implementation clearly demonstrates that social issues cannot be dissociated from political ones. Although the players themselves often find it difficult to estimate economic costs, these are nonetheless real and represent burdens that should be distributed equitably among the beneficiaries of services; but which are, in practice, often viewed in terms of profit. This leads to conflicts between different population groups, the political authorities and private intermediaries. Rather than viewing technological action as an unique “source” of innovation, we must consider its global dimension via the social practices it generates. On the other hand, we should reposition every specific event in its immediate environment and see how it reflects contemporary macro-social processes, in a world of “globalisation”.