No abstract

Abstract

This paper examines the introduction of land-use planning requirements into the regularization process of informal settlements in areas designated as "conservation land" in Mexico City. Since 1997, the government has increasingly deployed digital technologies to map and track informal settlement in conservation land in order to select those eligible for reclassification as "residential land use": a prerequisite for other stages in the regularization process, including property titling, access to urban services and subsidised loans for home improvements. We argue that the incorporation of land use planning into the discursive and material enactments of regularization continues to reproduce the social class divisions behind the otherwise rather tenuous distinction between formal and informal urban development. Although presented as a technical concern by planners, regularization remains embedded in political processes and outcomes, a characteristic long recognised in the abundant literature on the subject. What is new is the geo-referencing of informality as part of land use planning, as this alters the dynamics of regularization processes, now involving the everyday planning practices of local government. This experience thus suggests the need for re-conceptualising informality as a form of selective spatial regulation and governance integral to the planning and urban development process. © 2017 The author(s). Published by informa UK limited, trading as Taylor & Francis group.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the creative commons attribution-noncommercial-noDerivatives license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.

This article explores the complexities of informal urbanisation at the metropolitan periphery of Mexico City through a case study of Ampliación San Marcos, a former agricultural area on the city's south-eastern periphery. While the physical annexation of small towns and their environs is a common feature of Mexico City's growth, the settlement of Ampliación San Marcos is more accurately described as a two-pronged process involving the extension of a nearby pre-Hispanic town and the expansion of Mexico City itself. The case study shows that the rural periphery of Mexico City is no tabula rasa upon which urban growth simply 'takes place', rather, settlement processes are influenced by longstanding in situ social relations and practices related to property. The paper highlights the importance of considering the relationships among social relations, property and informal settlement for understanding the complexity of metropolitan growth and change in large cities such as Mexico City. population of 3.2 billion will increase by another 2 billion, reaching its expected apogee of approximately 10 billion in 2050 (Davis, 2004). Almost all of this urban growth will be accommodated in the so-called developing world where many of the largest and fastestgrowing cities in the world are now located (UN-HABITAT, 2003;World Bank, 2000).

For many low-income households in cities of the developing world, 'self-help' or informal housing provides not only their shelter, but also functions as a vital productive asset. The land accessible to the urban poor for informal housing, however, is often remotely located in the urban periphery. While providing access to shelter, such peripheral locations may undermine the potential of shelter to serve as a productive asset, especially for women whose mobility is constrained by their dual roles as care-givers and wage-earners. This research explores how location influences the potential of housing to serve as a productive asset in two informally settled communities in different parts of Mexico City. The paper argues that the 'right to shelter' associated with informal housing needs to be 'scaled-up' to include the 'right to the city' through closer consideration of the linkages among shelter, location, and livelihoods. Such a policy focus necessarily situates housing in a broader socio-spatial context and would serve to complement the prevailing emphasis on community or place-specific upgrading activities in informal or lowincome settlements. Finally, the paper raises questions about the role of planning in improving the livelihood opportunities of lower-income households.