Neglected? Strengthening the Morphological Study of Informal Settlements

Abstract

The world is now an urbanized planet with 95% of the urban population growth predicted to occur in cities of the developing world by 2045. One of the challenges of rapid urbanization in the 20th century is the burgeoning growth of urban poverty and slums, both spatially and demographically. Currently, one third of the global urban population lives in slums (UN-Habitat, 2003), with this number predicted to increase, causing an "urban tsunami" (Forman, 2008). Although many of these areas are considered "unplanned" or fringe areas, these peripheral urban landscapes are characterized by houses built on land for which the ownership is typically in question. The urban form is traditionally called spontaneous, irregular, informal, illegal, or squatter settlements. Although the study of slums has been predominantly focused on policy, housing and land tenure, and urban poverty, analyzing their morphological distinctiveness adds considerable potential to planning for site-specific design or policy responses (including mobility, access, and services) for these areas in the contemporary city. Although informal settlements can be seen as a response to certain socioeconomic conditions (UN-Habitat, 2003), they are also tied to factors such as the growth limit of the broader city (built-up area) and the terrain and steepness of land and building conditions (Appadurai, 1996; Benton, Castells, & Portes, 1989; C. Gilbert & Vines, 2000). Within informal settlements, the blurring of boundaries between questionable property ownership and right of use, access to infrastructure and hazardous site, function and form, and public and private spaces, introduces a set of dynamics that existing methods of morphological study do not sufficiently address. If informal settlements are potential sites of future city growth, more attention should be paid to their distinct morphological characteristics. As an established field of study, urban morphology expanded on three broad geographical differentiations within the broader city (Conzen, 1958; Whitehand, 2009). First, the separation of function, form, 760375S GOXXX10.

Socio-Spatial Segregation and the Spatial Structure of ‘Ordinary’ Activities in the Global South

“…These measures often reinforce the formal/informal dichotomy either by overlooking the intrinsic characteristics of urban space (McCartney & Krishnamurthy, 2018) or by displacing people. Socio-spatial segregation of vulnerable groups in informal-labelled areas excludes them from material means, services and opportunities, or from decision-making processes (Smets & Salman, 2016).…”

Morphology of Residential Environment of Singengu Village in Mandailing Julu, North Sumatra

“…Morphological studies at the regional level are prevalent, especially on an urban scale, for example, Fadhilah et al (2013), Tallo et al (2014), Wei et al (2016), Wijaya (2017), Yan and Chen (2018), Mathewson (2018), McCartney and Krishnamurthy (2018), Sitompul and Roychansyah (2018), and Jones (2019). Overall, the studies in this field that have been carried out over the last ten years focused mostly on urban areas, such as the study conducted by Fadhilah et al (2013), who studied the morphology of Kampung Kalengan in Bugangan Village, Semarang City through two aspects: firstly, a physical study that included courtyards/fields and road space, and secondly, a non-physical study covering socio-economic aspects.…”

“…In contrast to previous studies, Mathewson (2018) focused more on the morphology of the city in terms of the phenomenon of flooding and its influence on the spatial growth of cities, especially the city of Jakarta. As for McCartney and Krishnamurthy (2018) and Jones (2019), they focused on identifying the morphology of informal or slum areas that are very dynamic. McCartney and Krishnamurthy (2018) explain that slums need different handling from other urban areas, therefore, an appropriate strategy for subsequent planning practices should be aimed at urban slums in general.…”

“…As for McCartney and Krishnamurthy (2018) and Jones (2019), they focused on identifying the morphology of informal or slum areas that are very dynamic. McCartney and Krishnamurthy (2018) explain that slums need different handling from other urban areas, therefore, an appropriate strategy for subsequent planning practices should be aimed at urban slums in general. Jones (2019) studied a slum area in Lebak Siliwangi Village, Bandung through identification of the structure of the urban village settlements and their nature and changes.…”

Using citizen science to assess cumulative risk from air and other pollution sources in informal settlements

“…Researchers and development planners usually focus on and typically address a single environmental issue, such as air pollution, rather than to take a holistic approach that considers the combination of risks, that cumulatively affect these residents due to multiple exposure. This lack of a holistic approach is made worse in informal settlements that are considered illegal, unplanned and therefore ignored in urban development frameworks (McCartney& Krishnamurthy, 2018;Jones, 2017). The sustainable development goals (SDGs), including the New Urban Agenda (NUA), which emerged from SDG 11 presents policy opportunities for a holistic approach to urban development, given the attention paid to the progressive and democratic approaches such as liveable, inclusive, and just cities.…”