The Spatial‐Political Outcome of Urban Development Conflicts: Emancipatory Dynamics of Protests against Gentrification in Peñalolén, Santiago de Chile

Abstract

This study addresses the spatial‐political impact and lasting emancipatory potential of urban development conflicts. It is based on a case from Santiago de Chile, where activists from different social backgrounds struggle against processes of gentrification and structural densification within the context of current urban planning measures. The (temporary) peak of the conflict constituted a referendum, by means of which the social movements were able to refuse a new land‐use plan. Theoretically, the article builds on the combination of radical democratic and spatial perspectives. A frame analysis serves to capture the spatial‐political approach for the empirical analysis. Findings reveal a range of emancipatory practices, such as counter‐hegemonic and self‐organized housing and planning policies. Furthermore, my research shows that maintaining agonistic spaces enables experimental social orderings that symbolize sustained contestations of neoliberal spatial policy.

The potential of collaborative housing to tackle the social deficit of housing: the Chilean case

“…Since the 1970s, following the dictatorship, Chile has become a neoliberal state and has privatised public services, affecting the housing system (Hölzl, 2018). In this period, a free market model was implemented based on 'subsidiarity', where the State relegates housing production to the private market (Angelcos & Pérez, 2017).…”

“…In many cases, the option provided by these programs is either non-voluntary or represents a sub-optimal choice for the residents due to the lack of better opportunities in view of their underprivileged socioeconomic situation. Residents are then forced to redefine their social relations and connection with the built environment (Zumelzu & Barrientos-Trinanes, 2019) and could suffer a breakdown of their social ties (Rodríguez et al, 2018), a weakening of social cohesion and capital (Hölzl, 2018;Wormald & Sabatini, 2013) and isolation (Garrido & Kornbluth, 2015). Since the 1970s, some of these policies have been replicated in Latin America, including plans such as land liberalisation in Mexico and mass double-up relocation in Argentina (Castillo & Hidalgo, 2007;Greene & Mora, 2020;Rodríguez & Sugranyes, 2005).…”

¿Es posible vivir juntos? Conflictos por la vivienda en el Gran Santiago

“…El concepto 'comunidades', referido en general a agrupaciones u organizaciones de propietarios que defienden su entorno, tiene aplicaciones más bien líquidas en el caso chileno. La investigación respecto a conflictos espaciales señala que se trataría de actores emergentes, cuya permanencia está supeditada a la duración del conflicto y sus tensiones particulares, anulando las experiencias de politización de largo plazo (Hoelzl, 2018). El problema estaría en las otras nuevas definiciones de NIMBY, donde la propiedad y sus regímenes subsidiarios de acceso incidirían en la construcción de opuestos sociales indeseados, sin nuevos proyectos políticos de ciudad (Piat, 2000) (Scally y Koenig, 2012).…”