Segregation in neighborhood open spaces:

Building a framework for participatory planning

Akhilesh Mohan

A Dissertation submitted
for the degree of
Masters of Architecture in Urban Design
in
Kamla Raheja Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture and Environmental Studies
(Mumbai University)
2017

1
 Abstract

Segregation can be defined as social sub division between different groups that share urban
spaces between them. Spatial transformations in the form of urban projects bring about a great
deal of social changes and sub-divisions in the locality resulting in segregation. All such socio-
economic and spatial transformations produce spaces of negotiation in the shared urban spaces
by limiting their users and creating problems of accessibility. In any locality the most affected
shared urban spaces are the public open spaces. As a result of the reduced accessibility to these,
the recreational requirements of the community often go unmet. But it’s understood that in order
to allow the practice of democratic rights and to improve the health of public life, it is important
to build sociable public open spaces in the city. The civic body traditionally looked at the
provision of open spaces, quantitatively (and less qualitatively) which resulted into lower quality
of public life. Every neighborhood is different from each other in its socio-cultural and economic
aspirations. In essence, the conflicts within the neighborhood depend upon the degree of wealth,
social status, cultural values and its access to political power. And these conflicts are the ones
that shape the spaces in the neighborhood. Variation in the levels of these factors cause varied
levels of collective aspirations and negotiations. This study proves that there is no one way of
planning open spaces in the city. The study of segregated open spacesi is carried out through an
understanding of the Open Space Policy of Mumbai and critiquing about its adoption and
caretaker policies it complies. By looking at the ground realities, an evaluation toolkit for open
space is devised to inform the policy making process. While, also drawing a comparison with the
global standards of open space policy, it adopts place-making design mechanism as a solution to
the problems registered. And finally to build a framework for participatory planning.

Keywords: Segregation, sociability, public life, open space policy, pocket parks

2
Intend
This study attempts to understand possibilities of aligning the state’s aspirations to that of the
grass-root’s by building evaluation techniques to study such spaces. Evaluation techniques that
looks for - improvised quality of life, building inclusive spaces, opening new income generating
avenues for communities, bringing down the levels of gentrification and initiating a drive
towards building responsible citizenships. It is an attempt to improvise ones notion of its ‘Right
to the City’ii driven through public spaces. The socio-spatial character it provides in reality, as
against what is imagination by the state.

Observation

Segregation studies conducted in India are very limited and are relatively new concept in the
field of urban design. It needs to be explored, how this phenomenon affects the morphology of
the city, in both social and the cultural developments. It was also widely overlooked of the fact
that the urban form could be affected by segregation in public spaces. The study also realized
that the factors affecting the role of social cohesion in Indian cities are multi-faceted. Therefore it
was worthwhile to have a look at the empirical history of the city for evidences of exclusion
through events of conflicts that shaped its morphology. The in-depth study revealed that place
making techniques can be used for solving the issue affecting social cohesion, through design
and policy making. Cities in India have witnessed organic development of public spaces through
the years by introducing activities that promote livelihood possibilities. And it has been fairly
observed that these spaces are rich in social cohesion. And this thesis deems to explore this
phenomenon in public open spaces.

3
Bibliography
Anonymous. (2015, March 23). UK Essays. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/culture-studies/social-segregation-in-developing-world-
culture-studies-essay.php

Associates, A. Inventorisation of Open spaces & Water Bodies in Greater Mumbai. Mumbai:
Adarkar Associates.

Baviskar, A., & Gidwani, V. (2011, December 10). Urban commons. Economic and Political
Weekly, Vol. 46, Issue No. 50 .

Bibeva, I. (2012). Public space and its role for segregation, identity and everyday life: A case
study of Östbergahöjden and its square. Department of Human Geography, Stockholm
University.

Biswas, S. K. (2013). Play! Tactics & strategies for public spaces in Mumbai's informal city.
Mumbai: Observer Research Foundation (ORF) Mumbai.

Burgess, E. W. (1928). Residential Segregation in American Cities. The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 140, The American Negro , 105-115.

Burte, H. (2003). The spaces of challenge: Reflection upon the relationship between public space
and social conflict in contemporary Mumbai. (In)visible Cities, Spaces of Hope, Spaces of
Citizenship (pp. 1-5). Barcelona: Centre of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona.

Cammona, M. a. (1998 & 2003). Community Management of Urban Open Spaces in Developing
Economies.

Carmona, M. (2015). Re-theorising contemporary public space: a new narrative and a new.
Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Vol. 8,
No. 4 , 373-405.

Castells, M. (1983). The City and the grassroots. London: Edward Arnold Pvt. Ltd.

Clark, A., Holland, C., Katz, J., & Peace, S. (2009). Lessons from a participatory observation
research project in public spaces. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 12(4) .

(1991). Development Control Regulations of MCGM 1991. Mumbai.

Doron, A., & Raja, I. (2015, August 12). The cultural politics of shit: class, gender and public
space in India. Postcolonial Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2 , 189-207.

EMBARQ. (2014). Mumbai’s Equal Streets launch sees overwhelming community support.
Equal Streets movement .

Evcil, & Stahl, I. &. (2009). Impact of inaccessible spaces on community. UN Convention.

4
Garau, P. (2016). Global Public Space Toolkit: From Global Principles to Local Policies and
Practice. Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat).

Gopalan, K. (2015). Affordable housing: Policy and practice in India. IIMB-Century Real Estate
Research Initiative, Indian Institute of Management Bangalore, Bangalore .

Hoff, K. (2015, February). Behavioral Economics and Social Exclusion: Can Interventions
Overcome Prejudice? The 2015 World Development Report, Policy Research Working Paper
7198 . Research Support Team, World Bank Group.

Holston, J. (2009). Insurgent Citizenship: Disjunctions of Democracy and Modernity in Brazil.

Jain, A., & Moraglio, M. (2014). Struggling for the use of urban streets: preliminary (historical)
comparison between European and Indian cities. International Journal of the Commons, volume
8, issue 2 , 513 - 530.

kaul, C. a. (1992). Sociology of Environment. Readings in Indian Sociology .

Keep open spaces with BMC. (2002). Hindustan Times .

Lau, H. M. (2014). Investigating the Small Public Urban Open Spaces at High-density Cities: A
case study of Hong Kong. Uppasala: Uppasala University, Department of Earth Sciences, Master
Thesis.

Legeby, A. (2009). From Housing segregation to integration in public space. 7th International
Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 1-12). Stockholm: School of Architecture, Stockholm, Sweden.

Legeby, A. (2010). Urban Segregation and urban form: from residential segregation to
segregation in public spaces. Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Mankikar, S. U., & Kirtane, G. (2015). Re-envisioning MCGM's flawed Adoption Policy: To
ensure holistic and pro-people development of Mumbai's open spaces. Mumbai: Observer
Research Foundation (ORF).

Maria, L., & Bogus, M. (2008). Urban Segregation: A Theorotical Approach. 13th Biennal
Conference da IPHS. Chicago: Conference Paper.

MCGM. (2015). Adoption Policy of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation for open spaces
in Mumbai City and Suburbs. Policy Guidelines, Mumbai.

Moraglio, J. a. (2014). Struggling for the use of urban streets. International Journal of the
commons

Park, R., & Burgess, E. (1967 [1925]). The City: Suggestions for the Investigation of Human
Behaviour in Urban Environment. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

5
Pinto, A. J., & Remesar, A. (2014). Urban Cohesion: A Public space network Assessment. Past
Present and Future of Public Space - International Conference on Art, Architecture and Urban
Design Bologna with the theme, Morphology of Architecture and Urban Design (pp. 7-25).
Bologna, Italy: Volume 39, Nr 2.

Poornananda, D. (2013). Shrinking Public spaces. Kuvempu University, Shimoga .

Priest, N., Paradies, Y., Rouhani, L., & Kelaher, M. (2014). Patterns of intergroup contact in
public spaces: Micro-Ecology of Segregation in Australian Communities. Societies , 30-44.

Ranade, S., Phadke, S., & Khan, S. (2009, January). Entry Restricted: Open Public spaces in
Mumbai. Indian Architect & Builder, Vol 22(5) , pp. 436-439.

Sasidharan, P., & Prosperi, D. C. (2012). Dichotomy of Urban Public Spaces: "Timeless or
Ephemeral" - The Indian Experience. 48th ISOCARP Congress (pp. 1-10). ISOCARP .

Shapiro, J. A. (2006, May 27). Street Hawkers and Public spaces in Mumbai. Economic and
Political Weekly , pp. 2140-2146.

Sidhwani, P. (2015). Spatial inequalities in Big Indian Cities. Economical & Political Weekly ,
55-63.

Vithayathil, T., & Singh, G. (2012). Spaces of Discrimination: Residential Segregation in Indian
Cities. Economic and Political Weekly Vol - XLVII No. 37 , 60-66.

i
For the purpose of this thesis in case of Mumbai, amongst other open spaces - gardens, parks, playgrounds,
recreational grounds, encroached open spaces are the ones under consideration.
ii
The idea of right to the city was first proposed by Henri Lefebvre in his 1968 book Le Droit à la ville. It is a collective right,
that pertains to the ethnicity of all inhabitants. It envisage a socially and spatially equal distribution and planning of resources,
ensuring good living conditions all across.