The impact of urban inequalities and insecurity on adolescents
and youth in Rio de Janeiro
F l o r i n e B o s
Title: Less Weapons, More Education:
The impact of urban inequalities and insecurity on adolescents and youth in Rio de Janeiro.
Date: May 2014 Author: Florine Bos Student nr: 6009964
Email: florinemarte@gmail.com Supervisor: Rivke Jaffe
Second Reader: Kees Koonings
Research Master Thesis in International Development Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences
Abstract
Development processes create winners as well as losers. Whereas in some urban locations the economy is booming and new sources of wealth are being created, other locations show a deepening of inequality. Until recently, urban development studies have mostly focused on the impact of poverty and inequality on cities’ poorer residents. Yet, inequalities affect both poor and wealthy citizens and as such it is more appropriate to research the impact on both poor and rich, and to see whether and how those groups reproduce the status quo. This article analyses how socio-spatial perceptions and practices of youth in Rio de Janeiro reflect and reproduce existing urban inequalities. It focuses on youth, aged 14 to 24, as they comprise the next urban generation and as such are the key to societal change. The research is based on questionnaires, follow-up semi-structured interviews, and participatory mapping exercises with 68 youth from Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul, half of whom live in the favelas. The findings show that youth are deeply affected by existing urban inequality and, more so than children, have the agency to act upon them. Findings also show that both rich and poor youth, consciously or not, maintain the vicious circle of poverty and inequality through patterns of segregation and marginalisation.
O Último Andar The Top Floor
No último andar é mais bonito: On the top floor it is very beautiful: do ultimo andar se vê o mar. from the top floor you can see the sea. É lá que eu quero morar. It is there where I want to live.
O último andar é mais longe: The top floor is very far: custa muito a lá chegar. it costs a lot to get there.
Mas é lá que eu quero morar. But it is there where I want to live. Todo o céu fica a noite inteira The entire sky stays all night long
sobre o último andar. above the top floor.
É lá que eu quero morar. It is there where I want to live.
Quando faz lua, no terraço When the moon shines, on the terrace
fica tudo luar. all is covered in light.
É lá que eu quero morar. It is there where I want to live.
Os passarinhos lá se escondem, It is there where the birds are hiding, para ninguém os maltratar, so that no one can harm them,
no último andar. on the top floor.
De lá se avista o Mundo inteiro, From there you can see the entire World, tudo parece perto, no ar. Everything seems near, in the air.
É lá que eu quero morar: It is there where I want to live:
no último andar. on the top floor.
- Cecília Meireles
Acknowledgements
This thesis remarks the end of a one-year journey that took me to a cidade maravilhosa, the marvelous city of Rio de Janeiro. I could not have completed this journey alone; along the way I was accompanied and assisted by friends and family, staff and strangers, whom I am eternally grateful. First of all I would like to thank the youth participating in this study for sharing their stories. Special thanks to Felipe and Paulo for being my guides. Zezinho for his efforts and enthusiasm. I am grateful to the adults and youth from Casa Jovem for showing me their project and for participating in my research. Rita and Pedro for providing me with a home away from home. My family. My wonderful friends Clarisse and Cato for the wonderful time. I am immensely grateful to my supervisor, Rivke Jaffe, for her valuable guidance and support throughout the entire journey.
Esta tese mostra o fim de uma jornada de um ano que me levou à Cidade Maravilhosa do Rio de Janeiro. Eu não poderia ter completado este caminho sozinha, ao longo fui acompanhada e ajudada por amigos, família, equipe e estranhos a quem sou muito agradecida. Primeiramente, eu gostaria de agradecer aos jovens que participaram deste estudo, dividindo suas histórias. Agradecimentos especiais ao Felipe e ao Paulo que foram meus guias. Zezinho pelo seu esforço e entusiasmo. Sou muito grata aos jovens e adultos da Casa Jovem por me mostrarem seu projeto e por participarem da minha pesquisa. Rita e Pedro por proporcionarem um lar longe de casa. Minha família. Meus amigos Clarisse e Cato pelos incríveis momentos que passamos juntos. Eu sou imensamente grata ao meu supervisor, Rivke Jaffe, pela sua valiosa orientação e suporte através de minha inteira jornada.
List of Figures
Figure 1 Photo: Contrast between the favela Vidigal and the formal
neighbourhoods Leblon and Ipanema. 8
Figure 2 Photo: View on the favela Cantagalo-Pavãozinho from Copacabana. 32
Figure 3 Map of Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul. 36
Figure 4 Photo: Welcome to Rocinha graffiti. 38
Figure 5 Assessment of the quantity and quality of a range of services and
opportunities by youth from the formal neighbourhoods. 40 Figure 6 Assessment of the quantity and quality of a range of services and
opportunities by youth from the favelas. 40
Figure 7 Perceptions of safety for day and night of youth from the favelas. 46 Figure 8 Perceptions of safety for day and night of youth from the formal
neighbourhoods. 46
Figure 9 Map of perceptions of insecurity according to youth from Vidigal and
Rocinha. 48
Figure 10 Map of places where youth from ‘o morro’ feel unwelcome. 62 Figure 11 Map of places where youth from ‘o asfalto’ feel unwelcome. 62 Figure 12 Map of places on Ipanema and Leblon beaches where youth
from ‘o morro’ and ‘o asfalto’ hangout. 66
Figure 13 Photo: A local NGO uses graffiti to create awareness about the littering
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION 9
1.1BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 9
1.2PURPOSE OF RESEARCH 11
1.3STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS 12
2. URBAN INEQUALITIES 14
2.1FROM POVERTY TO INEQUALITY 15
2.2FRAGMENTED CITIES 18 2.3FOCUS ON YOUTH 22 3. METHODOLOGY 25 3.1RESEARCH APPROACH 25 3.2RESEARCH METHODS 25 3.3DATA ANALYSIS 28
3.4ETHICS,LIMITATIONS, AND THE ROLE OF THE RESEARCHER 29
4. THE DICHOTOMY OF ‘O MORRO’ AND ‘O ASFALTO’ 32
4.1SETTING THE CONTEXT 33
4.2 PERCEPTIONS FROM ‘O MORRO’ AND ‘O ASFALTO’ 36
4.3 BARRIERS 41
5. FEAR! 45
5.1THE ISSUE OF SECURITY 45
5.2 PACIFYING THE FAVELAS 51
6. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE 57
7. ONE THE CITY OF THE POOR, THE OTHER OF THE RICH 64 8. BRIDGING THE GAP: INEQUALITIES AND INTEGRATION 70
8.1THE IMPACT OF URBAN INEQUALITY 70
8.2TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED CITY 71
9. CONCLUSION 74
FUTURE RESEARCH 78
LITERATURE 79
‘Any city, however small, is in fact divided into two, one the city of the poor,
the other of the rich.’ – Plato
Figure 1. Contrast between the favela Vidigal and the formal neighbourhoods Leblon and Ipanema. (Photograph: Florine Bos)
1
Introduction
1.1
Background and Context
This thesis is about the impact of urban inequalities on low-income and high-income youth in Rio de Janeiro. Based on the relational approach, as described by Mosse (2010), I argue that it is essential to incorporate both the position and perspectives of the poor and the rich in debates on urban poverty and inequality. A large part of the world’s population lives in deprived inner-city neighbourhoods or impoverished neighbourhoods surrounding affluent urban centers. The segregation of cities between spaces for the rich and spaces for the poor is well known and centuries old, as the quote by Plato proves. Yet, whereas in the past inequality was seen as the problem of the poor, nowadays it is closely associated with the presence of the wealthy (Glaeser, Resseger, and Tobio, 2008). This shift in focus can be attributed to the fact that economic prosperity is often accompanied by a deepening of social inequality (Wacquant, 1999). In addition, processes of globalisation and subsequent urbanisation pose a new set of challenges to the world of development. Especially, urban inequalities in densely populated cities are associated with a variety of negative consequences for individuals and society at large (Thorbecke and Charumilind, 2002). These consequences range from high crime levels to lack of education, health, and employment opportunities for citizens. While there is certainly plenty of rural inequality as well, the density of cities and urban regions makes the contrast between rich and poor particularly striking. The wealth and abundance of opportunities often associated with major cities are in sharp contrast with the extreme poverty and deprivations encountered in poor inner-city neighbourhoods as well as in the urban peripheries.
This thesis seeks to contribute to and expand Mosse’s work by taking a relational approach to urban inequalities as well as to youth and inequalities. I use the regional focus on Rio de Janeiro to highlight my thematic focus on urban inequalities and youth. The issue of urban disparities and segregation is a growing problem in many emerging nations, like Brazil. As such, the context is used to support my claims about the importance of including the concept of inequality and incorporating the views of both poor and rich in development debates.
Urban Inequalities: The case of Rio de Janeiro
A member of the BRIC group, Brazil has one of the world's fastest growing major economies, and its economic reforms have given the country new international recognition and influence. As of 2012, the Brazilian economy is the world's seventh largest by nominal GDP and the seventh largest by purchasing power parity1. Yet, in addition to its enormous economic growth in the past decade and its growing political influence in the world, Brazil has one other thing in common with the other BRIC nations. The society is characterised by huge inequalities, which, due to the country’s high urbanisation rate, are most visible in the urban context. More than 80 per cent of the population lives in urban areas, of which 28 per cent in informal settlements that lack basic infrastructure and services, such as electricity and water2. Residents of such informal settlements, the so-called favelas, often have limited opportunities for education and employment, which reinforce existing inequalities.
Social inequality is probably the most salient characteristic of Brazilian cities (Caldeira, 2012: page 386), and of Rio de Janeiro in particular. Over one third of Rio de Janeiro’s citizens live in favelas and this percentage is still rising as favela growth outpaces city growth; a trend that is largely a function of downward social mobility. This brings us to the daunting prospect that in the future most of Rio de Janeiro’s residents will live in places of concentrated poverty (Perlman, 2006: 156). What is particularly striking about Rio de Janeiro is the close proximity of the impoverished neighbourhoods to the cities’ wealthy areas. In many cities, informal settlements are located in the urban peripheries, far removed from the economic and cultural center where the middle and upper classes have their living and working spaces. The adjacency of Rio de Janeiro’s informal settlements to some of the cities’ most affluent neighbourhoods increases the saliency of urban inequalities and emphasises the relativeness of poverty.
Youth and Inequalities
Adolescents and youth, aged 14-24, make up a substantial percentage of the urban population. As the transition phase between childhood and adulthood, this is a time of both opportunities and risks. The ‘future urban generation’ is susceptible for social transformations and holds enormous potential for sustainable societal change. Hence,
1 World Bank (2009). World Development Indicators database. 2
United Nations Human Settlement Programme (2010). State of the Urban Youth 2010/2011: Leveling the playing field: Inequality of youth opportunity. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya.
engagement of adolescents and youth is important for changing social attitudes and behaviours and breaking entrenched cycles of poverty, inequity and deprivation3. At the same time, due to their undefined position between childhood and adulthood, adolescents and youth are often regarded as invisible citizens. Consequently, young people are found to be in a state of oblivion; without the prospect of a decent career or education and unable to fulfil the duties that adult life requires of them. They are unsure about their capacities and capabilities and lack long-term goals for the future.
Young people in Rio de Janeiro encounter huge inequalities on a daily basis, and those living in the favelas are also faced with marginalisation and subsequent deprivations. Unequal access to basic services, such as education and healthcare, often begins in childhood and continues into youth and adulthood4. Education is in particular essential for young people to develop into responsible and accomplished individuals that contribute positively to society. Lack of access to quality education and other services can lead to opportunity deprivations later in life, particularly regarding income, employment, and housing. Unequal opportunities increase exposure to risk factors and undermine young people’s overall development. In the long term, persistent and subsequent intergenerational inequity deprives youth of their political, economic, social, and cultural rights to the city (UN-HABITAT, 2012).
1.2
Purpose of Research
In the past, studies have mostly focused on the impact of poverty and inequality on cities’ poorer residents. Yet, inequalities affect both poor and wealthy citizens; as such it is more appropriate to research the impact on both groups and to show if and how those groups reproduce the status quo. My special interest goes to adolescents and youth as they comprise the next urban generation and as such are the key to societal change. They are affected by existing urban inequalities and, more so than children, have the agency to act upon them. Therefore, the purpose of my fieldwork and thesis was to find out how socio-spatial perceptions and practices of adolescents and youth in Rio de Janeiro reflect and
3 United Nations Children’s Fund (2011). Adolescence An age of opportunity. UNICEF India, New Delhi, p. 4. 4
United Nations Human Settlement Programme (2012). State of the Urban Youth 2012/2013:Youth in the prosperity of cities. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya.
reproduce existing urban inequalities. The objectives of the research were twofold. First, I tried to find out how existing urban inequalities restricted or benefitted young people depending on their socioeconomic background and spatial location. Second, I was interested in how existing inequalities were, consciously or unconsciously, reproduced through this generation’s socio-spatial perceptions and practices.
The thesis applies the relational approach to poverty and inequality, as described by Mosse (2010), to debates on urban inequalities as well as debates concerning youth and inequalities. The vast majority of studies about urban inequalities have focused on poverty and the position and perspectives of the urban poor. Only recently has there been a shift in focus to incorporate the position and perspectives of the city’s wealthy citizens, as can be seen in the work of Caldeira (1996, 2000, 2012). Likewise, studies on and policies concerning youth and urban inequalities are mainly focused on the impact of inequalities on the lives of poor youth, in many cases further limiting the debates to young people living in informal settlements5. My research stresses that urban inequalities cannot be fully understood by focusing on just one side of the story; the side of the urban poor. Inequalities more so than poverty, implicate the mutual relation between poor and rich as well as both parties’ share in sustaining the status quo. Added to this is that inequalities are detrimental to all sections of the urban population due to its implications for public healthcare and education as well as security (Thorbecke and Charumilind, 2002). In this thesis I would also like to stress the role of insecurity in urban contexts as well as its implications for youth. In crime-ridden and violent contexts, insecurity and inequality often go hand in hand. Therefore, it is crucial for the relational approach to incorporate notions of security and acknowledge its association with inequality.
1.3
Structure of the Thesis
The aim of this thesis is to show how the lives of youth differ according to where they grow up and live, and how their use of the city and their perceptions on urban inequalities
5
United Nations Human Settlement Programme (2010). State of the Urban Youth 2010/2011: Leveling the playing field: Inequality of youth opportunity. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya.
United Nations Children’s Fund (2012). The State of the World’s Children: Children in an urban world. UNICEF, New York, USA.
reinforce current patterns of exclusion. The thesis is structured as follows. The second chapter comprises an overview of the available work on urban inequalities. This theoretical framework is organised around three main concepts, namely: security, segregation, and marginalisation. Chapter three contains the methodology, including a discussion of ethical issues, limitations encountered during the research, and the role of the researcher. In the fourth chapter I used literature review and empirical data to give an overview of the background and context of the research as well as to discuss the distinction between the two concepts central to this thesis: ‘o morro’ and ‘o asfalto’. The following three chapters present the main finding of the spatial, quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Chapter five addresses the issue of security and its impact on youth in Rio de Janeiro. It shows that youth fear people and places that are different and that this fear restricts them in their freedom, as they tend to avoid these places and people. Further, the chapter deals with youth’s perceptions on the pacification of the favelas; a project that most youth criticise as they consider it to be based on dubious grounds. Chapter six addresses the social side of urban inequalities. It discusses ‘soft city’ exclusion techniques, such as stigmatisation and marginalisation, which are used to exclude certain residents based on their socioeconomic status and spatial location. The chapter also shows that both pride and prejudice flourish in the favelas and demonstrates that youth from the formal neighbourhoods (the middle- and high-income areas of Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul) also suffer from prejudice. Chapter seven presents the spatial side of urban inequalities. It addresses ‘hard city’ exclusion techniques: the segregation between public and private spaces as well as restrictions in spatial mobility. It shows that spaces in Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul are shared though segregated. The discussion in chapter eight seeks to determine what the impact of urban inequalities is on youth in Rio de Janeiro and presents how youth think their city can be made more integrated. This is followed by the conclusion in chapter nine.
2
Urban Inequalities
Where the focus of international development debates has for many years been on poverty, current debates have increasingly incorporated notions of inequality. Particularly Mosse’s (2010) relational approach to poverty, which states that poverty is the consequence of historically imbedded political, economic, and social relations, has been important in this respect. As such, poverty cannot be understood as independent of its context, and the relation between different factors ultimately determines its scale and impact. It is crucial that debates on poverty and inequality understand and incorporate this relational perspective to poverty as it means a qualitative shift in focus. Inequality is inherently a two-way street; not just the poor are affected but the wealthier citizens as well. Surprisingly, up till now little research has incorporated their perspective.
In urban studies, research on inequalities has been concentrated on the urban poor. Yet, especially in the context of densely populated cities with people from different socioeconomic background living in close proximity, it is important to incorporate the perspective of the city’s wealthier citizens. Similarly, youth and urban inequalities has been a popular topic and much research has been dedicated to this issue. The United Nations Human Settlement Programme’s (UN-HABITAT) 2010/11-report Leveling the Playing Field: Inequality of Youth Opportunity has made urban inequalities the main focus of the report and the organisation’s 2012/13 report Youth in the Prosperity of Cities also pays specific attention to unequal opportunities. Likewise, The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) dedicated their 2012 report on the State of the World’s Children to ‘children in an urban world’. These and other studies, though drawing attention to the issue at hand, often limit their focus to the impact of urban inequalities on poor youth, particularly those youth living in informal settlements. Although urban inequalities most certainly affect middle and upper class youth, their position and perspective has too often been omitted from research. For this reason I will take a relational approach to the impact of inequalities on youth as well as to inequalities in an urban context.
This chapter will give an overview of current theories of urban poverty and inequality. The first section further examines the shift in focus from poverty to inequality in the field of international development. In this context, the dichotomies of absolute versus relative
poverty and agency versus structure are discussed, touching on the relational approach to poverty as described by Mosse (2010). The second section zooms in on the urban context. In this section three concepts related to urban inequalities are discussed, namely security, segregation, and marginalisation. I look into how these concepts contribute to the fragmentation of cities. The third section links the debate of urban inequalities to youth. How do inequalities affect the outcome opportunities of low-income and high-income youth and how do these youth use urban space in the context of today’s fragmented cities?
2.1
From Poverty to Inequality
Absolute versus Relative Poverty
For many years poverty has been the focus of the majority of the debates on development (Collier & Dollar, 2001; De Haan & Maxwell, 1998; Rakodi and Lloyd-Jones, 2002). These debates often stress the relation between economic growth and poverty reduction as well as the link between poverty and a variety of adverse social outcomes (Thorbecke and Charumilind, 2002). Accordingly, much attention has been given to the income-related or absolute approach to poverty, as this approach was and is often regarded to be the most effective way of tackling poverty. For example, Rocha (1996) states that since a large population of the Brazilian population still has insufficient income to guarantee access to basic necessities, social policy’s priority is to deal with absolute forms of poverty and by doing so income inequality might be improved eventually. Yet, given existing inequalities, growth often benefits the rich more than the poor, as in many cases it causes a reduction in poverty but an increase in inequality (Ravallion, 2004). As an example, the income gain to the richest decile in India was about four times higher than the gain to the poorest quintile; in Brazil it was nineteen times higher6. In addition, the relation between income distribution and a range of social problems (such as violence and health) reasserts that the socio-spatial gradients of such problems – the fact that they are worse in poorer areas – reflect relative income and social status rather than absolute material standards and absolute poverty (Wilkinson, 2006: 726).
6
These numbers are based on income shares for Brazil in 1996 and consumption shares for India in 1997: in both cases the ranking variable is per capita (World Bank, 2000)
Sen (1999: 89) argues that relative economic deprivations are closely associated with absolute capability deprivations. Capabilities, according to him, can be understood as what a person can do or is capable of doing. He states that significant inequalities in a given country or city make deprivations more salient and reduce the opportunities for the poor to achieve the same social functioning, what a person can be or can do, as the wealthy. As such, one can make a distinction between inequality as a condition and inequality of opportunities (Sen, 1999). The former refers to the unequal distribution of income and goods. For example, housing can be seen as an inequality of conditions, with people living in favelas sitting at the bottom of the hierarchy and people living in the multi-million dollar houses in the wealthy neighbourhoods sitting at the top. The latter refers to the unequal distribution of life chances and can be linked to Sen’s concept of capability deprivation. Inequality of opportunities is reflected in measures such as level of education, employment and health status of different income groups in society.
Agency versus Structure
A substantial number of theories on poverty, fuelled by neoliberal thinking, have focused on the agency-aspect of the reproduction of poverty
.
An example is Sen’s capability approach, which stresses that the poor lack the necessary capabilities, preventing them from changing their socioeconomic position. Sen (1999: 87) argues that capability deprivation is an intrinsic ingredient of poverty and goes much further than mere lack of income, which is only instrumentally important. For example, many informal settlement residents are denied the ability to use their capabilities in pursuit of their own best interest and thereby they are denied the agency to make their own decisions and their ability to steer their own life (Perlman, 2012: 156). This lack of agency influences residents’ political freedom, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency, and security. Appadurai (2004) focuses specifically on the capability to aspire. He states that aspirations are formed through one’s environment and its social interactions. The elite, due to their background and network, do not only have better chances to reach their aspirations but also have the capabilities to find the pathways that lead to the fulfillment of them. In contrast, the poor’s capability to aspire is greatly reduced due to lack of opportunities and their limited social safety net.Agency can thus be seen as important for the establishment and assessment of a person’s capabilities. Looking at a given person’s capabilities can show whether social, economic, or political barriers impede a person’s chances to achieve substantial freedoms. Even so, it is
equally important to address the structure-component of poverty and inequality, hereby referring to factors such as social class, race, gender, as well as the wider socioeconomic environment that limit or influence individual opportunities. In the next section I will discuss Mosse’s relational approach to poverty and inequality, which advocates for a stronger focus on the structural factors that contribute to durable poverty.
Towards a Relational Approach to Poverty
Poverty is often thought of as a condition and understood through a focus on the characteristics of ‘the poor’ themselves rather than on the wider economic and social systems of which they are part. As a consequence, the study of poverty is often equated with the study of poor people (Harriss, 2007: 18). Mosse (2010: 1156) argues for what can be called a ‘relational’ approach to poverty. He states that capitalist transformations and the operation of categories underlay structural poverty, while the direct results of power imbalances, such as exploitation, corruption, and violence, come to the fore. The relational approach views poverty as the outcome of historically developed economic and political relations and sees poverty and inequality as an effect of social categorisation and identity. The strong focus on stigmatisation makes the effects of poverty particularly long lasting as these are based on structural categories instead of on the attributes of individuals. Social and political structures are thought to constrain poor people’s individual capabilities and freedoms. For this reason, the relational approach rejects the neoliberal focus on agency and instead argues for an emphasis on the role of social structures and power imbalances in keeping the poor poor.
In addition to analysing structural poverty and inequality as an effect of social and political systems, Mosse (2010:1157) argues that it should also be analysed in terms of inclusion or exclusion. According to Roberts (2004) the new, or relative poverty is often embedded within structures of social exclusion that severely reduce opportunities for social mobility among the urban poor.Silver (1994: 543 as cited in Hickey and Du Toit, 2007: 5) goes one step further and argues that the poor suffer from ‘adverse incorporation’ in societal processes, making that ‘the excluded are simultaneously excluded and dominated’. The new focus on relative poverty or inequality differs substantially from the focus on absolute poverty; the former being more structural, more segmented and even more exclusionary than before. Accordingly, inequality to a greater extent than poverty is seen as the major contributor to the social categorisation and exclusion of impoverished sections of the population and as such should be incorporated in debates on urban issues and international development.
In this thesis I will link the relational approach to poverty and inequality to the field of urban studies, as cities, due to their density and proximity of people, are pre-eminently places where the contrast between rich and poor is particularly striking. In addition, I will engage youth in the debates on inequality. First, because the perspective of the future urban generation is still too often left out of these debates. Second, because research often limits itself to a focus on the position of low-income youth and pays no attention to the perspective of higher-income youth in an unequal context. Further, in Mosse’s relational approach to poverty and inequality there has been little attention for the issue of security. Although this theme is not new to the thematic and regional context, I argue that it should have a more central position in the relational approach as inequality and insecurity are in many cases entwined and reinforce each other’s impact. Insecurity, just like inequality, should thus be seen and treated as a development problem.
In the following sections I will have a closer look at the different dimensions of urban inequality and insecurity and their implications for youth. Special attention will be given to youth’s use of and thoughts about urban space.
2.2
Fragmented Cities
Economic deprivation, social discrimination and spatial disadvantage are the key dimensions of inequality (Kabeer, 2005). Economic deprivation covers the distribution of income, consumption and assets. Social discrimination includes the degree of political participation and representation as well as (lack of) access to public goods, education, healthcare, and employment opportunities. In addition, social deprivation or exclusion is the process through which individuals or groups are wholly or partially excluded from full participation in the society in which they live7; it is seen as the opposite of full participation in society. Spatial disadvantage comprises the spatial or social isolation of a location, which might make it difficult for its residents to participate in socioeconomic and political processes. It might also involve the segregation of certain neighbourhoods due to the violence and criminality that sometimes characterises these territorially excluded places (Beall, 2002). According to
7
Savage and Warde (1993: 63) segregation can be seen as ‘the spatial dimension of inequality’.
Urban inequalities are strongly connected to spatial relations within a city, as space is both a product and producer of unequal social relations (Tickamyer, 2000). Certain techniques of exclusion have come into existence that reinforce the social and spatial segregation between different urban groups (Davis, 1990; Thörn, 2011). Material or ‘hard city’ exclusion techniques can be certain architectural characteristics such as a defensive building style to protect residents from perceived insecurity. In addition, the geographical environment, such as water bodies, hills and mountains, also play part in, and can be used to enhance, the physical segregation of cities. Symbolic or ‘soft city’ techniques include strategies like social categorisation, legitimation of inequality (‘who is allowed where’) and the promotion of discourses that shape how one sees the urban environment (‘don’t go to that place’). As such, the everyday socio-spatial perceptions and practices of urban citizens reinforce existing patterns of urban segregation and marginalisation.
It is clear that the built environment and society interact. Citizens’ socio-spatial perceptions and practices are considered by academics to be conditioned by the socioeconomic structure of the city: segregation represents the distribution of classes and social exclusion in space8. In particular perceptions of fear and insecurity lead to spatial isolation and social alienation between groups. Through these existing inequalities in the built and social environment violence is perpetuated. Moreover, the experience of violence is often distributed unequally in space, making the urban poor more vulnerable to crime and abuse (Moser, 2006). In the following section I will discuss three interrelated concepts that help explain social and spatial inequalities in an urban context, namely: security, segregation, and marginalisation. These concepts can be linked to ‘hard city’ exclusion strategies, in the case of segregation, and ‘soft city’ exclusion strategies, in the case of marginalisation. First, I will address the relation between the segregation of urban spaces and security issues. Second, I will look at the marginalisation and subsequent deprivation of informal settlement residents.
8 Veiga, D. (2012). Urban Inequalities and Segregation In Montevideo. In The Second ISA Forum of Sociology
Security, Segregation, and Marginalisation
According to Teresa Caldeira (1996, 2000) segregation – both social and spatial – is an important feature of cities. In a substantial number of the world’s metropolises a clear class divide can be noticed, with spaces occupied by the city’s more affluent citizens separated from the poor inhabitants of low-income, often informal settlements. Socio-spatial segregation is closely linked to security concerns as low-income areas or slums become, rightly or wrongly, associated with crime and violence and their inhabitants labeled criminals. In order to protect themselves from real or imagined danger the rich use expanded strategies of security, thereby increasing spatial segregation and social exclusion and emphasising social differences (Jacobi, 2006). This causal relation works two ways: on the one hand fear and insecurity tend to promote segregation patterns, while on the other hand segregation reinforces the fear towards others and increases feelings of insecurity. Caldeira’s book City of Walls (2000) addresses the dynamics of urban fear and the subsequent segregation patterns that emerge or are reinforced. She states that the urban landscape is changing and with it the patterns of segregation.
Specifically, Caldeira (1996, 2000) identifies a contemporary urban trend that sees the middle and upper classes retreat into fortified enclaves: secured private spaces for residence, work, consumption and leisure. These private properties for collective use provide their inhabitants with seclusion and services, which fulfill their needs for security (see also Landman, 2004; Low, 2010). These secluded spaces create a world in itself in which there is limited need to engage with the outside world. Inhabitants of such communities choose to live away from the danger of the street and undesired interactions. As a consequence, their relationship with the public spheres of the city deteriorates, as physical barriers enclose not just private properties but also public spaces such as parks, shopping malls and schools. Rodgers (2004) even speaks of a ‘disembedding’ of the city, as the wealthy do not just create fortified enclaves but a whole fortified network that aims to connect private and secure spaces through the construction of high-speed roads and roundabouts. This has resulted in a spatial segregation in favour of the urban rich.
Landman and Schönteich (2002) compared the phenomenon of gated communities in Brazil and South Africa and found that in both countries those communities, by excluding certain groups of urban residents, reinforce social differences and create social distance and inequality. The elites come to see fences, bars and walls as essential; not only for security
but also to represent the social status of residents. Further, as fortified enclaves emphasise the value of what is private, they devalorise the public, shared spaces of the street. As elites spend a greater amount of time in their private properties, public spaces are abandoned to the poor. Coy and Pöhler (2002), working on the socio-spatial consequences of gated communities in Brazil and Argentina, argue that the number of spaces for public encounters between different social groups is greatly reduced as a result of the segregation and stigmatisation, directly and indirectly, caused by gated communities. Moreover, encounters in public space become tense, sometimes even violent, because they are framed by people’s fears and stereotypes. Accordingly, people’s movements become restricted as they increasingly form mental maps of no-go areas in the city (Caldeira, 2000).
No-go areas, spaces characterised by violence and deprivation, are formed through a spatial concentration and stigmatisation of poverty (Wacquant 1999: 1641). These spaces are often assigned to residents of informal settlements who are regarded to be marginal, both in spatial and social respect; spatial in the sense that informal settlements are generally located farther away from the city center or in less desired areas of the city, and social because its residents are stigmatised and excluded from the city’s prosperity. Stigmatisation and exclusion deprive informal settlement residents of opportunities, thereby perpetuating vicious cycles of poverty and reinforcing their marginality (Fernandez, 2013: Perlman, 2013). As such, deprivation, implying not just economic deprivation but also a wider range of so-called capability deprivations, is a salient feature of the marginality of these people. Wacquant (1999) argues that urban marginality has been fuelled by the close socio-spatial proximity of people of different socioeconomic backgrounds. Low-income and high-income residents are bound to different places and their citizenship, rights and identity are derived from those places. Ideologies of inequality and difference often serve to legitimate spatial and social segregation: the phenomenon of socio-spatial distancing or ‘othering’ has become the rationale of and justification for inequality (Krumer-Nevo & Benjamin, 2010).
Brazil has a long history of inegalitarian or differentiated citizenship, and rights and privileges are distributed conform those lines of differentiation (Holston, 2011). Until today there exists a clear economic, social and cultural gap between different social groups, especially between those living in favelas and those that live in the formal neighbourhoods (hereby referring to the middle and upper income areas). Janice Perlman (2013), working on Brazil, states that favelas are often regarded as non-places and its residents considered to be second-class citizens. Middle and upper class citizens often hold a view of favela residents
as being marginal, an image reinforced by the media. In her 1969 book The Myth of Marginality Perlman found that in the 1960s favela residents were not marginal at all but were actively involved in society. Favela communities were well organised and cohesive. Residents were aware of political issues and were trying to contribute to society as well as trying to improve their living conditions. Yet, in return residents did and do not benefit from the state’s goods and services (Perlman, 2006; Wacquant, 1999). This links to Silver’s (1994) idea of the poor’s ‘adverse incorporation’ in societal processes, which leaves them both excluded and dominated. In Perlman’s 2013 book Favela: Four Decades of Living on the Edge in Rio de Janeiro she found that the myth of marginality had become reality. The stigmatisation of informal settlements and its inhabitants as a ‘social problem’ and a ‘threat to security’ has resulted in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Wealthier Brazilians see being from such a place as a reason for discrimination, which leads to the economic, political and social deprivation of favela residents (Cullen and Pretes, 2000).
Perlman uses the term ‘marginal’ to define the position of favela residents in society. In this thesis I will discuss the ‘marginalisation’ of favela residents, which implies the compartmentalisation of this particular group by others (e.g. the state, the middle and upper classes), though it is separated from whether or not the favela residents are truly marginal. In contrast to the static concept of being marginal, marginalisation can be seen as a process that involves the perspectives of other people and organisations towards favela residents.
2.3
Focus on Youth
Segregation and marginalisation have a profound impact on the opportunities of youth. An UN-HABITAT report on urban youth has shown that the degree of outcome inequality that defines people’s exclusion or inclusion in urban life is strongly related to the unequal opportunities that occur during childhood, adolescence and youth9. One such a predetermined circumstance is the location where a person lives. Growing up in an informal settlement often has a negative impact on children and young people’s outcome opportunities later in life. This is first because of the physical circumstances associated with living in a slum, such as substandard housing and lack of basic infrastructure and services.
9
United Nations Human Settlement Programme (2010). State of the Urban Youth 2010/2011: Leveling the playing field: Inequality of youth opportunity. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya.
Physical and social segregation can also have adverse consequences for youth and therefore integration and inclusion are crucial for the prosperity of the city and its residents. Facilitation of mobility is particularly important, as it will improve residents’ quality of life due to their increased access to services. Second, the marginalisation of slum residents has a deep impact on education and employment opportunities in childhood and adulthood (Perlman, 2013). Education is seen as the key to employment opportunities and therefore unequal access to quality education is major barrier to the improvement of youth’s life chances. The economic growth experienced by many metropolises does not generate adequate employment, as a substantial number of youth are unemployed and a similar number rely on low-income, informal jobs10. Consequently, lack of sufficient and satisfactory educational and employment opportunities for marginalised youth further deepen existing levels of inequality.
Youth and Urban Space
Urban inequalities influence how youth use and perceive space. Research by Gough and Franch (2005) on social mobility and exclusion of lower and middle class youth in Recife, Brazil, sheds light on their differential socio-spatial perceptions and practices. According to them, urban space has multiple functions and is perceived in a variety of ways by young people. They also found that spatial practices differ for lower and middle class youth. Youth from poorer areas have extensive knowledge of their neighbourhood and the city at large as they spend much time on the streets and often roam around the city. Adolescent boys and young men from lower class neighbourhoods ‘experience the greatest freedom in the city’ as they are not confined to their own neighbourhood (Gough and Franch, 2005: 159). In contrast, youth from more affluent areas often tend to stay in or around their house due to security concerns. This group also makes most use of the city’s secured, enclosed and regulated spaces that Caldeira (2000) refers to. As opposed to the dangerous and contested image of the street, these spaces are perceived to be safe and high-status (Toon, 2000). Gender also plays a significant role in the social and spatial perceptions and practices of youth. Although not much research has been done on this topic, available work show that in general girls are more affected by security concerns and tend to stay closer to their homes than boys (O’Brien, et al., 2000; Harden, 2000; Johansson, et al., 2012).
10
In this research the focus is on the socio-spatial perceptions and practices of young Cariocas, the inhabitants of the city of Rio de Janeiro, in order to highlight the vicious cycle of spatial and social exclusion and inequalities. To deepen the understanding of youth in an urban context the following research question was formulated: How do youth’s socio-spatial perceptions and practices reflect and reproduce urban inequalities in Rio de Janeiro? The three main concepts foregrounded in this research question are: urban inequalities, socio-spatial perceptions and socio-socio-spatial practices (see appendix for operationalisation and conceptual framework). The following four sub questions have been derived from these concepts. First, what are young Cariocas’ socio-spatial perceptions on inequality? Second, what are the socio-spatial practices of young Cariocas? Third, how do these socio-spatial perceptions and practices vary according to gender, socioeconomic background and spatial location? And fourth, what is the role of security issues in (re)producing socio-spatial boundaries?
3
Methodology
This chapter comprises an overview of the methodology used for this thesis. The first section discusses the approach that was adopted while conducting the research. The second part presents the research methods used, followed by a section that discusses how the qualitative and quantitative data was analysed. The last part contains information on ethics, the limitations encountered during fieldwork, and presents the role of the researcher.
3.1
Research Approach
The research has its roots in participatory research as it seeks to create awareness about the relation between socio-spatial perceptions, practices and inequality; and engage youth in this process. The specific aim of the research is to shed light on how youth’s socio-spatial perceptions and practices reflect and reinforce urban inequalities. The research is participatory in nature as youth were encouraged to reflect on the status quo through discussions and their participation in mapping exercises. Further, youth were asked how they thought urban inequalities could be reduced and the city could be made more integrated. The issue of urban inequality is of course a substantial problem that is not easily resolved. For this reason the study did not aim to make an enormous difference in the lives of youth, rather it sought to create awareness and involve low-income and high-income youth in finding solutions that were ‘owned’ by the youth themselves. Rather than preferring a single method I adopted a holistic research approach and used several different research methods for data collection and analysation.
3.2
Research Methods
A multi method approach was used to analyse the socio-spatial perceptions and practices of youth. The following research methods were used.
(Participatory) Observation
Observations in the favelas and formal neighbourhoods of Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul allowed for the opportunity to experience the everyday use of space by youth from different socioeconomic backgrounds and different spatial locations. It enabled me to capture the everyday scenes of youth’s daily practices and define the places that were most important to them. In addition, it revealed underlying gender roles and norms, and underlined the importance of security in the lives of youth. Observations provided information on norms, values, habits and youth’s ways of interacting with peers in and outside their own neighbourhood. For example, through observing my target group I found out that almost all youth liked to go to the beach, though the exact place on the beach they went to differed for youth from different socioeconomic backgrounds and spatial locations. Public spaces, like the beaches, were thus shared through segregated. Such elements could not be solely understood from semi-structured interviews as some youth might not have been fully aware of their behaviour and in some cases said things that contradicted their actions. Observations as such were used to determine the relation between youth’s socio-spatial perceptions and practices.
Questionnaires Followed-up with Semi-structured Interviews
Questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were conducted with youth from the favelas and formal neighbourhoods of Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul. Questionnaires, presenting both closed and open questions, and interviews were mainly used to gain information on the perceptions of youth on social exclusion and inequality as well as information on how they viewed and used their neighbourhood and the city at large. Some questions were quantitative in nature, as participants had to rate the quantity and quality of a range of services in their neighbourhood (a translated version of the questionnaire used in the research can be found in the appendix). An equal number of questionnaires and interviews were conducted with boys and girls in order to account for gender differences in the socio-spatial perceptions and practices of youth. Likewise, an equal number of youth from favelas and formal neighbourhoods participated.
Participatory Mapping
Participatory mapping was used to map the neighbourhood and the city with the direct involvement of local youth. Special attention was given to how the different groups
(favela/formal neighbourhood and boys/girls) used the city in terms of their spatial mobility (where they went for education or work, and where they liked to hangout in their free time). Information on security was gained by letting the youth map the spaces of the city that they considered to be no-go areas because they were unsafe or insecure. Information on prejudice was gained by letting the youth map the spaces of the city that they considered being no-go areas because they felt unwelcome, prejudiced or discriminated. Participatory mapping proved to be a useful method for understanding the socio-spatial patterns of youth and how these differ according to their gender, socioeconomic background and spatial location.
3.2.1 Unit of Analysis and Sampling
The target group includes adolescents and youth aged 14-24. The research looks at how existing urban inequalities restrict or benefit this age group depending on their socioeconomic background and spatial location. In addition, it shows how these inequalities are reproduced by the city’s ‘future generation’. The research was conducted with youth from contrasting neighbourhoods in Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul. Access to the target group was gained through local NGOs, education institutions as well as ‘on the street’. An equal number of boys and girls were asked to fill in the questionnaires, conduct the interview and participate in the mapping exercise.
A total of 68 youth filled in the questionnaires and were interviewed on their socio-spatial perceptions and practices. Questions concerning youth’s socio-spatial perceptions contained information about youth’s perceptions of their neighbourhood, the south zone and the city at large. Special attention was given to perceptions of security and stigmatisation. Questions regarding youth’s socio-spatial practices incorporated where they normally went for education or work, and leisure; and how insecurity and prejudice influenced their socio-spatial practices. In addition, youth were asked about the impact of urban inequalities on their socio-spatial perceptions and practices. The same 68 youth were asked to map spaces in the neighbourhood and city where they normally went for education or work, and leisure. They were also asked to map no-go areas in the neighbourhood and city in terms of security and due to feeling ‘unwelcome’. Participants were asked to elaborate on why they considered these places to be no-go areas.
A purposive sampling technique was used, based on the criteria of age, residence and gender. All participants were between 14 and 24 years of age. In terms of residence,
participants lived in one of the neighbourhoods of Rio de Janeiro’s Zona Sul. There was an equal share between participants from poor and rich neighbourhoods (of the 68 participants, 30 lived in one of the favelas of the Zona Sul and 38 lived in one of the formal neighbourhoods of Zona Sul). A similar number of male and female respondents participated in the research (of the 68 participants, there were 33 girls and 35 boys).
3.3
Data Analysis
Spatial and Quantitative Data
Youth’s socio-spatial practices were analysed using ArcMAP. Spatial mobility and identified no-go areas (places considered unsafe or insecure) were mapped for youth from the favelas and formal neighbourhoods. Gender differences were taken into account as spatial mobility and no-go areas were expected to be different for boys and girls. The spatial data was used to answer sub question two: What are the socio-spatial practices of young Cariocas? And part of sub question three: How do youth’s socio-spatial practices vary according to their gender, socioeconomic background and spatial location? In addition, quantitative data such as the ratings of quantity and quality of services were analysed; thereby comparing the different statistics for the two groups.
Qualitative Data
All interviews were transcribed and entered into Atlas.ti. The interviews were analysed using open coding as well as a process of coding based on the pre-defined concepts of security, segregation, and marginalisation (as discussed in chapter two, section two). The latter two concepts were linked to respectively socio-spatial practices and perceptions of youth. The qualitative data was used to answer sub question one: What are young Cariocas’ spatial perceptions on inequality? And part of sub question three: How do youth’s socio-spatial perceptions vary according to their gender, socioeconomic background and socio-spatial location? Security was treated as a stand-alone concept and as such can be linked to sub-question four: What is the role of security issues in (re)producing socio-spatial boundaries? Taken together, the four sub questions, supported by spatial, quantitative and qualitative data, are aimed to answer the main research question: How do youth’s socio-spatial perceptions and practices reflect and reproduce urban inequalities in Rio de Janeiro?
3.4
Ethics, Limitations, and the Role of the Researcher
Ethics
The ethical questions seen as most relevant to this research are anonymity and reciprocity. Anonymity was secured by using pseudonyms for the participants. Although the residence and age of participants are real, due to the fact that the information was needed to make inferences about the socio-spatial perceptions and practices of youth, the pseudonyms are chosen in such a way that it is highly unlikely to link a specific individual to the provided information. Reciprocity was particularly important, as the research has its roots in participatory research. Youth were actively involved and engaged in the research project and research findings as well as youth’s ideas about integrating the city were shared openly with partnering NGOs and individuals who displayed interest. At all times I tried to be open to discussions that a social and political topic, like urban disparities, logically evokes. In these discussions I did my best to be impartial and not judge people on their socioeconomic background and the choices they had made based on their background and socioeconomic status.
Working with young people required some extra thoughts. Specifically, adolescence is a period of profound physical and emotional changes, making children in this age group particularly vulnerable. It was checked if the participant did not object to the research, either in word or in action. Needless to say, participation did not place an individual at more than negligible risk or harm11. Youth were encouraged to speak about their experiences with and perspectives on urban inequalities, though they were not pressed to share information that they preferred to keep to themselves or that might put them at risk. An example is information related to drug trafficking. Some youth were not willing to talk openly about the pacification in fear that they would say something that might offend one of the parties involved (drug traffickers versus the pacification police) or just be identified as someone talking to an outsider. In the time the fieldwork was undertaken, some favelas were partly retaken by drug traffickers. The instability and uncertainty this brought about hampered the fieldwork in some ways as shootings became more frequent and safety, both for participants and the researcher, became more of an issue.
11
Workshop on ’The ethics of social research with children and young people’ by Virginia Morrow, Institute of Education, University of London.
Limitations
The following limitations were encountered during fieldwork. In some cases language barriers posed a challenge: the questionnaires were in Portuguese, interviews were mostly conducted in Portuguese, either with or without the help of an interpreter. Only in cases were the participant had a good working knowledge of English (e.g. university students) were the interviews held in English. A second limitation was the small age gap between participants from the favelas and formal neighbourhoods. The former were mainly accessed through local NGOs and as a consequence were a bit younger than the latter whom were accessed through a private university. This issue was dealt with by ensuring that the people participating through the NGO were in the upper age group, while participants from the university were first year students. Respondents were also accessed on the street, which allowed for a further reduction of the age gap. The unstable situation in some of the favelas posed a third challenge. Since the pacification (expulsion of drug traffickers and taking over by the state) of most of the favelas in Rio de Janeiro’s south zone, these neighbourhoods had in a certain sense become more accessible. Yet, many residents feared that the pacification would not be sustainable. They specifically were afraid of what would happen after 2016 when the major sporting events that Brazil and Rio de Janeiro are hosting would terminate. For this reason, also explained in the ethics section, some respondents could not talk openly about the issue of pacification.
Role of the Researcher
As a young woman living in Copacabana, one of the more expensive neighbourhoods of Rio de Janeiro, I encountered both advantages and disadvantages in contacting and connecting with my research group. One advantage was that the target group, youth aged 14-24, was similar in age, which facilitated meeting and talking to them. Most of the participating youth from the formal neighbourhoods studied at a local university, which made it easy for me to fit in. Being a student as well established some kind of trust and understanding, which made them open up to me more readily. Outside of the university grounds, I found it very difficult to find youth willing to fill in the questionnaires and talk about the research topic. The most cited reason was that they were too busy and did not have enough time to participate. I met most participants from the favelas through local initiatives as well as on the street. Being different in appearance made me standout somewhat in these neighbourhoods, which probably made it a bit more difficult to gain youth’s trust. The reactions of local youth on the question whether they wanted to participate in the research project were divided. Most youth were
excited and interested to tell about life in their favela and the main socioeconomic problems encountered in their neighbourhood and the city. Even so, some youth told me that so many researchers from the west were coming to document issues about poverty and inequality, yet nothing concrete had been done to improve the situation. Understandably, they were tired of answering questions to which there were apparently no answers. I dealt with this issue by paying specific attention to reciprocity and openly shared and discussed my research with the participating organisations and youth.
Before I went to Rio de Janeiro I was warned about the security issue in the favelas and was even discouraged from going there. Although Rio de Janeiro indeed has a huge security problem I did not encounter any direct dangerous situations. The favelas were close-knit communities with high levels of social control where the risk of an assault was much lower than in the formal neighbourhoods. The only moments that I felt unsafe were when the Tropa de Elite (BOPE) entered the favelas, which increased the chance of shootouts between drug traffickers and the police. The unstable situation in one of the pacified favelas in Zona Sul (Cantagalo-Pavãozinho) made me refocus the research on two other favelas (Vidigal and Rocinha). The next chapter provides background information about these neighbourhoods, as well as about the more affluent neighbourhoods where the research was conducted. I discuss youth’s perceptions on the gap between poor and rich, and look into the barriers that divide the favelas and formal neighbourhoods respectively referred to as ‘o morro’ and ‘o asfalto’.
4
The Dichotomy of ‘o Morro’ and ‘o Asfalto’
In this chapter I will discuss the main characteristics of the research area and introduce the dichotomy between ‘o morro’ and ‘o asfalto’, that is central to this thesis. This distinction between Rio de Janeiro’s favelas and the formal neighbourhoods, respectively called ‘morro’ (after the Portuguese word for hill) and ‘asfalto’ (asphalt – the term for the city’s official neighbourhoods), in reference to their geographical location, is commonly used and very much alive amongst youth living in the city. Consequently, real and perceived barriers reinforce the social and spatial segregation and marginalisation of different groups of residents. This chapter is structured as follows: the first section gives some background information about Brazil and Rio de Janeiro in particular. The second section discusses youth’s perceptions of their neighbourhoods and the main challenges and opportunities associated with living in that neighbourhood. The third section addresses the visible and invisible barriers that divide the formal neighbourhoods and the favelas as well as youth’s perceptions on the morro-asfalto dichotomy. This chapter combines background information from the literature with empirical data to sketch a comprehensive image of the context.
4.1
Setting the Context
Brazil
Brazil, as one of the BRIC countries, has seen huge economic progress in the past decade. The country has the largest economy of South America and is soon expected to be the fifth largest economy in the world. Brazil’s progress has led to increased international influence and acceptance. Its influence is enhanced by the reputation of the country as being securely democratic with a vision that is similar to that of most western countries (Armijo and Burges, 2010: 21). As such, Brazil is considered to be a ‘safe option’ that poses no threats to international cooperation. Yet, although Brazil has to deal with comparatively few security threats on the regional and international level, security is an important issue on the national and city level. Inequalities and social exclusion of the poorest segments of the population have resulted in increased crime and violence levels. In Rio de Janeiro, probably the most violent city in Brazil, the police forces and drug traffickers are entangled in a violent battle to claim the city’s spaces (in particular the favelas). Neglect and corruption by the state and violence and repression on the side of the traffickers have resulted in the residents feeling trapped between two evils.
