SUSTAINABLE LIMA, MEGACITY

Download the draft paper in *.rtf format

Sustainable development is integral development

This paper is written from the point of view of Lima, an example of the megacities in the poorer countries, with a concern the participation of the urban poor and their organizations in processes of sustainable development. More precisely, our concern is to find way in which the grassroots community organizations can continue to respond to the basic material needs, but to do so in such a way that their efforts and linked to development and not limited to poverty relief. We will are that this concern is a social, political and ethical enterprise.
The paper will first discuss the approaches to 'sustainable' development, arguing that in order to be sustainable the development processes and strategies must be based on an integral understanding of development. That is to say the approaches to development must comprise all the dimensions that the people themselves recognize as essential to their well being, both as individuals and as a community or society. In our work in development planning with the people we have identified the following dimensions: economic, social, cultural, environmental, organizational, spiritual and political.

A fragmented dream

Working out from an integral perspective it is possible to build criteria to review the different policies and approaches to development that are common to the national and international agents and evaluate to what extent the support or hinder sustainable development. This evaluation will propose that a central problem in the forms of intervention is fragmentation, in viewpoint, in projects, and among the actors involved. In some cases, particularly in local NGOs, there has been a demand to achieve more professional and specialized practices. This necessary specialization is often reinforced by the international agencies that demand more concrete indicators to measure results in each specific project area. In many cases it has effectively helped to respond to basic human needs of the urban poor in a context of increasing poverty, reduced resources and the retreat of State from it social obligations.
The specialization, however, has also lead to the fragmentation of global visions of development and does not build synergetic strategies nor build link among different organizations. In many cases such segmented strategies are quite functional to the neoliberal model in as much as projects are designed more to clean up the effect of structural adjustment rather than contribute to alternative approaches and strategies for achieving sustainable human development.
One of our major concerns, therefore, will be to find ways to integrate actors, especially the popular urban actor, but also the State and private sectors such as NGO and international cooperation agencies. We will argue that such a task is basically a political task, which implies building democratic political systems and scenarios and forma of negotiation that can lead to integral, sustainable development. Further we will argue that in the megacities, which are more urban agglomerates than integrating cities, (J. Borja) such a democratic approach to development must be carried out in a decentralized manner, in the case of Lima in its geographical Cones where the bulk of the urban poor live.

Ethics and Cultural Values: guiding principles or the icing on the cake?

The paper will further consider the importance and role to be attributed to ethical and cultural values in the discussion and especially in the designing and carrying out of sustainable development strategies. Ethics and development is not a new topic. For decades authors such as Denis Goulet and Amartya Sen have been champions of ethics for development. The recent and growing criticisms of the neoliberal model, or at least the criticism of the inhuman results of the model, have led to efforts to recuperate the human dimension of development and its ethical and cultural underpinning. The Nobel Prize awarded to Sen in 1998 is an expression of this interest.
However there is reason to believe that much of the recent interest in ethical issues comes as an afterthought in the wake of globalized structural development. That is to say ethical principles are used to argue for the need to give more attention to cleaning up the model's mess than to redo the model. Therefore we find resources available for working on environment, especially water and green lands, to combat hunger and unemployment, for getting women more involved -often as unpaid social workers- and so on. Ethics and cultural values often dress up the model but have no way of changing it. Our concern is to discuss how such principles can be active in the very conception of development, in the planning, execution and evaluation of the processes themselves. Here also we will look to democratic politics as an essential element in this objective
The breakdown of democratic politics for development It will therefore be necessary to reflect on the importance of rebuilding democracy if we take seriously the definitions of development put forward by the UNDP, -enhancing the people's capacities- or Sen's -expanding of freely determined human capacities. It should be clear from these understandings of human development that no person, no agency, no State or Nation has the right to determine what capacities are do be developed and expanded. However it is just as clear that the political power to decide on what paradigms are to be used has been taken from the people, especially the marginated. and from their Nation-States. Democratic political systems are becoming inoperative for determining the course of development. This reality has led Ralf Dahrendorf, former head of the London School of Economics, to ask very seriously "Is there any future for democracy?"
Our concern for sustainable development and for the paradigms created and imposed brings us to ask the question as to how and where democratic political systems can be rebuilt and, just as important, how can such systems can be linked to development processes.
New public spaces and human, sustainable development Therefore, we are concerned with the loss of an integral vision of development and with the need to put ethical and cultural values at the core of development strategies and practices. Further, we are convinced that both goals need a political more than a technical solution, we will return to the megacity to find ways of rebuilding democratic politics. We will suggest that the key to such and adventure can be found in the emerging public spaces where the popular urban organizations in nenare learning to do politics. We will present and analyze the emerging practice in the local neighborhoods of the megacities in the outlying districts of Lima. In these scenarios, there are new forms of negotiation and planning in what we are calling public spaces. In these scenarios, popular organizations of different types, each with its own specific interests, are learning to negotiate together, to recognize the legitimate interests of others and to find solutions to particular often conflicting interests. These solutions must be based on common interests, on the common good, and on ethical and cultural values recognized by all the players. In such political experiences of negotiation, the relation between the popular organizations and the local governments is also changing. Formerly and traditionally such a relation was conflictive and mutually manipulative, now the are experience of collaboration in the building of common developmental goals.
However, if we are to contribute to strengthening these scenarios and the embryonic forms a democracy for development, we must be well aware of the limitations and obstacles to be faced. The paper will, therefore look into the reality of the principal actors.
It is more and more evident that the prolonged and profound economic and political crisis, as well as the increasing unjust gap between rich and poor, are producing negative effects in the popular organizations. These effects are seen in the loss of self-esteem, a reduced vision of development, the lack of desire for progress and the unwillingness to participate in democratic politics. Poverty has never dignified anybody, nor has it ennobled or motivated the poor. Quite the contrary, poverty and injustice dehumanize, depress and paralyze, and make the poor easy targets of political manipulation through the control of resources intended for assistance.
These negative effects are deepened by the discourse that accompanies the neoliberal model around globe. According to this discourse, success and development are the sole result of individual efforts and depend exclusively on the ability of each person. The poor however, especially those in the megacities, have absorbed much of this discourse of extreme individualism, but at the same time they are well aware of the tremendous disadvantages they face and that it impossible to compete in a market which is free or liberal only in name. They have a sense of defeat even before the market game begins. As one analyst said, it's like entering a monopoly game when all the property has been bought up, and the only solutions are either to go to jail or to overturn the playing board. A feeling of defeat is a tremendous problem from our point of view for it is a fact that no people or social class in defeat has ever been a free and creative agent of historical changes. To feel alone, an outsider defeated and unable to compete makes one open to manipulation and willing to accept authoritarian solution and governments, which in the words of President Fujimori, act first and talk later.

Strategies for moving ahead

In the face of this rather bleak scenario, our strategies must focus on the strengths and positive aspects that can contribute to strengthening the principal actors, especially the community organizations and to consolidate the emerging processes and practices which can lead to sustainable human development in the megacities. It is easy to understand that from our point of view the main concern is not so much with creating new development paradigms, -although we do need new paradigms. What is essential is who decides and how the decisions are made and carried out. Or more precisely we are concerned with creating conditions that allow the peoples of different nations and cultures to freely determine their paradigm and gives them the power to implement what they decide.
Through our experience with the community organizations in the urban poor areas, and in a recent study organized by UNRISD and UNV, along with our research on the political culture of the people we have come to some preliminary results which are helping us to contribute to these goal through our programs of research, promotion and education. One principal conclusion is to continue to base our strategies for development and democracy building on the people's organizations and leaders. They are a source of experience, creativity and human values essential to sustainable development. Our work with these organizations must continue to support the people's efforts to reduce poverty and to satisfy basic material needs. However, the possibility of going beyond poverty relief strategies and of linking them to sustainable human development depends to a great extent on the consolidation of the public spaces and the practices where negotiation and planning can take place as a political activity, linking basis material needs to development processes.
A second conclusion is that in all our work with the people we must consider three central aspects which seem to determine the possibilities of the people becoming fully involved in development processes.
The first aspect centers on the individual person in relation to the community or popular organization. This is part of a classic debate between liberalism and communitarianism. Often goal oriented programs of poverty relief do not take into account the effects of such programs on the self-esteem of the people involved, the strengthening or weakening of their ethical and moral principles, such as solidarity and confidence. Often poverty relief programs weaken rather than strengthen the people's awareness of their interest and rights. And on the other hand, programs should strengthen the community organizations making them not only efficient instruments to reach set goals. These communities must also help make their members more humane and, be schools of democracy. The community organizations should make ethical principals and cultural values operative, and promote the collaboration among different community organizations. Community organizations can be negative, weakening self-esteem, reducing the vision of development to survival, and even create a beggars mentality. We must evaluate or programs in these terms as well.
The second aspect to be taken into account is precisely the vision of development that results from our activities. Our interventions to alleviate poverty and the effects of the structural adjustment must broaden, not shrink, the vision of development. That is to say all the dimensions of human development must be considered in the process. Our work and research show the 'post material values' can be present and operative, even when the community is absorbed with the need to survive.
Finally, the third central aspect of our work is related to the political dimension. As we have argued, in complex urban societies, the only way to make ethical and cultural principles operative is through a democratic political system which links politics to development. However extreme poverty and any forms of intervention inculcate the idea the politics in a negative factor. This is particularly true in intervention strategies and projects concentrate on one single problem or issue, such as environment, nutrition, health, employment, etc. Such projects can have a negative effect on the way people understand politics and their will to participate. Only when a process goes beyond isolated, stop-gap projects to more long-term, synergistic strategies can the real importance of politics understood.
All our project and programs must be evaluated not only in the concrete results in poverty relief, but also in the effects they have on the three dimensions we have mentioned: individual-community; the vision de development and the vision of politics.
Finally, we are discovering that we must do more than broaden our perspective and better our programs and strategies. While this is essential, it also is increasingly evident that if we expect people to get involved in and be in charge of complex processes of sustainable development, if they must produce new paradigms which effectively lead to human development, then they need the education to do so. The theoretical and conceptual understanding of the three dimensions we are working on should not be limited to intellectuals and researchers. The people themselves, especially the leaders, as well as the technician and promoters have the same needs and rights to these tools. We must therefore give the needed time and resources to education and create adequate tools for this task.

ESF/N-AERUS: International workshop - Geneva, Palais des Nations - May 3-6, 2000

N-AERUS: Network-Association of European Researchers on Urbanisation in the South
http://www.naerus.net