Wi h o
wi hou you:
models o u ban
equali ica ion unde
neolibe alism
in Po ugal
Sónia Al es
Rosa B anco
19.
458 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
in oduc ion
Goals ha unde pin policies in he ields o housing and u ban equali ica ion,
as well as he policy ins umen s h ough which hese policies a e ca ied
ou , ha e been p oblema ised om nume ous pe spec i es. Rega ding he
misma ch be ween policy goals and hei ou pu s, Elsinga (2017, 149) a gues
ha “many cu en housing policies a e based on w ong (explici o implici )
assump ions”, while, in a s udy o he Po uguese case, Al es (2017a) ques ions
he a ionali y o policies ha in coun ies wi h high le els o income inequali y
and po e y suppo he commodi ica ion o housing and he de elopmen
o deb -d i en owne ship. Likewise, Mendes (2014) and Quei ós (2015)
ques ion he mo ali y o s a egies o u ban enewal ha , unde ad e se
socio-economic ci cums ances, use housing as an in es men asse wi hin a
globalised inancial ma ke .
The ela ionship be ween housing and social exclusion has been analysed
om di e en pe spec i es, o example, psychological, economic, poli ical, o
ideological. On he one hand, he expe ience o housing a ec s e e y aspec o
well-being. Room (1995, 105), who claims ha he no ion o social exclusion
ocuses p ima ily on ela ional issues such as inadequa e social pa icipa ion
(e. g. in e ms o social, poli ical o ci il igh s), iden i ies se e al o ms o
social exclusion ha go beyond me ely ma e ial ac o s and in ol e aspec s o
democ a ic empowe men .
Ande son and Sim (2000), Ha ey (2003), Le eb e (1996) also pu o wa d
he need o a mo e comp ehensi e unde s anding o how ulne able g oups
a e excluded and ma ginalised; as well as unde wha condi ions he denial o
he undamen al igh o a decen house occu s, and he denial o he- igh -
o- he-ci y. In o he wo ds, he igh o no be displaced and excluded om
one’s p e ious loca ion, social ne wo ks e c.
In e ms o globalisa ion and capi alism, in which he e is an inc easing
commodi ica ion o housing, and widening social and economic di isions,
housing and u ban policies ha e o be sc u inised in ela ion o he
ou comes hey p oduce. A e hey gene a ing jus and inclusi e ou comes?
To wha ex en a e hey p o iding o he igh o a o dable, adequa e and
secu e housing enu e? Al es’ (2017b) s udies con i m he exis ence o
o ms o ins i u ional disc imina ion agains people pe cei ed o belong o
di e en acial o e hnic g oups, o ha lack ma e ial and symbolic powe .
As indica ed by Madanipou , Ca s and Allen (1998), social exclusion can
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 459
bes be unde s ood a he mic o-le el by loca ing indi iduals in hei social
con ex and unde s anding how policies and ins i u ional p ac ices a ge ing
neighbou hoods can a ec hei homes, he buil en i onmen , social
ne wo ks and e e yday li es.
Se e al s udies con i m ha a ea-based ini ia i es can con ibu e o he
u he ma ginalisa ion and impo e ishmen o al eady ulne able amilies/
g oups (Knox and Pinch 2010; Al es 2017c).
To add ess hese issues, and he impac s o policies and ins i u ional
p ac ices on neighbou hoods and hei esiden s, he a icle is o ganised in
he ollowing manne . The i s pa p esen s a li e a u e e iew on he opics
o gen i ica ion, en ep eneu ialism and displacemen . The second pa
summa ises he heo e ical insigh s d awn om an empi ical s udy on he
implemen a ion o he s u (Sociedades de Reabili ação U bana) model in he
municipali y o Po o. The Ca dosas ope a ion was he speci ic ocus, d i en
by eli e p io i ies, while dis ega ding he needs and expec a ions o si ing
enan s. The hi d pa jus i ies he choice o i le, d awing upon discussion
o he ole o u ban and housing policies as an inequali y ac o in ela ion o
housing policy and he housing ma ke .
This esea ch p esen s wo main heo e ical con ibu ions. On he one
hand, i illus a es how u ban equali ica ion policies based on public-
p i a e pa ne ships and a laissez- ai e app oach o he housing ma ke
cause widesp ead displacemen o o me si ing enan s, uelling social
and economic inequali y wi hin he ci y. On he o he , i suppo s he claim
ha c isis and aus e i y should no be used as an alibi o he o ma ion
o neolibe al s a egies, which dis ega d people’s igh s and p e e ences. I
should a he demand he sea ch o a middle-g ound s a egy, such as he
inclusiona y housing model equi ing de elope s o se aside, in ma ke - a e
de elopmen , a ce ain pe cen age o dwelling uni s o sale o en o low-
income households (Tulumello 2016).
heo ies o gen i ica ion, en ep eneu ialism
and displacemen
Much li e a u e has been published on he opic o gen i ica ion, a signi ican
pa o which a emp s o explain he mechanisms ha unde lie he
ans o ma ion o adi ionally esiden ial wo king-class a eas in o middle-class
460 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
neighbou hoods. The deba e on he concep o gen i ica ion1 has mos ly
e ol ed a ound he causes and consequences o his phenomenon when he e
a e unequal powe ela ions be ween he s a e, he ma ke and ci izens. The i s
academic s udies ypically ocused on he causes o gen i ica ion by looking a
he cha ac e is ics o he gen i ie s and he gen i ied a eas (Vázquez 1992).
Mo e ecen s udies, howe e , ha e ied o ela e gen i ica ion p ocesses o,
on he one hand, a b oade se o ans o ma ions ope a ing in economic and
occupa ional s uc u es (Hamne 2004); and, on he o he , o he ole o he
s a e and o neolibe al policies ega ding social s uggles o e u ban space.
In he li e a u e e iew, i is possible o dis inguish di e en explana o y
heo ies ha es ablish he connec ion be ween gen i ica ion and o he
con empo aneous p ocesses. The phenomenon o gen i ica ion has been
explained: (i) by he ansi ion om an indus ial socie y o a pos -indus ial
socie y, in which he social s uc u e o he indus ial ci y (domina ed by
manual wo ke s wi h weak economic esou ces) gi es ise o a social s uc u e
domina ed by employees o inancial se ices and he public sec o (Hamne
2004); (ii) by changes ha occu a he le el o p oduc ion, ela ed o he
decision o ein es in he ma ke , aiming o cap u e he en -gap ha exis s
in ce ain a eas, ha is, he di e ence in alue be ween he ac ual and he
expec ed p o i able en 2; and (iii) by changes ha occu a he le el o consume
p e e ences, ela ed o changes in alues and li es yles o a new middle class.
The ela ionship be ween neolibe al u banism, p ope y-led enewal, and
gen i ica ion as ega ds globalisa ion and inancialisa ion o home-owne ship,
has also been highligh ed by se e al au ho s, who claim ha gen i ica ion is
an in eg al pa o u ban policies wo ldwide (Ui e ma k and Loopmans 2013;
Janoschka, Seque a and Salinas 2014). Wi h na ional and local adminis a o s
emphasising he ele ance o ma ke -based solu ions o sol e social and u ban
p oblems, gen i ica ion, ypically used as an economic ool o p omo e u ban
enewal, is explained no simply as an economic phenomenon esul ing om
1 The concep o gen i ica ion was o mula ed by sociologis Ru h Glass in 1964 o desc ibe he
in asion o wo king-class London neighbou hoods by he middle-classes. Sociologis s and geog aphe s
in Po ugal ha e used he e ms “nobilização” (nobilisa ion), “a is oc a ização” (a is oc a isa ion) and
ou is i icação ( ou is i ica ion) (Rod igues 2010; Mendes 2012) as synonyms o gen i ica ion.
2 The en -gap heo y con inues o be seen as a use ul means o explain gen i ica ion, as i looks a
cycles o in es men and disin es men in he buil en i onmen , and speci ically a p ocesses o economic
dep ecia ion o eal es a e alue ha lead o he possibili y o p ocesses o p o i able ein es men (Smi h
1979, 1987; an Loon and Aalbe s 2017).
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 461
he exis ence o a en gap, bu as a poli ical phenomenon, wi h mains eam
media and poli icians cons uc ing gen i ica ion as a p ac ical solu ion o
deal wi h u ban decline (Chum 2015; Sla e 2009). Laue mann (2016) claims
ha he ‘en ep eneu ’ o he en ep eneu ial ci y is a municipal go e nmen
ha has in e nalised neolibe al impe a i es and mo i a ions ha a e close
o p o i , speci ically: “in es ing public unds wi h simul aneous objec i es
o achie ing public policy goals and expanding public e enue” (Laue mann
2016, 7). He claims ha use o he label “en ep eneu ial” is ele an because
i o e s a mo e p ecise desc ip ion o he ype o go e nance p ac ice ha is
co ela ed bu no iden ical o neolibe alism (Laue mann 2016, 8). Mo eo e ,
he explains ha con empo a y en ep eneu ial ci ies deploy well-es ablished
en ep eneu ial oolki s, such as public-p i a e in es men en u es, municipal
eal es a e specula ion, place-b anding and in e -u ban compe i ion.
Ponzini (2016) obse es he ela ionship be ween c ises and neolibe alism,
no ing ha : “when bo h public and p i a e esou ces become sca ce,
policymake s end o lowe he s anda ds o egula ion, o s ip-o planning
powe s and au ho i ies, o y o de-poli icise and s eamline choices and
p ojec s, o p omo e new s a egies” (Ponzini 2016, 1238). The nega i e e ec s
o he use and p omo ion o gen i ica ion as an u ban s a egy ha uses
public money o pu sue ma ke in e es s ha e been ex ensi ely se ou . I is
a gued ha gen i ica ion is likely o ha m he in e es s o he poo (Pugalis
2016) and, mo e b oadly, i can damage he social ab ic (Pa on and Coope
2016). The upg ading and eplacemen o exis ing building s ock, namely
o low- en housing by expensi e housing, has an impac on di e en o ms
o displacemen (Shaw and Hagemans 2015). Ma cuse (1986) dis inguishes
be ween di ec and indi ec o ms o displacemen . While ‘di ec displacemen ’
ep esen s a p ocess in which enan s mo e because o en inc eases o
p essu e om landlo ds, “exclusiona y displacemen ”, an indi ec o m o
displacemen , e lec s he inabili y o low-income esiden s o mo e in o
gen i ied neighbou hoods because o changing condi ions in he housing
ma ke , o example, highe en s o a educ ion in he numbe o a o dable
en al dwellings (Hochs enbach and an Gen 2015). As emphasised by
Shaw and Hagemans (2015), he me e p esence o middle-class people in a
gen i ying neighbou hood ep esen s he loss o a o dable housing s ock and
he ongoing educ ion o housing op ions, a ou ing displacemen .
We con ibu e o his deba e by examining how, unde neolibe alism and
aus e i y, and wi h he wi hd awal o he s a e in a ou o he p i a e sec o ,

462 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
he municipali y o Po o has p omo ed u ban go e nance modes in he ield
o housing equali ica ion, a ou ing gen i ica ion and displacemen p ocesses
(Sequei a 2011). In his ega d, i is wo h no ing ha , in Po o, he ela ion
be ween gen i ica ion, en ep eneu ialism and displacemen has been analysed
om di e en pe spec i es. Fe nandes (2011) claims ha ou ism has b ough
new economic alue o he his o ic pa s o ci ies, and his new economic alue
encou ages ein es men ela ed o ou ism (gues house accommoda ion,
ho els and hos els, es au an s and ca és, c a shops). Quei ós (2013), b inging
class ela ions and inequali ies in o ocus, claims ha models o neolibe al u ban
go e nance ha e played a decisi e ole in displacing o me si ing enan s o
low socio-economic s a us and p omo ing eal es a e specula ion ela ed o
“comme cial gen i ica ion” (an exp ession also used by Douce 2014, 127).
models o u ban equali ica ion and ci y cen e
e i alisa ion in po ugal
Wi h a poo ly de eloped wel a e s a e sys em, Po ugal, like o he sou he n
Eu opean coun ies, has expe ienced low le els o public spending on housing3
and has chosen models ha mainly a ou he cons uc ion o new housing a
he expense o housing equali ica ion, and ma ke -d i en housing p o ision
o pu chase, a he han o en al and by non-p o i housing o ganisa ions.
This p edominan (libe al) concep ion ha he ma ke is he bes p o ide o
housing and ha in e en ion should be es ic ed o indi iduals wi h g ea e
and means- es ed needs, has played a c ucial ole in Po uguese housing
policy o wo easons. Fi s , he p o ision o social housing was insu icien
o espond o he needs o a la ge pe cen age o he popula ion ha needed
housing in ci ies ( he main des ina ion o he u al exodus), leading o he
non-planned and non-au ho ised cons uc ions, wi h p eca ious housing
condi ions becoming e iden in many ci ies.4 Second, be ween 1987 and 2011,
he s a e spen mos public unds on housing o suppo in e es a e subsidies
3 Figu es on go e nmen spending show ha le els o s a e expendi u e a e e y low, equi alen o
only 0.1% o he gdp in 2015 ( ms 2017).
4 In he 1970s a la ge pe cen age o pe manen housing accommoda ion in Po ugal s ill had no basic
acili ies, such as unning wa e (47% o o al housing s ock), ba h o showe (32%), sani a ion (58%)
and sewe s (60%) (Al es 2017a).
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 463
on bank loans o he cons uc ion and pu chase o homes (abou h ee-
qua e s o all public spending in his domain); a he expense o housing
equali ica ion, which ecei ed only 1.7% o he o al unding (ih u 2015).
As a esul , owne -occupancy became he dominan enu e, wi h 73% o all
pe sons li ing in a p i a ely-owned dwelling (ine 2011).
Owing o housing policies ha mainly suppo ed he p oduc ion o new
buildings, and o land-use planning policies ha a ou ed he expansion o
u ban sp awl o he pe iphe ies ( h ough he ans o ma ion o u al a eas
in o buil -up a eas), he his o ic cen es o Lisbon and Po o – whe e he
implemen a ion o he so-called i s gene a ion o en con ols (Ha ne ,
Elsinga and Hoeks a 2012) was p olonged o e ime-, c ea ed u ban decline.
The physical and demog aphic decline o he his o ic cen e o Po o is
a es ed o by s a is ical da a. Be ween 1991 and 2011, he popula ion o he
his o ic cen e o Po o ell om 20,342 o 9,334 indi iduals, a loss o abou
hal o he o al esiden popula ion (ine 2011). In 2011, he sha e o acan
buildings was abou 19% o all housing s ock and much o his was in a poo
s a e. O he 1,800 buildings in he his o ic cen e o Po o in 2011, 34% we e
in poo condi ion, equi ing majo wo ks, while 51% equi ed small and
medium-scale epai (ine 2011).
A he same ime, he p i a e en al sec o dec eased ab up ly be ween 1981
and 2011: in Po ugal om 40% o 20%, a educ ion om 1 074 590 o 545 710
dwellings (ine 2011), in he municipali y o Po o dec eased om 67 373 o 43
302 dwellings. In 2011, when 43 302 con ac s o p i a e en al we e egis e ed,
hal o hese dwellings (equi alen o 21 084) s ill had en s below 100 eu os.
In con as , he segmen o con ac s signed a e 1990 has been inc easingly
domina ed by highe en s, which has aised issues o a o dabili y o middle
and low-income amilies.
Following legal e o ms in en egula ion (U ban Lease Ac Law n .
31/2012) aiming o elimina e enan secu i y unde new leases, and he
ansi ion om he old (p e-1990) lease con ac s o a new egime o en s, he
s a e has c ea ed a si ua ion in which he in e es s o landlo d and enan could
be mo e e ec i ely balanced, bu also in which emaining si ing enan s a e
exposed o a ious o ms o displacemen .
The cu en pe iod o libe alisa ion, which we name “a p o-gen i ica ion
phase” comes a e an an i-gen i ica ion phase (1974-1998); and a g adual
shi owa ds gen i ica ion (1999- 2004), in which i was no longe possible o
he ulne able amilies o emain in he a ea/p ope ies a e equali ica ion.
464 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
he an i-gen i ica ion phase (1974-1998)
Du ing his phase, public policies clea ly sough o main ain and assis
popula ions ins alled in he his o ic dis ic s. Social and physical objec i es
we e closely associa ed, as ini ia i es aimed o imp o e he housing si ua ion
o wo king-class amilies, while a oiding o ced emo al and displacemen .
Decisions we e aken by municipali ies wi h he pa icipa ion o local esiden s.
The Local Suppo Ambula o y Se ice (Se iço de Apoio Ambula ó io Local –
saal, 1974-1976) is a good example in his ega d as well as he “P og amme
o U ban Requali ica ion” (1985) ha c ea ed Gabine es Técnicos Locais (g l)
o de elop in eg a ed plans o u ban equali ica ion. In addi ion, o suppo
he equali ica ion o p i a e en ed dwellings wi h old con ac s and poo
housing s anda ds, he cen al go e nmen launched se e al p og ammes,
such as he ec ia (Po uguese ac onym o Special Reimbu semen Scheme
o he Reco e y o Leased P ope y), o he ehabi a (Regime o Suppo
Housing Reco e y in Ancien U ban A eas) ha p o ided unding o
landlo ds ( o suppo he upg ading o buildings) and housing allowances o
si ing enan s ( o co e en inc eases ollowing housing equali ica ion). In
some cases, municipal housing se ices p o ided housing o he empo a y
eloca ion o si ing enan s du ing pe iods o housing equali ica ion, which
was conside ed a g ea incen i e o landlo ds o ehabili a e hei p ope ies
(Cos a 2010).
In Po o, he go e nmen agency c ua b (Po uguese ac onym o
Commi ee o he U ban Reno a ion o he Ribei a/Ba edo A ea) was
c ea ed in he mid-1970s (a e he implemen a ion o democ acy) o ensu e
ha he wo king-class popula ion which inhabi ed he his o ic cen e o
Po o “ o a long ime, in he wo s condi ions o housing and exploi a ion”
could emain in he a ea (Al edo 1997, 78). The goal was o a oid e ic ing
he poo because o ising p ope y alues de i ing om he equali ica ion
o buildings. Fi s as a go e nmen agency, la e as a g l, and subsequen ly
as a municipal o ice, he c ua b wo ked o o e 30 yea s o de elop an
app oach based upon: (i) buying deg aded p ope ies, h ough nego ia ion
o exp op ia ion5; (ii) de eloping ehabili a ion a chi ec u al enginee ing
5 The exp op ia ion o buildings was jus i ied, allegedly because p i a e landlo ds did no in es in he
main enance o hei p ope ies, al hough hey we e legally obliged o do so. The e o e, he public sec o
had o ac in o de o p e en he deg ada ion o he his o ic cen e.
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 465
p ojec s; and (iii) implemen ing hem. This model allowed he p o ision o
many e u bished en al uni s wi h en s below ma ke alues. Howe e , i
also had se e al d awbacks, such as he lack o esou ces o sus ain he cycle
o exp op ia ion, equali ying and en ing. In ac , only a lack o esou ces
explains why many o he exp op ia ed buildings had been no e u bished o
decades and ha mos o he si ing enan s who li ed he e we e e en ually
ehoused on subu ban housing es a es (Al es 2010).
In his ega d, i is wo h no ing ha in he 1990s, ollowing he accession
o Po ugal in o he Eu opean Union in 1986, he coun y began o ecei e
Eu opean unding o suppo na ional and local in es men in se e al
domains, such as slum clea ance, conse a ion o his o ic monumen s and
si es, p o ision o social in as uc u e e c. Howe e , as esponsibili y o
housing policies emained a na ional and – o a lesse ex en – municipal
ma e and he eu had no di ec compe ence (no unding a ailable) o his
policy, a ea-based ini ia i es suppo ed by he eu had only indi ec in luence
on housing enewal. The his o ic cen e o Po o pa icipa ed, o example, in
he ini ia i es Po e y iii and U ban Pilo P ojec s (launched by he Eu opean
Commission in 1996) ha add essed a wide ange o u ban p oblems, such as
a ic conges ion, was e managemen , de elic buildings ( esiden ial buildings
we e no eligible o unding), economic decline e c. P ojec s in his phase
ended o adop an in eg a ed app oach o ackle hese p oblems, combining
ha d in as uc u e wi h en i onmen al, social and economic suppo
measu es. Ta ge a eas and popula ions we e clea ly de ined, along wi h
in e en ion measu es. Fo example, in he disad an aged neighbou hood
o Mo o da Sé, in an a emp o p omo e he ci izens’ quali y o li e, he
U ban Pilo P ojec alloca ed esou ces o ain he long- e m unemployed,
suppo o child en and senio s a isk o po e y e c. Ac i i ies and se ices
subs an ially inc eased he quali y o li e o esiden s, and se e al o ms o
pa icipa ion and empowe men we e implemen ed (G os 1993).
he shi owa ds gen i ica ion (1998- 2004)
The g owing unde s anding ha a 100% publicly unded in e en ion would
no be enough o sol e he p oblems o physical de elic ion, which we e
ex ensi e in he his o ic cen es, led o he ecogni ion ha : (i) i would be
necessa y o pu he ma ke o housing equali ica ion and p i a e en al o
472 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
he ca dosas ope a ion
This sec ion discusses he main ideas, assump ions and discou ses associa ed
wi h he Ca dosas Ope a ion.
Fi s , e ision o he s a egic o icial documen s ha suppo ed he
ope a ion show ha he need o a comp ehensi e es uc u ing o he
Ca dosas qua e , loca ed in he hea o Po o ci y cen e, was jus i ied bo h by
he le els o physical deg ada ion o he a ea, and he po en ial o le e aging a
wide a ea in cen al Po o. The in en ion o a ge a mo e a luen popula ion,
i possible ou is s and in es o s in e es ed in a second home, is explici ;
whils he p oduc ion o a o dable housing a con olled cos s and o en al
was ne e en isaged by he documen . The decision o eloca e he exis ing
popula ion elsewhe e was jus i ied by he ac ha si ing enan s would no
be able o a o d he “highe s anda d” quali y housing ha was en isaged o
he a ea (Po o Vi o s u 2007, 21).
Second, ega ding modes o implemen a ion, a public-p i a e pa ne ship
was c ea ed be ween Po o Vi o s u and wo p i a e pa ne s. A eal es a e
The Ca dosas qua e in he his o ic cen e
Figu e 19.1

models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 473
in es men und, designa ed Fi s Opo o U ban Regene a ion Fund (4F), was
in ol ed.
The planning ag eemen signed be ween he pa s en isaged he
equali ica ion o a luxu y ho el, a housing complex wi h 50 new luxu y
dwellings (mos ly one- o wo-bed oom uni s), quali ied comme ce and
se ices (on he g ound loo ), and an unde g ound ca pa k, ha aim o mee
he needs o an a luen popula ion.
Al hough he public pa ne suppo ed he cos s wi h exp op ia ions,
demoli ion and cons uc ion o new buildings and semi-public spaces,
de elope s we e no equi ed o se aside a pe cen age o dwelling uni s o
sale o en o low-income households. Planning pe missions we e app o ed
wi hou local au ho i ies equi ing a pe cen age o a o dable housing uni s
in he new de elopmen om de elope s. As a esul o his “exclusiona y”
s a egy, si ing enan s we e displaced and ehoused by local au ho i ies
elsewhe e.
As o implemen a ion on he g ound, in e iewees claimed ha he main
pu poses o s u was/is he ehabili a ion o public spaces, he ehabili a ion
o hei own buildings and, o emos , he acili a ion o p i a e in es men
by cu ing back bu eauc acy and suppo ing hei p ojec s. The p e ailing
iew o Po o Vi o s u’s ole in public-p i a e pa ne ships is ha i plays an
ins umen al ole in he implemen a ion o p ojec s: “i se es as a me e ool o
exp op ia e he p ope ies which we e no in he p i a e pa ne s’ possession
so ha hey could execu e he wo ks” (ps1). Acco dingly, he in e iewees’
iew on s a egies and goals seems o a ou p i a e in es o s’ in e es s: “ he
owne can b ing ideas in o he p ojec o an in es o can appea who is no he
o iginal owne and has a gi en p ojec in mind and all his is lexible. We ha e
changed a ious si ua ions acco ding o ma ke dynamics” (ps1).
When asked abou he need o mo e di e se social composi ion o he
qua e , in e iewees dis ega ded inclusi eness. In one case, i was a gued
ha he inclusion o o he social g oups (low-income g oups) occu ed in a
nea by qua e – “50m om he Ca dosas we ha e he Mo o da Sé” (ps3), a
dis ic whe e he in e en ion o Po o Vi o s u a ge ed low-middle income
amilies.
Rega ding ou comes, i is undispu ed ha he Ca dosas Ope a ion
ans o med he p o ile o he qua e ’s housing s ock in e ms o enu es and
ypology s uc u e, en alues, he s a e o conse a ion o he buildings and
esiden s’ socio-economic p o iles.
474 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
Whils some in e iewees a emp ed o legi ima e he s a egies and
ope a ional choices made by s u bu eauc a s, o he s ques ioned he a ionale
and esul s o he ope a ion in e ms o bene i s, cos s, and disad an ages.
One pa icula aspec was pa adigma ic o he lack o in e en ion om
public pa ne s ega ding he social exclusion aspec s o he in e en ion: he
p i a isa ion o he open a ea o he qua e , a ga ed condominium ha is
closed by nigh . Whils admi ing ha his is undesi able, all s u s a membe s
conside ed i necessa y o p ese e he new esiden s’ in e es s.
conclusion
Social exclusion is a mul i ace ed p ocess by which indi iduals and hei
communi ies become pola ised, socially di e en ia ed and unequal (Le i as
2006). Social exclusion can ha e p o ound e ec s on some aspec s o social
pa icipa ion.
In his chap e , he in e p e a ion o social exclusion in ela ion o
housing is de eloped h ough he analysis o discou se and na ional and
local policies; in o he wo ds, analysis o hei embedded a ionali ies, aims,
and ou comes.
The i le o he pape e e s o he need o e alua e policies om a mo e
humani a ian pe spec i e, om ha o he impac hey ha e o migh ha e
on people’s li es/ ajec o ies. A e policies p omo ing he economic, social,
and poli ical pa icipa ion o indi iduals and g oups, o a e hey ins ead
con ibu ing o p ocesses ha dis ance pe sons, g oups, and communi ies?
By sc u inising he di e en phases o u ban policy a ge ing u ban decline,
we ha e shown ha , a e an an i-gen i ica ion phase in which policies we e
closely linked o he p o ision o decen housing o wo king-class popula ions
and he igh agains po e y and social exclusion, a subsequen phase,
ocusing upon he imp o emen o public spaces and he o ganisa ion o la ge
cul u al e en s, pa ed he way o a mo e agg essi e phase o gen i ica ion
which coincided wi h se e e aus e i y policies ha mainly a ec ed spending
on housing and social policies.
Neolibe al ideas, which we e dominan among policy-make s du ing his
pe iod, amed he new legal and ins i u ional amewo k designed o boos
housing equali ica ion. The s u model, speci ically ha implemen ed by Po o
Vi o s u, di e ged om he undamen al p inciples and goals o p e ious
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 475
public ins i u ions (e. g. c ua b), whose s a egies ocused on equali ica ion
o secu e a o dable housing in o de o main ain less esou ce ul amilies in
he ci y cen e (Al es 2017a). In con as , he new wa e o en ep eneu ial
neolibe al u banism de eloped by s u claims ha gen i ica ion is a necessa y
u ban s a egy o b ing in es men and ac i i ies back o he ci y, dis ega ding
social aspec s ela ed o displacemen and he inc easing commodi ica ion o
housing.
By looking a he discou ses and p ac ices o u ban equali ica ion policy
in Po o Vi o s u, his esea ch illus a es how gen i ica ion and a new
e anchis u banism has o e aken u ban policies in Po ugal so ha he s a e
has gone om being a egula o o being an agen o p omo e o ma ke -led
ini ia i es and inancialisa ion.
The in e connec edness o global capi al and local housing ma ke s,
along wi h neolibe al policy in Po o has also shown ha s u s a egies a e
ein o cing a ising en pa e n, which is likely o in ensi y he po e y ap
and unde lining inequali ies in Po ugal.
The p e ailing ideology o libe alism a ou ed he c ea ion o public-
p i a e pa ne ship ha , wi h he Po o Vi o s u go e nance, p o ided
a ou able condi ions o ma ke -led in e es s. Resul s show ha na ional and
local au ho i ies made no e o o limi p o i and o cap u e spill-o e s and
he inc ease o alue ha esul ed om public spending on in as uc u e and
licensing. Rede elopmen pe mission was no nego ia ed o secu e he p o ision
o a o dable en al housing in si u, he c ea ion o mixed communi ies, and o
egula e he use o dwellings o non-pe manen accommoda ion (e. g. sho
en als o ou ism).
Public policy should mi iga e a he han agg a a e po e y dynamics,
as hey ein o ce social and spa ial inequali y. Public policy should suppo
nego ia ions and legal ag eemen s wi h p i a e de elope s o p omo e enu e
di e si ica ion, no o p oduce a landscape o gen i ica ion ha , by inc easing
land and housing alues, exposes households o g ea e ma ke isks ela ed o
indeb edness, in e es a e luc ua ions, and house p ice ola ili y. We a gue,
wi h Ha ey (2003), ha he igh o he ci y should no be: “ he igh o access
o wha he p ope y specula o s and s a e planne s de ine, bu an ac i e igh
o make he ci y di e en ”. In o he wo ds, a ci y wi h inclusiona y zoning
p ac ices equi ing a pe cen age o a o dable housing uni s o be buil on-si e,
enabling he p o ision o a o dable housing wi h di e en p ice anges and
enu es, acili a ing social inclusion.
476 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
acknowledgemen s
Wi hin he amewo k o a Ma ie Sklodowska-Cu ie Indi idual Fellowship, Sónia Al es
is cu en ly de eloping he p ojec plana ho (planning o a o dable housing) a he
Camb idge Cen e o Housing and Planning Resea ch, Depa men o Land Economy,
Uni e si y o Camb idge. This p ojec has ecei ed unding om he Eu opean Union’s
Ho izon 2020 esea ch and inno a ion p og amme unde g an ag eemen No. 747257.
____________________________________
sónia al es
Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa
and Camb idge Cen e o Housing and Planning Resea ch,
Depa men o Land Economy, Uni e si y o Camb idge
A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal
[email p o ec ed]
o cid.o g/0000-0003-1231-8588
____________________________________
osa b anco
In e disciplina y Cen e o Social Sciences – cics.no a
Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas – no a csh
mb a[email p o ec ed]
o cid.o g/0000-0001-8319-8531
____________________________________
e e ences
al edo, J. C. C. 1997. “Planeamen o e ges ão em zonas his ó icas: es a égias, polí icas e
c i é ios de in e enção: a Ribei a-Ba edo”. Mas e s disse a ion, Po o: Faculdades de
A qui ec u a e de Engenha ia da Uni e sidade do Po o.
al es, S. 2010. O Social, o Espacial e o Polí ico na Pob eza e na Exclusão: A aliação de Inicia i as
de Regene ação de Á eas U banas em Risco na Cidade do Po o. PhD disse a ion. Lisbon:
isc e – Ins i u o Uni e si á io de Lisboa.
al es, S. 2016. “Spaces o inequali y: I ’s no di e en ia ion, i is inequali y! A socio-spa ial
analysis o he Ci y o Po o”. Po uguese Jou nal o Social Science, 15 (3): 409-431.
al es, S. 2017a. “Poles apa ? a compa a i e s udy o housing policies and ou comes in
Po ugal and Denma k”. Housing, Theo y and Socie y, 34 (2): 221-248.
al es, S. 2017b. “E hnic housing seg ega ion and he Roma/Gypsy popula ion: a Po uguese
pe spec i e”. In Spaces o Dialog o Places o Digni y: Fos e ing he Eu opean Dimension o
Planning. 30 h annual aesop 2017 Cong ess. Lisbon: 1472-1480.
al es, S. 2017c. “Con li os ins i ucionais no âmbi o da Capi al Eu opeia da Cul u a Po o
2001”. Finis e a: Re is a Po uguesa de Geog a ia, 104: 39-56.
ande son, I., D. Sim. 2000. “Social exlusion and housing: con ex and challenges”. Co en y:
Cha e ed Ins i u e o Housing.
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 477
bap is a, I. 2013. “The a els o c i iques o neolibe alism: u ban expe iences om he
‘bo de lands’ ”. U ban Geog aphy, 34 (5): 590-611.
b anco, R., S. Al es. 2015. “A o dable housing and u ban egene a ion in Po ugal: a
oubled ys ?”. In enh 2015 Housing and Ci ies in a Time o Change: A e We Focusing on
People? Lisbon, Po ugal, 28 June-1 July 2015.
b anco, R., S. Al es. 2018. “U ban ehabili a ion, go e nance, and housing a o dabili y:
lessons om Po ugal”. U ban Resea ch and P ac ice. doi:10.1080/17535069.2018.1510540.
chum, A. 2015. “The impac o gen i ica ion on esiden ial e ic ions”. U ban Geog aphy,
36 (7): 1083-1098.
cos a, J. P. 2010. “U ban ehabili a ion socie ies: The Po uguese case, cha ac e is ics and
po en ial”. Jou nal o U ban Regene a ion and Renewal, 3 (4): 395-414.
deloi e and pa que expo. 2009. “Po ugal: jessica e alua ion s udy – Final Repo ”,
Eu opean In es men Bank, 164 p. Accessed 10 No embe 2017, h p://www.eib.o g/
a achmen s/po ugal-e alua ion-s udy.pd .
douce , B. 2014. “A p ocess o change and a changing p ocess: In oduc ion o he special
issue on con empo a y gen i ica ion”. Tijdsch i oo economische en sociale geog a ie,
105 (2): 125-139.
elsinga, M. 2017. “Li ing in asse s wi hou limi s: owa ds new p inciples o policies on
housing.” Housing, Theo y and Socie y, 34 (2): 146-150.
e nandes, J. A. R. 2011. “A ea-based ini ia i es and u ban dynamics – The case o he Po o
ci y cen e.” U ban Resea ch & P ac ice, 4 (3): 285-307.
g os, M. 1993. “Lu a con a a exclusão social: assis encialismo ou desen ol imen o local.”
Es u u as Sociais e Desen ol imen o – Ac as do ii Cong esso Po uguês de Sociologia, 1:
998-1016.
ha ne , M., M. Elsinga, and J. Hoeks a. 2012. “Access and a o dabili y: en egula ion.” In
In e na ional Encyclopedia o Housing and Home. Else ie : 40-45.
hamne , C. 2004. “Economic and social change and inequali y in global ci ies: The case o
London.” The G eek Re iew o Social Resea ch, 113: 63-80.
ha ey, D. 2003. “The igh o he ci y”. In e na ional Jou nal o U ban and Regional Resea ch,
27: 939-941.
hochs enbach, C., W. Van Gen . 2015. “An ana omy o gen i ica ion p ocesses: a iega ing
causes o neighbou hood change.” En i onmen and Planning A 47 (7): 1480-1501.
ih u – Ins i u o de Habi ação e da Requali icação U bana. 2015. 25 Anos de Es o ço do
O çamen o do Es ado com a Habi ação 1987-2011. Lisbon: Ins i u o da Habi ação e da
Reabili ação U bana.
ine – Ins i u o Nacional de Es a ís ica. 2011. Recenseamen o Ge al da População e Habi ação.
Lisbon: Ins i u o Nacional de Es a ís ica.
janoschka, M., J. Seque a, and L. Salinas. 2014. “Gen i ica ion in Spain and La in Ame ica – a
c i ical dialogue.” In e na ional Jou nal o U ban and Regional Resea ch, 38 (4): 1234-1265.
knox, P., S. Pinch. 2010. U ban Social Geog aphy: An In oduc ion. London: Rou ledge.
laue mann, J. 2016. “Municipal s a ec a : Re isi ing he geog aphies o he en ep eneu ial
ci y.” P og ess in Human Geog aphy, 42 (2): 205-224.
le eb e, H. 1996. W i ings on Ci ies. Ox o d: Blackwell Publishe s.
le i as, R. 2006. “The concep and measu emen o social exclusion”. In Po e y and Social
Exclusion in B i ain: The Millennium Su ey, eds. C. Pan azis, D. Go don and R. Le i as.
B is ol: The Policy P ess.

478 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in
madanipou , A., G. Ca s, and J. Allen. 1998. Social Exclusion in Eu opean Ci ies: P ocesses,
Expe iences and Responses. London: Jessica Kingsley.
ma cuse, P. 1986. “Abandonmen , gen ifica ion, and displacemen : he linkages in New
Yo k Ci y.” In Gen ifica ion and he Ci y, eds. N. Smi h and P. Williams. London: Unwin
Hyman, 153-177.
mendes, L., A. Ca mo. 2016. “S a e-led gen i ica ion in an e a o neolibe al u banism:
examining he new u ban lease egime in Po ugal.” In In e na ional Con e ence F om
con es ed_ci ies o Global U ban Jus ice – C i ical Dialogues. Mad id, 4-7 July 2016.
mendes, L. 2012. “Nobili ação u bana ma ginal enquan o p á ica emancipa ó ia: al e na i a
ao discu so hegemónico da cidade c ia i a?”. Re is a C í ica de Ciências Sociais, 99: 51-72.
mendes, L. 2014. “Gen i icação e polí icas de eabili ação u bana em Po ugal: uma análise
c í ica à luz da ese en gap de Neil Smi h.” Cade nos Me ópole de São Paulo, 16 (32):
487-511.
pa on, K., V. Coope . 2016. “I ’s he s a e, s upid: 21s gen i ica ion and s a e-led e ic ions.”
Sociological Resea ch Online, 21 (3): 9.
ponzini, D. 2016. “In oduc ion: c isis and enewal o con empo a y u ban planning.”
Eu opean Planning S udies, 24 (7): 1237-1245.
po o i o s u, and Câma a Municipal do Po o. 2005. “Mas e plan pa a a Re i alização
U bana e Social da Baixa do Po o.” Accessed 15 May 2017, h p://www.po o i os u.p /
p /a ea-de-a uacao/enquad amen o.
po o i o s u. 2007. “Unidade de In e enção das Ca dosas: Documen o Es a égico.”
Accessed 15 May 2017, h p://www.po o i os u.p /p /a ea-de-a uacao/de alhe-qua ei o
es/ca dosas.
po o i o s u. 2012. “Rela ó io de Con as.” Accessed 15 May 2017, h p://www.po o i os u.
p /p /po o- i o-s u/in o macao- inancei a/ ela o ios-e-con as.
pugalis, L. 2016. “Aus e e s a e s a egies: egene a ing o eco e y and he esigni ica ion o
egene a ion.” Local Go e nmen S udies, 42 (1): 52-74.
quei ós, J. 2013. “P eca iedade habi acional, ida quo idiana e elação com o Es ado no
cen o his ó ico do Po o na ansição da di adu a pa a a democ acia.” Análise Social, 206:
102-133.
quei ós, J. 2015. No Cen o, à Ma gem: Sociologia das In e enções U banís icas e Habi acionais
do Es ado no Cen o His ó ico do Po o. Po o: Edições A on amen o.
oom, G. 1995. “Po e y and social exclusion: he new Eu opean agenda o policy and
esea ch”. In Beyond he Th eshold, ed. G. Room. B is ol: Policy P ess.
od igues, W. 2010. Cidade em T ansição: Nobili ação U bana, Es ilos de Vida e Reu banização
em Lisboa. Lisbon: Cel a Edi o a.
sequei a, J. A. P. 2011. “Rup u a(s) e con inuidade(s): a eabili ação da Baixa e Cen o
His ó ico do Po o.” In Diálogo Cul u al en e Ibe oamé ica y Eu opa – Pa imonio
U banís ico Ilus ado: Expe iencias y P oyec os en B asil, Cuba, Gua emala, Po ugal
y España, edi ed by Associação In e nacional de Cidades e En idades do Iluminismo.
Valencia: Associação In e nacional de Cidades e En idades do Iluminismo (aicei), 63-73.
shaw, K. S., I. W. Hagemans. 2015. “Gen i ica ion wi hou displacemen and he consequen
loss o place: he e ec s o class ansi ion on low income esiden s o secu e housing in
gen i ying a eas.” In e na ional Jou nal o U ban and Regional Resea ch, 39 (2): 323-341.
sla e , T. 2009. “Missing Ma cuse: On gen i ica ion and displacemen .” Ci y, 13 (2-3): 292-
-311.
models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alism in po ugal 479
smi h, N. 1979. “Towa d a heo y o gen i ica ion a back o he ci y mo emen by capi al, no
people”. Jou nal o he Ame ican Planning Associa ion, 45 (4): 538-548.
smi h, N. 1987. “Gen i ica ion and he en gap.” Annals o he Associa ion o Ame ican
geog aphe s, 77 (3): 462-465.
swyngedouw, E., F. Moulae , and A. Rod iguez. 2002. “Neolibe al u baniza ion in Eu ope:
la ge–scale u ban de elopmen p ojec s and he new u ban policy”. An ipode, 34: 542-577.
ulumello, S. 2016. “Reconside ing neolibe al u ban planning in imes o c isis: U ban
egene a ion policy in a ‘dense’ space in Lisbon.” U ban Geog aphy, 37 (1): 117-140.
ui e ma k, J., M. Loopmans. 2013. “U ban enewal wi hou displacemen ? Belgium’s
‘housing con ac expe imen ’ and he isks o gen i ica ion.” Jou nal o Housing and he
Buil En i onmen , 28 (1): 157-166.
an loon, J., M. B. Aalbe s. 2017. “How eal es a e became ‘jus ano he asse class’: he
inancializa ion o he in es men s a egies o Du ch ins i u ional in es o s.” Eu opean
Planning S udies, 25 (2): 221-240.
ázquez, C. 1992. “U ban policies and gen i ica ion ends in Mad id’s inne ci y.” Jou nal o
Housing and he Buil En i onmen , 7 (4): 357-376.
ci e his chap e as:
al es, S., R. B anco.2018. “Wi h o wi hou you: models o u ban equali ica ion unde neolibe alismo
in Po ugal”. In Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. i. Ambiguous Inclusions: Inside Ou ,
Inside In, eds. S. Aboim, P. G anjo, A. Ramos. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 457-479.
h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715030.19