scieee Open visual document viewer

With or without you: models of urban requalification under neoliberalismo in Portugal

Alves, Sónia,Branco, Rosa

Abstract

Goals that underpin policies in the fields of housing and urban requalification, as well as the policy instruments through which these policies are carried out, have been problematised from numerous perspectives. Regarding the mismatch between policy goals and their outputs, Elsinga (2017, 149) argues that “many current housing policies are based on wrong (explicit or implicit) assumptions”, while, in a study of the Portuguese case, Alves (2017a) questions the rationality of policies that in countries with high levels of income inequality and poverty support the commodification of housing and the development of debt-driven ownership. Likewise, Mendes (2014) and Queirós (2015) question the morality of strategies of urban renewal that, under adverse socio-economic circumstances, use housing as an investment asset within a globalised financial market.

Full text

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