Essay Sample on Rights to the City in Rio de Janeiro

Introduction

Rio de Janeiro is one of the cities in Brazil, where the largest number of people live. As a metropolitan area, the city of Rio de Janeiro attracts thousands of business activities for the locals as they seek ways of earning a decent income. There are industries in Rio de Janeiro, which employ millions of skilled and unskilled labor. Like any other city, Rio de Janeiro houses people from different social classes, including the rich and the poor. The economic differences between the two social classes are driven by their accessibility to employment opportunities (Maurer & Christenson, 1982; Molotch, 1976). Most people live below the poverty line as they cannot access a regular income, forcing a large percentage of persons residing in the city to live in the streets. Land in Rio de Janeiro is owned and controlled by the most influential political leaders in Brazil who use it to create wealth and generate incomes that benefit themselves, at the expense of the citizens.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Harvey Molotch and John Logan in The City as a Growth Machine argued that land in metropolitan areas affected the growth of the city. Most political leaders in cities are on the lookout for ways they can profit themselves by influencing the values of different pieces of land. For instance, it is common to find political leaders owning large tracts of land through monopolistic control. The monopolistic controllers hold the land for personal gains and exchange large amounts of money amongst themselves (Logan, Molotch, Fainstein, & Campbell, 1987). In the case of Rio de Janeiro, wealth is controlled by a small group of people who then limit the city from becoming a growth machine to the society. Invariably, since most land in Rio de Janeiro belongs to a few influential people, most people are forced to live in slums and informal housing setups. The cost of living increases and most people are unable to sustain the expenses of maintaining an expensive house in terms of rent, forcing them to retract and seek alternative housing.

Land owners raise capital to build both rental and residential houses (Logan, Molotch, Fainstein, & Campbell, 1987). This gives them an assured flow of income both in the short-term and in the long-term. However, the growth entrepreneurs do not hold on to developed land for long as they seek interested buyers who will purchase the properties at a profit. Therefore, housing in Rio de Janeiro is perceived as a trade commodity than can exchange hands between influential persons. Logan and Molotch referred to this act as a special use value of housing. Places are not disposable nor movable, which justifies their increased prices since they become limited by time. Unlike other factors of production like labor or capital which can be increased, land remains constant (Molotch, 1976). This makes its value increase, meaning only a few people in Rio de Janeiro can afford to own tracts of land. A few entrepreneurs' in Rio de Janeiro have designed a strategy of purchasing places, then developing them, and later putting them up for sale. The special exchange concept becomes applicable as rent, mortgages, or direct purchases become the compensation for the developers.

Politics influences the growth rate of cities as political leaders have the responsibility of developing strategies and plans that can be implemented in the metropolitan areas (Molotch, 1976). The political leaders are elected into power as citizens hope that such individuals will have the interests of the city when engaging each other. However, political leaders in cities have sought ways they can own places (Logan, Molotch, Fainstein, & Campbell, 1987). The places are then developed using public money. For instance, the Mayor of Chicago, Ogden, the then president of Union Pacific Railroad used his political position to develop a structured railroad. The act of using funds meant to benefit the public has affected the growth rate of cities in Brazil. It is also common for political leaders to influence the decisions of major stakeholders and investors in the society to consider investing in their places, with the hope of increasing their value. The developments on personal land influences the growth and expansion of nearby structures. For instance, it is common to find amenities like hospitals, road network, and schools near private-owned land.

In a perfect society that considers a capitalist approach, the commodification and privatization of public land is discouraged (Maurer & Christenson, 1982). Political leaders put the needs of the citizens as a priority and invest in areas that generate incomes for the public. Cities grow and expand and provide opportunities for their inhabitants to lead a quality life. If the revenue generated is invested back to the community, then there is a high probability of incorporating the city as a growth machine (Molotch, 1976). For instance, the road and communication is improved, making it easy for people to move from their homes to their workplaces as well as pass information from amongst themselves. People are also able to secure positions in different industries, making them earn a decent income which could sustain their lives as they can afford better housing.

The political economy of people living in slums of Rio de Janeiro is poor since they have little or no representation in the politics of the country (Whitt, 1987). People living in the slums come from different parts of Brazil as they go to the city with the aim of looking for opportunities they can improve their lives both in the short-term and in the long-term. Hence, most are willing and able to live in slums as they seek for opportunities they can use to increase their incomes. The cheaper housing units are affordable for most people who are forced to live with their families in shanty setups (Logan, Molotch, Fainstein, & Campbell, 1987). The attention of the economically limited people is directed towards earning their daily needs and are less concerned about the new developments and space grabbing by the political leaders in the country. This is because their protests against political leaders who grab public land for private uses would not respond to their pleas.

The people living in slums are separated from those in affluent areas. The social classes have no common environment where they can interact with each other or a chance they can exchange ideas on ways they can grow together (Molotch, 1976). Therefore, the rich continue accumulating large amounts of wealth while the poor are forced to live in slums. The voices of the rich are more likely to attract the attention of political leaders than those living in slums. For instance, if the influential people in the society are against particular development projects they feel have a probability of interfering with their living situations, then they will pool their resources and fund protests to ban the activities. The power to control and influence decisions on the political environment makes the rich enjoy more privileges than the poor.

The rights to the city of people living in slums in Rio de Janeiro exist legally. Every citizen of Brazil has the freedom of movement in any part of the country, and those living in Rio de Janeiro are no exception. Their economic conditions affect their ability to move from one place to another, limiting them to one secluded place. For instance, the economic regression that affected the country in the 1980s triggered a large percentage of people from the lower middle class to relocate to the slums, commonly known as favelas (Whitt, 1987). Life in the slums was affordable and the reduced costs of housing made them a preference for most families that were going through a financial crisis. The people living in slums have rights over land and the economically empowered, have managed to establish houses in both public and private lands as a settlement scheme.

Despite there being rights to own places for every person in Brazil, the rich have used their positions to influence stakeholders in the country (Molotch, 1976). The strategy to eradicate slums and resettle people living in such areas have been adopted in the past. Settlement strategies aimed at doing away with slums have been supported by influential people in the society to create an open ground for growth and expansion projects like construction of parks, roads, or of apartments that could generate incomes for the rich. Protests from people living in slums and their refusal to move from their places have reduced the settlement projects by the political leaders who have opted to embrace a new approach. The new idea of upgrading the slums to integrate Rio de Janeiro as an area that people can survive without being subjected to deplorable conditions has eased the tension between the rich and the poor (Maurer & Christenson, 1982). However, there is still a group of political leaders who maintain the 'urban phenomena and attitude' for the city. Such individuals maintain that equality in cities is impossible as some people must possess more than others. The idea of securing control of spaces in the city and influencing urban development decisions has clouded the judgment of such persons. Their personal goals of controlling the economic conditions of the Rio de Janeiro would limit the city from being a growth machine.

In modern day, most urban cities are on the lookout for economic development strategies that will expand and grow the metropolitan areas. Developing cities to become business hubs attracts both internal and external investors who pool their resources and influence the growth of an area. Hence, strategic areas in a city are targeted by governments to set up trade centers that will draw local and international business opportunities (Molotch, 1976). In such a scenario, Rio de Janeiro slum dwellers will be presented with opportunities where they can secure employment. The incomes from their jobs can be used to sustain life in other parts. However, due to the low cost of living, most slum dwellers are unwilling to relocate to other parts. Most slum dwellers have managed to accumulate wealth and invest in different parts.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the city as a growth machine is influenced by different factors in the metropolitan areas. The political and economic decisions made by the stakeholders determine the environment created for the rich and the poor to interact and generate wealth. The rich have a comparative advantage and own spaces, as opposed to the poor who are forced to live in slums. The gap between the poor and the rich continues to increase and strategies to reduce the disparity fail despite attempts from political leaders. Further, some political leaders enjoy the power and control they have over the resources in the city.

References

Logan, J. R., Molotch, H. L., Fainstein, S., & Campbell, S. (1987). The city as a growth machine (pp. pp-199).

Maurer, R. C., & Christenson, J. A. (1982). Growth and nongrowth orientations of urban, suburban and rural mayors: Reflections on the city as a growth machine. Social Science Quarterly, 63(2), 350.

Molotch, H. (1976). The city as a growth machine: Toward a political economy of place. American journal of sociology, 82(2), 309-332.

Whitt, J. A. (1987). Mozart in the metropolis: The arts coalition and the urban growth machine. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 23(1), 15-36.