Urban Development in Southeast Asia

94 Pages·2022·1.64 MB·English

by  Rita Padawangi

P
a
Urbanization as a process is rife with inequality, in Southeast d
a
Asia as anywhere else, but resistance and contestation persist w
a
on the ground. This Element sets out to achieve three goals: n
g
1) to examine the political nature of urban development; 2) i
to scrutinize the implications of power inequality in urban
development discussions; and 3) to highlight topical and Politics and Society
methodological contributions to urban studies from Southeast
in Southeast asia
Asia. The key to a robust understanding is groundedness:
knowledge about the everyday realities of urban life that
are hard to see on the surface but dominate how the city
functions, with particular attention to human agency and
the political life of marginalized groups. Ignoring politics in
U Urban development
research on urbanization essentially perpetuates the power r
b
a
inequities in urban development; this Element thus focuses n
d
not just on Southeast Asian cities and urbanization per se but e in Southeast asia
v
e
also on critical perspectives on patterns and processes in their lo
p
development. m
e
n
t
in
S
o
u
t
h
about the Series Series Editors ea
s
The Elements series Politics and Society Edward Aspinall t a
s
in Southeast Asia includes both country- Australian National ia
specific and thematic studies on one of University Rita Padawangi
the world’s most dynamic regions. Each Meredith L. Weiss
title, written by a leading scholar of that University at
country or theme, combines a succinct, Albany, SUNY
comprehensive, up-to-date overview of
debates in the scholarly literature with
original analysis and a clear argument.
Cover image: tashechka/Shutterstock ISSN 2515-2998 (online)
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press ISSN 2515-298X (print)
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
ElementsinPoliticsandSocietyinSoutheastAsia
editedby
EdwardAspinall
AustralianNationalUniversity
MeredithL.Weiss
UniversityatAlbany,SUNY
URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN
SOUTHEAST ASIA
Rita Padawangi
Singapore University of Social Sciences
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom
OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA
477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia
314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,
NewDelhi–110025,India
103PenangRoad,#05–06/07,VisioncrestCommercial,Singapore238467
CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof
education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108705608
DOI:10.1017/9781108669108
©RitaPadawangi2022
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2022
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
ISBN978-1-108-70560-8Paperback
ISSN2515-2998(online)
ISSN2515-298X(print)
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof
URLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication
anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain,
accurateorappropriate.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Urban Development in Southeast Asia
ElementsinPoliticsandSocietyinSoutheastAsia
DOI:10.1017/9781108669108
Firstpublishedonline:June2022
RitaPadawangi
SingaporeUniversityofSocialSciences
Authorforcorrespondence:RitaPadawangi,[email protected]
Abstract:Urbanizationasaprocessisrifewithinequality,inSoutheast
Asiaasanywhereelse,butresistanceandcontestationpersistonthe
ground.ThisElementsetsouttoachievethreegoals:1)toexaminethe
politicalnatureofurbandevelopment;2)toscrutinizetheimplications
ofpowerinequalityinurbandevelopmentdiscussions;and3)to
highlighttopicalandmethodologicalcontributionstourbanstudies
fromSoutheastAsia.Thekeytoarobustunderstandingis
groundedness:knowledgeabouttheeverydayrealitiesofurbanlife
thatarehardtoseeonthesurfacebutdominatehowthecityfunctions,
withparticularattentiontohumanagencyandthepoliticallifeof
marginalizedgroups.Ignoringpoliticsinresearchonurbanization
essentiallyperpetuatesthepowerinequitiesinurbandevelopment;this
ElementthusfocusesnotjustonSoutheastAsiancitiesand
urbanizationpersebutalsooncriticalperspectivesonpatternsand
processesintheirdevelopment.
Keywords:urbandevelopment,cities,urbanplanning,urbanpolitics,
urbanization
ThisElementalsohasavideoabstract:www.cambridge.org/padawangi
©RitaPadawangi2022
ISBNs:9781108705608(PB),9781108669108(OC)
ISSNs:2515-2998(online),2515-298X(print)
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Contents
1 ThePoliticsofUrbanDevelopmentinSoutheastAsia 1
2 Historical“Debris”inSoutheastAsia’sUrbanDevelopment 6
3 PlanningforUrbanDevelopment 18
4 StudyingUrbanDevelopmentinSoutheastAsia 27
5 PoliticalEcologyandEnvironmentalJustice 46
6 SoutheastAsia’sUrbanFutures 57
7 Epilogue 70
References 73
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
UrbanDevelopmentinSoutheastAsia 1
1ThePoliticsofUrbanDevelopmentinSoutheastAsia
Why do we need to study urban development in Southeast Asia? Most of the
world’spopulationisnowurban(UN-Habitat,2017);rapid,widespreadurban-
ization is not unique to Southeast Asia. Moreover, there has been plenty of
research on various cities in this region, so why should we need more of it?
Iarguethat studying urbandevelopment inSoutheast Asiaisimportant forat
least two reasons: first, to contribute to larger conceptual understandings of
urbandevelopment;andsecond,toshapeanewvantagepointthatreconfigures
the relationship between academia and planning practice in contested urban
landscapes. In other words, we need to critically revisit the “what” and the
“how”ofstudyingcities,aswellastheextenttowhichthe“what”and“how”
areconnected,andSoutheastAsiaprovidesvaluableexampleswithwhichtodo
so.ManycitiesinSoutheastAsiaremainsubjectedtoprescribedbestpractices
from elsewhere, a symptom of insufficient conceptual development from
studies in and of this region to build a comprehensive and robust under-
standing of urbanization. We face an urgent need to reshape studies of urban
development in Southeast Asia in light of the consequences of urbanization
for everyday lived experiences.
WhatisitaboutSoutheastAsiathathasmostinfluencedtheshapeofcities,
urbanlife,andurbanization?Isthereanythingdistinctiveabouturbandevelop-
mentinSoutheastAsia?MuchofwhatwefindinSoutheastAsiaisnotdistinct
to this region. More than two decades ago, Howard Dick and Peter Rimmer
warned that “any attempt to explain either the historical or contemporary
urbanization of south-east Asia as a unique phenomenon is ... doomed to
absurdity” (1998: 2319). It was Terry McGee’s concept of desakota (1991) –
amixedvillage-city,agricultural-urbanlandscape–asadistinctiveurbanization
pattern in the region that Dick and Rimmer (1998) viewed as a variation of
urbansprawlthatcanbefoundelsewhere.Tothisday,desakotacontinuestobe
influentialinstudiesofurbanizationindevelopingcountries,includinginChina
andIndia.Theexpansionoftheapplicationoftheconceptbeyondtheregionin
which it emerged indicates that the phenomenon may not be distinctively
Southeast Asian. Therefore, the key reason to study urban development in
Southeast Asia is not to look for its distinctiveness. Rather, studying urban
development in Southeast Asia is important for identifying patterns and pro-
cesses of city life that are not sufficiently explained by existing theories and
concepts.
UnderstandingthepatternsandprocessesofSoutheastAsia’surbandevelop-
ment is part of a largereffort to build knowledge about cities, urban life, and
urbanization. The range of studies of urban development in Southeast Asia
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
2 PoliticsandSocietyinSoutheastAsia
today reflects Margit Mayer’s concerns in her observation of urban studies in
developing regions of the world: There are many case studies of local efforts
and comparative analyses ofvarious issues – such as poverty, social housing,
evictions, and resistance movements – but there is not yet a comprehensive
pictureoutofsucha“fragmentedmapof...hard-foughtcontestations”(2020:
45).HoweverrichtheliteratureonSoutheastAsia,likestudiesofurbanization
elsewhereitwarrantsarefocus,givenrapidlychangingrealitiesontheground
andtheneedtobetteralignacademicperspectives,planners’assumptions,and
livedexperiences.
Amajorchallengeinrefocusingstudiesofurbandevelopmentistheemphasis
on pragmatism in research, as urbanization has become the world’s recipe for
economicgrowth.Suchapragmaticfocusondeliveringbread-and-butterissues
obscurestheneedforcriticalanalysisofpoliticalpowerinequalitiesinherentin
development strategies. In other words, the ends of developments justify the
means, and scholars are caught in this process. These urbanizations assume
certainimagesofadesirablefuture,tobeachievedthroughprescribedstrategies
for development. The problem with these future images is that, while they are
normativeintermsoftowhereandhowtoprogress,theycomewithtechnocratic
and investment-driven narratives that exacerbate power inequalities in urban
development (Ghertner, 2010; Harms, 2012; Padawangi, 2018c). In a socially
fragmented landscape with increasing complexities cultivated over several
decadesofrapidurbanization,urbandevelopmentbecomesanarenainwhich
“progress” for some comes at a cost of displacement of others, often the
sociallyandeconomicallymarginal.
Yet not only are urbanizing landscapes of Southeast Asia places of social
marginalizationandenvironmentaldestructioninthenameofdevelopment,but
theyalsopresentalternativestothestate’sofficialnarratives.Thesealternatives
areindicativeofactionsonthegroundthatreflectcommunities’humanagency
andpoliticallife.Activeparticipationofdisenfranchisedcommunitiesinurban
development opens avenues to understanding cities, urban life, and urbaniza-
tion as political terrain on which socially and politically active communal
enclavescoexistwithtop-downplanners.
By proposing a new vantage point that critically examines urban develop-
ment,thisElementhelpstomeetthisimportantneedforadeeperunderstanding
ofurbanization,onethatcaptureshowpowerinequalitiesmanifestmateriallyin
urban spaces. First and foremost, this Element fully recognizes that urban
development is political, and therefore studying urban development must be
critical.Thisrecognitioniskeytoshapingone’sperspectiveonurbandevelop-
ment and consequently influences the methods one selects. The methods that
scholarsandpractitionersadopt–whetherground-uportop-down–ultimately
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
UrbanDevelopmentinSoutheastAsia 3
structuretheabilityofurbandevelopmenttoaddresscorechallengesofsocial
justiceandenvironmentaljusticeinreal-lifesettings.Therefore,thechoiceof
perspective is not just “academic” but has real implications for the future of
citiesinSoutheastAsia.
1.1SoutheastAsiaasaPostcolonialRegion
To study Southeast Asia’s urban development, the extent of its complexities,
anditscontradictions,onemustunderstandthescopeoftheregionitself.Mostly
emerginginitscurrentgeopoliticalformafterWorldWarIIanddecolonization,
Southeast Asia is a relatively “new” region in the field of urban studies, and
studiesonurbandevelopment heregrewalongwiththeincreasingrole ofthe
regionintheworldeconomy(Rimmer&Dick,2019).Reflectingthefactthat
SoutheastAsiaisapostcolonialregion,thusfaritsurbandevelopmenthastwo
contradictory realities: first, in extending colonial systems; and second, as
stagesfornationalistprojects.
Urban development as an extension of colonial systems comes from the
formationofSoutheastAsia’snation-statesas“by-products”ofcolonialstates
(Anderson, 1983) in terms of their categories and territories, as well as the
“cultural” positions of the residents as postcolonial subjects. Colonial urban
planning was a tool to sustain order, contain disorder, and modernize as the
“rational choice” to achieve the public good, but it did so to “incorporate
coloniesintothecapitalistworldeconomy”(Kusno,2017a:219;Yeoh,1996).
Such objectives continue in the postcolonial era, as urban planning applies
technocraticapproachestogearcitiestobecomegatewaysforglobalcapitalism.
Postcolonialurbanplanningextendstomoreall-encompassingscales,however,
ascontemporarycapitalismrequiresparticipationofthewholelandscapeinthe
marketeconomy(Yeoh,1996).
Weseethesecondframe,ofurbandevelopmenttoshowcasenationalism,in
modernbuildingsandmonumentalprojectsinpostcolonialtimes.Newlyinde-
pendentcountriesoftenrelyonthesebuildingsandprojectstopaintanimageof
anationfreeofcolonialsubordination,buttheirnow-sovereignleaderscontinue
to preserve some legacies of the colonial era (Kusno, 2017b: 231). These
monumental projects appear inofficial maps,but self-built,semi-autonomous
enclaves do not appear in detail. In the colonial era, such semi-autonomous
enclavesfunctionedasspacesfortheIndigenouspopulationbutalsocontained
thosepopulations,albeitallowingadegreeofself-governance.Inthepostcolo-
nialera,theseenclavescontinuetoabsorbpopulationsandbufferthegovern-
ment’s incapacity to provide affordable housing, but they continue to be
underrepresented in cities’ official maps, which instead highlight flagship
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press
4 PoliticsandSocietyinSoutheastAsia
projects and larger buildings. Moreover, their capacity for autonomy has
declinedassubsequentregulationsandstructuraltransformationshavebrought
more spaces intothe capitalist economy. Overtime, urban development plan-
ninghastendedincreasinglyinfavoroftechnocraticplanning,whichprovides
spatialengineeringtoolsforsocietalcontrolanddisciplinetosupporteconomic
growth,inthenameofnationalprogress.
These two contradictory realities share a core attribute: both are top-down.
Nonetheless,contestationandnegotiationalsoshapethecityandurbanization
processes in Southeast Asia, not just overarching control of the state. In her
seminal work Contesting Space in Colonial Singapore, Brenda Yeoh (1996)
points to the importance of examining the role of urban actors in these chal-
lenges. In other words, although urban development seems to be a rational-
technocratic vehicle to achieve public good, what gets built is a result of
political processes, and it is important to understand these political processes
to be able to obtain a comprehensive view of the seemingly fragmented city.
Thisisadifficultterraintonavigatebecauseitrequiresmappingpoliticalactors
and linkages onto the built environment. Yet this navigation is necessary to
allow in-depth understanding of urban development dynamics in Southeast
Asia. An assumption of a linear progression of development is problematic,
as the evolution of cities through various historical eras reflects a mix of
continuityanddiscontinuityinurbansystems.Suchasituationrequiresscholars
to focus on “distinctions between what is residual and tenacious, what is
dominantbuthardtosee,and...whatisemergentintoday’simperialforma-
tions–andcriticallyresurgentinresponsestothem”(Stoler,2008:211).
1.2UrbanDevelopmentasPowerContestations
UrbandevelopmentinSoutheastAsiaisamanifestationofpowercontestations.
Propertydevelopershaveemergedasdominantactorsinthemakingofurban
spacesinSoutheastAsia,followingtheascendancyoftechnocraticapproaches
and investment-driven planning in decades of postcolonial industrialization.
Although several countries – namely Indonesia, the Philippines, and, to
a certain extent, Thailand and Myanmar (before the latter’s military coup in
2021) – have undergone waves of democratization in the late twentieth and
early twenty-first centuries, even the democratization process “did not suffi-
cientlyaddresstheurbandevelopmentcoursethatallowedover-corporatization
ofurbanspaces”(Padawangi,2014:47).
The continued hegemony of technocratic planning in global-capitalism-
pluggedeconomieshasconvertedbuiltenvironmentsintospacesthatcelebrate
consensus while stigmatizing dissent. Beautiful, tidy landscapes embody
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669108 Published online by Cambridge University Press