Breaking boundaries

reimagining the power of collaboration
Field report 2012 MSc. BUDD/DPU/UCL

2
lina gonzález|colombia william hunter|USA
0.1

Akag, Ojama Ahmad, Sarah Ardakanian, Atiyeh Gonzales, Lina Mascia, Stefano Martins, Diogo Navarro, Luz Pinzon, Laura Ritter, Bethany Rachel Tanamas Zhu, Han

Members of Group E:

bethany ritter|USA

stefano mascia|italia luz navarro|españa

anna schulenberg|deutschland atiyeh ardakanian|iran

zhu han|

diogo martins|portugal laura pinzón|colombia

camillo boano|italia ojama akagwu|nigeria

rachel tanamas|indonesia sarah n. ahmad|pakistan

3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The generosity of time, space, and energy displayed by our hosts and friends in Bangkok has left us with many wonderful memories. Therefore, we are extremely grateful for the hospitality extended to us by everyone who was part of our field trip experience, without whom, this report would not have been possible.

Acronyms
ACHR BMA BMR a BUDD CBO CDF CODI CPB DPU JICA MOU NESDB NGO NHA NULICO UCL UCDO UDP Asian Coalition for Housing Rights Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Bangkok Metropolitan Region Building and Urban Design in Development Community Based Organisation Community Development Fund Community Organisations Development Institute Crown Property Bureau Development Planning Unit Japan International Cooperation Agency Memorandum of understanding National Economic and Social Development Board Non-Governmental Organisation National Housing Authority National Union of Low Income Community Organisations University College London Urban Community Development Office Urban Development Planning

A heart full thanks to everyone in CODI, whose staff was very friendly and their food amazing. Especially we would like to thank Somsook Boonyabancha. We deeply appreciate the time we had to hear from your condensed wisdom, and really appreciate your sapient speech and the kindness you showed to our raw thoughts and ideas. Your inspiring insight, knowledge and reflexive thoughts contributed to our learning process during our fieldwork and after while working on this report. We are very grateful to Supitcha Nong, for hosting and translating the meetings and making sure that we could move on smoothly. We would also like to thank Kitti Patpongpiboon, your amazing speech extended our knowledge to the unfamiliar field and Diane Archer for sharing so much of her research and experience with us. Also thank you Nattawut Usavagovitwong and Wijitbusaba Ann Marome, your presentations set the secene for us. Thank you Noot Supreeya, your warm welcome help us to settle down in the unfamiliar country. A special thanks goes to our fellow Community Architects, ACCA Architects and Thai students who helped us in developing our knowledge throughout the field the communication would have not been possible. There is a special thanks we need to give to all the people from the communities of our six sites: Chatuchak, Wangthonglang, Bangkolaem, Pattaya, Bang Prong and Nonthaburi. No matter what different roles they had- community leaders, representatives from NULICO, or normal members of a community- we truly believe that their hospitality and their kindness to share with us all their information, experience and knowledge are the most precious memory and valuable learning we got in this field trip.

We need to give a sincere thank you to all the DPU staff that helped us to prepare for this field trip throughout the year and guided us in the field. Their experience and knowledge helped us in arming ourselves to face the problems and difficulties. Camillo Boano, your insightful critique always drives us back to the right road and pushed ourselves from our own boundaries. Caren Levy, thanks for guiding us in the pre-field preparation and sharing with us your experience and knowledge. The patient tutorial of William Hunter was always missed by us in the field, thanks for being always available for us. Thanks to Anna Schulenburg, it is your considerate care that made our trip much easier. Ruth Mcleod, it is thanks to you that people like us from architecture and urban planning background realize the importance of relating the technique to the real world by having an eye on the financial solutions. Barbara Lipietz, your comment opened another door for our BUDD horizons. Cassidy Johnson, your focus in disaster prevention always reminds us to think about the sustainability of any current decisionmaking. Benjamin Leclair, on you we saw one of the successful model of a BUDD student. We would also give our thanks to the other DPU staff, though they did not accompany us, what we got from them guide us all the way along this journey. Thank you Alex Frediani, the participatory action plan was mentioned again and again in the discussion and gave us lots of ideas about the participatory workshop. Thank you Jorge Fiori, your idea about scaling up always lights the candle in our mind. A special thanks to Andrew wade who guided us during half of the course until he left. At last, we would like to thank our beloved group D BUDDies and UDP students. You made this trip is so memorable. And there are lots of people that we are not able to thank one by one here, but it is the effort of everyone of them that leaded to the realization of this field trip and this report that is now presented.

0.2

4

5

CONTENTS
Acknowledgments Executive Summary Definitions 1. 2. Introduction
1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Field trip overview What is in this report Baan Mankong overview Pre-fieldtrip preparation 2.2.1 Our definition of transformation 2.2.2 Initial tools and methodologies Bangkok, as we studied it Bangkok, as we experienced it Actor map General impressions Cross-cutting issues 3.2.1 Land 3.2.2 Finance 3.2.3 Housing 3.2.5 Sense of community 3.2.6 Accesibility

Setting the scene

3.

Experience in the field and findings
3.1 3.2

4.

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

Strategic approach

Conceptual approach Our approach Boundaries Why boundaries? Opportunities Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4 Strategy synthesis

5.

Strategies

6.

Conclusions

Bibliography List of figures
6
0.3

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document is a final report of a field trip that was organized with the broad objective of providing student practitioners with a proximal insight into the vibrant examples of slum upgrading in Bangkok. The Baan Mankong Program was the collaborative people centred upgrading that students were given a chance to study and visit. The resultant findings and collections of experience from this visit to Bangkok presented in this document are structured in a way to allows readers to learn more about the city, its approach to urban poverty, and identify stakeholders in society that have a chance to make a meaningful difference. While on the field, us students were focusing on land, finance, housing and its relation to the wider urban context. In developing our understanding of the relationships between people and procedures, we identified the presence of boundaries that are confining the opportunities and the impact of the BMK project in a wider scale. This report mixes field experience with graphic concepts that act as metaphoric and diagnostic lenses that analyse how Bangkok can increase the involvement of poorer citizens, especially those living in informal conditions, in a greater process of decentralization and more localized urban governance. Finally, the report is premised on the concept of breaking boundaries and emphasizing the power of collaborative change in Bangkok. The findings and strategies are meant to highlight the opportunities that exist for CODI and the member communities of Baan Mankong. The impact of these strategies, interpreted as vibrations, are seen as ripples that when they will grow and connect each other at the city scale. They will have the potential to break the boundaries in order to achieve in a deeper way our definition of transformation: “…a flexible process of activating citizenship through systemic changes in spatial production that enables the long-term restructuring of the political and socio-economic status quo; this restructuring requires recognition of the complexity of the urban poor and catalyses strategic decentralization of decision making.” This report covers the following points: * The identification of boundaries that currently limit the possibility of scaling up the influence and potential of Baan Mankong. *The listing of opportunities that can be utilized by communities and local authorities. *The suggestion of four core strategies to increase the transformative potential of slum upgrading processes in Bangkok. These strategies are:

DEFINITIONS
Active Citizenship:
D.1 Refers to the effective practice of carrying out roles and responsibilities in the civic arena. Active citizenship is the ability to successfully participate in the demand, deliberation, and delivery of goods and services. It enables citizens to be critical enough in order to contest the structure and systems of governance so that they work better for them and their communities.

Systemic Change

Refers to the altering of governance and service delivery systems across a broad spectrum of bureaucracy and hierarchy.

Boundaries

1. Building the Common

Understood as collective spaces and arenas of benefit that exist not just for the urban poor, but all members of society. This strategy focuses around common spaces, not just physical spaces and buildings or amenities, but also common financial spaces (or funds) and shared platforms that enable citizens to speak and participate across all scales.

Our appropriation of the word ‘boundary’ refers to a wide range of restrictions, hesitations, and limitations that are confronted while trying to further a process of social change. In our view, boundaries exist when power relations are unequal resulting in hierarchies of decision-making, but also when socio-economic norms and values restrict the means of achieving common goals. Boundaries, in our opinion, are also a result of a lack of knowledge sharing and awareness.

The implication, the impact, and the effect that is started by a certain event.

Ripples

Scaling Up

Vibrations

2. Urban triggers

Are the catalyst or the events that begins to generate changes.

These quick and provocative interventions look beyond housing, and even the Baan Mankong programme, to promote visibility and integration of the urban poor population at the larger district and city scales The aim of this strategy is a more equitable distribution and access of land for the urban poor population in Bangkok generating mutual benefits for the community and the landowner around the use and management of land.

In our humble, and evolving, understanding of the term, it refers to creating meaningful change to a process or for a community. Scaling up, as we understand it, is about increasing capacity and broadening the area of influence. It consists of, but is not limited to, increasing the size of organizational structures through careful network making so people can achieve more. the disconnection and segregation of physical space from the social processes of life urban such as commerce and leisure. Spatial disengagement also refers to spatial disconnects on the basis of consumerism trends, wealth, and real estate value. More simply: the phenomenon whereby social exclusion of groups from each other’s activities is physically visible.

Spatial Disengagement: This term refers to

3. Reconfiguring relationships around land

4. Adjustable program requirements

Reconfiguring flexibility of spatial design and savings group structure to encourage the adaptability of the program With the help of these strategies, CODI and members communities of Baan Mankong can re-evaluate and imagine alternative urban futures centred on the evolving capacity of citizens.

Spatial Production

The processes and practices that influence the way the built and physical environment is shaped and used. ES.1 Door, by Diogo D.1 Temple stairs, by Diogo D.2 Canal, by Diogo

ES.1

D.2

8

9

0.4

10

1. Introduction
11

1.INTRODUCTION
1.1 Field trip Overview
At the end of the second academic term of postgraduate programs at the Development Planning Unit, students are required to conduct fieldwork in various parts of the global south. The aim of the fieldwork is to act as a practical reflection on the theory and strategies on development processes that are taught and discussed over the preceding course of months in various classroom seminars and group based studio assignments. World-wide examples of urban and rural poverty alleviation, housing provision, and innovative social design approaches towards upgrading are studied in depth by students at the Development Planning Unit before their penultimate assignment of visiting and studying a live example of such a process. This year, students from two postgraduate programs, MSc Building & Urban Design in Development (BUDD) and MSc Urban Development Planning (UDP), travelled to Bangkok to learn more about a housing provision program called “Baan Mankong”. The field trip was organized with the broad objective of providing student practitioners with a proximal insight into the vibrant examples of slum upgrading in Bangkok. The Baan Mankong Program was the collaborative people centred process that we were focusing on while intermittently getting the opportunity to widen our scope of analysis.

1.2 What is this report
This report is structured to give an overview of the Baan Mankong Program, as understood through a series of investigations carried out over selected areas of Bangkok. These investigations revealed that the Baan Mankong Program is a robust social process addressing key issues related to poverty alleviation and housing provision in the city. Our interpretation of Baan Mankong was established in tandem with a broader view on the notion of transformation and the inherent transformative potential such a program possesses. The concepts and strategies compiled herein act as a set of possible supplementary approaches that CODI, and those communities that work with it, can adopt to increase social benefits. Our approach and findings were of an analytical nature that enabled the development of core conceptual axioms such as Boundaries, Vibrations, and Ripples. These concepts act as metaphoric and diagnostic lenses whereby we proceed to understand how Bangkok can increase the involvement of poorer citizens, especially those living in informal conditions, in a greater process of decentralization and more localized urban governance.

1.1.1 This fieldtrip report is the culmination of the 20112012 academic year of the MSc program Building and Urban Design In Development (BUDD) from the Development Planning Unit (DPU) at the University College London (UCL). The fieldtrip at the end of the program is intended to bring together in one single exercise, all the theoretical knowledge and practical skills we acquired throughout the annual program, studying different case studies from all around the world, focusing on questions of recognition of citizenship and the ‘right to the city’, and participation as a means to socially produce more equitable urban spaces. Throughout this report we will analyze the ways in which the Baan Mankong program (BMK) is being implemented and maintained in the specific context of the city of Bangkok, and try to expose the potentialities and obstacles that it faces today. Through our experience in the field we will present the findings revealed by the analysis of crosscutting issues observed on site, and recognizing these as structural intervention areas we explain our approach to the case and develop a set of suggestions in the form of strategies intended to strengthen the program and ensure continuity of its socioeconomic benefits. The final section of this report consists of appendices that contain the explanation of the methodologies we used in the fieldtrip and also detailed information regarding all the six sites that were visited.

Our hosts on the ground, the Community Organizations Development Institute (CODI), the communities involved with upgrading projects and the Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR) accommodated our field visits with a humbling degree of hospitality and patience while we explored the six designated districts. To further support our field investigations, CODI and ACHR arranged informative seminars and presentations addressing key social, political, and economic particularities of Bangkok. Moreover, a dynamic team of translators accompanied us from local universities, CODI, and volunteer initiatives. With comprehensive ground support from our hosts and additional guidance from on site faculty from the DPU, us students focused our analysis and data gathering on the understanding of the transformative potential of the upgrading processes. As Building and Urban Design in Development (BUDD) students, we directed our attention on housing, land and the public realm, critically reflecting on the role of design and urban interventions within current governance structures and procedures.

1

1.1.3

1.1.2 1.1.1 Children playing. By Sarah. 1.1.2 DPU students visiting Bam Bua. By Sarah. 1.1.3 Presentations with communities at CODI. By Sarah. 1.1.4 Models of BMK projects at CODI. By Luz. 1.1.5 List of members joining BMK. By Sarah. 1.1.4 1.1.5

12

13

0.4

14

2. Setting the scene
15

2. SETTING THE SCENE
These funds are intended to carry out upgrading and improvement of housing and built environment issues facing communities. The access to these funds also allows communities to address pressing livelihood concerns such as tenure security, access to sanitation services and similar amenities. This process requires building effective and productive relationships between many actors including (but not limited to) local authorities, NGOs, academia and certain bureaucracies at the national level. Baan Mankong, along with the support from CODI, fosters ideals that go further than just the provision of housing. During our various conversations with former Director of CODI, Somsook Boonyabancha, we learnt that the vision behind the Baan Mankong Programme inherently lies in the power of the people being a part of a collective and thus learning how to exercise their rights as citizens. These rights have somehow been lost or neglected in the socially disjointed process of urban development that Bangkok has experienced. In order to assess the Baan Mankong Programme, an intensive exploration of the city of Bangkok was undertaken by the students. Fieldwork was carried out in Chatujack, Wang Thonglang, Bang Ko Laem, Pattaya, Bang Pro, and Nonthaburi. Our days spent with the various communities of these districts greatly advanced our understanding of the socially virile circumstances that the residents confront. Furthermore, our time in our six allocated districts allowed us to familiarize ourselves with the dynamism with which certain facets of Bangkok’s urban poor have triumphed over the difficult odds they have faced.

2.2 Pre-Field preparation
Prior to embarking on the 3-week field visit, students familiarized and developed concepts for the specific requirements of the field assignment. The first part of the assignment was to survey a vast amount of literature on the city of Bangkok and to consider the meaning of the term ‘Transformation’. Through a series of discussions and collective understandings of powerful urban social processes, we outlined the following definition of ‘Transformation’: “…A flexible process of activating citizenship through systemic changes in spatial production that enables the long-term restructuring of the political and socio-economic status quo; this restructuring requires recognition of the complexity of the urban poor and catalyses strategic decentralization of decision making. “ Through our concept and strategies, we will revisit this definition.

2.3 Bangkok, as we studied it
By the beginning of the 20th century, Bangkok found itself being promoted as the industrial and financial centre of Thailand, which meant transforming the region from a traditional agricultural foundation to large a diversified growing metropolis. This accelerated infrastructure development (transportation networks) represented loss of connection with water based systems and Bangkok starts becoming a land-based city and much of the agricultural leaning of the city was lost. The 1960’s beckoned a further and more drastic acceleration of urban growth wherein the urban built-up area expanded from 93.37sq.km to 700sq. km continuing until the next thirty five years. This area represented 39% of the 1.568sq.km of the Bangkok Metropolitan Area (BMA). With the construction of radial and circumferential road network, expansion extended beyond the borders of the BMA, into neighbouring provinces to comprise the Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR). By this time the influence of Bangkok covered 7.758sq. km, with a population of 8.6million in 1990 and 10.1million in 2000 - Density 1,542 pp/km and population growth 0.66% year. With the expansion of the city the trend observed is of the production sector to be pushed further from inner Bangkok, This further emphasizes the importance of the city centre as the business district of Bangkok. This is also an indicator of how the labour market in Bangkok has shifted to one of an industrial society with high employment within the formal sector - In Bangkok the proportion of employment between the formal and the informal sectors is respectively around 60% and 40%.

2.2.1 Our definition of transformation

2.1 Baan Mankong Overview
Launched in 2003 the “Baan Mankong Collective Housing Program” is an innovative approach towards housing provision and neighbourhood upgrading targeted for the urban poor in Thailand. The program, structured around the concept of collective finance, was initiated by CODI - a public organization under Thailand’s Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. CODI facilitates the development of community based long-term solutions to problems of land and housing for the poorest residents of Bangkok. CODI’s efforts focus, in part, on the careful allocation of governmental funds to poor communities who are part of the Baan Mankong program.

2.2.2 Initial Tools and Methodologies
In the pre field stage, we grounded our methodologies on constant reflections and re-assessments of our approach and strategies throughout the field trip, depending on how our knowledge of the program and its implementations would alter and/or improve from our initial understanding. In our intended timeline, we devoted the first week on redefining our general approach, modifying and finalizing maps and actor diagrams for the upcoming day. The second week involved a triangulation of information, defining site similarities and differences and redefining strategies. In regard of the tools we intended to use, we planned on dynamic participatory surveys, pre defined actor maps and financial diagrams, where participants would fill in information about their resources and the processes involved, in the favour of our understanding of which processes functioned best and which were the weakest links.

2.1

16

17

2.4 Bangkok, as we experienced it
As we arrived in Bangkok, we observed that different actors – the poor and the land developers- share the ‘need’ for the city but have different understandings of what the city means and of what it should provide. There are different visions of the city being devised simultaneously. For some it is the ground for capital accumulation via speculative action. For others it is the opportunity to access housing and a sustainable livelihoods inside the city. A program such as Baan Mankong precariously straddles these visions. Baan Mankong invites us to imagine a new kind of city. A city that allows the generation of collective forces by the citizens and challenge the unabated and exclusionary accumulation of wealth via speculative land development. The case of the BMK program in the city of Bangkok is particular, exactly because it puts forth an alternative way to access those levels of power decision that dictate for their right to live and work in the city. The outcome of the city to be, through collective organization of the urban poor, while these fight We can say that BMK openly deals with pressures from speculative action, promoting collective civic action to confront it. Our observation of the urban poor in Bangkok highlighted a particular form of spatial disengagement. Bangkok’s urban grain was observed as being akin to most rapidly developing cities, with its splintered spatial forms contrasting slums and wealthy neighbourhoods side by side. The rich have disengaged with the spatial realities of urban poverty in the city resulting in a symbolic disconnection. 2.2 Those with money and privilege in Bangkok have abandoned most outdoor urban public spaces and retreated into quasi-public areas such as shopping malls, golf clubs and gated communities. In our view, this disengagement furthers the boundaries in a city, both in terms of space and understanding. Moreover, it gets represented in the way officials plan the city and for whom. As the demand for spaces of capital consumption increase, the city spirals upwards and outwards, creating gaps of spatial and financial disparity. Ultimately, citizens find themselves trying to inhabit a disengaged city that is struggling to negotiate its boundaries. Such spatial disengagement deters face-to-face interactions among various groups. Such an interaction, when made regular and involuntary, is intrinsic to the creation of more dynamic communities and collective production of space in the city. Through our strategies and identification of opportunities within the Baan Mankong Program, we hope to assist Bangkok in harnessing the full potential of its citizenry interacting with its built environment. We consider ourselves lucky enough to learn about and engage with the vibrations of Bangkok – the many opportunities the city and its people provide for learning, sharing, and expanding both our knowledge and their own. Through the strategic generation of ripples – the possible actions that can promote meaningful change and alternative approaches – those working at CODI and are part of Baan Mankong can pave a pathway towards a city that embodies inclusiveness, integration, and the power of the people. 2.3

2.5 Actor Map
What is an actor map? It is a graphic representation of the interaction between various stakeholders. This representation aims to illustrate the mechanism through which people and groups are interacting in order to achieve a goal or influence a process. The general idea of the actor map is initiated from a circular diagram representing percentages of middle and lower income groups, dedicating a 8% sector to the poorest of the poor and 40% for the dwellers with insecure tenure.   Our actor diagram displays the expansion of the BMK program, highlighting important moments in the process (such as the creation of networks, and CDF) and actors for its evolution. CODI, is the starting point of it. The pilot communities upgraded with its support. At a further level, the emersion of community networks strengthen the existing communities but also open up opportunities for other communities to join. As time goes by, we see the appearance and formation of the CDF’s, which indicates a higher internal financial organization that communities gain access to. External support is mainly given by the community architects, and either support or pressure from the landowners and at some levels the local government.   It is apparent that through time, the dependency of communities towards CODI and external actors decreases and in return, increases towards themselves, again as networks. In this process, we hope that at some point we can have the integration of the poorest of poor as well as an active participation of the rest of Thai society in the course of the program. 2.4 2.5 2.1 Collage “Urban perceptions”.
an informal dewlling in Bam Bua. By Luz 2.3 Image of different infrastructures overlapping in Bangkok. By Luz 2.4 People involved in the process in Pattaya. By Luz. 2.5 Actor map Diagram, developed by the group and drawn by Lina 2.6 Interpretation of main financial sources. By Lina

2.2 Image of a new building behind

By Lina.

2.6

18

19

1.7.2

20

21

0.5

3.Experience in the field and findings
23

22

3.FINDINGS

1. Chatuchak

2. Wang Thonglang

The cities of Bangkok and Pattaya – where the sites we visited are placed – are being shaped, among other factors, by the demands for housing from those living in informality, and the private sector pressures to access available land for investment and development. In Bangkok, the issues about upgrading of informal sites are tied to struggle for affordable land, but also often to land owners powerful voice over the possible uses for it. In Pattaya, the starting trend of informal upgrading has been initiated and encouraged by the local government; a case that can potentially show new dynamics in the origins and support for such urban processes. Our findings in the field tried to decipher some tendencies and particularities in more detail while also paying attention to more specific issues of finance and housing design.

3. Bang Kho Laem

4. Pattaya

3.1

3.1 General map’s site location. By Rachel. 3.2 Specific map analysis of tensions and dynamics in each 2.3 Diagram representation of the program. By Lina.3
site. By Rachel and Atiyeh.

5. Bang Prong

6. Nonthanburi

2.2

24

25

3.1 General Impressions
We begin this section by introducing our general impressions towards each site individually, and continue afterwards with an analysis of the cross cutting issues in each site, namely issues of land, finance, housing, sense of community and accessibility to the program. The diagrams illustrated below, along the following pages, represent the current status of each community along a road that portrays the BMK program. Each community has its own particularities depending to their resources, level of engagement and community organization, external pressures or alleviators, which presents their potentials and can be strengths or challenges in the way of the implementation of the BMK program. As an example, as is illustrated in site 4, the commitment of external actors facilitates the process, or in site 5, the communities are taking on the easy path, while neglecting the goals of the program. A people centered program cannot be reduced to a single action. It needs constant evaluation and adaptability to new context and events, in order to achieve self-sufficiency and forward momentum. However, it is in the hands of each community to make most of it.

2.3

26

27

2.3

28

29

3.4

3.2 Cross cutting issues
3.2.1 Land
There is an evident lack of land regulations and policies that would benefit the urban poor in Bangkok. A comprehensive city plan that con- trols or locks land to guarantee accessibility of tenure for the informal dwellers does not exist. Additionally, there is no communication between government organizations to develop land policies towards the above goal. The current issue is particularly expressed in the Chareonchai Nimitmai Community. (see appendices of site 1). Despite the program´s limitations to develop a legal mechanism to convert squatter rights into legal rights, this analysis can lead to some strategies to facilitate access to land for new communities. Taking into account the data shown by Sheng (1989), slums are found on 65% private land, 28% public land and 7% mixed ownership. Therefore, new possibilities for land development focused on mutual benefits can be discussed and platforms for negotiations can be developed, in order to regulate land price and efficiency in time and resources.

3.5 3.7 3.8

3.6 3.9

Despite this problem, slum dwellers have been able to access land (in most cases) due to col- laboration, willingness to negotiate, or generosity of the landowners. It is clear that accessibility to land for the urban poor exclusively depends of the Landowner’s decision. Nevertheless, some (usually public landowners) add personal regulations and conditions for the development of their land, as was observed in sites 2 and 3 (see appendices of 2 and 3). Across the sites, we noticed some trends, revealing the existence or nonexistence of certain pressures due to differences in the landowner‘s position: Communities usually relocate in suburban areas, in order to buy affordable land from private land- owners, expressed in site 4, 5 and 6 (see appendices of sites 4,5 and 6). Site 5 and 6, had an interesting strategy to secure land. Initially, they surveyed available locked land in order to negotiate it for a cheap price. Ownership, in most cases is gained through negotiation with private landowners. Surprisingly some landowners are willing to sell land below market price as expressed in site 4 and 6(see appendices of sites 4 and 6). Communities that remain in the urban areas usually lease land from public institutions and they cannot negotiate at any level towards ownership. This highlights the government’s objective in holding a strong position in protecting land and influencing future decisions for the city, as ex- pressed in sites 1, 2 and 3(see appendices of sites 1,2 and 3).

3.2.2 Finance

  According to the lecture given by Kitti Patpongpiboon at CODI head quarters, any program implemented for the urban poor must consist within of models; therefore it should focus on the ability to repay. This explains the success and permanence of the BMK program so far. The development of a flexible financial model has made loans accessible for the urban poor; for example, by introducing the notion of saving groups and cooperatives they have acquired guarantee for the repayment of mortgages. On the other hand, it has helped create a community habit of saving, as well as it has passed the decision and responsibility to include or exclude individuals from the collective loan, over to the community. This is why the model facilitates the accountability and sustainability of the program. To analyze this broad issue while including many variables as possible, we divided our focus into two micro and macro levels: The micro-level focuses particularly on the capacity and flexibility of the saving groups to include the whole population as well as on the affordability of the model for all urban poor communities. We were surprised and charmed by how communities in sites 1, 4 and 6 (see appendices of sites 1,4 and 6) have been flexible with their ways of saving and creating new sources to generate income, specifically in site 6. However, we also met communities (usually in relocation projects without community history, see appendices of site 5) with a fixed minimum saving, where the exclusion of individuals was imminent.  

3.10

2.4 Upgraded settlements along canals in Bangkok. By 2.5, 2.6 Bangkok’s landscape. By Luz.
Lina

2.7, 2.8, 2.9 Land pressure in the city centre. By Laura.

2.10 Landscape in Pattaya. By Luz. 2.11, 2.12 Landscape contrast in Bang Prong. By Lina 2.13, 2.14, 2.15 Landscape in Nonthanburi.. By
Han

3.11 3.13 3.14

3.12 3.15

30

31

This displays a challenge for the program to guarantee the inclusion of all the urban poor, as well as it questions the ability of the program to be implemented in other countries with high levels of poverty, unemployment as well as low economic development. Whilst on the macro-level, our focus is on the capacity of the program to work and sustain itself. It should be noted that the large percentage of the loans (90%) originates from this level. According to our previous studies and highlighted in Kitti Patpongpiboon’s presentation, there is a concern about the scarcity of monetary resources to sustain the program in a long-term period. Until now, it has been executed with the contribution of the central government. However, it seems necessary to diversify the sources of funding in order to scale up. While on field, we discovered the expansion and strengths of the CDF. The beneficiaries themselves have created this fund. We imagine that this organization will have the ability to reproduce and sustain the program by itself. It can be the future engine of the program if it can diversify its sources of funding, by bringing external actors to contribute to the program. Therefore it shouldn´t be thought as a network exclusively supported by the urban poor rather an organization that connects with all the society in order

3.2.3 Housing  

3.16

3.17

Flexibility on design typology We understood that though people show preference in living in low-rise buildings and houses rather than flats, they mostly come to accept the housing typologies suggested by the municipality, due to the fact that they have either seen outcomes presented elsewhere or to avoid time consuming bureaucracy. However, though there are no impositions of specific housing designs on the community, some are reluctant to join the program because they are not aware of the flexibilities in design. Connection with urban context Though there are fairly clear boundaries that mark the communities, some have gone further in gating and in one case setting up CCTV’s (see appendices of site 3). In general, the communities are not well connected with the city, though there are opportunities for an interconnection of communities in the case of common circumstances such as locally shared economical streets (see appendices of site 2) or along the canal (see appendices of site 1)

3.18

3.19

3.20

3.21

3.22

3.23

3.24

3.25

By Bethany.

3.16, 3.17 Informal settlements’ typology along Chatuchak. 3.18, 3.19 Traditional typologies of traditional communities 3.20 Traditional house in the rural area. By Lina. 3.21, 3.22, 3.23 BMK & NHA highrise buildings. By Diogo. 3.24, 3.25 Informal houses in urban and rural areas. By
in the centre of Bangkok. By Lina.

Rachel and Bethany. 3.26, 3.27, 3.28 Different construction’s systems in housing development. By Lina, Rachel and Luz 3.29, 3.30, 3.31 Predominant housing typology in rural , by Han and Lina

3.26 3.29

3.27 3.30

3.28 3.31

32

33

3.2.4 Sense of community

  Cultural ties, common interests or geographical boundaries have formed the existing communities involved in the BMK. Therefore, it is impossible to reduce the diversity and uniqueness of each community to a single description. Nevertheless, across the sites, the leaders have played a crucial role in preserving cohesion and maintaining incentives in the community’s participation. However, on field we understood that the ‘sense of community’ fluctuates beforehand, throughout and later in the process. Through the initial phase, the community becomes stronger, sometimes portrayed with excitement and enthusiasm as in sites 4 and 6 (see appendices of sites 4 and 6). Throughout the process, they understand the importance of working together and usually this phase goes smoothly. However, when the upgrading process finished, collective action decreases and the ‘sense of community’ fades. Therefore, what occurs after BMK? How would it be possible to preserve the momentum and face up to new challenges?

3.2.5 Accesibility

  Within the cooperatives, the communities decide on how to deal with individuals; the program avoids interfering in these details as to avoid rigidness in mobilizing people. In sites 2, 4 and 5 (see appendices of sites 2, 4 and 5), we discovered the program has excluded a huge portion of the people; the seasonal and migrant workers which live by the rental scheme. Some do not have historical links with any community in order to join the program, others are not interested in secure tenure or do not have the ability to save. Therefore this population has more tendencies towards poverty. As a high portion of their income fairly covers their basic needs; therefore, a welfare rental scheme managed directly by CODI or by the cooperative could be very useful to improve their quality of life.

3.33 3.34

3.32 Community participation in Pattaya, for the initial phase of the BMK program. By Luz. 3.33 Participatory process designed by DPU students in Chatuchat, to catalyst mobilization. By Bethany. 3.34 Welcoming community environment in an original settlement in Bang Prong. By Lina.

3.32

34

35

0.6

36

4. Strategic Approach
37

4.Strategic Approach
4.1 Conceptual approach
As explained before, Baan Mankong, through its collaborative people-centred alliances, is transforming the way low income communities are integrated in the spatial production of the city; in particular of their community sites. Despite the process of integration already initiated by Baan Mankong, in this report, we argue that there remain certain boundaries – social, spatial and organisational – that prevent this integration from reflecting a comprehensive form of active citizenship.These boundaries, according to our experience in the field, significantly restrict the program from successfully operating across various scales of city development, thereby reducing the degree of transformation achieved. The recognition of boundaries that are not just physical, but also socio-economical can be a mechanism whereby communities, CODI, and relevant local authorities are able to think and plan beyond housing provision onto wider issues related to urban poverty alleviation. Moreover, thinking of the city and its processes as a generator of vibrations and ripples can help people to visualize and perhaps specialise\se, their collective actions. 3.1.1, 3.3.3 Collages from image animation “Breaking the boundaries” See video. By Lina. 3.1.2 Diagram. Building upon opportunities. By Laura. The boundaries we were able to identify through our investigations stand in the way of achieving a critical restructuring of the political and socio-economic status quo. This status quo currently consists of certain exclusionary, non-communicative, and insensitively homogenous aspects. These aspects are represented in our definition and understanding of ‘Boundaries’ (strategic approach). Our argument positions itself on the belief that the opportunities identified can be used to build upon and strengthen existing socio-political platforms. This will allow for every citizen, to take part in decision making about the place where they live and work; and thus to participate in the envisioning and planning of their city. We hope that our findings – vis a vis the identification of opportunities and boundaries- can enable CODI as well as current and future members of the Baan Mankong Project to utilise the system for maximum benefit. It is our hope that the recognition and operationalising of opportunities is based directly on existing strengths and capacities we encountered during our fieldwork, and empowers communities to utilise these to facilitate change. Our identification of these opportunities and boundaries was part of our methodology for studying the BMK program during our time in Bangkok. We kept our definition of Transformation in mind as well as a set of criteria upon which we could develop strategies to assist CODI’s future endeavors.
Inclusion of nonpermenant residents Increasing design flexibility Foster strategic alliances

Defining transfromation as:

“…a flexible process of activating citizenship through systemic changes in spatial production that enables the long-term restructuring of the political and socio-economic status quo; this restructuring requires recognition of the complexity of the urban poor and catalyses strategic decentralization of decision making.”
Increasing exchange 4.3

The strategies we have developed have been a result of our findings from the field and the resultant belief of the need for boundaries to be broken. That said, the following strategies help to explain how collaboration amongst stakeholders in Thailand can ensure a more forceful and effective social change. This change we believe is already in motion through CODI, and through the identification of organizational and/or social restrictions, we have imagined ways in which those working with CODI can achieve more through Baan Mankong.
Recognise different assets and savings capacities

Increasing two-way channels of communication

4.1

4.2

38

39

4.2 Our criteria
Based on our findings across our sites, we attempted to develop strategic linkages with our understanding of transformation. Revisiting our definition of transformation, we focused our strategies and recommendations for the Baan Mankong Program and CODI on the notion of active citizenship for the urban poor. Moreover, we paid close attention to addressing those issues that we felt were most in need for revision by CODI and member communities of the BMK program. Our broad objective was to highlight and ultimately minimize socio-spatial boundaries that emerged during the course of our investigations. The acknowledgement and strategic addressing of these boundaries, we believe, can allow the BMK program to extend its reach in socio-political and economic terms. Essentially, our strategic approach is intended to expand and augment the transformative spectrum of people-cantered collaborative slum upgrading in Bangkok. We recognise that there are multiple existing initiatives (or vibrations) already occurring in the city, both from the communities and from outside actors. These vibrations have been having effects; creating ripples to influence the immediate and surrounding context. However, there are also existing boundaries that are inhibiting these initiatives from growing, gaining influence and achieving transformation. So the question is: how do we break down or reconfigure these boundaries? We understood boundaries less as the outer-limits of the BMK and more as blockages, barriers, or impediments to a process that can otherwise provide a flourishing and non-partisan civil sphere for change and empowerment.

These boundaries, therefore, can be understood as the social, political, or economic factors that are inhibiting the potential of the upgrading program. The eradication of these boundaries can occur, in part, through the identification of critical opportunity areas. We understand these opportunity areas as social vibrations that need strategic impetus to resonate on a wider scale across the city. Therefore, once these opportunities (or vibrations) have been identified, we propose the concept of generating ripples culminating in a comprehensive ripple effect. This ripple effect capitalises on existing vibrations that trigger the ripples to gain influence and momentum as they grow and break down the boundaries that inhibit the potential for transformation on an urban scale (see graphic).

4.6 1. Recognition of the complex nature of urban poverty 2. Enabling long-term sustainability (scaling-up, building skills, livelihoods, construction quality, maintenance, tenure) 3. Promoting active citizenship and empowerment 4. Representative spatial production (of socioeconomic diversity) 5. Flexibility and adaptability, targeting aspects other than housing These criteria were the starting point for the development of our strategies, and we constantly revisited them as the process continued. In this way, we ensured that every strategy addressed all of the above criteria.

4.5 When understanding the metaphor of ripples, it is important to pay attention to the overlaps that occur once vibrations have been unlocked and allowed to grow across the city. These overlaps and common interfaces then have the potential to become the events, understandings, and shared experiences across communities that sustain the transformative process. First we identified ten prioritised issues (or boundaries) that cut across the six sites we visited in the field, and then started to unpack why these boundaries were present and occurring. This led us to identify the current opportunities, capacities, resources and examples. Building off things that were already happening on the ground, we developed our strategies to address multiple boundaries and utilise multiple opportunities simultaneously, thus widening the possible ripple effect our strategies have, to break down the barriers to achieve transformation. We did this keeping in mind the following criteria for our definition of transformation:

4.3 Boundaries

4.7

4.8

4.4

40

41

4.4 Why boundaries?
4.9

4.5 Opportunities
4.10

4.4 Existing conditions and boundaries 4.5 Wider influence of the ripple effect 4.6 The ripple effect illustrated 4.7 Thought and analysis process 4.8 Existing and cross-cutting boundaries identified 4.9 Questioning why the boundaries exist 4.10 Existing opportunities (vibrations) identified

0.8

5.Strategies
43

42

5. STRATEGY 1

5. STRATEGY 1

1. Building the commons
This strategy focuses around common spaces, not just physical spaces and buildings or amenities, but also common financial spaces (or funds) and common spaces to speak and participate across all scales. We recognise that during this strategy, it is key for the communities to identify the common needs of their own communities, as well as the needs at larger district and city scales, and then propose the solutions to fill these needs in order for the people to take ownership over the processes, the products and sustain the interest in the common and in the collective into the future.

Type: Collaborative

ACTIONS
Action 1: Expansion/linking of CDF with a newly formalised network of alternative funding sources that communities already utilising Who: Communities, CDF board, other funding sources How: CODI initiates an investigation into the alternative funding sources that the communities have been utilising outside the Baan Mankong programme and contacts them to see if they would be willing to enter into a more formalised network that would lint them directly with CDFs and with CODI to allow all communities in the programme to have access to the possibilities of these funding sources. Why important: The access to these alternative funding sources, not all loans, some grants that do not need paying back, could act as triggers to allow communities to start savings groups, or to build on income generation activities, that would ease the entry into the Baan Mankong programme for those who are facing difficulties. Existing example on site: Site 1: utilising these alternative funding sources already
PHASE 1

5.1.1

BOUNDARIES ADDRESSED

OPPORTUNITIES UTILISED

5.1.4 Who: Communities, local authority, universities, city engineers (BMA), CODI How: This will be an integrated exercise involving actors at many scales, communities will be able to best map their own settlements, and how they relate to their immediate surroundings, while district and city authorities will be able to fill in the wider context, allowing all involved to see the connection between the scales. Why important: This survey can identify possible spaces for the common, how to use these spaces to start integrating with the city (voids as common spaces among districts, larger scale, think about city as a whole and how communities fit in) Existing example on site: Many communities (either with NULICO or the district authority) have already undertaken these surveys and mapping on a smaller scale

Action 2: Surveys or mapping of the communities/districts

5.1.2 5.1.3

44

45

5. STRATEGY 1

PHASE 3

5. STRATEGY 1

1. Building the commons
PHASE 2 Who: Communities, local authority, general public, universities How: The idea for the intervention, for example the cleaning of the canal, can be put forth by an actor(s) (preferably a community), advertised around the city (date, time and location) so all interested parties can attend. The funding and ability to remove the rubbish collected can be given by the local authority, as the communities and other city residents are providing the bulk of the labour to clean a municipal amenity. Why important: the idea is to foster interest not only in the Baan Mankong programme, but also in the idea of the ‘common’, showing the strengths ad possibilities inherent in focusing on these types of spaces. There is also the idea to initiate this interest and motivation not only in the communities, but also in the municipal actors from the districts and the city, to provide reason to participate fully in future common initiatives. Existing example on site: There have already been canal cleaning initiatives organised by the communities (with support from the district), occurring over a couple days. 5.1.5

Action 3: Rapid public interventions (example: canal cleaning)

TIMELINE

Who: Communities, CDF board, BMA, other funding sources How: Via the alternative funding sources, a grant for the specific creation of common spaces/ initiatives (much like the infrastructure grant from CODI or the grant to build a health centre from the Ministry of Health) is created, which can be accessed/applied for via the CDF (perhaps a new specific task managing the allocation of this grant?) Why important: If just general finding is provided, such as the CODI loan, the bulk if it tends to go towards more individualised and possibly shorter-term tasks, such as housing. However, if an accessible grant is provided that specifically stipulates it must be used for common spaces, the communities will take priority for them. Existing example on site: Specific funding grants are already in use on at least two sites (1, 6) Action 5: Competition for ideas for the common spaces and amenities Who: Communities, universities, CODI, local authority, BMA How: CODI, and possibly NULICO, will spread the idea that the communities should visualise their situation, identify the issues, the possibilities, and the plots of land in which these possibilities can occur. The communities (or community members) submit their proposals to a board consisting of community leaders, CODI architects and district and city officials, who decide which proposals to pursue. Funding for these initiatives can come from combined savings groups of the communities who can access the common space/amenity, the CDFs and any other alternative funding sources available. Why important: By identifying the issues, proposing some solutions/ possibilities and the land/space on which these things can occur, the communities take ownership not only over the process, but over the concept of the common itself. And by creating a big event out of this, the possibility that it will be repeated and that the communities start prioritising the 5.1.6 common increases.

Action 4: Grant for the creation of common spaces and amenities

46

47

5. STRATEGY 1

5. STRATEGY 1

1. Building the commons

PHASE 5

Who: Communities, CODI, NULICO, local authority, universities, BMA, community builders How: Once the common space proposal(s) are chosen by the panel, the communities involved sit down with CODI, NULICO, the community architects and the community builders to develop the plan more comprehensively. These types of participatory workshops are very common in the structure of Baan Mankong, so can be utilised to develop the common spaces instead of individual houses quite easily. Why important: This process/step enables the communities (all members of the communities) to continue their ownership of the process and strengthen their relationships with the other actors, as well as giving those communities hesitant about Baan Mankong an idea of the benefits of the programme. PHASE 6

Action 7: Participatory design workshop

Who: Communities, community builders, CODI, local authority, BMA, NULICO How: This will turn the construction of the common space and/or amenity into an event which all the communities and local and city authorities can attend. In addition to showcasing the construction of the new space/building, the fair can really show the possibilities of working as a collective. Why important: This gives the opportunity for the community architects and other actors to demonstrate what they are able to offer the communities (design options, etc) and can be a motivating event for others who are not fully convinced to do the same or enter in the Baan Mankong programme.

Action 8: Construction fair

5.1.7 PHASE 4

Who: Communities, local authority, civil societies, universities How: The communities decide what type of festival or exhibition they would like to put on, create a committee to network and work with the local authority, CODI and possibly NULICO and the universities to secure the space, support and whatever permits need to be dealt with. This enables the festivals and other events to go smoothly. Why important: These events, showcase income generation activities, food, upgrading processes, raising awareness and promoting the common and collaboration from all actors across all scales, linking the ‘formal’ with all of the things already occurring in the ‘informal’. Existing example on site: Many communities have been holding festivals and events in shared common spaces, our goal is to increase their influence and impact on a wider range of actors

Action 6: Festivals

5.1.8

48

49

5. STRATEGY 1

5. STRATEGY 1

1. Building the commons
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
5.1.9

POSSIBLE OUTCOME 1: (above)
Through the collective creation of common spaces and amenities, the communities themselves begin to break down the boundaries that they have created around themselves over the years, isolating themselves not only from involvement in the wider district or city context, but also from their immediate neighbours. Via the actions in this strategy, the communities, as well as actors in the district and the city, recognise the common goals and common methods to achieve them in the others and acquire the motivation and momentum to work collectively to break down the boundaries and move towards transformation.

POSSIBLE OUTCOME 2: (right)
Additionally, via these multiple common actions (spatial, financial, political and communicative), there is the distinct possibility of increasing the capacity of the urban poor, as collective, to organise and act as a single body or entity, thus enabling them to participate in a more meaningful way across the wider scales of development, such as the district and city.

5.1.11

5.1.10

50

51

5. STRATEGY 1

1. Building the commons
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
Over the six phases of Strategy One, communities are able to take advantage of existing collaborations between neighbours; to develop alternative funding schemes, gain visibility and consolidate their position. Using trigger-actions for collective dynamics they strengthen their organization. Focusing on the younger population, promoting livelihoods schemes and participatory processes aims for long term sustainability of programmes. 5.1.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.1.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.1.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.1.4 Diagram of how alternative funding sources are

5.1.12

connected to the CDF and CODI 5.1.5 Canal cleaning initiative 5.1.6 Image of a common public space, by Diogo 5.1.7 Image of a festival 5.1.8 Image of a construction fair 5.1.9 Image of a collective commons 5.1.10 Diagram of possible shared amenities 5.1.11 Communities participating in decision-making at wider scales, by Han 5.1.12 Phased ripple effect, mesa scale 5.1.13 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 3

5.1.13

0.9

52

53

5. STRATEGY 2

5. STRATEGY 2

2. Urban triggers
These quick and provocative interventions look beyond housing, and even the Baan Mankong programme, to promote visibility and integration of the urban poor population at the larger district and city scales. These interventions not only promote the existence and contributions of the urban poor within and to the city, but they also aim to incorporate multiple actors into the agenda of including the urban poor in the development of the city.

Type: Provocative

ACTIONS
PHASE 1 Who: Communities, local authority, general public, universities How: For example the cleaning of the canal, can be put forth by an actor(s) (preferably a community), advertised around the city (date, time and location) so all interested parties can attend. The funding and ability to remove the rubbish collected can be given by the local authority, as the communities and other city residents are providing the bulk of the labour to clean a municipal amenity. Why important: The idea is to jump start interest in the Baan Mankong programme and shift the perception of the urban poor communities as separate from the city of Bangkok and to promote participation and integration across all actors. Existing example on site: There have already been canal cleaning initiatives organised by the communities (with support from the district), occurring over a couple days.

Action 1: Rapid public interventions

5.2.1

BOUNDARIES ADDRESSED

OPPORTUNITIES UTILISED

5.2.4 5.2.2 5.2.3 PHASE 2

Who: Communities, community builders, CODI, NULICO, universities How: Those communities that would like to participate (we recognize than some may not for various reasons) get in (or are put in) touch with a support and development team (possibly made up of CODI, NULICO, universities and the community builder network) to develop an enlarged version of their entrance (possibly just bamboo poles, fabric and paint) and put together a team to build and erect it. Why important: The idea is to promote the recognition of the location, identity and presence in the city as a whole, and perhaps also to alter the perception of gated communities in the city.

Action 2: Enlarged entrances

54

55

5. STRATEGY 2

5. STRATEGY 2
Action 3: Faces, jobs, crafts, and such identifying traits of the communities painted on the city’s large infrastructure Who: Communities, universities, BMA, local authority, CODI, NULICO How: Those communities and community members that would like to participate (some may not for various reasons) can get in touch with support and development team (made up of CODI, NULICO, and the community builder network) who collects images and develops a scheme for placing them on the infrastructure, with the collaboration of the BMA. Why important: To bring attention to the presence, numbers and contributing qualities of the urban poor population, and to promote this population not being seen as disconnected from the city, but as a integral part of its workings.

2. Urban triggers

5.2.5

TIMELINE

5.2.6

56

57

5. STRATEGY 2

5. STRATEGY 2
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES

2. Urban triggers
PHASE 3

Who: Communities, local authority, civil societies, universities How: The communities decide what type of festival or exhibition they would like to have, create a committee to work with the local authority, CODI, NULICO and universities secure venues and provide available support. This enables the festivals and other events to go smoothly. Why important: These are quick and innovative events, showcasing income generation activities, food, upgrading processes, raising awareness and promoting motivation and participation from actors from within and beyond poor communities. Site example: Many communities have been holding festivals and events in shared common spaces; our goal is to increase their influence and impact on a wider range of actors. PHASE 4

Action 4: Festivals

Who: Communities, community builders, BMA, CODI, NULICO How: This step requires a huge collaboration between the communities, the community builders and the authorities (both district and BMA). There has to be a design (possibly from city engineers) and the location, based on where the communities feel the need to make this strong visual and physical connection. The construction could be done with a combination of city-trained (or private) construction workers and the local community builders network. Why important: This bridge, constructed over the highest infrastructure, can connect two communities, or a community with a public park, or similar, to bring higher awareness of the existence of these communities and their capacity to intervene in the city. 5.2.7

Action 5: The construction of a bridge

5.2.8

POSSIBLE OUTCOME 1:

Through the urban triggers, increasing the visibility and the inclusions of the urban poor into the daily life, activities and movement of the city, the districts and city take into account and interact with the communities when making short-term and long-term decisions about the development of Bangkok.

POSSIBLE OUTCOME 2:

Via the focus on the wider contexts of the district and city with the provocative triggers, the communities are made aware of the benefits of the Baan Mankong programme that extend beyond just housing to touch much larger issues of inclusion, environment and even income generation opportunities. 5.2.9

58

59

5. STRATEGY 2

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES

Strategy two puts forth the concept of ‘Urban Tactics’ as rapid interventions that have the specific goal of increasing the visibility of the collective and the individual in the city. Looking beyond the housing question the higher goal is inclusion in the discussion and decision processes that shape the urban environment they live and work in. 5.2.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.2.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.2.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.2.4 Canal cleaning initiative 5.2.5 Enlarged community entrance 5.2.6 Faces and community imagery on the

5.2.10
AI N

infrastructure of the city 5.2.7 Bridge constructed between two communities over the high infrastructure 5.2.8 Communities participated in city and district wide development planning 5.2.9 Communities seeing beyond individual housing to possibilities in the wider context 5.2.10 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.2.11 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 1

FL O

OD

PL

FLOOD PLA

IN

INFRASTRU

CTURE

5.2.11

0.10

60

61

5. STRATEGY 3

5. STRATEGY 3
ACTIONS
Who: CODI, NULICO, landowners, communities, local authorities, BMA How: Step 1A: Map the land available and its owners in the BMA, as well as the communities facing eviction or seeking to relocate. This action can be done through a collaborative action between CODI, NULICO and the districts. Step 1B: Land Bank for communities and land owners who are willing to provide their land (rent or sell) to upgrading programs for poor communities. To encourage more land owners to join the bank, tax deduction can be allow in different percentages depending on the location of the land; higher percentages for land in more consolidated areas of Bangkok. Step 1C: Initially the information can be displayed in CODI’s offices and its website. Once the bank receives enough attention from communities and land owners, some workshops or meetings can be proposed. Why important: As Sopon Pornchokchai (2005) proposes a bank or centre with the information about the housing stock is the best strategy to regulate prices. The desired results are the same with a bank of land. The land bank will be a space where to identify the different conditions and situations from offer and demand of land. For example, some communities could have more resources than other to pay for land, in the same way, restrictions about the use of land can vary between land owners. Existing example on site: For sites 5 and 6, the district and CODI helped them to locate land that was locked (without access) as this represents the most affordable land in the city.

3. Reconfiguring relationships around land management Type: Negotiation
The final aim of the strategy is a more equitable distribution and access of land for the urban poor population in Bangkok. The actions of the strategy look to generate mutual benefits for the community and the land owner around the use and management of land. This can be done around a co-dependent business model for land sharing where responsibilities and benefits are shared by the parts. Ideally the paybacks from the strategy are both social and economic.

Action 1: Land Bank

5.3.1

BOUNDARIES

OPPORTUNITIES

5.3.3 5.3.2

5.3.4

62

63

5. STRATEGY 3

5. STRATEGY 3

3. Reconfiguring relationships around land
Who: CODI, Communities, landowners, local authority, NULICO How: Step 1B: With the support from CODI, the community organisation can propose a project to the land owner to use a piece of land for mutual benefits. The ideas behind this could be as varied as to reduce or stop the increase in the price for land, to generate sources of income for the community, to build common amenities related to welfare, or to cover all at the same time in a mix use typology. The initiative can also come from the land owner including the cooperative as fast as possible in the preparation of the proposal. The knowledge from the community about their social needs and management capabilities represent a crucial input for the proposal. Step 2B: The cooperative and the land owner need to study the options and best location for the project. Also, both parts need to agree in the investment of each in terms of economic resources, time, labour, and management. CODI with the support from the district can advise the community about the feasibility of the project related to the needs and commercial demands in the area. Depending on the location and context the project can go from farming inside and in the periphery of the city, to a building with multiple services utilizing the market demands in more consolidated urban areas as a business opportunity. In the case the projects provide services for the district it can apply for the city grant proposed in Strategy 1. Step 3B: CODI could adapt this idea to Baan Mangkong and provide loans for this type of projects. Apart from the loan, resources from the cooperative and the land owner can support the first stage. Ideally projects should target collective income generation and social amenities as well. However, the first stage could focus on the profitable part of the project to ensure a fast payment on the loan to then build the second stage seeking social benefits for the community. See in the next section some examples of the mix uses mentioned above. Why important: Once the project is finished, it becomes an important asset for the cooperative and a tool to reverse the current one-way situation of dependence between land owner and community; the management of the project will be done by the cooperative and in that way responsibilities and benefits will be spread more equally between the parts.

Action 2: Land sharing / building sharing projects

5.3.5

TIMELINE

64

65

5. STRATEGY 3

5. STRATEGY 3

3. Reconfiguring relationships around land
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
Building in partnership
Hypothetical location: Bang Kho Laem (City centre) – high density of population, high demand for commercial rent, lack of social amenities for low income communities, land owner: Crown Property Bureau. Possible outcome:
First stage: Profitable. A mid-rise building with shops in the ground floor, commercial rent units, and a space to rent for events and to use for community meetings. The use for the last can be changed once the two stages are finished, so it can be a social amenity in the ground or first floor. (i.e. elderly house). The profit from first stage should be enough to sustain the building of second stage, which can be a smaller percentage of the building.

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
Farming in partnership
Hypothetical location: Bang Prong I or II (less consolidated urban area) – low density of population, more land to be developed, lack of social amenities and public open spaces, current support from the local government for urban agriculture projects. Change of trend in land use from industrial to residential and agricultural. Possible outcome:
First stage: Definition of plots and access to clean water, acquisition of tools and seeds to sow. Training in urban agriculture methods for cooperative members and employees. Probably the most affordable option for production is through intensive labour instead of mechanized, providing more jobs for the community and covering maintenance costs. Building of a marketplace and farm for small animals in one storey building with possibility to grow vertically. Through the district network facilitate access to markets and selling points for the production of the sites. Second stage: Affordable rent units and social amenities in a two storeys over the market. Possibly some of the current renters that work for industries would stay in the affordable rent units once the industries have to be translated outside the district. These people can be integrated in the savings groups and volunteer for some hours to work in the farm and marketplace.

5.3.6

Second stage: Social. Flats for affordable renting for people from the community, and common amenities such as handcraft workshops, nursery, elderly home, toy library or whatever the community decides as priority. Part of the profits can go to the land owner in exchange to stop the rise of the rent for land. The other part can go to sustain the affordable renting and the management of the social amenities in the building.

5.3.8

5.3.7

66

67

5. STRATEGY 3

3. Reconfiguring relationships around land
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
5.3.9 Strategy three proposes the creation of a ‘Land Bank’ where information about land with potential for the programs would be gathered, in order to have a city scale perspective of land availability and access conditions for those most needed, and leading to the creation of incentives for land rental and acquisition. Land and/or building sharing projects, as a productive piece of land or a mix use building, would unite the land owners and the communities, transforming their relation from one-way dependence into the development of one of mutual benefit. 5.3.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.3.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.3.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.3.4 Land bank 5.3.5 Land and building sharing 5.3.6 Building section showing mixed use and rental

possibilities 5.3.7 Building in partnership possibilities and benefits 5.3.8 Farming in partnership - urban agriculture 5.3.9 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.3.10 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 5

FACT

ORIE

S

FACTORIES

INFRAST

RUCTURE

5.3.10

0.11

68

69

5. STRATEGY 4

5. STRATEGY 4
ACTIONS
PHASE 1 Who: CODI, NULICO How: CODI architects and social science personnel, perhaps in conjunction with NULICO staff, collaborate together to come up with a series of guidelines or goals to ensure that the participatory aspect of the design workshops and other community activities are being met. These guidelines get filtered down to the community architects, and other staff working with the communities in the field, to make sure these approaches are being followed through in every aspect of the Baan Mankong and associated programmes. The participatory methodologies should be implemented since the earlier phases of Baan Mankong program, such as savings group and land negotiations. In the same way the design process needs to star earlier in the timeline and be developed in parallel with the savings capacities. This will help to close the gap between saving capacity and proposed typologies, which sometime are detached from the conditions and needs from the community. Why important: An ideal participatory approach with clear guidelines will create the platforms for people to speak and be heard. This way, the upgrading program could recognise and build upon the particularities of each community conditions. PHASE 2

4. Adjustable program requirements Type: Collaborative
Reconfiguring flexibility of spatial design and savings group structure to allow the adaptability of the program to the specificity of the cases and access for the less capable and marginalised (rental, transient etc.) The aim is to reconfigure the relation between savings schemes and spatial representation that can better reflect the specific demands. When the community starts planning in collaboration with community architects and NULICO to configure possible scenarios, the spatial design rather than being just a final output and a result of the money saved it might help to diversify the option and the possibilities. For example, if within the specific community there are households with different economic capacity and needs, starting to figure out possible future flexible scenario it may be possible to identify specific ad hoc savings schemes and include the less capable in a more comprehensive way. This strategy may require a reflection on the role of community architects and NULICO staff, who need to be more involved in the community organisational process 5.4.1 and savings.

Action 1: Development of guidelines/goals of participatory design methodologies by CODI

Action 2: Reconfiguration of the savings group structure to reflect different financial capacities and

BOUNDARIES ADDRESSED

OPPORTUNITIES UTILISED

include rental scheme. (see last point). Who: Communities, CODI, NULICO, BMA, Savings group collectives, other financial organisations How: Some financial flexibility can be enriched if CODI encourage the use of flexible schemes that are already being utilize punctually in some communities. Flexibility than is achieved when the financial design is thought during the spatial one. Starting with the creation of savings group collective data bank (example of successful flexible scheme of community’s savings groups)/ savings typology map related also to output/ physical spatiality. The communities using this bank, perhaps managed by CODI and its website, can visualize approaches on how savings can reflect outputs, and possibility according to difference and needs. Strengthen the CODI’s financial support. Involve the communities on creating saving scheme for data collection which might also link to the financial cost of the upgrading and final output. Also alternative financial funds can be added to the bank data that other communities might not know. Why important: Differences in saving capacity for house and land can be adapted to the specific situation and need. In addition, it is possible to promote different schemes of savings within the community according to the capacity of the residents. This can be linked to the final output, figuring different typologies, dimensions of the plot, incremental solutions and mixed use buildings (see strategy 3). It’s a long term process that can be increased and expanded over time, community by community but can start immediately. Existing example on site: Site 1: Utilising these alternative funding sources already

5.4.3

5.4.2

5.4.4

70

71

5. STRATEGY 4

5. STRATEGY 4

4. Adjustable program requirements
PHASE 3 Action 3: Communities and technical support training together, training each other. Who: Community architects, universities, NULICO, community members, city and district officials, other experts or interested parties. How: University Design Lab: This could be an option for the thesis or practice as a requirement for university courses in Thailand. Students can be introduced to the communities through CODI and expected to study and help with their capacities to one or several communities during that year. The outcome, apart from the process itself, can be a report with some feasible recommendations to the communities and institutions analysed. Students can come from different disciplines related with the organisational and upgrading processes. Community member could propose what can be more useful for them depending on their stage of upgrading. Simulation upgrading camp (linked with strategy 1: This can be an initiative of CODI, and NULICO, aimed at the education of community architects, university students, officials from the district and the city, as well as any other interested parties. Members from different communities in Bangkok can attend to the camp to contribute with their experiences; bringing common obstacles during the community organisation into the exercises. A rapid three or so day camp where all involved participate in a role playing activity as community members with different assets and aspirations. They will go through organisational activities, dividing land plots, designing houses, etc. These camps could organised and coordinated by CODI in collaboration with universities, local authority, BMA, community architects, NULICO, other interested parties. Construction fair (linked with strategy 1): Designing of a fair to be displayed inside the community, or on an area of the city accessible to several ones, depending on the scale of the event. These fairs can inform, create awareness and compare techniques, designs, possibilities & benefits. Communities can invite surrounding communities and other hesitant groups to promote action, invite the Local Authority and other outside actors (such as financers, landowners). There is the possibility for associated activities such as a Land Auction.

5.4.5 Why: For the people in the community it is important to gain technical knowledge and learn about different options for upgrading, compare benefits and identify what can be the best solutions for the specific conditions of their sites. In order to do so, it is important a constant and committed support from architects and institutions involved in developing projects. There is a need to make visible the opportunities that collective proposals have when community and practitioners work together. On the other hand, training with people from the community or through simulation of real conditions, can help community architects, university students and technical support staff from CODI and NULICO to strengthen their engagement with participatory processes, through studying the possible obstacles and recognition of heterogeneity of actors inside a community. Existing example on site: Currently site 4, Pataya, the communities have received training from CODI related with organisational and technical skills, and savings management. They also have the support from community architects.

TIMELINE

72

73

5. STRATEGY 4

5. STRATEGY 4

4. Adjustable program requirements
Who: Communities, community architects, CODI, NGOs, local employers, other external actors How: After studying the particular situation of the community in terms of needs around affordable rent, the cooperative with the support of the CODI and the community architects can design a typology that integrate such needs in the upgrading plans, both in the physical design and in the financial aspects. The proposals should include mechanisms to sustain the affordable units in a long term, which in principle should be managed by the cooperative. A mix between commercial units to rent and affordable ones can be a way to support the cost and management of the projects. Also, CODI could increase the amount of the loan for communities that are including affordable renting schemes. In some contexts, rental proposals can be built and managed in co-production with landlord and external actors (NGOs, founders etc), with benefits and responsibilities spread among all the stakeholders according to their capacities and resources. (See Strategy 3 for an example on partnership between landlords and communities). Although it is not the majority, some households get most of their incomes from sub renting. In this cases, upgrading plans could adapt, in both design typologies and financial structures, to include specific livelihood such these. Why important: Renters are present in most of the sites this report study, and usually the physical respond is through the subdivisions of houses to have spaces to accommodate more people. Possibilities for affordable renting should be included in the plans and design from early stages. Acknowledging the presence of renters as part of the community is one step towards long term sustainability of housing projects; it can be seen as both a social responsibility and an opportunity depending on the context.

Action 4: Designing for renting

In site 2, Wangthonglang, the need for student accommodation can be used as an opportunity to support financial schemes for affordable renting. The initial investment can come from different sources such as, a loan from CODI, money from the university, and possibly the land owner and savings groups. Some local businesses could be interested to contribute to the project when some of their employees are currently living in the area. The project can be managed by a collective of one or different communities interested in the creation of affordable renting. The priority for the affordable units should be given to current renters in the local area.

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
Designing for flexibility in Pattaya. Using the existent technical support (and also the current stage in the upgrading process) find typologies that can adapt to the different needs and aspirations from the households. 5.4.6

5.4.7

5.4.8

74

75

5. STRATEGY 4
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
Strategy four looks at reconfiguring spatial design and savings groups, by involving and training the actors engaged in participatory processes to understand specific environments and the importance of local knowledge for the programs. Learning from precedents to understand capabilities and identify opportunities, when laying down the guidelines for the programs, will be decisive in the promotion of the inclusion of those less capable and marginalised.

5. STRATEGY SYNTHESIS
In a wide scale we can observe the effects that the strategies might have on the existing boundaries from the current situation to the long term. These effects are symbolized by the red ripples which grow their influence by time during the three stages represented (current situation, short-term and long term). The ripples, generated by the vibrations already existing and by the strategies proposed, start from the communities under the Baan Mankong project, in black that one with already existing potentials, such us the six communities visited during the field trip, and in white the possible future one for a wider collaboration. The boundaries are represented in green, that start to be broken (in dots) when the ripples influence their effect each other overlapping and reaching a wider city scale.

5.4.9

5.4.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.4.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.4.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.4.4 Diversity of savings group to reflect varying needs and
capacities within the community 5.4.5 Simulation camp 5.4.6 Participatory design workshop in Pattaya 5.4.7 Student and affordable rental accommodation 5.4.8 Diversity of housing typologies 5.4.9 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.4.10 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 4

5.5.1 In the current situation the opportunities, or vibration,

present in the communities are developing ripples whose effects are limited and constrained by the existing boundaries.

EXPANSION OF CITY

(Map of Bangkok at a macro scale)

5.5.2 In the short-term the strategies proposed begin to be 5.4.10

implemented in the communities who present the related opportunities. The expansions of the resulting ripples have the potential to break the boundaries inhibiting the growth towards transformation.

5.5.3 In a long-term process different strategies fully interact,

overlap and connect their effects and impacts in order to break the boundaries in a wider scale and achieve transformation

76

77

5. STRATEGY SYNTHESIS

5. STRATEGY SYNTHESIS

5.5.4

5.5.4 This new actor map shows how these strategies will go some way to help us achieve our idea of transformation. Keeping the momentum of the communities through the spatial production of common spaces; integrating the Thai society through ties of collaboration and cooperation for a shared city, and adjusting the program to the new needs leading to a broader inclusion.

5.5.1 Current vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.2 Short-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.3 Long-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.4 Long-term transformative actor map resulting from the strategies

Also, some of these strategies may consolidate new rings of growth (please refer to the initial actor map in pag.17) such as: 1. The diversification and expansion of the CDF to fund the common spaces proposed. 2. The creation of a land bank to facilitate the access to land for the urban poor but also for the common spaces open for all the citizens. 3. The inclusion of new communities and individuals that without accessing to the program have the tendency to remain in poverty. It is the refection of how the strategies proposed may consolidate new rings of growth, by the inclusion of new communities, and the integration of the Thai society (institutions, local government, universities and middle and low income class) in order to cooperate partnership around building the commons at a shared city level.

78

79

0.12

80

6. Conclusions
81

6. CONCLUSIONS
Our visit to Bangkok allowed us to exercise and reflect on our role as student practitioners critically assessing the processes of design and development of urban space. This report is a collection of our reflections and we hope that those who read it would learn that there are many ways to experience a city. Moreover, the preceding chapters have attempted to contextualize the challenges and opportunities that arise when studying complex instances of poverty in the city. Our time in Bangkok gave us a better insight of the complexity and well structured management of the BMK program. We could verify that it is certainly a program based on people. Communities showed that a collective action with the power of collaboration is possible, and besides that it can be expanded. To date, they have created networks of learning and support, an alternative financial fund, and different schemes to include the poorest or less fortunate people inside communities. It seems clear that the program is taking on a life by itself. Their empowerment has consolidated a social capital able to expand and secure its continuation. However, a constant evaluation and adaptation to new up-comings, or existing barriers is always necessary in order to nurture, to scale up the program, or simply to avoid the emersion of bad practices. As we witnessed firsthand, CODI is constantly doing that, without losing its flexibility and essential parameters that maintain its well functioning and preserve the vitality of the program. However, through our analysis and experience while working with the communities we found out some issues that prevented the program from scaling up, what we so called “boundaries”. We break, reconfigure those boundaries introducing vibrations in the form of strategies that will generate the necessary ripples to break them. Once those boundaries are broken, we believe the process of transformation as we defined it previously in this report can be initiated or in some cases, continued. The analysis and strategies proposed in this report aim to expand and build on the substantial work that CODI and the Baan Mankong Programme have started. Our lessons and learning’s through CODI and the inspirational communities part of BMK helped us suggest the strategies outlined herein. We believe that working towards a better understanding of the common, sharing interests, capitalizing on existing networks, celebrating diversity through flexibility and adaptability are crucial cornerstones of socio-spatial transformation Likewise, the strategies proposed give some hints to move forward.

We were not focused on the specificity of the communities visited, neither on the underlying structural issues out of hand to contest the system. We followed the same line of thought of the program, using the power of collaboration and networking to change the status quo from below. Our time in Bangkok, under the auspices of CODI, helped us envision new possibilities for the future of cities. We think there is a need for a new vision of Bangkok, how the city wants to be developed. In doing so it has to question what kind of spaces and what kind of citizenship wants to encourage. Alternative urban futures are therefore centered on the evolving capacity of citizens, particularly the urban poor, and their ability to bring transformative change in existing structures of governance and the production of space. We believe that for an active role of the poor in society there is a need to acknowledge the importance of spatial production not only as an end but also during the same process. Here is where the role of the community architect has the potential to shift from being a mere facilitator of a preconceived standardized design, to be a key element articulating the process of social transformation through spatial production in our strategies. A process where the poor are in the centre of the decision making. All of the five strategies use space and design to achieve our definition of transformation, and the community architect should start also focusing on aspects such as mediating and advocating in the relations around land, designing and planning coordinately at a meso and macro level, engaging finance and design from the beginning of the programs and organising urban acts as triggers for reclaiming visibility. After working with the communities we believe there is an opportunity to capitalize the connections with authorities, but more important, with external actors from the civil society who are engaged with the program and can play an essential role keeping the momentum. The potential role of external actors from civil society as a catalyst for the BMK and keeping the momentum forward, bypassing the binomial state-people has been proved in sites like Pattaya. We therefore see a very strong asset for the BMK to build up on the potential shift on the perception of the informal city by the society, not seen as separate from the formal city, but as a part of it, moving beyond the dichotomy formal/informal. Hence, as we understand, the up-grading of the communities have to be done by comprehensively, including everyone in the city (social, political and economic agents), and in an integrated manner within wider planning frameworks at a district level, and at a city level, to be able to scale up the programme city wise.
Front Cover:

Night skyline of Bangkok, by Diogo (top) Community along the river, by Sarah (bottom)

0.13

0.1 Tapestry, by Luz 0.2 Bells, by Luz 0.3 Mural, by Luz 0.4 Framing Bangkok, by Luz 0.5 Community walk, by Luz 0.6 Postboxes, by Luz 0.7 Shrine, by Diogo 0.8 Mosaics, by Diogo 0.9 Community walk, by Luz 0.10 Temples, by Diogo 0.11 River boats, by Diogo 0.12 Flowered steps, by Luz 0.13 Temple bells, by Diogo

82

83

BIBLIOGRAFY
Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Negotiating the Right to Stay in the City’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 16, No. 1, April 2004, pp. 9-26. Asian Development Bank. ‘Scaling Up Poverty Interventions: Global Learning Process’, a paper presented at a conference in Shanghai, China from 25-27 May 2004, 17 pages. Archer, D. (2010), “Empowering the urban poor through community-based slum upgrading: the case of Bangkok, Thailand”, Paper written for the 46th ISOCARP Congress, 2010 (Available at: http://www.isocarp.net/Data/case_studies/1648. pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Archer, R.W. ‘Introducing the Urban Land Pooling / Readjustment Technique into Thailand to Improve Urban Development and Land Supply’, in Public Administration and Development, Vol. 12, Issue 2, 1992, pp. 155-174. Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Housing by People in Asia: Community Funds’, No. 14, February 2002, 32 pages. (http://www. achr.net/ACHR%20newsletter%2014%20with%20 photos.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. ACHR, ‘Design with, for, by people’, Community Architects in Asia – What they, who they are, 2010 (http://www.achr.net/Young%20Professionals/ Downloads/design-by-with-for-%20peoplecompressed-1.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Baan Mankong participatory slum upgrading in Bangkok, Thailand: Community perceptions of outcomes and security of tenure Original Research Article Habitat International, Volume 36, Issue 1, January 2012, Pages 178-184 Berner, Erhard. ‘Learning from Informal Markets: Innovative Approaches to Land and Housing Provision’, in Development in Practice, Vol. 11, Nos. 2-3, May 2001, pp. 292-307. Bishop, Ian D. et alli. ‘Spatial Data Infrastructures for Cities in Developing Countries’, in Cities, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2000, pp. 85-96. Boonyabancha, Somsook for UN-HABITAT. ‘Community Development Fund in Thailand: A Tool for Poverty Reduction and Affordable Housing’, Nairobi, 2009. (http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/ getElectronicVersion.asp?nr=2782&alt=1) Accessed 08 February 2012. Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘How Upgrading of Thailand’s Informal Settlements is Spear Heading a Community-Driven, City-Wide, Integrated Social Development Process’, a paper presented at the Arusha Conference, New Frontiers of Social Policy, Arusha, Tanzania, 12-15 December 2005. (http://www.codi.or.th/downloads/english/ Somsook5-23-06.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘Baan Mankong: Going to Scale with “Slum” and Squatter Upgrading in Thailand’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 17, No. 1, April 2005, pp. 21-46. Browder, John O. et alli. ‘Patterns of Development on the Metropolitan Fringe: Urban Fringe Expansion in Bangkok, Jakarta, and Santiago’, in the Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 3, Summer 1995, pp. 310-327. Bruneau, Michael. “Mode of Production and Spatial Organization in Thailand: Process and Trends”, in Antipode, Volume 14, Issue 1, April 1982, pp. 1–10. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1982.tb00014.x/pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Cities Alliance for Cities without Slums. ‘Action Plan for Moving Slum Upgrading to Scale’(web. mit.edu/urbanupgrading/sponsor/ActionPlan.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Crawford, M. (1999) ‘Blurring the Boundaries: Public Space and Private Life’, in: J. Chase, M. Crawford & J. Kaliska (eds.) Everyday Urbanism, New York Chutapruttikorn, Rittirong. ‘Squatter Life in Transition: An Evaluation of Participatory Housing Design’, in the FORUM Ejournal: International Ejournal for Postgraduate Studies in Architecture, Planning and Landscape (Newcastle 9, Issue 1, December 2009, pp. 13-30. (http://research. ncl.ac.uk/forum/v9i1/Papers/Chutapruttikorn%20 (2009)%20Square%20Life%20in%20Transition. pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Du Plessis, Jean. ‘The Growing Problem of Forced Evictions and the Crucial Importance of Community-Based, Locally Appropriate Alternatives’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 17, No. 1, April 2005, pp. 123-134. Dowall, David E. ‘Bangkok: A Profile of an Efficiently Performing Housing Market’, in Urban Studies, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1989, pp. 327-339. Daniere, Amrita & Lois M. Takahashi. ‘Poverty and Access: Differences and Commonalities across Slum Communities in Bangkok’, in Habitat International, Vol. 23, No. 2, 1999, pp. 271-288. Dovey, Kim. ‘Memory, Democracy and Urban Space: Bangkok’s ‘Path to Democracy’’, in the Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2001, pp. 265-282. Hunter, William. ‘Decoding Bangkok’s PocketUrbanization: Social Housing Provisions and the Role of Community Architects’, Archinect Feature Article, 31 October 2011. (http://archinect.com/ features/article/25485248/decoding-bangkok-spocketurbanization-social-housing-provisionand-the-role-of-community-architects) Accessed 08 February 2012. Evers, Hans-Dieter & Rüdiger Korff. Southeast Asian Urbanism: The Meaning and Power of Social Space, Lit Verlag, Münster 2003. (http://books. google.it/books?id=IpioeNvfyk0C&printsec=front cover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=one page&q=&f=false) Accessed 31 January 2011. Also, G307.76 /807013 (SOAS Main Library) Fekade, Wubalem. ‘Deficits of Formal Urban Land Management and Informal Responses Under Rapid Urban Growth: An International Perspective’, in Habitat International, Vol. 24, Issue 2, June 2000, pp. 127-150. Fraser, Evan D. G. ‘Urban Ecology in Bangkok, Thailand: Community Participation, Urban Agriculture and Forestry’, in Environments, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2002, pp. 37-50.

BIBLIOGRAFY
Genta, Peter, 1995, “Economic Lift off, Boom and Bust- A Systems Dynamic view of the Bangkok, Thailand economy, 1980-1992”, [online] Ha, Seong-Kyu. ‘Developing a CommunityBased Approach to Urban Redevelopment’, in GeoJournal, Vol. 53, 2001, pp. 39-45. Hartman, Arntraud & Johannes F. Linn. ‘Scaling Up: A Framework and Lessons for Development Effectiveness from Literature and Practice’, Wolfson Centre for Development, Working Paper 5, October 2008, 76 pages. Jenks, Mike. ‘Above and Below the Line: Globalization and Urban Form in Bangkok’, in The Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 37, No. 3, 2003, pp. 547-557. Kittiprapas, Sauwalak. ‘Role of Bangkok and its Periphery in the Asia-Pacific Region: Toward Globalization Economy and Sustainable Development’, in TDRI Quarterly Review, Vol. 14, No. 3, September 1999, pp. 18-24. Webster, Douglas. ‘Financing City-Building: The Bangkok Case’, April 2000. (http://iis-db.stanford. edu/pubs/11894/Webster.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Mutebi, Alex M. ‘Deliberative Civic Engagement at the Grassroots: An Exploration of Political Participation in Bangkok’, in Space and Polity, Vol. 10, No. 3, December 2006, pp. 279-298. Mukhija, Vinit. ‘Challenges for International Development Planning: Preliminary Lessons from the Case of the Cities Alliance’, in Cities, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2006, pp. 56-62. Mitlin, Diana (Editor). ‘Catalysing Pro-Poor Development, The Role of Savings and Savings Organizations: Key Issues Arising from an International Workshop on Housing Finance and Poverty – Bangkok June 2004’, IIED Working Paper 15, Poverty Reduction in Urban Areas Series, March 2005, 23 pages. Pugh, Cedric. ‘The Theory and Practice of Housing Sector Development for Developing Countries, 1950-99’, in Housing Studies, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2001, pp. 399-423.

84

85

BIBLIOGRAFY
Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Negotiating the Right to Stay in the City’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 16, No. 1, April 2004, pp. 9-26. Asian Development Bank. ‘Scaling Up Poverty Interventions: Global Learning Process’, a paper presented at a conference in Shanghai, China from 25-27 May 2004, 17 pages. Archer, D. (2010), “Empowering the urban poor through community-based slum upgrading: the case of Bangkok, Thailand”, Paper written for the 46th ISOCARP Congress, 2010 (Available at: http://www.isocarp.net/Data/case_studies/1648. pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Archer, R.W. ‘Introducing the Urban Land Pooling / Readjustment Technique into Thailand to Improve Urban Development and Land Supply’, in Public Administration and Development, Vol. 12, Issue 2, 1992, pp. 155-174. Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Housing by People in Asia: Community Funds’, No. 14, February 2002, 32 pages. (http://www. achr.net/ACHR%20newsletter%2014%20with%20 photos.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. ACHR, ‘Design with, for, by people’, Community Architects in Asia – What they, who they are, 2010 (http://www.achr.net/Young%20Professionals/ Downloads/design-by-with-for-%20peoplecompressed-1.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Baan Mankong participatory slum upgrading in Bangkok, Thailand: Community perceptions of outcomes and security of tenure Original Research Article Habitat International, Volume 36, Issue 1, January 2012, Pages 178-184 Berner, Erhard. ‘Learning from Informal Markets: Innovative Approaches to Land and Housing Provision’, in Development in Practice, Vol. 11, Nos. 2-3, May 2001, pp. 292-307. Bishop, Ian D. et alli. ‘Spatial Data Infrastructures for Cities in Developing Countries’, in Cities, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2000, pp. 85-96. Boonyabancha, Somsook for UN-HABITAT. ‘Community Development Fund in Thailand: A Tool for Poverty Reduction and Affordable Housing’, Nairobi, 2009. (http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/ getElectronicVersion.asp?nr=2782&alt=1) Accessed 08 February 2012. Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘How Upgrading of Thailand’s Informal Settlements is Spear Heading a Community-Driven, City-Wide, Integrated Social Development Process’, a paper presented at the Arusha Conference, New Frontiers of Social Policy, Arusha, Tanzania, 12-15 December 2005. (http://www.codi.or.th/downloads/english/ Somsook5-23-06.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘Baan Mankong: Going to Scale with “Slum” and Squatter Upgrading in Thailand’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 17, No. 1, April 2005, pp. 21-46. Browder, John O. et alli. ‘Patterns of Development on the Metropolitan Fringe: Urban Fringe Expansion in Bangkok, Jakarta, and Santiago’, in the Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 3, Summer 1995, pp. 310-327. Bruneau, Michael. “Mode of Production and Spatial Organization in Thailand: Process and Trends”, in Antipode, Volume 14, Issue 1, April 1982, pp. 1–10. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1982.tb00014.x/pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Cities Alliance for Cities without Slums. ‘Action Plan for Moving Slum Upgrading to Scale’(web. mit.edu/urbanupgrading/sponsor/ActionPlan.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Crawford, M. (1999) ‘Blurring the Boundaries: Public Space and Private Life’, in: J. Chase, M. Crawford & J. Kaliska (eds.) Everyday Urbanism, New York Chutapruttikorn, Rittirong. ‘Squatter Life in Transition: An Evaluation of Participatory Housing Design’, in the FORUM Ejournal: International Ejournal for Postgraduate Studies in Architecture, Planning and Landscape (Newcastle Pornchokchai, Sopon. ‘Bangkok Housing Market’s Booms and Busts: What do we Learn?’, Paper presented at the Pacific Rim Real Estate Society Conference, 21-23 January 2002, Christchurch, New Zealand, 9 pages. (http://www.prres.net/Papers/ Pornchokchai_Bangkok_housing_markets_what_ do_wee_learn.pdf) Accessed 08 February 2012. Sintusingha, Sidh. ‘Sustainability and Urban Sprawl: Alternative Scenarios for a Bangkok Superblock’, in Urban Design International, Vol. 11, 2006, pp. 151-172. Shatkin, Gavin. ‘Planning to Forget: Informal Settlements as ‘Forgotten Places’ in Globalising Metro Manila’, in Urban Studies, Vol. 41, No. 12, 2004, pp. 2469-2484. Usavagovitwong, Nattawut & Prayong Posriprasert. ‘Urban Poor Housing Development on Bangkok’s Waterfront: Securing Tenure, Supporting Community Processes’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 18, No. 2, October 2006, pp. 523-536. UN-HABITAT. ‘Slum Upgrading Facility: Exchange Visit to the Community Organisations Development Institute in Thailand’, UN-HABITAT Slum Upgrading Facility Working Paper 11, 2009. (http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/listItemDetails. aspx?publicationID=2678) Accessed 08 February 2012. Yeoh, Brenda S. A. ‘Postcolonial Cities’, in Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2001, pp. 456-468. [http://www.systemdynamics.org/ conferences/1995/proceed/papersvol2/genta494. pdf] Yeoh, Brenda S. A. ‘The Global Cultural City?: Spatial Imagineering and Politics in the (Multi) cultural Marketplaces of Southeast Asia’, in Urban Studies, Vol. 42, Nos. 5-6, May 2005, pp. 945-958. Websites: http://www.scribd.com/doc/59522633/DecodingBaan-Mankong-Bangkok-Thailand http://changesuk.net/themes/active-citizenship/

BIBLIOGRAFY
http://www.iied.org/tag/asian-coalition-forhousing-rights-achr http://www.scribd.com/doc/59523112/ Depocketisation

86

87

LIST OF FIGURES
ES.1 Door, by Diogo D.1 Temple stairs, by Diogo D.2 Canal, by Diogo 1.1.1 Children playing. By Sarah. 1.1.2 DPU students visiting Bam Bua. By Sarah. 1.1.3 Presentations with communities at CODI. By Sarah. 1.1.4 Models of BMK projects at CODI. By Luz. 1.1.5 List of memebers joining BMK. By Sarah. 2.1 Collage “Urban perceptions”. By Lina. 2.2 Image of a new building behind an informal dewlling in Bam Bua. By Luz 2.3 Image of different infrastructures overlapping in Bangkok. By Luz 2.4 People involved in the process in Pattaya. By Luz. 2.5 Actor map Diagram, developed by the group and drawn by Lina 2.6 Interpretation of main financial sources. By Lina 3.1 General map’s site location. By Rachel. 3.2 Specific map analysis of tensions and dynamics in each site. By Rachel and Atiyeh. 3.3 Diagram representation of the program. By Lina. 3.4 Upgraded settlements along canals in Bangkok. By Lina 3.5 Bangkok’s landscape. By Luz. 3.6 Bangkok’s landscape. By Luz. 3.7 Land pressure in the city centre. By Laura. 3.8 Land pressure in the city centre. By Laura. 3.9 Land pressure in the city centre. By Laura. 3.10 Landscape in Pattaya. By Luz. 3.11 Landscape contrast in Bang Prong. By Lina 3.12 Landscape contrast in Bang Prong. By Lina 3.13 Landscape in Nonthanburi. By Han 3.14 Landscape in Nonthanburi. By Han 3.15 Landscape in Nonthanburi. By Han 3.16 Informal settlements’ typology along Chatuchak. By Bethany. 3.17 Informal settlements’ typology along Chatuchak. By Bethany. 3.18 Traditional typologies of traditional communities in the centre of Bangkok. By Lina. 3.19 Traditional typologies of traditional communities in the centre of Bangkok. By Lina. 3.20 Traditional house in the rural area. By Lina. 3.21 BMK & NHA high rise buildings. By Diogo. 3.22 BMK & NHA high rise buildings. By Diogo. 3.23 BMK & NHA high rise buildings. By Diogo. 3.24Informal houses in urban and rural areas. By Rachel 3.25 Informal houses in urban and rural areas. By Bethany. 3.26Different construction’s systems in housing development. By Lina 3.27Different construction’s systems in housing development. By Rachel 3.28 Different construction’s systems in housing development. By Luz 3.29Predominant housing typology in rural , by Han and Lina 3.30Predominant housing typology in rural , by Han and Lina 3.31 Predominant housing typology in rural , by Han and Lina 3.32 Community participation in Pattaya, for the initial phase of the BMK program. By Luz. 3.33 Participatory process designed by DPU students in Chatuchat, to catalyst mobilization. By Bethany. 3.34 Welcoming community environment in an original settlement in Bang Prong. By Lina. 4.1 Collages from image animation “Breaking the boundaries” See video. By Lina. 4.2 Collages from image animation “Breaking the boundaries” See video. By Lina. 4.3 Diagram. Building upon opportunities. By Laura. 4.4 Existing conditions and boundaries 4.5 Wider influence of the ripple effect 4.6 The ripple effect illustrated 4.7 Thought and analysis process 4.8 Existing and cross-cutting boundaries identified 4.9 Questioning why the boundaries exist 4.10 Existing opportunities (vibrations) identified 5.1.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.1.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.1.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.1.4 Diagram of how alternative funding sources are connected to the CDF and CODI 5.1.5 Canal cleaning initiative 5.1.6 Image of a common public space, by Diogo 5.1.7 Image of a festival 5.1.8 Image of a construction fair 5.1.9 Image of a collective commons 5.1.10 Diagram of possible shared amenities 5.1.11 Communities participating in decisionmaking at wider scales, by Han 5.1.12 Phased ripple effect, mesa scale 5.1.13 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 3 5.2.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.2.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.2.3 Opportunities utilized by strategy 5.2.4 Canal cleaning initiative 5.2.5 Enlarged community entrance 5.2.6 Faces and community imagery on the infrastructure of the city 5.2.7 Bridge constructed between two communities over the high infrastructure 5.2.8 Communities participated in city and district wide development planning 5.2.9 Communities seeing beyond individual housing to possibilities in the wider context 5.2.10 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.2.11 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 1 5.3.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.3.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.3.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.3.4 Land bank 5.3.5 Land and building sharing 5.3.6 Building section showing mixed use and rental possibilities 5.3.7 Building in partnership possibilities and benefits 5.3.8 Farming in partnership - urban agriculture 5.3.9 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.3.10 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 5 5.4.1 Diagram of concept of strategy 5.4.2 Boundaries addressed by strategy 5.4.3 Opportunities utilised by strategy 5.4.4 Diversity of savings group to reflect varying needs and capacities within the community 5.4.5 Simulation camp 5.4.6 Participatory design workshop in Pattaya 5.4.7 Student and affordable rental accommodation 5.4.8 Diversity of housing typologies 5.4.9 Phase ripple effect, mesa scale 5.4.10 Breaking the boundaries, example in Site 4 5.5.1 Current vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale

LIST OF FIGURES
5.5.2 Short-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.3 Long-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.4 Long-term transformative actor map resulting from the strategies 5.5.1 Current vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.2 Short-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.3 Long-term vibrations and ripples scenario at the macro scale 5.5.4 Long-term transformative actor map resulting from the strategies

88

89

APPENDICES
90

Methodologies
93

A.0 Methodologies
In the pre field stage, our methodologies involved constant reflections and re-assessments of our approach and strategies depending on how our knowledge of the program and its implementations would alter and/or improve from our initial comprehensions. In our intended timeline, we devoted the first week redefining our general approach, maps and diagrams to modify and finalize them for the upcoming day. The second week involved a triangulation of information, defining site similarities and differences, redefining strategies. In regard of the tools we intended to use, we planned on dynamic participatory surveys, pre defined actor maps and financial diagrams, where participants would highlight the processes and linkages that were the strongest or were well functioned. However, on the ground, we noticed that our tools were too rigid and our methodologies needed to incorporate more flexibility. CODI as well as the communities’ channeled incredible amounts of information to us through their various presentations as well as the interviewees on site, that answered to most of our gaps and hence our process could not be limited to a simple collection of data. In addition, the time limits, each site´s agenda and our little understanding of the reality called for a different tactic and approach. Therefore, each of us developed a personal methodology (which is explained in detail in the appendix of each site) to collect information and capture the reality. Therefore we agreed on some strategic points: Explore the history and process of the communities involved the BMK program. Set attention to the dynamics of each context. Dig out and explore the particularities and outstanding components of each process. When we came back to London, our group meetings were far from just a report back to the group.     As a large group, we were both over exited with information that frequently contradicted our initial speculations and anxious on how to formulate them within a context. It would be fair to say we adapted some critical tactics to control our discussions from going wild, such as a coordinator in our meetings to allow fairly equal opportunities for every voice to be heard, subgroups that took over tasks to prevent overlaps in our group discussions and appointing tasks to individuals, who would then be accountable to their subgroups. How is this program bringing about a change in the communities/ participants perception of self- development? 1. Observational Mapping, sketches, pictures, logbook What are current opinions about the political/ administrative system related to service provision? How flexible are the schemes in allowing residents to sell property once it matures on the market? How does this exacerbate or solve the problem of marginalization of the urban poor in Bangkok? Do these programs have an effect on the real estate prices of the neighbourhoods they upgrade?

2. Interactive Formal or Informal interviews, focus groups, surveys (fatigue)?

3. Secondary knowledge Literature, Indicators, statistics, demographics

3.1.4, 3.1.5 Tools designed for the pre-field presentation, in order to gather information from the community members through a participatory process. By Lina and Diogo. 3.1.6 Methodology developed for the pre-field presentation.

3.1.5

How are the upgrading projects transforming the inter and intra spatial dynamics.

3.1.4

3.1.6

94

Site overview

A13.1

Chatuchak
97

Methodologies
A11.2 A12.2

Site 1: Chatuchak
by Bethany and Atiyeh A11.2 A11.3

Procedure:
Agenda proposed by the community Objectives: Proposed by CODI and students Methodology: designed and implemented by students and community architects The following part justifies our analysis of the site, it shows important information about the district, a review of each of the communities visited in the district, and the brief assignment developed on the field Communities visited: Chaeronchai Nimitmai, Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua, Phahoyothin 32, Lang Witthayalaikru Chankaseam, Lang Rong Jae, Rim Khlong Pawana Ladprao, Krungthep Pathana, Bor Farang Rimnam

A 11.1. View of the canal. By Bethany A 11.2. View of the canal. By Bethany A 11.3. Pressures and dynamics. By Bethany A 11.4: Communities we visited in the District, site group 1

98

99

 

Chareonchai Nimitmai
Land
The land was initially privately owned, the community used to rent out the land for 10 baht a month, which gradually increased, to 100 baht per month. At this point, they started the savings group, this goes back to 30 years ago and therefore prior to BMK, they had initiated and organized savings groups. When they decided to buy the land from the land owner, it cost 60 million baht and was a well wanted land so together with CODI, they negotiated for a fair price which in the end with the charitable consciousness of the land owner and CODI’s guarantee, they settled the price for 17 million baht (7500 baht/wah^2).

Community organzation/ Connections with authorities
After a lot of talking with the community members and agreeing on buying the land and organizing their savings group based on that, they set 3 groups that took care of the management, coordination with CODI and the landowner. At some point they had a 12 million baht payment due to the landowner, which they could not afford therefore through their connections they met up with the royal secretary who channeled them to the prime minister and eventually they got the amount, reduced to 3 million baht.

A11.4

A11.5 A11.6

General Information
Located in the northern area is the Chatuchak District, one of the 50 districts (Khet) in Bangkok, Thailand. The name of the district comes from its two major landmarks Chatuchak Market and and the Chatuchak Weekend Market, which is the largest market in Thailand. The District is a major transportation hub in the area, the Bangkok Subway (MRT) passes through the district with four stations -Kamphaeng Phet, Chatuchal Park, Phahon Yothin and Lat Phrao.  Bang Sue MRT station is just outside Chatuchak district. It is also the northern end-point of the Bangkok sky train (Mo Chit station). The Northern Bus Terminal is situated in the district, with connections to all northern provinces starting from there. This also implies that the communities in the area are privileged with easy access to the city. However, it does not end here, there are plans in process for further highway and expressway adjunctions in the near future, which has increased pressure of eviction on the neighbouring informal settlements. The communities we visited are mainly located along two canals that run along the district, the Ladprao and Preamprachakom canals. The recent floods have led to policies, which involve the widening of the canals, and address the environmental issues. The fear that these policies could result in the relocation of people living close by has motivated the communities to get together and form a network along the canal in order to access CODI funds and negotiate with officials.  

CODI Loans/ Other financial resources 
The loans they received from CODI added up to 18 million baht that went all for the sake of acquiring the land. They received a 1.8 million baht grant from the government for the infrastructure. Currently their monthly savings ranges in between 1000-2000 baht per family. They managed to pay off their loan to CODI 5 years ago.  Most communities, including this one, held others responsible for the current pollution, a mysterious ‘upstream’ was responsible!

A 11.4. Krungthep Patthana community, Bethany A 11.5. Communities we visited in the District, site group 1 A 11.6. Lang Witthayalaikru children

A11.7

Housing Design
The community’s design process consisted of 3 groups that came up with ideas then with the help of community architect and CODI found solutions to complement the designs which were based on the family size, income and jobs (space for production and trade if necessary) This community upgraded before the 9 typologies were suggested and replicated in other communities, therefore they had more flexibility and creativity for their designs. The have visits from other canal communities, the visitors are mainly amazed with the outcome and want the same to be replicated in their own communities. This community takes care of their garbage and recycles regularly, but as part of the canal community, they received 1 million from the BMA, before he floorings, as a start up to clean the canal. Most communities joined the process, however, the recent floorings have brought back trash and have caused the current pollution in the still waters of the canal.

Accessibility of program to all
The community found out about CODI through an NGO that was executing a survey in the communities. A complete survey was done before they started their saving groups. 4-5 households decided to leave when they started saving through the BMK because they did not believe in the possibility of the outcome. A11.8

The majority of land in the area belongs to the government and therefore is under the care of the treasury department, whilst the rest is mainly privately owned. The main objective of CODI and the communities is to return part of the land to the landowner, upgrade the lands near the canal and develop the area to the city scale. There is no intention and willingness of relocation from the communities, and surprisingly there seems to be no persuasion from the treasury department to do so. There seems to be a complete sense of agreement and understanding from the treasury department side, it is the communities that need to reach agreement within themselves to organize and secure tenure for the land.  

A 11.7. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta A 11.8. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta

100

101

  We found this community to be a proud example of success in the BMK program. We realize a major part of this success relies on the pre-existing sense of community which initiated from the fact that they were mostly relatives and lived very closely together before the upgrading’s, close as in sharing day to day meals and caring for one another as we found is typical in Thai culture.

Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua
Land
This community was situated along the canal, as the lands along the canal all belong to the treasury department. Community organization/ Connections with authorities All community members are part of the savings group, but not all are on board for upgrading. They have brought in local builders for the construction of the site. Leadership in this community was as vibrant as in others, but even more motivated to take forward tasks regarding the BMK program They have gone on training other communities for designs and help in planning.

 

Phahoyothin 32 community
Land
Treasury department land, but privately owned land is nearby

Accessibility of program to all
Some families have left after receiving compensations for the last years flooding but most have stayed. At the moment there are 40 households, 22 have joined the BMK. The program is divided into 2 phases; the first phase included 4 houses being rebuilt, 18 houses for the second phase. These 18 households have not yet joined the program.

Community organization/ Connections with authorities
There are two different people in charge of leading the community and the savings group, currently 70 out of 100 households are in savings groups, there have been misunderstandings between the two leaders. Their savings groups are managed for: infrastructure, welfare, education and the elderly. They have already organized groups from neighboring communities in a collective action for cleaning the canal twice.

Current issues
The 500-meter setback regarded for the new expressway affects the community, in addition there is no transparency regarding the plans for it and therefore community does not have a clear view on how they can deal with the problem in order to benefit both sides, they are willing to negotiate terms. What is bothering in this case is that there is a lack of correspondence in regard to city plans and the initiatives of CODI and BMK in particular. It is a pity that after the community has upgraded and rebuilt, anew eviction threatens their presence.

Current issues
Municipality plans on building dikes along the canal, which the community will have to set back for this purpose, as well as another connecting road that will affect the community. The floods have been a trigger for this community to take in more seriously precedence in the program, however not all people have faith in the program, therefore CODI has coordinated differently in this site, which demonstrates the programs fascinating flexibility. Though logically they have to apply as a whole community for accessing the loans, right now a portion have applied and gained the loan and started the upgrading, with the remaining are waiting to see the initial results.

Housing Design
The designs mainly come from the municipality, summarized into 9 typologies, which the communities can choose from. They prefer these typologies because they are ready to use and involve less bureaucracy. This has Mainly local municipal engineers initiate the designs and CODI architects act in between and help out for site planning, in the district. As most houses nearby the canal, the rebuilding’s include a 2-meter rise of floors to deal with flooding.

CODI Loans/ Other financial resources
This community is strong in having access to external funds other than CODI They have access to the village fund World vision has a strong presence in the site They also have access to funds from the ministry of health (they have established a clinic) They are sill in the process of gathering people to apply to CODI and start phase 1

Accessibility of program to all

 

CODI Loans/ Other financial resources
They are situated within the CDF organization, as most of the communities along the canal are. Due to the floods, the rent was cut for one year as a compensation from the government. A11.10

A11.11
A 11.11. Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua community. By Elisabetta A 11.12. Phahoyothin 32 community, entrance. By Elisabetta A 11.13. Phahoyothin 32 community, clinic,. By Elisabetta

A11.12 A11.13

A11.9
A 11.9. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta A 11.10. Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua community. By Elisabetta

102

103

Lang Witthayalaikru community
Land
Land owned by the treasury department, which has not yet signed a contract to lease the land. Some own a large portion of land are not willing to let go of it for the re blocking scheme suggested lately by the community. The area has a specific landscape; it is narrowed out and we found this characteristic negatively affects the amount of connectivity the community have with each other, it seems communities are better connected via the canal than inside themselves.

Lang Rong Jae community
Housing Design
The same 9 typologies are issued in this site. As most houses nearby he canal, the rebuilding’s include a 2-meter rise of floors to deal with flooding. Currently they have built a bank to manage the inflow of money. CODI Loans/ Other finanThey have access to CDF’s via the canal network. They have applied for CODI loan at district level (canal network), community level still don’t recognize the need to join, as they sense no fear of eviction

 

Bor Farang Rimnam Pathana
Land
Land was privately owned, but surprisingly led to the community for free by the landowner (SCG).

Community organization/ Connections with authorities
The community is inter and outer connected through a local radio station Currently there are conflicts within households in joining the BMK and there have been collective protests.

cial resources

Community organization/ Connections with authorities
SCG initially contacted BM and CODI to start the process in order to confront drugs and violence in the area.

Housing Design

Community organization/ Connections with authorities

The community lacks community builders, so they apply from the local community builder network. The community leader is the savings group leader as well, which accelerates the process by avoiding disagreements if some else had the responsibility. They have started saving, and all are participating in the savings, but not all agree to join the BMK program. They have joined the city canal network, and registered as a cooperative under that organization, to be able to use loans, as they are not capable of registering financially as an individual cooperative. They are in hope (mostly the leader and the people who want to join in) that the other canal communities reach accomplishments through the BMK program, as an incentive for their members to accelerate in their process of savings and hope it would raise eagerness in collective participations

Accessibility of program to all

As most houses nearby he canal, the rebuilding’s include a 2-meter rise of floors to deal with flooding.

CODI Loans/ Other financial resources

Though all are part of savings group, the plans of the BMK and the community decisions are not clear for all members. A lack of active participation due to unclearness of processes within the community was apparent.

Krungthep Patthana community
Community organization/ Connections with authorities
They had personal connections with municipality, which resulted in bringing in a community architect into the site. They don’t have a member in NULICO but the leader knows a NULICO member from another community and in this way they keep connected.

They were made aware of the village fund through a university lecturer that visited them, so basically this community has confronted isolation by keeping well connected through individuals.

Current issues

Current issues

They need to show some plans or they will have to give back the infrastructure grant they received 5 years ago. The current amount of saving of each household is very low (100 baht) While we appropriated a mapping of the River of Dreams and aspirations, most of the drawings by the community leader or members were basically around the canal and a willingness to have clean water and economical activities going over it. Public green spaces for sports were another common aspiration. From what we understood, they have the knowledge to prevent pollution entering the canal at least from kitchen sewage, though they are short in financing it. It is a gain something they havnt been able to reach approval on with the whole community.
A 11.12. Lang Witthayalaikru community, participatory mapping,.By Elisabetta A 11.14. Lang Witthayalaikru community,. By Elisabetta A 11.15. Lang Witthayalaikru community, dream house excercise,. By Elisabetta

Housing Design
They want to prioritize their focus on housing, they had been to communities along the canal that had done the upgrading.

Though aware of the various funding resources, they are not able to afford them. The area they lived in was heavily polluted, the sewage of a low-income residential condominium added to the existing pollution in the canal. They had great ideas for recycling and had started a process of selling recycles to factories, which had also attracted a community fellow’s attention as an income generator.

A 11.16. Bor Farang Rimnam Pathana community. By Elisabetta A 11.17. Bor Farang Rimnam Pathana community, group picture under the entrance. By Elisabetta A 11.18. Krungthep Patthana community, interviewing. By Elisabetta A 11.19. View of the canal. By Elisabetta

A11.16

A11.17 A11.18

A11.13 A11.14

A11.15

104

105

A11.14

106

Wangthonglang Pattaya

A12.2

Site 2: Wangthonglang
A12.3 by Sarah and Stefano

Procedure
Agenda: proposed by the community and arranged to address priorities, objectives: proposed by CODI and students, methodology: designed and implemented by students arranged according the agenda proposed by the communities. Communities visited: Seven settlements which are in different phases of BMK: Kaopattana is complited since 2007, Ruamsakkee have just complited the last phase of the buildingconstruction Nomklao and Rungmaneepattana are under construction Thep-lila, Sapsin-kao and Sapsin-mai are in the negotiation phase

A12.1

108

A14.1

A12.1. . by Sarah A12.2. RungmaneePattana School & Office. By Sarah A12.3. Map of the district dynamics. By Sarah & Stefano. A12.15. Children playing. By Sarah

109

General information
AGENDA DATE May 3 (organized by the community) Meeting with all the stakholders working in the district (Communities, CPB, BMA) in a community centre. May 4 Visit Kaopattana, Ruamsakkee, Thep-lila communities Observe and understand the implemetation of the BMK program in the communities and its process Interview with each community leader. Capture the physical and social dimension through sketches, photograps and mapping May 5 Visit Nomklao and Rungmaneepattana communities Observe and understand the implemetation of the BMK program in the communities during the construction phase. Interview with each community leader. Capture the physical and social dimension through sketches, photograps, mapping and the “river of life” map. May 7 Visit Thep-lila, Sapsin-kao and Sapsin-mai communities Observe and understand the dynamic in the communities that are in the negotiation phase with the landlord. Interview with each community leader. Capture the physical and social dimension through sketches, photograps, mapping and the “river of life” map. May 10 Walk in the Papla community (no in theBMK program) and Presentation in the comunity centre Initial presentation of our findings, suggestions,feedback and open discussion. Presentation supported by drawings, followed up by a debate, and discussion on future challange with all the stakholders divided in small group and final sommary. - Understand the role of the landlord (CPB) and the local goverment in BMK,and they relation with the communities Interviews & Debate. OBJECTIVES METHODOLOGY USED

Situated in the densely commercial eastern part of Bangkok, Wang Thonglang was visited in collaboration with seven host communities in the district. We encountered dynamic and engaging community leadership as well as many involved residents. We observed that the seven communities were linked through, apart from socio-economic similarities, a single landowner i.e. the Crown Property Bureau (CPB). Each community is interacting with the CPB and the Baan Mankong (BMK) Programme in stages. Some communities are in the initial stage (organization savings group, negotiation of the land, etc.), others in the construction, and some in post construction. Our findings concluded that despite each community being at a different stage of BMK, they were not sharing their experience with neighbors in the district. We observed communities to be conducting their efforts in partial isolation with weak communication and networking, replicating the same process and not learning from previous obstacles and achievements encountered by communities within the same district. Moreover, the development of the program seems, in most of the cases, guided and initiated by the CPB; from the initial starting of the saving group to the physical definition and construction steps taken by communities. This centralized management of the upgrading project was in part responsible for creating a standardized typology of land use and housing design.

A14.5 A14.6

A12.4.

Photo of housing block. By Sarah

110

111

Kaopattana
Kaopattana is a community that has completed its upgrading process in the 2007 and it has 31 units. The residents upgraded their community using the reconstruction scheme, dividing equally the plot per household (each plot is 48 sqm with a small block of 36 sqm per plot for the extended families). The blocks are composed by two storey houses (living room, kitchen and bathroom in the ground floor, bedrooms in the first one - 220.000 bath each). The agreement with the landlord (Crown Property Bureau – CPB) was to use 70% of the land (2160 sqm in total) for housing and the other 30% for public infrastructures and open spaces. In the construction phase they built temporary shelters in front of the plots to allocate the families during the demolition period. Originally the residents were migrant living informally in a single storey houses in precarious conditions. In the 1997 they started the savings group, helped by a NGO, for facilities and infrastructure improvements. In the 1998 they registered as formal community and in the 2003 they started the BMK program as pilot project. Interviewing the community leader it emerged that the residents are glad of the shelters and environment improvements even they recognize a lack of landscape design, a need for open public spaces and income generation promotion. Furthermore post-occupancy problems are emerging such as foundation sinking, probably due to the cheep construction and material. The will of the community for the future is rent another piece of land due to the fact that is emerging the necessity of more accommodation specially for the future needs of the young generation. The opportunity will be a negotiation of a piece land that was informally occupied by the community before the actual rental agreement with the CPB (33.000 sqm).

A15.7

A12.5 A12.6

A12.7.

Community meeting in Kaopattana . By Sarah

Ruamsakkee
The community is composed by 126 units allocated in a 0,8 hectare land plot, developed with the re-blocking scheme. The blocks have been built following the main scheme of two storey house (living room, kitchen and bathroom in the ground floor, bedrooms in the first one) in a plot of 48 sqm equal for all the residents with previous member registration(78 units), plus 36 sqm (30 units) for the extended families plus an additional accommodation in a four storey house for who was not previously registered but has been living in the community for a long time (296 sqm; 18 units). The hoses will become individual after a 15 years mortgage repayment. The reconstruction phase has been divided in three phases and currently the last one is going to be completed (they are waiting for the electricity connection). The Infrastructures have been subsidized by CODI and for maintenance they expect a contribution of BMA. They started the construction without land agreement with CPD, they have been boosted by CODI in order to use their capacity of upgrading as a tool for the land negotiation. Despite several interruptions, obstacles and eviction threat, they obtained a 30 years lease. Furthermore they negotiated for a special notification for the building act obtaining the possibility of restrict the building footprint (1m rather than 2m). The savings process has been formalized with the registration of a cooperative subdivided in 14 subgroup, after the construction phase every household is paying individually to the cooperative. Related to this individual repayment, the community leader explained that the relationship among the residents is becoming less sympathy, loosing cohesion and sense of community. Also in the district level, the communication and the network is very restricted, every community has its own priority being in different stages of the program and the CDF and the city network is not fully working how it should. In addition the community leader expressed a lack of open space and public facilities. Walking throughout the community it emerged the presence of spaces that could have been managed in a more comprehensive way during the design phase such us backyard along the riverside which has been occupied informally, with vegetation and waste material. The community is developing, even in a micro scale, an interesting example of income generation for the cooperative based on mushrooms cultivation

A15.5. A15.6.

Model of Kaopattana site. By Sarah. Residential Kaopattana. By Sarah

112

113

Nomaklao
The community is composed by 245 households allocated in 2160 sqm land plot. Similarly to the previous communities that have already implemented the BMK program, Nomklao has been implementing a re-blocking solution which is under construction (currently are in the second of the five stages). There are different house typologies based on two, three and four storey allocated in 48 sqm and 36 sqm plots. The design proposal based on typology consensus has been led by CPD and CODI which proposed 3 types of houses, included with price, to the community (the prize for house was around 300,000 bath), with also some limitation based on building rule (eg: no possibility of rooms divisions, no building renovation, etc.). The lend is rented for 30 years with an incremental 3% of the original price every three years. The community has been foinding problems on the savings to cover the rigid construction timescale imposed by the CPB and the high price of the hoses. The saving scheme is divided in three category: for hoses, livelihood and welfare with a a 90% of the total amount covered by the first one. The community is also having some problems on involving all the residents in the savings group, both for mistrust and for skepticism on the temporary accommodation provided during the construction period. Indeed the condition of the temporary hoses are precarious (provided by CPB) and some family lived there for a long time waiting for the new hoses. Apparently the transient workers that used to live in the community had to leave when the BMK program started. The community that is processing in the BMK program is part of a mixture of realities within the neighborhood that is composed also by households that are not part of the BMK program (big and with good quality, they have already land agreement). The will of the community for the future is promote social entrepreneurship, enhancing revolving founds opportunities, looking also to the CDF, occupational promotion and education.

Rungmaneepattana
Rungmaneepattana is a community composed by 1,568 residents and 412 housing units divided in 7 lanes. Part of these households, 112, are not part of BMK program, ( houses with land agreement, factories, CPB houses for their worker, public buildings etc.). The 300 Households that are part of the program are under in the construction step, part under reconstruction scheme, part upgrading in situ. The community has been using also other founds, from BMA, for social project and community improvement called “1,000,000 bath project”, in part used for the construction of the community building. One of the most problematic aspects related to the construction phase is related to the temporary houses accommodation provided by the CPB, 16 rooms in poor conditions made by aluminum and woods that did not incentivize the families to use this option. Indeed, they usually prefer use the alternative subsides that the CPB provide as alternative to the temporary accommodations.

A12.8.

NomKlao Community. By Sarah.

A12.9.

Rungmaneepattana community. By Sarah

114

115

Thep-lila
Thep-lila is an old informal settlement founded by refugees from Lao, mainly composed by traditional wood houses on pile on the water with one or two floor plus a storage room under the ground floor. It has actually 175 households which are in the phase of negotiation with the landlord (CPB) for the agreement with the land. The location of the area is strategic both for its proximity with the market, that gives to the residents income opportunities as street vendors, and with the biggest university in Thailand which is increasing the prize of the land in the surrounding due to the high house demand. The community is facing some problem on involving all the residents in the savings process proposed and initiated by the CPB in conjunction with the community leaders. Indeed around twenty family are not part of the savings scheme due to their mistrust on the benefits of the program which might negatively affect who has rental earnings, bigger houses or plots. There are also some disagreement on the scheme to adopt for the upgrading, if re-blocking or upgrading in situ. There is the needs for a better understanding from the community of the implications and consequences that these solutions might have in issues such us to infrastructure, sanitation, garbage, sewage, fire risk and high density. Interviewing some residents, it appears unclear which will be the future plan of the upgrading, how the resident will be involved in the design process. The re-blocking scheme seems, as in the most communities, to be the favorite solution of the CPB and the community leaders.

A12.10. Interview w/ leader in Sapsin-Kao. By “Bu-Op” A12.11. Houses in Sapsin Mai. By Sarah.

Sapsin-Mai
Sapsin-mai is in the last phase of BMK. Was relocated to the present site in 1982 after recieving comprehensive ‘vision’ from the CPB.  In 1992 the community received a substantial development donation by a local politician (who they maintain good ties with).  Through conversation with the community leader emerged that they had savings groups long before BMK, but that post 2003 they started adapting the working of the savings group to utilize the facilities of CODI.  Houses are in need for in-situ upgrading and most of saving group funds are focused on getting this upgrading done.  The savings group is strong and has a good relationship with local authorities.  

Sapsin-Kao
Also Sapsin-kao is in the first phase of BMK. This community was rather divided. They are still in the process of officially joining the program. At the moment they just have an active (but not strong) leader.  The CPB started pushing the BMK program here roughly 3 years ago according to the conversations.  This is due to the CPB’s desire to commercialize Ramkhamhaeng 39 (the main traffic artery that ran through the district) and push all existing economic activity within Sapsin Kao to the community periphery that runs along the main road.    The structure of the savings group is still under internal negotiation amongst community members. There is an ongoing trust deficit between residents due to a large component of uninterested people in the program as well as migrant renters. .  

116

117

Response to the community
During the site work, the community asked us to provide them with some design proposals for the re-blocking solution in the Thep-lila community. Due to the limited time, the lack of involvement of the residents, specially that one that are skeptical to the BMK program, we decided to focus our attention on the dynamics around the involvement of the community, the ways of communication, aspirations and problems of the residents. In the last day some suggestion and feedback as been given in order to open a discussion, stimulating the conversation among all the stakeholders, also using the tool of “the river of life” in order to highlight the main issues and the future challenges.
A12.12. Upgrading conditions, Nomklao. By Sarah A12.13. mapping Conditions, by Stefano A12.14. Street in Sampsin-Kao. By Sarah

General considerations: Challenges
Housing & Land:
1. Need to make process of planning and design of homes more representative of people’s varying needs (in terms of affordability, livelihood, extensions, etc.) 2. The re-blocking process needs to be more flexible to individual socio-spatial reality.3. Land regulations very stringent due to CPB ownership; possibility of tenure security limited to 30 years. 4. Temporary housing arrangement needs improvement. 5. Many people not willing to join program due to various reasons – eg. Larger land plots, subrenting options, etc. 6. Real Estate price increasing resulting in pressure for upgrading – results in evictions and exclusions   A12.12

General

The creation of a more efficient community network across the district can help communities in different stages of the BMK program learn from each other, particularly in terms of innovative finance approaches. This can also help them to share common amenities across the sites such as public space, material banks, shared finance, etc. A strong and efficient network can help gather greater political capital for negotiating terms with land owner (existing network is too dependent on CPB). This network can act as a voice   As an organizing tool Means to increase resident dialogue with land owner Slowly increasing political capital of the communities In different phases Alongside an accommodating albeit omnipresent landowner Not very inclusive – (affordability, preference, seasonal migrants, etc.)

How is BMK functioning in the site

Finance:

1. Differing income levels 2. How to include the sub-letters and the transient population

A12.13

Opportunities
Housing & Land:
1. Introduction of new building materials (esp. in temporary housing)2. Community laborers can be involved3. Capacity building, skill developing to reduce cost of housing units4. Planning & Design of housing types need to take into account urban context eg. Landscape, local connections, access points, amenities, etc.  

Possibilities for Scaling Up
A comprehensive community liaison network that coordinates cross district communication and exchange – a kind of “para” body organization that allows district to deliberate autonomously Experimentation with housing typologies and possibility of influencing building regulations Greater negotiations with BMA Vertical gardening.. income generation for maintenance, open spaces and landscape. Development of an inclusive participation design, not based on typology and schemes consensus. Not only focus on house typology, establish a broader understanding of the neighborhood, link with open space, landscape economic activity, flexibility and difference of capacity. Use local material and local labor can cut the price of the houses. Comprehensive analysis of implication of upgrading scheme and reblocking, with consequence and alternatives. Management of temporary accommodation, necessity to find founds and alternative solutions such us using recycle or local material (also from the demolition phase) for a better quality.

Finance:

1. Enhancing the flexibility of community-based finance 2. Take advantage of innovative saving techniques and experimenting with alternatives that allow greater inclusion of varying income groups 3. Renew interest in CDF and Integrate mobilised communities into district planning and budgeting to access 1,000,000 Baht fund from BMA for registered communities. 4. Utilise funds to support community learning centres 5. Attempt to reduce construction costs by using local materials, reducing land plots, and considering alternative design strategies  

118

119

120

A12.14

Wangthonglang Bang Kho Laem Pattaya

A13.2

A12.2

Site 3: Bang Kho Laem
A13.3 by Laura and Diogo

Procedure
Agenda and objectives proposed by the community, and CODI; methodology designed and implemented by students. The next section presents a description and analysis of the sites visited. With a particular emphasis on L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai, the site where we spent more time and based most of the exercises. Communities visited: Sang Kee. Satorn district Suan Plu. Bang Kho Laem district. Lung Talad Kao Wat Pra Ya Krai (L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai). Bang Kho Laem district.

122

A13.1 A12.1 A14.1

A13.1. A13.2. A13.3.

View from a window in Suan Plu. By Laura. Mapping exercise with children. By Amit Bajracharya. Outside decoration in Suan Plu. By Laura.

123

  DATE   May  3  

AGENDA   (organized  by  the  community)   MeeGng  in  the  Bang  Kho  Laem   district  office,  with  leaders  from   the  communiGes,  and   representaGves  from  the  Crown   Property  Bureau.      

OBJECTIVES  

METHODOLOGY  USED  

-­‐  Understand  the  role  of  the  local   goverment  in  BMK  and  explore   his  posiGon  in  opening  new   chanels  of  ciGzen´s  parGcipaGon.      

PresentaGon  form  the   Crown  Property  Bureau   &  QuesGons  to  all   parGcipants.      

May  4    

Visit  to  Suan  Plu    in  the  morning   -­‐  Have  a  deeper  insight  about   and  Sang  Kee  in  the  aYernoon.   the  mulGplicity  and  flexibility  of       the  uprgrading  programs  in  the   districts.        

May  5    

Visit  to  L.T.K.W.  Pra  Ya  Krai  

PresentaGon  and   meeGngs  with  each   community´s  leader.   Capture  the  physical   outcome  through   sketches  and     photograps.   -­‐  Explore  people´s  perspecGve  to   PresentaGon  from   join/  not  join  the  BMK  program.   community  leaders,   -­‐  InvesGgate  the  history  of  the   walking  trough  the  site,   site,  its  formaGon  process,   informal  interviews  and   people´s  interests,  life  style,  etc.   some  house  visits.             -­‐  Understanding  the  urban   context,  and  its  spaGal   parGculariGes.   -­‐  Understan  why  people  seem  so   reluctance  to  middle  rises  as   typology  for  upgrading.       -­‐  Explore  the  meaning  of  living  in   the  city  centre  for  the   parGcipants.     -­‐  Understand  the  main   connecGons  with  the   surroundings  and  the   opportuniGes  it  represent.       -­‐  Understanding  networks  of   support  and  exchange  around   upgrading  programs.         Guided  debate  through   exercises.  Benefits  and   disadvantages  –  houses   vs.  Flats           Mapping  daily  journeys   and  most  important   places  -­‐  for  them  -­‐   outside  the  community.      

A13.4.  

Exercises  with  the  community   from  L.T.K.W.  Pra  Ya  Krai  about   preferences  for  housing   typologies.        

A13.6.  

A13.5.  

Exercises  with  the  community   from  L.T.K.W.  Pra  Ya  Krai  about   mapping  the  surroundings.  

A13.8.  
-­‐  Mapping  actors  and   insGtuGons  in  small   meeGng.      

Exercises  with  the  leaders  from   L.T.K.W.  Pra  Ya  Krai  about   mapping  the  program  and  its   networks.   May  7     Interviews  to  households  in   L.T.K.W.  Pra  Ya  Krai  

-­‐  TriangulaGng  informaGon  and   -­‐  Walking  and  visiGng   conclusion  from  the  exercises  on   households,  informal   the  previous  day.   interviews  and  exercises   about  preferences  for   housing  typologies.   - Explore  the  main  constrains   during  planning  for   upgrading  aYer  a   disaster.         -­‐  Exercise  “the  next   step”  with  the   representaGves  from   Suan  Plu  and  L.T.K.W.   Pra  Ya  Krai.      
A13.4. Meeting at Bang Kho Laem district. By Diogo A13.5. Suan Plu NHA buildings. By Diogo A13.6. Exercise Flats vs Houses. By Diogo A13.7. Meeting people in Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo A13.8. Households interviews in Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo

May  8  

PresentaGon  in  the  community   centre  at  Suan  Plu      

A13.7.  

124

125

A13.9.  

General information
Two of the sites we visited are in Bang Kho Laem district (Suan Plu and L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai ), and the other one – Sang Kee – is in Satorn district . Both districts are in central Bangkok . This area is characterized by the density in the population , a very mix use of the land, and the location of some of the oldest communities in the city. Despite the great mix of uses and situations the center represent for the city, the trend of new developments is high end oriented. The price of land in this area is increasing, specially along the river and near the new shopping mall “Asiatique”. There is a large area in Bang Kho Laem district that has been designated as special economic zone, in other words, encouraging the development of projects that target the consolidation of the business district. Most of the high end development is currently on the other side of the river. The construction of a bridge that has been proposed to connect both business centers will result in the eviction of some communities. This is supposed to attract much more investment to the area for commercial projects, which represent a threat for low income communities in the city centre. In response to this, the district is promoting social activities that leads to the creation of saving groups, that way communities can start getting ready for future upgrading plans. The three sites have gone through upgrading processes after different fires destroyed part of the houses. In each site the different typologies for financial support and design were chosen by the community. This is explained in more detail in the next section. Two of the sites are located in public land, one from the Crown Property Bureau, and the other from the Treasury Department. Both land owners are deeply concerned with the social situation of the communities in their land, as well as reducing the risk of fire and floods. In both sites the fire brigade, some social cultural initiatives and the promotion of healthier habits are supported by the land owners. Despite their ethics towards the communities renting their land, public landowners exert control over the possible uses for the land and buildings. Sometimes these regulations are not flexible, and can be a cause of tensions with the community around the adaptability of houses and spaces income production.
A13.9. Map of the district, sites and land owners. By Abigail Shemoel, Site Group 3. A13.10. Special Economic Zone. Source: Bang Kho Laem district office A13.11. House from upgrading project in Suan Plu. By Laura

A13.10.  

A13.11.  
127

126

Sang Kee – Satorn district
33 years have passed since a fire affected most of the houses of Sang Kee community and the nextdoor community. After the fire people stayed in the area, and soon enough saw the necessity of forming a cooperative and feel stronger to negotiate with the land owner, the Royal Family. The cooperative managed to meet the King’s sister informally. Then the negotiation started - that would end up in the transferring of the tittles. At that moment the NHA – with Somsook Boyabancha – supported the negotiation process and gave the community a loan for the upgrading. (2500 B/ Household) Every household has a property title for the land. However, the cooperative has regulations to discourage people from selling property to private developers; to sell the house, the owner needs to make a contribution equivalent to the value of the land to the cooperative. From the original 150 families that formed the cooperative, around 30 have transferred their property titles to outsiders. The community center that holds a nursery and a room for events was funded with the money from the regulation mentioned before. The cooperative is still working as a revolving fund.

Suan Plu– Bang Kho Laem
SANG KEE Fire 1978
150 families

A13.12.  

Before the fire in 2004 the community of Suan Plu were formed by 717 houses. After the fire people were accommodated in a temporary camp for two years with the support of Satorn District. For the up-grading on-site families needed to choose from BMK and BEA; these were the only options available if they wanted to stay in the same site. Some people decided to join BEA because it was an easier process – not so many meetings like in BMK. However, they were not so happy with the design of the mid rises. Most people preferred to live close to the ground as in the traditional way but also for convenience related to their livelihoods. The people that joined BMK have gained a lot in terms of social relationships although they recognized the process would be more time consuming. When the 10% was saved, people from the other program have started the process of designing the project. However, people from BMK ended up moving first to their houses, while the construction for the BEA building was delayed due to problems with some contractors. According to a BMK representative, many people from the BEA flats would have preferred to join BMK, because of the typology (houses instead of midrises), the amount for the monthly installment is less, and they complain about little support from the government. In addition, one resident from the flats commented: “Some people were not ready to start saving, that is why many – like me – chose BEA model although they preferred houses. It’s not a matter of ‘rich or poor’, but what people were ready to do after the fire”. BMK representative also explained how BMK helps people to improve the communication with local authorities. The registration of the cooperative gives them power to talk directly with the district. In the case of BEA people are only sharing buildings but the sense of community does not bring them closer to the district. Neither the houses nor the flats have the possibility of adaptation to the growth of the population in the communities. Nevertheless, the people from the BMK site started to look for land where to expand their

A13.14.   A13.15.  

Land owner

Royal Family

Regarding the BMK program, Sang Kee cooperative presidents do not see advantages in sharing the ownership over the land. They believe every household should be able to decide over ones private property. At the moment Sang Kee does not belong to any formal network. In relation with the district, there is good communication but they stated that the district is not involved enough with the community; the only support is through maintenance of drainages.

A13.13.  

A13.12. Basic data and map from Sang Kee. By Site Group 3. A13.13 Sang Kee community after a succesful negotiation for land. By Diogo from the board at the community centre. A13.14 Suan Plu – Buildings from BEA program. By Laura A13.15 Suan Plu – main internal road in BM project. By Laura A13.16 Basic data and map from Suan Plu. By site group 3.

SUAN PLU
Fire   2004 631 families

A13.16.  

Land owner

Treasury Department

128

129

Fire

2005 80 families

L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai– Bang Kho Laem district
The upgrading process in this community also started after a fire that destroyed many of their houses. It was also a up-grading on-site. The group of households affected got together after the disaster and started a savings group. At this stage NULICO approached them and introduced the BMK program. The Crown Property Bureau - with the support from CODI and NULICO – designed and built two 4 story buildings with a total of 80 flats. All the flats have the same area. Apparently, the only variable were people’s participation was taken into account was for the arrangement of internal areas of the flats. Finishing for walls, floors, and ceilings is also personalized, since it was done by the households once the flats were delivered. From our exercises and talks to the people, our interpretation from the Crown Property Bureau is that it is preventing the flexibility in design and adaptation of spaces as a result of the control it exerts in the built environment of the community. Perhaps there are reasons related with reduction of risk for fires behind these regulations, however, some of them affect directly the livelihoods and income-generation capacity for some people. For example, one of these regulations is that there cannot be workshops, shops, or cooking for business in the flats or in the non-upgraded houses for the rest of the site. As seen in Suan Plu, the ground floor offers many possible uses to income generations, specially in communities like these, where the location in the city is an important opportunity to be recognized. When we were introduced to the context of the site by the community leader, we were given the task of proposing ideas for the upgrading of phase two, but different from the 4 storey buildings. They wanted us to think in a plan for 2 storey houses. This presented an interesting opportunity for us to understand what was behind the reluctance towards living in flats. Was it something related with the ground floor uses? Was this about the esthetics for building? We tried to find out about this conflict through the exercises and interviews with the community.

LUNG TALAD KAO WAT PRA YA KRAI A13.19.  
Fire 2005 80 families

Land owner

Crown Property Bureau

Land owner

Crown Property Bureau

A13.17. A13.18. A13.19. Group 3. A13.20.

Suan Plu, Main internal street. By Laura. Suan Plu community leader. By Diogo. basic data and map from L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Interviews in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo.

A13.20.  

A13.17  
At first it seems most of the houses from Suan Plu has been modified from the original designs to accommodate production or income generation spaces in the ground floor. In this case the land owner – Treasury Department - has been much more flexible than the Crown Property about modifications in the buildings and complementary uses to living spaces. All the construction of the houses, except two of them, were done by a contractor. The exceptions were built by the households themselves. Even in a small percentage of the total area, some green spaces are spread along the main internal roads in Suan Plu. During the design stage communities decided it was better to spread them into small areas, that way more people could have access to them. The other option was the same total area but in one spot. Nowadays, people living next to these green areas take care of the spaces but can be used by all the community. Most of them have fruits and vegetables, also for common use.

A13.18  

A13.20.  

For the allocation of the houses, groups of families and friends were arranged and then the allocation of these groups were done by a lottery. The same system was used to allocate the individual houses inside the groups.

We concluded it was much more complex than that, and that the opinions were divided. For example, the residents of the mid rise were generally happy about their houses. The most common complains about the building were related to the difficulties in paying the loan. On the other hand, people in the non upgraded phases were not so convince about upgrading at all. Most would prefer to upgrade their own house, some do not have interest in joining savings groups, some feel flats are safer against fire.

130

131

A13.21.   A13.21.  

A13.23.  

Impressions from walking in the community
Diverse situations: income, spaces, expectations, meaning of living in central Bangkok, priorities. Lack of organization or mobilization. Most of the people do not seem to be interested in community organizations and savings groups. People prefer 2 storey houses and seem reluctance to more new buildings like the one in Phase 1 (4 storey buildings). Despite the limited sense of community perceived, most of the people interviewed showed strong bounds with the area, and some with the history. The quality of the houses (non-upgraded phases) was good in comparison with the other sites we visited From our observations and the first meeting in the District offices, we perceived potential and influential threats to push low income communities towards relocation. However, inside the communities, people recognize there can be commercial pressure over the land, but no one seems to be concerned about the possible threat it represents.

Impressions from collective activities
There seems to be information gaps and lack of transparency in the communication channels. In other words, the information that leaders get from external actors such as CODI, NULICO, the District; is not the same that arrives to the households. The lack of clarity in the communication gives space for rumors to affect the perception of the community about well intended initiatives. Apart from the economical compromise implied in collective funding and upgrading, the majority of the people show resistance to change. New typologies for upgrading are associated with the faults founded in the buildings for Phase 1 (4 storey buildings) Numerous restrictions, specially on phase 1. Some of the restrictions about uses for spaces have been defined by the land owner and other by the same cooperative. Difference of perception between those living in flats and those living in older area.
A13.21. Mapping exercises with L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai community. By Diogo. A13.22. Interviews with households from L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo. A13.23. Map of phases in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Laura.

A13.22.   A13.22.  

132

133

Building options for the future

A13.24.  

Recommendations
A13.25.  
Building options for the future.
The importance of the process of organization in the community :awareness, capacity for negotiation and definition of aspirations, in order to respond to the city pressures.
A13.24. The ‘next step’ exercise. By Site Group 3. A13.25. Talking about upgrading. By Site group 3. A13.26. Information board in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Group 3.. A13.27. Most Common paths in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Group 3.

Sharing information:
News boards in the most common paths

134

A13.26.  

A13.27.   135

Buildings for communities

Low-rise Apartments: Every unit owns space on the ground floor. Typology to respond to density requirements, number of households, public space and community aspirations.

to the necessity of increase density, but at the same time conserve values of living in a two story house: Possibility to work, space, identity, and the possibility to transform the house over time.

MODEL SUGESTION: Respond

A13.30.  

A13.30.  

Share Facilities Spread Ideas, Build Networks

A13.28.   A13.28.  

planning for shared services between communities to create more integration and opportunities for alliances. munity‘s history. Community to identify some of its landmarks for conservation. Flexibility and diversity of design will foster individual pride and sense of identity.

Community Networking. More conscious

A13.28. A13.29. A13.30. A13.31. A13.32.

Networking map. By Site Group 3. Recognition of heritage. By Site group 3. Collective building. By Site Group 3. Possible typology. By Site Group 3. Different opinions about one typology. By Site Group 3.

Heritage and Identity. Evidence of com-

A13.31.  

A13.31.  

A13.29.   A13.29.  

136

A12.14

A13.32.  

A13.32.  
137

138

Pattaya

A14.2

Site 4: Pattaya
A14.3

Procedure

by Luz

Agenda: proposed by the community Objectives: proposed by CODI and students Methodology: designed and implemented by students and community architects The following part justifies our analysis of the site. It shows important information of the city of Pattaya, a review of each of the communities visited in the city and the brief assignment developed on the field. Communities visited: -Kao noi: pilot project in Pattaya in a rellocation site. Comprised of people from 5 different communities who got together to join the Baan Mangkong in their struggle for secure tenure. Got approval from CODI and started the works in the new site in May 2012. -Baan Nern Rodfai: second Baan Mangkong project in Pattaya, still waiting for final approval from CODI. Comprised mainly of scattered members from a previously evicted community near the railway and some external residents.

A14.1. A14.2. A14.3.

View of the bay of Pattay. By Luz. Canal in Kao Noi. By Luz. Map of the pressures in Pattaya

140

A14.1

141

DATE

AGENDA (organized by the community) Visit Pattaya with the representative members of the BM Project in the city

OBJECTIVES - Understanding the urban context, and its spatial production. - Gathering information from outsiders, related to the future development of the district. - Understand the role of the local goverment in BMK and explore the position they hold in opening new chanels of citizen participation. - Explore people´s perspectives to join/ not join the BMK program. - Investigate the history of the site, its formation process, people´s interests, life style, etc. - Explore people´s perspectives to join/ not join the BMK program. - Investigate the history of the site, its formation process, people´s interests, life style, etc. - Explore the history and process of the community. - Understanding the daily life of residents, integration within the district, their expectation and concerns for the future site. - Understanding the urban context, and its spatial production. - Gathering information related to the future development of the district. - Exploring the history and process of the community. - Setting attention to the dynamics. - Capturing the particularities and outstanding components of this project. - Integration with the community. - First hand experience into the real Thai culture. Understand the role of the local goverment in BMK and explore the position they hold in opening new chanels of citizen participation. - Initial presentation of our findings, suggestions, and brief assigments to the community and to the mayor.

METHODOLOGY USED

May 3

Informal conversations, observation and photographs. Lectures & Questions.

Meeting with the Mayor in the Local authority office. May 4

A14.4. Walking Street. By Luz. A14.5. View of the bay of Pattay. By Luz. A14.6 Meeting with local authorities. By Luz

A14.4

A14.5 A14.6

Visit to 3 original settlements of Kao Noi Visit to original Baan Nern Rodfai and new site relocation.

Informal conversations, questions, observation and photographs.

Informal conversations, questions, observation and photographs. - Particpatory planning, river of life, actor mapping: Obtaining information from residents through their drawings, conversations and observation of the relations and power dynamics.

General information
Pattaya is located 170 km south from Bangkok, on the east coast of the Gulf of Thailand, in the province of Chonburi. Known as an international tourist destination receiving 1.000.000 visitors per year, the city relies largy on its tourist oriented economy. It has a registered population of over 100.000 and an estimated hidden population of around 500.000, great number on which are informal dwellers and migrant workers attracted by the employment opportunities this sector provides. In a survey done by the authorities,33 informal communities were identified in Pattaya. Together with the challenges of hosting informal dwellers and a huge hidden population due to the above mentioned above, Pattaya also has to deal with seasonal earning variations, inflated land values and environmental degradation. Baan Mankong emerged in the City as a sideeffect of the Mayor’s vision to transforming the City into a Global Tourism Centre. To achieve this vision, the municipality set up a plan comprising 14 short-term policies called “Livable tourism Pattaya”. Connecting with the rhetoric of cleaning and greening the city, low income housing became a priority for the administration in the form of policy 14.11 “Low-income housing: garbage free and healthy living”. This means supporting Baan Mankong Programme for 15 years, with infrastructure, drainage and garbage management.

May 5 Participatory exercises with the members of Baan Nern Rodfai

Visit to new site of Kao Noi

Informal conversations, observation and photographs. Particpatory housing design, river of life, actor mapping: Obtaining information from residents through their drawings, conversations and observation of the relations and power dynamics. - Dancing, singing, talking and eating.

May 7

Participatory exercises with the members of Kao Noi

Baan Mankong started with the joint effort of municipal authorities and a researcher from Pattaya University. NHA derived them to CODI who introduced them the programme. This created a platform to engage strong community leaders committed to improve the impoverished physical and social conditions in their communities. The political commitment to this programme is shown in the close relationship between communities and the City Department of Social Welfare. Besides having 2 monthly meetings in the City Hall, Kao Noi’s temporary Community Savings Office is currently located in the City Hall and the Mayor himself was present at the recent Holy Stone ceremony. There is an opportunity to capitalize this connections with the authorities, but also with external actors from the civil society who are engaged with program and play an essential role keeping the momentum. If the upgrading of the 33 communities of Pattaya is done comprehensively and in an integrated manner within wider planning, there is a possibility of scaling up the programme city wise. We see an asset in the potential shift on the perception of the informal city by the society, not seen as separate from the formal city, but as a part of it. The challenge is how cope with openness and inclusiveness, but still allowing heterogeneity, specificities and diversity of needs of the different members, allowing for flexible solutions to which the program has to be adaptable.

Dinner al the group together

May 8

Presentation in the Local Authorithy Office

- Presentation followed questions - Presentation supported by drawings, images and videos, followed up by a debate, in order to gather impressions.

May 11

Presentation in the CODI

142

143

A15.7

Original Settlement 1
It is formed by 5 communities from different areas of Pattaya. They all face insecure tenure due to evictions, fires or exploitative rent. Some people from these communities have joined the Baan Mankong project, while others have refused due to several reasons. The main reasons to this were that it was an exclusionary process and they could not afford it as it has a minimum saving of 2.700 Bhat per month, they were interested in going back to their original hometown in the future or they just did not knew about the program. Most of the people have been living in this area for more than 30 years and they are mainly employed in the service sector, agricultural and farming activities. Most of them have well established livelihood networks and have tried to start entrepreneurial activities like crab banks. Around 80% rent the land, which belongs mainly to private landowners. The pressure for land is high therefore there was a threat of evictions as a result of the one of the landowners´ interest in speculative development. There are big differences in the upgrading of the houses between and within the communities.
A14.7. A14.8. A14.9. A14.10. A14.11. Map of the original settlements. Woman and chidren in Kao Noi. By Elsbet. Houses from Kao Noi. By Elsbet. Entrance of community. By Elsbet. House of community. By Luz.

Original Settlement 2
This community is comprised by residents scattered around the same area as a result of a previous eviction due to the construction if the railway. They have been living “together” and feel like a community for at least 10 years. The majority have built and upgraded their houses gradually and rent the land from 2 private landowners, one of which has around 80% of the land and wants a more commercial development of this. The threat of eviction due to this, triggered them to applied for the BMK program but have been having lots of problems organizing around the savings groups. They started 2 years ago, and due to this organisational problems,unsteady income, the lack of trust and commitment and weak community leaders they still haven’t got approval from CODI, which they intend to get soon. The community leader is not part of BM as he is one of the landowners, but is leading the process together with the president of the BM program, a university teacher who will move to new site and feels part of the community A14.12

A14.7 A15.8

A14.12. A14.13. A14.14. A14.15. A14.16.

Map of the original settlements. Community leaders in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. House in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. Entrance in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. Entrance in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz.

A14.8 A14.10

A14.9 A14.11

A14.13 A14.15

A14.14 A14.16

A15.10

A15.10

144

145

BMK- Kao Noi
Kao Noi is the pilot Baan Mankong Project in Pattaya. It is a 304 household relocation project that started 2 years ago, bringing people together from 5 different communities. They have bought their site at 1/4 of the average land value in Pattaya due to the generosity of the land owner, with the negotiation support of the authorities. They have the support of powerful external actors who play a key role in the organisational structure of the project. They have also had the support of NULICO, CODI and the authorities, visits to many other projects. The Community is very well organised and is further divided into 22 sub-groups each responsible for collecting contributions. Each sub-group appoints 1 president responsible for communicating with the committee and 1 leader responsible for organising collections within the sub-group, meeting once a month The new site is located in southeast, in a semi consolidated peri-urban area. Though being displaced from their livelihoods, they don’t see this as an inconvenient as distances are no bigger tha 4km and the have possibilities of reestablishing those networks in the surrounding environment. The community thinks beyond housing, being a proof of this the 2 tasks assigned to us: helping with the construction of the 1st building in the site which is the community centre and designing 14 subsidised welfare houses for the most vulnerable members of the community. However there is a lack of real participation in the design process resulting in a standardised design solution.
A14.17. A14.18. A14.19. A14.20. Column of future community center. By Luz. Holly Stone. By Luz. Participatory housing design. By Luz. Schematic site map. By Ariel.

BMK- Baan Nern Rodfai
Baan Nern Rodfaikong Project is the second BM project in Pattaya. It is relocation project comprising 63 households. Still trying to get approval from CODI, their site plan was rejected in their last meeting. In the meanwhile, they have a heart contract with the land owner of the relocation site to purchase the land and 1/5 of the average value of the area until November. They have faced many organisational problems and they represent the 3rd attempt to start the program. It has been very difficult to find committed leaders and people with steady income who could afford to pay the 2900 baht/month required for the savings groups. There is a high percentage of migrant workers who don’t see the benefits of joining BM, but could represent a potential demand of rental space in the new site, and therefore a source of income that could be re-invested in the community. The site is located not far from Kao Noi, in a periurban semi-consolidated area, not far from where the squatter now. They don’t see a big problem being displaced from their livelihoods as most of them are vendors and can readjust easily their livelihood networks. The program is aimed to the members more vulnerable to insecure tenure, and has somehow been exclusionary due to the conditions to enter the savings groups, so now are trying to flexibilize the monthly payment so no one is burdened by this. They also think beyond housing and want be trained by NULICO to produce brick that they can sale in the new site and then scale up to other sites. There si also a potential for flexible site schemes and house design to adapt to the diversity of the members of the new site.
A14.21. Future rellocation site. By Luz. A14.22. Future rellocation site. By Luz A14.23. Schematic rellocation site map. By Ariel.

A14.17 A14.20

A14.18

A14.19 A14.23

A14.21

A15.13 A14.22 A15.15

0.5 k

m

school school police station

0.5 k

m

Co

nity c en mu m

0.5 k

m

tre
resort
1k m

market
1k m

146

147

Response to the brief
During the site work, the community asked us to design 14 welfare subsidised houses for the most disadvantaged members. We found the exercise and all the others extremely easy to develop as the spirit of euphoria and general participation in this phase of the project is extremely high. These images show the exercise proposed to develop a participatory design approach to the response to the brief. The future dwellers were asked to draw their current houses and their dream houses, and what stroke our attention is how similar both were, and how stacked is the standard CODI design is in their minds, being very difficult for them to think of any alternative solution. We proposed a flexible design and they were open to the idea, as it can adapt to the specificity of needs of each individual. We also did the river of life exercise to understand better their past, present and future hopes, and we were also required to help them with the construction of their community centre which made us bond easily with the community.
A14.24. A14.25. A14.26. A14.27. Examples of current house and dream house. Participatory housing design. By Luz. Proposal flexible housing design. By Sabayta. Building exercise with community. By Elsbet.

A14.24

house cleaner 7-people household Old house: - Small -> cooking, laundry outside; - Heat, 1 window, 1 entrance - No motorcycle Expectation: - A garden for relax; - Multi-function space (incl. for laundry)

Response to the brief
In this community we were requested to design a new site plan, as the one they had before had been rejected by CODI. The members in this community were not as proactive and engaged as in Kao Noi, due to the different stages they are in. These images show the exercise we did with 8 members of the community to map out the existing site and the surrounding area and the in a participatory planning exercise they were asked to design how they envisioned the new site in terms of housing and common spaces. We found out that the common spaces were essential for them , being precise about what those should be, and also where they wanted to have their house in relation to their future neighbours to be as sensible as possible with each other’s lifestyles. They were also open to recycling materials, setting a material bank, rental schemes, though thought CODI wouldn’t agree and flexible housing solutions. We also did the river of life exercise to understand better their past, present and future hopes.

A14.25

A15.20

A14.26 A15.18
A15.18. A15.19. A15.20. A15.21. A15.22. Story Board. BMK process in the district. By Lisa Participation diagram analysis. By Lina. Image. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. Image. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. Image. Proposal for the district. By Rachel.

A14.28

A15.21

A14.27 A14.29
A14.28. Schematic symbols of the new site design. By Ariel. A14.29. Planning exercise with community. A14.30. Planning exercise with community. A14.31. Kao Noi community and workshop team. By Luz. A14.32. Kao Noi community and workshop team. By Luz. A14.33. Ceremony of good luck. By Luz. A14.34. Baan Nern Rodfai community and workshop team.

A14.30

A14.31

A15.22

148

149

A14.32

A14.33

A14.34

150

Bang Prong

A15.2

Site 5: Bang Prong
by Rachel and Lina

Procedure
Agenda: proposed by the community Objectives: proposed by CODI and students Methodology: designed and implemented by students The following part justifies our analysis of the site. It would give you some important information of the district, a review of each of the communities visited (inside the district) and the brief assignment developed on the field. Communities visited: - Two original informal settlements: Not upgraded through BMK (where some of the households joined the BM program).   Two Baan Mangkong projects (the only ones in the district) - Bang Prong 1: a pilot project finished 7 years ago. -Bang Prong 2: new project in the construction

A15.3
A15.1. Rural context in Bang Prong 1. By Lina. A15.2. District characteristics.. By Rachel. A15.3. Schematic map of the BMK projects visited in Bangkok Metropolitan. By Lina.

A15.1.

152

153

Methodology: Agenda proposed by the community,,objectives proposed by CODI and students, and methodology desined and implemented by students AGENDA Meeting with the Mayor in the Local authority office. OBJECTIVES - Understand the role of the local goverment in BMK and explore his position in opening new chanels of citizen´s participation. - Have a deeper insight about the multiplicity and flexibility of the BMK program - Explore people´s perspective to join/ not join the BMK program. - Investigate the history of the site, its formation process, people´s interests, life style, etc. - Explore the history and process of the community. - Understanding the dairly life of residents, integration within the district, its expectation and concerns. - Understanding the urban context, and its spatial production. - Gather information from outsiders, related to the future development of the district. - Explore the history and process of the community. - Set attention to its dinamics. - Capture the particularities and outstanding components of this project. - Integration with the community. - First hand experience into the real Thai culture. - Initial presentation of our findings, suggestions, and brief assigments to the community and to the mayor. METHODOLOGY USED
A15.4 As a mayor whom is elected democratically governs the district, citizens have a good relationship with the local authority in many aspects. For example in the two BMK projects, the mayor has played an important role in supporting the communities with the land negotiation, staff assistance and community integration. We observed there is an opportunity to establish a solid relationship between CODI and the mayor to promote programs that foster the active participation of citizens. Also, there is an opportunity to scale up the BMK program if it targets the particularities of the site. For example, according to the mayor, 30% of the district´s population has been living with a rental scheme for long-term periods. This type of population is not interested in securing tenure due to the fact that eventually they will go back to where they came from. However, the diversification of BMK rental schemes could be a very attractive production for similar areas.

DATE May 3

Interview & Debate. Interview with each community´s leader. Capture the physical outcome through sketches and photograps. Map the complete settlement, and did interviews from house to house. -Interviews: Getting information from residents through their drawings.

May 4

Visit other 4 Baan Mankong projects outside the district.

Visit to the original settlements 1 and 2 May 5 Visit Bang Prong 1. Interview with community members.

General information
Bang Prong is a district, which is reachable with a 20 minute journey to the south, from Bangkok. Private landowners, a scattered urban growth and lack of public spaces to integrate communities, characterize the district. Its urbanization started from 50 years ago with the construction of the first electric plant, followed by an industrial development caused by the facility of transporting goods by the river to the port. This type of economic activity attracted migrants and seasonal workers from the rest of the country to this district. There are between 300 to 500 national and international factories in the area, therefore 80 % of the district´s population work in factories. However, workers usually have no formal contracts even though the labour law is strong. The average minimum wage is 300 Bath per day and some of the factories offer welfare benefits. Nevertheless, recently, a central government policy is restricting the appearance of new factories and is incentivizing the existing ones to move away, in order to promote the district as a residential area. This change probably will cause other dynamics to the site such as the Bangkok expansion, sub-urbanization and the emersion of land tensions that compromise existing informal settlement.
A15.4. A15.5. A15.6.

Long walk in all Bang Prong District Visit Bang Prong 2. Interview the management team and community leader.

Informal conversations, observation and photographs. Informal conversations, observation and photographs. (there was not any community members) - Dancing, singing, talking and eating. - Presentation supported by drawings, followed up by a debate, in order to get their impressions.

A15.5

May 7

Celebration with the community. Thai cultural day. May 10 Presentation in the Local Authorithy Office

A15.6
Map of the district, highlighting the communities visited. By Lisa. River next to Bang Prong 1. By Nim. Electric Power station,. By Nim.

154

155

A15.7

Original Settlement 1
It is located near the fire station. From the main road, a small entrance and narrow fences define the access to the houses. Some of the people currently renting and living in this area will move to the new BMK program “Bang Prong 2”, while the others refuse to join. The main reasons to this were that it was an exclusionary process and they could not afford it (It has a minimum saving of 2,000 Bath per month) or they were interested in going back to their original hometown in the future. However, most of the people have been living in this area for more than 10 years and their main occupation is as industrial workers. This site has two private landowners, which are relatives. They both live in the site, and although the pressure for land is not imminent, some evictions have happened as a result of the one of the landowners´ investment initiatives. He has already built some rental rooms on this land for higher rent, and this has threatened some of the renters that cannot afford it.

A15.11

A15.12

Original Settlement 2
Similar to the previous community most of the people live in a rental scheme. The majority of have built and upgraded their houses gradually and just rent the land (aprox. 100-200 bath/ monthly), and the rest of them are renting both, land and house, with a higher price (aprox. 15002000 bath/monthly). Though this community is not part of the BMK program, they have upgraded the infrastructure (road and fences) through saving groups, which has made evident the preexisting self-organization of traditional informal settlements, and explained why the methodology of the BMK program has succeeded in most of the communities. The individuals who are joining the BMK program are also moving away due to security and drugs issues (we met 3 or 4 households), with an aim to generate an extra income renting their existing wooden house and to continue renting the land. The rest haven´t joined the program, due to the lack of monetary resources and time (a few of them preferred avoiding intense meetings). Also, some that show interest in joining the next BMK program prefer not to be the lead in starting and mobilizing for the program.

A15.8

A15.9

A15.7. A15.8. A15.9. A15.10.

Mapping the site “ownership”. By Lina. Participatory interviews with residents. Interview resident. Sequence of photographs. Settlement 1.

A15.11. Access to settlement 2. A15.12. Mapping the site. By Lina.

A15.10

A15.10

156

157

A15.13

A15.14

A15.13. A15.14. A15.15. A15.16. A15.17.

Extension between houses. By Rachel. Bang Prong community 1. By Lina. Schematic map. Bang Prong 1. By Lina. Diagram Bang Prong 2. By Rachel. Construction phase Bang Prong 2. By Rachel

BMK- Bang Prong 1
Bang Prong 1 is the pilot Baan Mankong Project in this district. It is a relocation project bringing people together from different communities. The strategy used to negotiate the land was interesting and they obtained a good deal with the support of the local government. Initially the community looked for available locked land (without access) and bought it for a cheap price; afterwards, they negotiated with the neighbour landowner for the land near the road, and finally, the local government helped them in providing the road’s construction and the basic infrastructure to the site. Due to the scattered urbanization of the district, this community seems clustered and isolated from the surrounding rural neighbourhood, even though the gate is open during the day. However, we perceived a vibrant public realm in the streets which is favoured mainly by the location of the car park outside the project. The project has a standardized design, but each individual household did some adaptations: selection of colour, window´s type, and appropriation of the empty space between houses for storage or service area. Two families, who usually are relatives, could occupy one house. There are rules applied in the community, such as no drugs, no drink and so on. Interestingly, people who live in this site came from other communities and parts of the district. They became one community because they had similar interest and ability in securing land and savings. However, since the project has finished, the community gatherings rarely take place.

A15.16

BMK - Bang Prong 2
Bang Prong 2 is a BMK project within a 5-minute walk from the original settlement 1. The project is in the construction phase and is following the similar process, strategies, and direction of the Bang Prong 1. For example, the community has no history together, they come from different parts of the district, with the same interests in secure housing at a low price, with the ability to pay the minimum saving required by the coop (2.000 bath/monthly), and with the same taste in relation to the final product and life style. We noticed a huge similarity of this process in relation to any commercial project. Firstly, the building typology (type, size, colour and so on) in this site would be exactly the same in the whole project. Secondly, in order to make the project efficient, the community passed the design process, and all the responsibility to the management team, whom copied the design from Bang Prong 1 while skipping the participatory process, and hired contractors for the construction work. With these few reasons, it can be noticed that the community are not involved in the process, and therefore, the aims of the BMK program cannot be achieved.

A15.17

A15.15

158

159

Response to the brief
During the site work, the community asked us to provide them with some design proposals for the landscape of the Bang Prong 2. Due to the limited open spaces, and having acknowledged the current problems in the process (lack of engagement and passive participation), we understood that this task, more than a design solution should present an alternative that motivates them to participate, to know each other, to build a sense of community and to develop a collective identity that fulfils their expectations and desires, through the physical intervention. These two diagrams illustrate their process in BMK. The first one shows through a story their main particularities, while the second one analyzes its differences compared with the BMK template. It also shows how the design and implementation of the landscape can be the catalyst to go back on the right track. A15.18
A15.18. A15.19. A15.20. A15.21. A15.22. Story Board. BMK process in the district. By Lisa Participation diagram analysis. By Lina. Image. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. Image. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. Image. Proposal for the district. By Rachel.

The first two images show some examples to inspire residents to design their own green space. Due to the limitation of public space, the road could change its use during the day. It could be a place for interaction providing a shade with green on top, or a play ground guidance. Each children could plant an adopt a tree with the help of adults. This can be the opportunity to engage children with the development of the community, as they are the future generation. Also, there is a proposal of vertical gardens and urban agriculture between houses. The last map was a proposal to the major, in order to integrate the community in the production of the common space for the district. A15.21

A15.20

A15.19

A15.22

160

161

A15.23. Group site photograph. Sorcha, Lisa, Lina, Nim, Caro, Om, Rachel, Cindy, Siena & Thai students.

A15.24. Drawing. By our community architect.

162

Nonthaburi Pattaya

A16.1

Site 6: Nonthaburi
A14.3 A16.2

Procedure

by Han Zhu and Ojama

A16.1. Ongoing projects in Nonthaburi by the communities A16.2. Main threats in Site Six. By Atiyeh

Nonthaburi Province is located in the central Thailand, and it is one of the neighbours of Bangkok on the Northwest side. The province is 622.3 square kilometres with 6 districts and under which there are 10 municipalities, then it followed by 52 sub-districts. According to the survey of Nonthaburi, there are more problematic houses in this area because of infrastructure, land tenure issues, and the natural disaster (such as flood and fire) in the past decade. During our 4 days site work, we visited 8 communities in Nonthaburi. They are in different stages of joining BMK hence provided us with fantastic opportunities to take a closer look at the overall picture of this programme. In the following section, we will illustrate further about what we did in the site and via which try to depict the picture of BMK for you.

164

165

Agenda in the site
May 4 Ruamjai Saiyai Community Khunsri Communit Pak Khlong Chao Community May 5 Fareast Community Ruammit Patthana community May 7 Kheng Phra tue Rattantibet 14 Community May 8 Inudom Community Inudom Community Our agenda in the site was decided by the community leaders. Compared to the groups in other sites, we did not have some “real” objects, in other words, the community did not expect us to do something concrete for them. But their expectation was that we could record what we learned in the site and really got to understand BMK.

A16.4

A16.5

General information Ruamjai Saiyai Community
Types of upgrading: relocation Area of new site: 38,640 m2 Saving group started: 2005 (registered as a cooperative in 2006) Construction work started: 2006 The construction of two-storey house (first stage) finished: 2010 Got the loan from CODI: 2011 People who joined BMK: 268 out of 370 households from the original community Ruamjai Saiyai Community is the first community that we visited in the Nonthaburi province, it gave us a fresh new impression on the situation we would come across—we thought we would face the low-income community that lives in the poorquality houses. But the truth is that Ruamjai Saiyai Community looked very lively and spacious.

A16.3
A16.3 Bird Cage in Ruamjai Saiyai Community by Han A16.4 two-storey house in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.5 one-storey house in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.6 Different colour houses in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.7 Ice-cream car in Ruamjai. By Han

A16.6 A16.7

There are two housing typologies on site: 2-storey house and 1-storey house. But both typologies have the save size of land plot. At present the construction for the 2-storey house has been finished but the other type is still under construction. We realized that the houses are of various colours, which makes the community looks lively and passionate.

Though part of the community has not been finished, some people have already moved in the community. After moving in for 2 year, they have settled down and started the new life. I noticed that there are several times cars went through the community to provide food or services.

166

167

Khunsri Community
Questions and Answers:
Community leader (is also the head of network of the BMK in Tambon Saiyan District) Member of Community Committee Secretary of saving group Types of upgrading: relocation Area of new site: 8,000m2 Land price: 400,000 Baht Joined BMK: 2005 2nd saving group started: 2009 People who joined BMK: 70 households Plot size: 80m2
A16.8 Interview in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han

Q: How do you connect with other communities? A: There is a BMK network in this sub-district. So before we started, we went to other communities to visit and got many suggestions from them. Actually we also considered about the NHA program, but then we felt that that is too expansive for us, so we chose BMK eventually. Q: When did you start the saving group? A: We started the saving group in 2005. At that time, the community rent the land from the subdistrict government. At first we did not expect anything from CODI, that’s why we started building in 2006 with our savings only. And in 2011 we got a loan from CODI because we wanted to improve the infrastructure. Q: Do you have the problems of flood? A: Yes, there is a flood-prone area. Last year when the flood was very severe, the water reached over 1 metre on the ground floor. Q: Why do you move here? A: This community is founded by people from 11 villages. We used to live by the canal and we knew each other in the sub-district meeting. Actually in the 11 villages, there are 370 households. But only 268 decided to join BMK, the other 102 households have registered with BMK but they are still considering.

A16.9 A16.10

Q: Why you decided to relocate here? A: This piece of land is relatively cheap, and it is close to primary school, band, commercial centre, police station and health centre. Q: What are the occupations of the community members? A: 70% of the residents earn their livings by agriculture, 10% run the shops, 10% are drivers of bus/taxi, or mini vans, and the rest 10% are workers in the factory. Q: Do people have any difficulties in paying the deposit for the saving group? A: No, the amount of money that we put in the saving group can barely influence our income. And when emergency happens that some people could not pay for one month, we have a small sum of emergency fund to help them.

After founding the saving group in 2004, the Khunsri Community joined the Baan Mankong program in 2005 which made it the first one in the sub-district. Khunsri Community needs to be relocated because of the flood. After they started the 1st saving group, they went to see many BMK projects in the district, sometimes organized by CODI and sometimes by them selves. At first more than 100 people showed their interest in joining BMK but eventually 70 households stayed. But after the houses started to be built, more people wanted to join them hence the 2nd saving group started in 2009.

A16.11

In the community, we saw two types of houses: one-storey house and two- storey house, and the latter type takes up most of the houses. In the 1st saving group, 70 families out of 175 problematic households joined the programme. The community finally bought a piece of land which is 11,200 m2. Among this land, 8,000 m2 goes to the housing construction, and 3,200 m2 goes to the collective fishing pond which would be built by the community later. Each household, no matter owns the house of one-storey or twostorey, has a plot of land of 80 m2, and the share for the land per month is 195 Baht.

A16.9 Khunsri Community. By Han A16.10 Houses in Khunsri Community. By Han A16.11 Different Housing types in Khunsri Community. By Han

168

169

Pak Khlong Chao Community
Questions and Answers:
Community leader Member of Community Committee A16.12 Type of upgrading: relocation People who joined BMK: 80 out of 105 households

Q: What are the main changes in your life after you join BMK? A: In the past we lived further away from each other but now we got to live closer and because of it we gain more support from the people around. Besides we feel safer after moved here. And one thing that surprised us most is that the drugs and stealing problems decreased a lot. In addition, we set up some community rules after forming the new community to help us to have a better life together. Follow up Q: What are the community rules? A: The garbage should not be burnt because of the smell. The sub-district government helps to collect the garbage. And there is another rule which is no dogs. Q: What are the main obstacles in joining BMK? A: There are no obstacles, but only some difficulties. But we could manage to overcome anything eventually. For example, now the space for each household is smaller than before but we think it is enough. And there are goats from the other communities come to eat the vegetables.

A16.12 Interview in Khunsri Community by Han

Q: What do you think about the younger generation? Do you think that they may not be willing to stay here? A: No, I don’t think they would leave. We have enough education institutions here. After they graduated, they could find jobs locally. And we would pass on the knowledge and information to them.

Pak Khlong Chao Community has a history of 5060 years, but only moved to this area 10 years ago because of the eviction of government. After they settled down here, they got a land lease of 10 years. As they live by the canal which was chosen to be the main canal to drive the water away when flood came, they suffered a lot during last year’s disaster. And then they were asked to move away from this flood-prone area by the local authority. Therefore, they started to look for land. Now there are 3 pieces of land under their consideration, and it is likely that they would choose the piece that was close to facilities (police station, health centre).

A16.13 A16.14

A16.15 Q: What are your future aspirations? A: We hope that after we paid off the loan in 15 years time, no one would leave the community and everyone still lives together. Besides, we think our common space is not enough, therefore we are planning to rent another 1,600m2 to build playground for the children.

A16.13 Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han A16.14 Flower in Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han A16.15 The bridge that connect the temple with the Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han

170

171

Fareast Community
Questions and Answers:
Style of upgrading: relocation Saving group started: 2004 Joined BMK: 2007 People who joined saving group: 359 Questions and Answers: Size of land: 18,996 m2 Land plot: 50m2

A16.17 A16.18

Q: How do you think of your relationships with the government?A: We set up the relationship with the government before we relocated, but after the relocation this connection is definitely stronger. And the regular meeting also helps in strengthen the relations. Q: What do you think are the main difficulties you come across in the process of joining BMK? A: At first it was quite difficult to reach the consensus. Besides for people who have jobs, it is quite hard to find the time that is suitable for everyone to meet. Q: How was your life like in during the flood? A: When the flood came last year, some people moved to the 1st floor to live or moved to other places that did not suffer from the water. We got 3 boats from the government for free during the flood. Actually the life was full of fun during that time and we got fish from the water as well as vegetables that floating on the water. Meanwhile we received lots of help from different organizations like the CPB and private sectors, the central government also gave each household 5,000 Baht. After the flood, we started a fund for the disaster prevention and recovery. The NULICO also did a survey after the flood to see how much we lose in the flood. And CODI also has a funding especially for the flood; we could get access to this sum of money via the committee in the sub-district.

A16.19
A16.19 Visiting Fareast Community. By Han

People live in this community come from 5 different communities and the reason of union is the eviction of central government. After they were evicted, the people wanted to solve the problem by them selves so they started to look for land (this process lasted for 1 year). The community chose to relocate here because of it is the cheapest available land near their original community. Though in order to get access to this piece of land, the community needed to buy another piece of land. In order to cover the cost of this 2nd piece of land, the community tried to involve more people in the program and 30 more families joined them.

Q: What are the future inspirations of you? A: We hope in the future 1) there would be no drugs, 2) everyone would be happy, 3) everyone would follow the community rules, 4) everyone would still be here after the loan was paid off. Q: Would you recommend this programme to other communities. If so, why? A: (Actually the community answers the question as if other communities want to join the program, what should they pay attention to?) I will explain to them that BMK is a program that needs everyone to participate for every decisionmaking process. And I will tell them how to set up saving groups and how to do survey about income and expenses of the construction. Then Finally I will teach them how to calculate the amount of money that they need to save for the program. Question from the community to us: What does the housing development look like in your own country?

In the process of deciding the housing typology, they got support from the local authority. After they designed the house, they sent the draft to the local authority and got some advices from the government, such as the necessity of setting back and the distance between 2 houses should be further. On site we saw one housing typology of row houses, but the community leader explained that there would be another housing typology built later. In terms of the building material, the communities member are free to use recycled materials. The community takes part in the cleaning canal movement called “beautiful canal, clean water” organized by the local authority and every ten days there would be people come to clean the canal. This canal cleaning program is run in order to prevent from the flood.

A16.16
A16.16 Houses under construction in Fareast Community. By Han A16.17 Flower received in Fareast Community. By Han A16.18 Housing typology in Fareast Community. By Han

172

173

Ruammit Patthana community
Type of upgrading: relocation Saving group started: 2004 Construction finished: 2007 People who joined BMK: 182 households Price of the land: 3,250 Ruammit Patthana Community gave us lots of surprise and delights in the fact that they have already been on the way of thinking beyond housing and they did it really well. This community has a leader team formed by female residents and is formed by residents from 3 communities. Actually at first, the 2 communities (112 households) evicted by the government because of the construction of skytrain decided to buy land together, but after they got the land, they realized that there is more space for other people, so they invited people who were renting land from a temple to join them, and then 70 households become the new members of the community. A16.20 In the process of finding land, they set up a team of 37 people and found 45 pieces of possible land. Meanwhile the local authority also gave some suggestions about how to choose a suitable land. They finally chose to live here because this piece of land is the easiest to get into and the price is reasonable. Thanks to the policy, they don’t need to pay tax in buying the land.
A16.20 Water shadow in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.21 Entrance of Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.22 Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco

In 2005, the community started the planning of the site, but then they realized that the land was very low so had a great potential to suffer from flood. Therefore they did the land fill for 180 centimetres. And in their design of house, they came across the problem of not have space for hanging clothes outdoor. So later they handed in the design to the local authority—on one hand they need the building permission from the local authority, and on the other hand they also wanted to get some help from the government in the design. The construction started in 2006. In this year, a flood hit in this area, but the community did not suffer from it, besides, it helped other communities in the flood. In doing so, a good relationship was set up between the community and local authority. Some residents lost their jobs owing to the relocation, so the community leader decided to start a fishing pond and soon after the fishing pond could bring profit to the people they welcome more people to join them. Last year they suffered from a great loss from the flood, but now everything has been back to normal.

Besides, they also own a parking lot from which they could gain some profit in renting it to other car owners outside the community. Apart from the community collective business, the community also set up a special health fund. Community members could get support of 2,000 Baht when getting ill and 29,000 Baht when family member dead. But in order to enjoy this welfare, strict community rules also need to be obeyed. For example, anyone who is related to drug would be expelled from the community.

Questions and Answers:
In the community, we got a chance to talked to different people. Here is the interview transcript with the CODI staff Joy. Last year they suffered from a great loss from the flood, but now everything has been back to normal. Q: How do you build up the relationships with the community? A: I have been working for 4 years, at first I don’t know what to expect in my work, but then I realized that the relationship between the community and me is set up with the passing by of time. Q: What do you think is the reason to make BMK successful? A: I think the most important factor of the success is the community itself while the people in the community also contribute a lot. However I think always concluding from the past is also important. Q: Does CODI have any relationships with the local authority? A: CODI is not well known in the local government level, and CODI has different kinds of relationships with different actors.
A16.23 Fishing business in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.24 Barber shop in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco

A16.21 A16.22

A16.23 A16.24

174

175

Kheng Phra tue Community
Saving group started: 2003 (pilot project in the district)

Rattantibet 14 Community
Type of upgrading: on-site infrastructure upgrading Saving group started: 2006 Got loan: 2008 Size of land: 31,776m2 People who joined BMK: 224 households A16.25 Rattantiet 14 Community is a special case in Nonthaburi because it is doing on-site upgrading but not relocation. The land belongs to the temple. At first people just moved to this piece land without permission. But later 21 houses started to pay rent to the temple to get legal land lease. After they settled down on this piece of land, 350 families came. After a while, the private developers came and wanted to evict the people. However the temple preferred to rent the land to the people at a very low cost than getting profit. But the community dwellers still thought it would be necessary to improve the living circumstance and aesthetics of the site. Actually to some degree the living environment is not pleasant as the houses were built directly on the original rice field and there is no drainage system. Therefore, the water could not flow away and cause a huge problem of mosquitoes and rubbish. enough and now they are facing the threat of losing their infrastructure because they could not afford to maintain it. The reason why the community only consider about the infrastructure upgrading now is no one is willing to reduce the area of their house so it is very difficult for the community to reach consensus. For the improvement of infrastructure, only 224 families decided to join. owing to the need of excluding families from the planning.

Though it is the pilot project in the district, it has not been finished yet. Owing to the low income of the community, the saving group in the community was divided into 2 parts. Between the 2 sub-groups, they reached the agreement that the group which saved faster could start building fast after they got the loan as a collective. All the community members are registered citizens outside Bangkok hence there is problems when they communicate with each other. The community leader said that in the past when they just knew each other, there was occasion that people tried to use knife to threaten people to concede. However, apart from the difficulties in reaching consensus, the community has a plan to build a community centre in order to take care of the children when their parents are absent for working. In addition, they also have a plan to build a house for 10 homeless people. In terms of infrastructure, they got a budget of 150,000 Baht from CODI. But the money is not enough and now they are facing the threat of losing their infrastructure because they could not afford to maintain it.

A16.26 A16.27

A16.28 A16.29

A16.25 Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han A16.26 Community leader of Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han A16.27 Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han

A16.28 Decorations on the window. By Han A16.29 House built on rice field- Rattantiet 14 Community. By Han

According to their introduction, we got to know that they plan to gate the community after the upgrading finished, so for those families who run shops or snooker rooms, they don’t have any intention to join the program as they may lose their income of living. But this fact brings lots of difficulties to the plan of the upgrading. For example, see from the planning map of Rattantiet 14 Community, we could clearly notice that some roads change their directions

176

177

Inudom Community
Type of upgrading: relocation Saving group started: 2006 Got loan: 2007 Loan from the bank for land: 16 million Baht People who joined BMK: 153 households Size of plot: 44 m2 Price of land: 1,500 Baht/ m2 Cost of each house: 190,000 Baht

A16.32 A16.33

A16.30

A16.31
A16.30 Upgrading plan for Rattantiet 14 Community. By Han A16.31 Zoom out of plan. By Han

It is with Inudom Community that we spent the longest time and we were surprised by many things happen in this community. Inudom Community was formed by people from 4 different communities in Nonthaburi. They knew each other on the monthly meeting hold by the local authority. After they started to suffer from the pressure of eviction, they realized that solving problems by them selves is not workable so they decided to gather together to buy this piece of land. They saw the advertisement of the land so went to negotiate with the private land owner. It is out of their expectation that after 4 times of negotiation (CODI also helped in the negotiation) the land owner would be willing to sell them this piece of land by 19 million Baht while the private real estate company offered to pay 45 million Baht and the original price of the land was 35 million Baht. For the infrastructure, they used 7 million Baht and among it 5 million Baht is the grant from the CODI (the rest is organized by the community).
A16.32 Door decoration in Inudom Community by Han A16.33 Inudom Community by Han A16.34 Vegetable house in Inudom Community by Han

A16.34

178

179

Participatory Workshop
Inudom community also thinks beyond housing. Currently, the saving group is not only saving for the loan but also save for the uncertain things. Several working teams (for example sewing, tuk-tuk, farming, taxi) have been set up ever since the housing construction finished in order to guarantee the income for the residents. Because of the success that happened in Inudom community about carrying out BMK, CODI gave a grant of 180,000 Baht to the community for the community centre. In addition, Inudom community is the only community that get fund directly from Nonthaburi Municipality and the fund (which is 50,000 Baht) went to building up a mushroom house in the community. A16.36

A16.35 Mushroom in Inudom Community. By Han A16.36 Community garden in Inudom Community. By Han A16.37 Working group in Inudom Community. By Han

A16.38

A16.39 A16.41

A16.40 In the mapping exercise, we had 3 phases. First we ask the representatives to map their own communities on an A4 paper, and then we gave them an A3 paper and asked them to stick the original piece of paper on this larger paper and drew the connection between the community and the neighbourhood. And finally we collected all the A3 drawings and provided them a very big blank sheet and asked all the representatives to imagine this paper as the Nonthaburi and put their drawings on this paper to indicate the location and networks that connect all these communities. Before moving on to each stage, we chose 1-2 people to illustrate their drawings to all of us. In the discussion group, the community leaders were asked to bring on the table about the future opportunities and challenges of their communities in different fields, for example, environmental, social and financial. This participatory workshop came out to be quite useful to us as it provided lots of information and updated our understanding. In the end, the community members prepared some games and invited us to join, and everyone enjoyed a lot at the end of the day.

A16.35 A16.37

After we got the agenda that the communities arrange for us, we realized that we would spend a full day in one community, we asked for the chance to do the participatory workshop. The participatory workshop in Inudom Community was done together with representatives from 6 communities to know more about the networks and future opportunities as well as challenges in Nonthaburi. We divided ourselves and the representatives into 2 groups. One group focused on the mapping exercise, and the other one on bringing on the discussion of opportunities and challenges.
A16.38 Legend for workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.39 Participant in the workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.40 Participatory workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.41 Preparation for workshop in Inudom Community. By Ojama

180

181

182

Findings
183

LAND
Site 1:
- Most community rent land from the Treasury Department and would never have the chance to own the land. However, one community got the land from the private owner who was very helpful. - Despite the threat of flood, the community refuses to relocate.

FINANCE
Site 1:
- The community has access to many alternative funding options through different channels, for example, the communities along the canal have the access to CDF through canal co-operative. - The community could have access to loan without the whole participation of the community to the saving group.

Site 5:

Site 2:

- The minimum amount of saving is 2,000Baht per month for each household. If people are not able to pay, they would be replaced by other people who have the money. - People lost trust of BMK because of one stolen case in this site despite the fact that soon after that registering as the co-operative was required when setting up saving group.

Site 2:

- There is a clear boundary of the community though not legally established. - The community is well integrated with a commercial- active main street. - The community has an office which allows community leaders to meet regularly.

Site 3:

- The land owner is CPB. - Only if the community could manage collectively that they could receive a 30-year tenure. - CPB allows private developers to invest in the surrounding area because it wants to improve the aesthetic in the surrounding area.

Site 2:

Site 3:

- The land belongs to CPB, Treasury Department and Private land owners. - People who rent land from public land owners could not get the ownership.

- The community got the access to CDF because of the promotion of CPB. And the reason for CPB to do so is to help the community to gain more financial independency. - Some people refused to join the saving group because of the hesitation of getting the debt. - In some communities people have started to save collectively for infrastructure improvement and welfare funding.

Site 6:

Site 3:

Site 4:

- The land is all owned by private owners. - The private owner is willing to transfer the ownership in a very low price (in one case 1/5 of the market price) - There is no restriction in land use.

Site 5:

- Some people refused to join the program because they could not see the benefits and they did not have the will to update their living environment. - Some people refused to join the saving group because of the hesitation of getting the debt. - In some communities people have started to save collectively for infrastructure improvement and welfare funding.

- After the loan was paid off, the land would be owned individually. - The local authority helps the community to find the land and build the access to the land - Some people join BMK in order to get the second house.

Site 4:

- The local authority covers the cost of connecting the community to the city main infrastructure system, but the community needs to build the infrastructure system in the community by itself. Sometimes the community could get infrastructure grant from the local authority and infrastructure loan from CODI, but the money is not enough. - Household which suffered from the flood in 2011 got 5,000 Baht each from central government. - In one of the communities, in order to get the loan from CODI as a collective, community members reached an agreement to divide into 2 groups. After getting the loan, people who saved faster started the construction first. - In some communities people have started to save collectively for infrastructure improvement and welfare funding. - In some communities working groups and collective business are set up to generate the income.

- The community is gated while the gate is open. However, there is CCTV in main points. - Some services in the community are shared with the other communities (such as nursery, library, and youth centre). - The location of the community brings a high demand of rental rooms or houses from the outsiders.

Site 4:

- The communities are not gated (open). - The communities were relocated in the outskirt of the city hence were not included in the urban tissue. - Before they joined BMK, they went to different communities to see programs where were good and less successful.

Site 5:

Site 6:

- All the housing upgrading programs happen in the form of relocation. - After relocation, some communities still have flood problems. - The land price is not decided by the market, but sometimes depend on the personal relationship between the land owner and the community. - The land load lasts for 15 years time. - In most cases the community needs to find land by itself and manage the access to the piece of land that they bought.

- The community does not have access to CDF, but the government covers the cost of building and maintenance of infrastructure. - As the land price is rising while the loan is fixed, it comes out that the community would have less money for housing construction. - The minimum amount of the deposit for saving group is decided on the lowest income in the community. - Each household save 200 Baht per month in the saving groups for the uncertain issues. - The community got the financial training from CODI.

HOUSING
1. CONNECTION WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNITY Site 1:
- The individual house is surrounded by fence and created the sense of isolation. - The community has an easy access of highways and public buses. - The community leaders have a better connection with the authorities because of the regular meeting, and this links help in the negotiation of some community related issues. - There is a network for all the communities live by the canal in this area.

- The community is gated, and the gate is opened during the day and closed at night. - The community members come from different places and they form the community only for joining BMK. - There are shops located inside the community. - The open area inside the community (for example streets) is used by the community members for meeting, talking and playing. - The urban typology looks similar to the private developers’ program (for example the condominium houses).

Site 6:

- Some of the communities have doors but the others are open. - The gated community has a strong sense of street eyes as any strangers in the community would be easily recognized. - As a community decided to be gated after joining BMK, some people refused to join as they would lose their customers. - There are social activities between some communities and their neighbors.

184

185

2. FLEXIBILITY TYPOLOGY Site 1:

ON

DESIGN

Site 6:

- The housing design was provided by the local municipality and the community has the tendency to choose the existing housing typology as they wanted to shorten the building process.

Site 2:

- It is flexible for the community members to choose the building material that they wanted to use as along as they follow the typology that they agreed as the whole community. - In most of the communities there is more than one typology to choose from. - In one of the communities the house in the middle of the row houses could get compensated space.

Site 5:

- Though the community is totally newly formed, everyone’s relationship with each other is good. - Among 800 people that have housing problems, only 82 joined BMK eventually.

Site 6:

Site 6:

- There are 3 types of 2-storey houses in this site. - Regardless the fact that the surrounding buildings are mostly high-rise, the houses in this site are 2-3 stories. The density of building in this area is very high. - There is a problem with the quality of building material in this area. - Residents use different materials inside their houses. - CPB wants the community to have more shops faced to the commercial street.

- There is a strong leadership in most of the communities. - Communities from neighboring area sometimes join together to buy the land together.

- Only people aged 20-60 are allowed to join the saving group in some communities. - This program is not accessible to renters. - There is a mechanism to help people when they could not pay for some time. - Some people do not want to join because of the issue of trust.

COMMUNITY
(WHO ARE THEY? TIME TOGETHER, SENSE OF COMMUNITY, HOW IS THE COLLECTIVE WORKING?)

ACCESSIBILITY
Site 1:
- Everyone in the community can have access to the program. - If some people in the community do not want to take part in the program, the rest can still join the program as a collective.

Site 1:

Site 3:

- In one community, the housing design was done by contractor or the household hence it shows some diversity. - In the community that lives in the 4-storey houses, there is only a fixed typology for all. - The 3rd community has houses of 2 stories and 3 stories and the design for the ground floor is flexible. Besides, in each house, there could be more than one family.

- There is a very strong and motivated leadership in the community. - The trust built in the saving groups relies on the long history of the communities. - The information that passes to the normal community members is not enough as they don’t know what their saving is used for. - There is a risk that the saving group would consider a certain group of people’s need rather than the whole community.

Site 2: Site 3:

- Seasonal renters are excluded by the program but they have a high demand of rooms and houses. - Everyone has the access to the program including the poorest, even sometimes they were not able to pay at the beginning.

Site 2:

Site 4:

- The community showed little participation in the design of the whole site and the housing typology. - The community members think it is far more important to get the possession of the houses than choosing the typology. Besides, the community’s perception of other successful projects is also quite fixed in people’s mind.

- There is a good sense of community - There is a strong involvement and leadership. - Some of the communities have a very long history and started to upgrade from 1980s.

Site 4:

Site 3:

Site 5:

- The community members decided to have same design (and it is exactly the same with previous BMK program in this area) for all people. - The construction of the house is finished by contractor.

the the the the

- There is no strong sense of community after the upgrading. - People do not want to attend the community meetings and lose trust towards the saving group. - Some communities have a history of more than 100 years.

- CODI does not allow renting within the new communities, while the demand from transient, migrant and seasonal workers is high. There is a rumor that some people rent the storage spaces underneath the house for some people to live in. - Transient people do not plan to stay in this district (do not want to attach to the place); therefore they are not interested in joining BMK.

Site 5

Site 4:

- There is a euphoric mood at the beginning of the program because of the excitement of upgrading. - In one community, the first thing to be built was the community centre. - Some public houses were built for the poorest community.

- BMK is only accessible to those who could pay 2,000 Baht per month. - There is a restriction for sub-renting. - The program is not attractive to those who want to go back to their hometown.

186

187

LIST OF FIGURES
A.0.1, A.0.2 Tools designed for the pre-field presentation, in order to gather information from the community members through a participatory process. By Lina and Diogo. A.0.3 Methodology developed for the pre-field presentation. A 11.1. View of the canal. By Bethany A 11.2. View of the canal. By Bethany A 11.3. Pressures and dynamics. By Bethany A 11.4. Krungthep Patthana community, Bethany A 11.5. Communities we visited in the District, site group 1 A 11.6. Lang Witthayalaikru children A 11.7. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta A 11.8. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta A 11.9. Chareonchai Nimitmai community. By Elisabetta A 11.10. Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua community. By Elisabetta A 11.11. Rimkhlong Patthana Bangbua community. By Elisabetta A 11.12. Phahoyothin 32 community, entrance. By Elisabetta A 11.13. Phahoyothin 32 community, clinic,. By Elisabetta A 11.14. Lang Witthayalaikru community, participatory mapping,.By Elisabetta A 11.15. Lang Witthayalaikru community,. By Elisabetta A 11.16. Lang Witthayalaikru community, dream house excercise,. By Elisabetta A 11.17. Bor Farang Rimnam Pathana community. By Elisabetta A 11.18. Bor Farang Rimnam Pathana community, group picture under the entrance. By Elisabetta A 11.19. Krungthep Patthana community, interviewing. By Elisabetta A 11.20. View of the canal. By Elisabetta A12.1. Road. by Sarah A12.2. RungmaneePattana School & Office. By Sarah A12.3. Map of the district dynamics. By Sarah & Stefano. A12.4. Children playing. By Sarah A12.5. Photo of housing block. By Sarah A12.6. Model of Kaopattana site. By Sarah. A12.7. Residential Kaopattana. By Sarah A12.8. Community meeting in Kaopattana. By Sarah A12.9. NomKlao Community. By Sarah. A12.10. Rungmaneepattana community. By Sarah A12.11. Interview w/ leader in Sapsin-Kao. By “BuOp” A12.12. Houses in Sapsin Mai. By Sarah. A12.13. Upgrading conditions, Nomklao. By Sarah A12.14. mapping Conditions, by Stefano A12.15. Street in Sampsin-Kao. By Sarah A13.1. View from a window in Suan Plu. By Laura. A13.2. Mapping exercise with children. By Amit Bajracharya. A13.3. Outside decoration in Suan Plu. By Laura. A13.4. Meeting at Bang Kho Laem district. By Diogo A13.5. Suan Plu NHA buildings. By Diogo A13.6. Exercise Flats vs Houses. By Diogo A13.7. Meeting people in Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo A13.8. Households interviews in Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo A13.9. Map of the district, sites and land owners. By Abigail Shemoel, Site Group 3. A13.10. Special Economic Zone. Source: Bang Kho Laem district office A13.11. House from upgrading project in Suan Plu. By Laura A13.12. Basic data and map from Sang Kee. By Site Group 3. A13.13. Sang Kee community after a succesful negotiation for land. By Diogo from the board at the community centre. A13.14. Suan Plu – Buildings from BEA program. By Laura A13.15. Suan Plu – main internal road in BM project. By Laura A13.16. Basic data and map from Suan Plu. By site group 3. A13.17. Suan Plu, Main internal street. By Laura. A13.18. Suan Plu community leader. By Diogo. A13.19. Basic data and map from L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Group 3. A13.20. Interviews in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo. A13.21. Mapping exercises with L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai community. By Diogo. A13.22. Interviews with households from L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Diogo. A13.23. Map of phases in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Laura. A13.24. The ‘next step’ exercise. By Site Group 3. A13.25. Talking about upgrading. By Site group 3. A13.26. Information board in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Group 3. A13.27. Most Common paths in L.T.K.W. Pra Ya Krai. By Site Group 3. A13.28. Networking map. By Site Group 3. A13.29. Recognition of heritage. By Site group 3. A13.30. Collective building. By Site Group 3. A13.31. Possible typology. By Site Group 3. A13.32. Different opinions about one typology. By Site Group 3. A14.1. View of the bay of Pattay. By Luz. A14.2. Canal in Kao Noi. By Luz. A14.3. Map of the pressures in Pattaya A14.4. Walking Street. By Luz. A14.5. View of the bay of Pat-tay. By Luz. A14.6 Meeting with local authorities. By Luz A14.7. Map of the original settlements. A14.8. Woman and chidren in Kao Noi. By Elsbet. A14.9. Houses from Kao Noi. By Elsbet. A14.10. Entrance of community. By Elsbet. A14.11. House of community. By Luz. A14.12. Map of the original settlements. A14.13. Community leaders in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. A14.14. House in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. A14.15. Entrance in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. A14.16. Entrance in Baan Nern Rodfai. By Luz. A14.17. Column of future community center. By Luz. A14.18. Holly Stone. By Luz. A14.19. Participatory housing design. By Luz. A14.20. Schematic site map. By Ariel. A14.21. Future rellocation site. By Luz. A14.22. Future rellocation site. By Luz A14.23. Schematic rellocation site map. By Ariel. A14.24. Examples of current house and dream house. A14.25. Participatory housing design. By Luz. A14.26. Proposal flexible housing design. By Sabayta. A14.27. Building exercise with community. By Elsbet. A14.28. Schematic symbols of the new site design. By Ariel. A14.29. Planning exercise with community. A14.30. Planning exercise with community. A14.31. Kao Noi community and workshop team. By Luz. A14.32. Kao Noi community and workshop team. By Luz. A14.33. Ceremony of good luck. By Luz.

LIST OF FIGURES
A14.34. Baan Nern Rodfai community and workshop team. A15.1. Rural context in Bang Prong 1. By Lina. A15.2. District characteristics.. By Rachel. A15.3. Schematic map of the BMK projects visited in Bangkok Metropolitan. By Lina. A15.4. Map of the district, highlighting the communities visited. By Lisa. A15.5. River next to Bang Prong 1. By Nim. A15.6. Electric Power station,. By Nim. A15.7. Mapping the site “ownership”. By Lina. A15.8. Participatory interviews with residents. A15.9. Interview resident. A15.10. Sequence of photographs. Settlement 1. A15.11. Access to settlement 2. A15.12. Mapping the site. By Lina. A15.13. Extension between houses. By Rachel. A15.14. Bang Prong community 1. By Lina. A15.15. Schematic map. Bang Prong 1. By Lina. A15.16. Diagram Bang Prong 2. By Rachel. A15.17. Construction phase Bang Prong 2. By Rachel A15.18. Story Board. BMK process in the district. By Lisa A15.19. Participation diagram analysis. By Lina. A15.20. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. A15.21. Landscape proposal. By Rachel. A15.22. Proposal for the district. By Rachel. A15.23. Group site photograph. Sorcha, Lisa, Lina, Nim, Caro, Om, Rachel, Cindy, Siena & Thai students. A15.24. Drawing. By our community architect. A16.1. Ongoing projects in Nonthaburi. By the communities A16.2. Main threats in Site Six. By Atiyeh A16.3 Bird Cage in Ruamjai Saiyai Community by Han A16.4 two-storey house in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.5 one-storey house in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.6 Different colour houses in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.7 Ice-cream car in Ruamjai. By Han A16.8 Interview in Ruamjai Saiyai. By Han A16.9 Khunsri Community. By Han A16.10 Houses in Khunsri Community. By Han A16.11 Different Housing types in Khunsri Community. By Han A16.12 Interview in Khunsri Community by Han A16.13 Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han A16.14 Flower in Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han

188

189

LIST OF FIGURES
A16.15 The bridge that connect the temple with the Pak Khlong Chao Community. By Han A16.16 Houses under construction in Fareast Community. By Han A16.17 Flower received in Fareast Community. By Han A16.18 Housing typology in Fareast Community. By Han A16.19 Visiting Fareast Community. By Han A16.20 Water shadow in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.21 Entrance of Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.22 Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.23 Fishing business in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.24 Barber shop in Ruammit Patthana Community. By Francesco A16.25 Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han A16.26 Community leader of Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han A16.27 Kheng Phra tue Community. By Han A16.28 Decorations on the window. By Han A16.29 House built on rice field- Rattantiet 14 Community. By Han A16.30 Upgrading plan for Rattantiet 14 Community. By Han A16.31 Zoom out of plan. By Han A16.32 Door decoration in Inudom Community by Han A16.33 Inudom Community by Han A16.34 Vegetable house in Inudom Community by Han A16.35 Mushroom in Inudom Community. By Han A16.36 Community garden in Inudom Community. By Han A16.37 Working group in Inudom Community. By Han A16.38 Legend for workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.39 Participant in the workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.40 Participatory workshop in Inudom Community. By Han A16.41 Preparation for workshop in Inudom Community. By Ojama

© 2012 Its not perfect, its okay, Inc.

190

191