The pacification of Favelas in Rio de Janeiro: a brief account towards social

sustainability
Anselmo Matusse1

1. Introduction
Urban landscapes and environments provide an opportunity to analyse the workings of
existing economic and political structures characterized by power relations, in which space is
produced. The relation between urban development and ecology is now gaining more and
more attention. However, this reproaching is still in its infancy.
In order to account for the production of nature or urban environment and its situatedeness, I
will analyse the pacification process of favelas in Rio de Janeiro, using the Urban Political
Ecology approach.
1.1. Objective and research questions
In this paper, I seek to analyse how power relations are embedded in urban landscapes and
environments production, taking the case of favelas. Specifically, I describe the ontology of
favelas and associated meanings attributed to them; then, by historicizing the favelas
production, I analyses the pacification process, linking it to the wider political and economic
processes in Rio de Janeiro; finally, I discuss the politics of nature and urban environment
production in the Favelas by analysing the political and economic processes characterized by
power relations and how these relations shape the production of these environments and viceversa.
1.2. Methods
The paper was produced resorting to literature review. My first step consisted of identifying a
topic of interest, in this case, the politics of place and space making; I was interested in
finding case studies that present different nuances in relation to the successful cases of
Freiburg, in Germany, Graz in Austria (Rohracher & Spath 2013), Ringdansen in Sweden

Masters student at Linkping University, Urban Sustainability, 7.5 credits, Fall, 2014. Ansma348@student.liu.se

studied during the course; my aim was to show how diverse forms, urban space making can
take; then, I used the Linkping university library database to search for articles about the
pacification process in the Rio de Janeiro favelas; I also resorted to Google scholar. For some
factual data, I searched on Google for opinions, articles, news, TV shows, and videos on
YouTube on the pacification process. This helped me in getting a sense of context, and in
mapping different discourses about the pacification process.
1.3. Outline of the paper
First, I provide a brief discussion of the theoretical approach used to analyse the data; then, I
make a short description of the pacification process, to give a general overview of the
phenomenon; then, I make a brief historical account to argue that the current pacification
process is an old phenomenon just with a different name, which marks the relation between
the urban ideals and the favelas and finally, I draw conclusions.
2. Adjusting the lens: a few remarks on political ecology perspective
Political ecology rather than a unified theory refers to a diversified field in which different
disciplines bring forward specific points of interest. Some focus on political economy, others
on formal political institutions, and others on environmental change, while others emphasize
narratives or stories about that change (Robbins 2011, p.4). According to this author, political
ecology is an interdisciplinary field with inputs from disciplines like Anthropology, forestry,
development studies, environmental sociology, environmental history, and geography.
This approach focuses on the interplay between natural and social systems ecology and
politics. The assumption is that environmental change and ecological conditions are product
of political and economic processes (Robbins 2011). Recently, a shift from the rural realm to
the urban one by the Anglo-Saxon geographers made it possible the production of a field of
study - Urban Political Ecology (UPE). UPE uncovers power relations that weave the
interwoven knots of social processes, material metabolism and spatial form (Swyndedouw &
Heynen cited by Ioris 2013), that together account for the production of uneven landscapes
within broader dynamics of capitalist urbanization (Holifield 2009 cited by Ioris 2013). In the
process of urban expansion areas of invisibility are produced and reproduced; in these areas
the economically unfit inhabit, however, Ioris (2013) alerts to the fact that it is crucial to
scrutinize the daily life, as it is in these that the global processes are materialized,
experienced, reproduced or challenged. In this case, the small, micro scale manifestations of
2

politicized urban environments is not simply the residue of macro, intense political clashes,
but both spheres interact and potentialize each other (Ioris 2013, p.1579). Therefore, it is
necessary to have a multi-scalar perspective in which global and local aspects are interwoven
together with nature or urban environment production (Zimmer 2010, Swyngedouw &
Heynen 2003a). For example, the modernization process in Rio de Janeiro, the industrial and
commercial growth, the economic recession, the political agendas produced the favelas, but
these are not just residues of those macro processes.
The focus of UPE is not just on justice in allocation of resources but also meaningful
involvement of different stakeholders in the decision-making process (Ioris 2013). Instead of
the nature or the urban environment per se the focus is on the existing political and economic
structures characterized by power relations that produce and reproduce those environments, as
a strategy to maintain power and positionality (Swyngedouw & Heynen 2003b). UPE
questions the status quo, in search of more inclusive urban landscapes, thus the emancipatory
aspect of the approach. Therefore, in the text, I look at power relations and instead of who
possesses or loses it, I enquiry how it is exercised (Flyvbjerg 2001), in the nature and urban
landscape production. Here, the questions asked by the phronetic social scientist guided my
reasoning: where are we going? Who gains, and who loses, by which mechanisms of power?
Is it desirable? What should be done? (Idem)
3. The Pacification of favelas
The pacification process in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro started in 2008, and the first favelas
to be re-occupied were Santa Maria, Cidade de Deus and Batan. This process was carried out
by the Secretary of State Security in cooperation with police forces. The favelas were areas
that since the 70s were run by drug dealers2; state intervention and presence was minimal.
The pacification process was organized into four different but integrated phases, namely,
retake of the territory, stabilization, permanent occupation and post-occupation, with each
phase privileging a specific means to achieve the goals, i.e., the first phase was mostly
through armed force intervention, and the second phase privileged a strengthening of the
relations between the communities and the police while also eliminating the remaining cells

http://direito.folha.uol.com.br/em-seguranccedila/para-entender-o-processo-de-pacificao-das-favelas-do-rio

of resistance, and the last phases sought to bring about community development through the
interaction between private and public entities.
The pacification process aimed at retaking 40 communities until 2014, when the world cop
was going to take place and more 60, before the Olympic Games in 2016, and installing in the
Unidades de Policia Pacificadora (UPP)3. According to Misse (2014), today there are 37
UPPs, in the city, and the criteria used to choose the 40 territories are questionable; the first
claim is that the choice was related to the World Cup in 2014, and the Olympic Games in
2016; the second, states that the UPPs were installed taking into account the criminality rates,
and the last one claims that it was influenced by the criminal factions and their significance in
the metropolitan area. Thus the most privileged areas were the South, Centre and North of the
metropolitan area.
Opinions and discourses about the pacification process of the favelas are diverse. Some
portray it as a positive aspect as in some favelas, it led to social, economic and spatial
improvements, i.e., schools and new training centres were built, some residents were now able
to pay their electricity bills and with that, they were allowed to acquire legal visibility and to
make loans from the banks, etc. Most areas that earlier were considered elite and became
devalued due to the increased sense of insecurity related to favelas, like Tijuca Bairro, Copa
Cabana, Sao Conrado, Ipanema, Jacarepagu, and Botafogo started gaining value after the
pacification process, which led to the growth of the real estate market4.
However, some portray it as a process that brought negative aspects, like the destruction of
the community identity, the increased police brutality and crime in the favelas. For example,
Edson Silva, an Anthropologist of the Fluminense Federal University, in an interview stated
that5 The idea behind pacification is interesting; it brought positive results, but we cannot
think that it is a magical formula; it is a more complex process and we are witnessing the
limitations of the pacification process6.

Unities of Pacifying Police (literal translation)

http://construcaomercado.pini.com.br/negocios-incorporacao-construcao/127/o-efeito-upp-a-pacificacao-de-favelas-no-rio282612-1.aspx
5

http://noticias.uol.com.br/cotidiano/ultimas-noticias/2013/05/24/conflitos-no-alemao-no-rio-mostram-que-pacificacaoainda-nao-chegou-ao-fim-dizem-especialistas.htm

O principio de pacificacao um princpio interessante, trouxe efeitos postivos, o que nao podemos imaginar
que uma formula mgica, um processo mais complexo, estamos vendo os limites da politica de pacificacao
6

The limitations Edson Silva is referring to has to do with the still on-going conflicts between
the police and the drug dealers, the persistence of the militias, the lack of trust on the police
by the local communities, the increase numbers of disappearance of people from the
communities, and some communities have even started manifestations against the presence of
the UPPs in the region, claiming the communities became even more dangerous.
What I would like to emphasize is the politics of place and space making in the favelas, of the
metropolitan Rio de Janeiro, and the specific way of constructing the sense of place and
space, a la Rio de Janeiro in which criminality, drug dealing and the world cup and Olympic
Games are discourses mobilized to produce nature or landscape. In order, to make my
argument clearer, I will historicize the process of favelas production linking it to political and
economic structures that produced an uneven urban landscape in Rio de Janeiro.
4. The politics of place and space: a brief archaeology of favelas in Rio de Janeiro
Rio de Janeiro is a famous city and attracts many tourists from around the world; the
fascinating thing is that the favelas and the zonas nobres (noble areas) of the city and the
favelas share a very close space, however, opposite from the noble areas the favelas do not
possess infrastructures, water and electricity is provided through illegal networks. According
to Alves & Evanson (2011, p.13), the residents of the favelas build their own roads, collect
garbage, and even distribute mail. Services like internet and cable TV are provided by gatonet
or gatocablenet and the residents have to pay a fee to the drug dealers or militias. This
distancing of the state and growth of drug dealers and militias is historically constructed.
In 1897, the first favela was founded in Rio de Janeiro by the war veterans from Canudos as
these did not have economic conditions to reside in the urban areas; more favelas emerged for
similar reasons. There were no public policies targeting the favelas, not until 1937, in which
the favelas were portrayed as an aberration. The modernization process of Rio de Janeiro, in
which the French urban model was informed the ideal of urbanization, did not open room for
the favelas to continue; thus many residents of these areas were removed. This is linked to
what UPE theorists argue when they state that global and local processes influence the
process of urban environments or landscapes production.

According to Pero et al. (2005), during the 40s and the number of immigration from poor and
agricultural lands increased and these people were inhabiting in the favelas. In 1949, the
Major of the city Henrique Dosworth portrayed the favelas a public health problem and
many residents of this area were removed to a park, which was called the Proletariat Park in
which campaigns and education activities were carried out. In the same decade, the Catholic
Church started funding social organizations in the favelas, fearing the growth of communism.
In 1950, many collective actions were enhanced, in such a way that each favela of Rio de
Janeiro had its own association of the residents and all of the associations were congregated to
the FAFERJ (Federacao da Associacao de Favelas do Rio de Janeiro), which was acting in
favour or the interests of the local communities7.
In 1960, the Catholic Church was stopped from intervening in the favelas, and Operation
MUTIRAO, was commissioned, which for the first time involved the local communities in the
urban planning process. In 1968, the CODESCO (Companhia de Desenvolvimento de
Comunidades) was created and it provided technical support and long-term loans with low
interest rates for the local communities to be able to buy building material for housing. Both
CODESCO and MUTIRAO were discontinued after one year and half and only one
community out of three had been developed, before the launch of the Federal program,
CHISAM (Coordenacao da Habitacao d Interesse Social da Area Metropolitana do Rio de
janeiro). This programme lead to removal of many inhabitants as these could not pay the rents
of the houses8.
In 1973, CHISAM was discontinued, and the National Housing Bank started funding housing
for individuals of medium and low-medium classes; little focus was given to favelas during
this period, except the government programme to give titles of property to local residents. In
1980, the Catholic Church started helping local residents keep their houses. In 1982, a newly
elected governor of Rio de Janeiro, with pro-poor policy supervised the launch of the project
MUTIRAO, and for the first time residents were paid for their work in the building process.
During this period a strong movement against the removal of local residents rises, and as the

http://jornalggn.com.br/blog/luisnassif/a-historia-da-urbanizacao-de-favelas-no-rj-1897-1988

idem

government allowed illiterate people to vote, the favelas started gaining visibility in terms of
vote potential9.
Since 1994, the government has been promoting the programme Favela-Bairro (favelaneighbourhood) which aims at providing infrastructures to favelas and developing the area,
however, the spatial discrimination, social exclusion are still present in current Rio de Janeiro.
The short history presented above enlightens us about the politics of nature and urban
landscapes production which are deeply embedded in power relations. Instead of looking at
the discourse of pacification and the loss or favela identity per se, it is necessary to scrutinize
these in relation to the power struggles in Rio de Janeiro. These discourses emerge as
strategies either of urban repression or domination and resistance which in turn shape the
urban landscapes. These relations have created what Dooling & Gregory (2012) coin the
politics and production of urban vulnerabilities, which can be evidenced by the landslides that
killed many people and destroyed many houses in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro in 201110.
5. Concluding remarks
The favelas present a situated and specific case of politics of urban landscapes production,
however, this situatedness does not mean isolation from wider global political economy
processes. The favelas are products of economic and political processes of exclusions and
power relations; these power differentials are inscribed in and reinforced by space, in which
dominant visions of urbanism seek to legitimize the state intervention in the favelas through
the discourses of criminality, public health or urbanity, however this urban repression is not
inoculated from the processes of resistance.
The pacification process, I argue, although not the best option to improve the urban area could
bring an opportunity for the federal government to opt for inclusiveness, because if the
uneven and unjust processes that created the favelas are not critically accounted for the efforts
made till now by the federal government will have just reproduced the exclusion and
marginalization processes, therefore, just relocating them to a more invisible area. I argue for
major political, social and economic reforms so as to enhance social equity, employment,
social inclusion and justice towards urban sustainability.
9

idem

10

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jan/12/brazil-landslide-leaves-115-dead

6. References
Alves, M. & Evanson, P., 2011. Living in the Crossfire: Favela Residents, Drug Dealers, and
Police Violence in Rio de Janeiro, Temple University Press. Available at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=nsd3ae5TNT4C&pgis=1 [Accessed December 8,
2014].
Dooling, Sarah & Gregory, S., 2012. Cities, Nature and Development: The Politics and
Production of Urban Vulnerabilities, Available at:
http://books.google.se/books/about/Cities_Nature_and_Development.html?id=ylr-vwnxzUC&pgis=1 [Accessed December 8, 2014].
Flyvbjerg, B., 2001. Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How it Can
Succeed Again, Available at:
http://books.google.se/books/about/Making_Social_Science_Matter.html?id=yVBXPf50
EV0C&pgis=1 [Accessed December 4, 2014].
Ioris, a. a. R., 2013. The Urban Political Ecology of Post-industrial Scottish Towns:
Examining Greengairs and Ravenscraig. Urban Studies, 51(8), pp.15761592. Available
at: http://usj.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0042098013497408 [Accessed December 9,
2014].
Misse, D.G., 2014. Cinco anos de UPP: Um breve balano. , pp.675700.
Pero, V. et al, 2005. Discriminao no mercado de trabalho: o caso dos moradores de favelas
cariocas. IUPERJ.
Robbins, P., 2011. Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction, Available at:
http://books.google.se/books/about/Political_Ecology.html?id=NixJcZnSsv8C&pgis=1
[Accessed December 4, 2014].
Rohracher, H. & Spath, P., 2013. The Interplay of Urban Energy Policy and Socio-technical
Transitions: The Eco-cities of Graz and Freiburg in Retrospect. Urban Studies, 51(7),
pp.14151431. Available at: http://usj.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0042098013500360
[Accessed October 29, 2014].
Swyngedouw, E. & Heynen, N.C., 2003a. Urban Political Ecology , Justice and the Politics of
Scale Urban Political Ecology , Justice and the Politics of Scale.
Swyngedouw, E. & Heynen, N.C., 2003b. Urban Political Ecology, Justice and the Politics of
Scale. Antipode, 35(5), pp.898918. Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.14678330.2003.00364.x [Accessed December 9, 2014].
Wessells, A.T., 2007. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory by
Bruno Latour. International Public Management Journal, 10(3), pp.351356. Available
at:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10967490701515606?journalCode=upmj2
0#.VIgv0nvrMvI [Accessed December 10, 2014].
8

Zimmer, A., 2010. Urban Political Ecology. Theoretical concepts, challenges, and suggested
future directions. Erdkunde, 64(4), pp.343354. Available at: http://www.erdkunde.unibonn.de/archive/2010-1/urban-political-ecology.-theoretical-concepts-challenges-andsuggested-future-directions [Accessed December 9, 2014].