Inappropriate appropriations of planning ideas: Informalizing the formal and localizing the global.

Abstract

This research explores how the American planning idea of the neighborhood unit was implemented in India, why and how the recipient society appropriated the concept, and what that means for how Indian cities actually develop. Using insights from cultural studies, anthropology, planning, and historiography this research examines the adaptation of the concept at the national and state level, and document and analyzes the spatial transformation of three built neighborhood units in the city of Jaipur. It does so by employing a combination of four research methods within a case study approach: archival research, analysis of built up areas using Geographical Information System (GIS), the neighborhood history calendar technique, and semi-structured open-ended interviews. This research reveals that the aspirations of elites and the contemporary planning and development agendas of recently independent India facilitated the introduction and institutionalization of the neighborhood unit concept. However, a range of actors including planners contributed towards the appropriation of the neighborhood unit. Indian planners attempted to adapt and translate the concept in order to translocate its American origins into Indian patrimony. This enabled planners to claim equal ownership of the concept and helped internalize it. The residents appropriated the envisaged spatiality of built units by transforming residential land use into commercial, encroaching on open setbacks to build residential extensions, and building temples in what were intended to be recreational parks. In addition, the urban poor have built informal settlements on the peripheries of these neighborhood units, and the state and its capillary organizations such as the Housing Board and Urban Development Authority have appropriated the open spaces and planned land uses. This study reveals that everyday practices of residents have substantially enriched the simple planning concept through a diverse range of appropriations. Such a pervasiveness of appropriations suggests patterns of collective behaviors that call for more multifaceted and historic studies of Indian cities in order to plan efficiently. It also calls for revisiting present subdivision norms that emphasis residential land use and proscribe other uses in neighborhoods apart from a few convenience shops. Planners and policy-makers, once they begin to appreciate the worth of these informalities, have sufficient ingredients at hand to create rich, lively and diverse neighborhoods in Indian cities.