De-Codi-Ng Baan Mankong

5/10/2018 De-Codi-Ng Baan Mankong - slidepdf.com

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/de-codi-ng-baan-mankong 1/174

DE-CODI-NG

B A A NM A N K O N G SPACES OF COMMUNITY FOR TRANSFORMATION

2 0 1 1 M S c B u i l d i n g a n d U r b a n D e s i g n i n D e v e l o p m e n t

D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n n i n g U n i t | U n i v e r s i t y C o l l e g e L o n d o n

F i e l d T r i p R e p o r t



KATJASTARC

AZZURRAMUZZONIGRO

FARIDAFARAG

SILVIACHI CERVERA

SERENALEHUA JARVIS

JOSUEROBLES CARABALLO

NOORAL GHAFARI



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK i

STUDENT BODYbuilding and urban design in development 2011

THE

DHRIN

TEAM

MAHYAFATEMI

MAGDALENAASSANOWICZ

DHRINANANTAMONGKOLCHAI

AFRAAALI

McKENZIEO’NEILL

SEPIDEHAJISOLTANI





dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK iii

ACRONYMS

ACCAACHR

ADBBM

BMABUDD

CCCCDCCDF

CODICPBDPUGHBIIED

LDFMWWANCDP

NESDBNGONHA

NRDCNULICO

RDFTAT

UCDOUCLUDP

Asian Coalition for Community ActionsAsian Coalition for Housing RightsAsian Development BankBaan MankongBangkok Metropolitan AdministrationBuilding and Urban Design in Development MScChang Chumchon ( Local Builders)City Development CommitteeCity Development Fund

Community Organization Development InstituteCrown Property BureauDevelopment Planning UnitGovernment Housing BankInternational Institute for Environment andDevelopmentLocal Development FoundationMetropolitan Waterworks AuthorityNational Committee on Decentralization Policy for Provincial and Local DevelopmentNational Economic and Social Development BoardNon-Governmental OrganizationNational Housing AuthorityNational Rural Development CommitteeNational Union of Low Income CommunityOrganizationRural Development FundTourism Authority of ThailandUrban Community Development OfceUniversity College LondonUrban Development Planning MSc





dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments

1.1 Executive Summary

1.1 รายงานฉบับยอ่

1.2 Vision

1.3 Introduction

2.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ANDMETHODOLOGY2.1 Denition of Transformation

2.2 Transformation/ Metamorphosis

2.3 Decoder

2.4 Methodology

3.0 FINDINGS / ANALYSIS3.1 Pressures and Drivers of Change

3.2 Actors

3.3 The 6 Case Studies3.4 Diagnosis

3.5 Conclusion

4.0 STRATEGIES4.1 Vision

4.2 Strategies and Proposals

4.3 Synergic Connections Between

Strategic Proposals

4.4 DECODING Strategic Proposals

5.0 REFLECTIONS

6.0 REFERENCES6.1 List of Figures

6.2 Bibliography

A.0 ANNEXES

iii

v

vii

viii

x

xii

xiv

1718

18

22

24

2728

30

3548

63

6566

68

92

94

99

105106

112

A116



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

LONDON

Presented de-CODI-ng would not take placewithout involvement of many signicantpersonalities.

This learning experienced was facilitated andcarried throughout by Development Planning Unitstaff :

Camillo BoanoWilliam Hunter Andrew WadeCaren LevyCassidy JohnsonVanesa Castan BrotoRuth McLeod

and all the DPU staff involved in the preparationof this trip.

BANGKOK

Through highly valuable hospitability of CODIand Somsook Boonyabancha we were exposedto practical knowledge-sharing.

Our transformation process would not becomplete if not for people who eagerly helped usunderstand what Baan Mankong means:

Dr. Nattawut UsavagovitwongDPU Thai alumniNESDBGovernment Housing BankLPN developersNHAACHRACCA

Photo by Noor Al Ghafari



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK vii

With the support of communities and communityleaders we had a chance to see Bangkok from adifferent perspective and get an overall picture of CODI’s actions:

Bang Khen communitiesBang Bua, Roon Mai Pattana Tai, RumjaiPatthana Nu, Ruamjai-Pattana Tai, Roy Krong,

Ou Tid A Nu Son, Chai Klong Bang Bua, BaanBang Khen, Sapan Mai, Warawi Wattana andKlong Lumpai.

Khlong Toey communitiesKoh Klang Klong Pra Ka Nhong, Sang SunPhatana, Ruam Jai Pattana, Penang market, RimKlong Pai Sing Tho, Rim Klong Wat Sa Parn andLock 1,2,3

Pasi Chaloen communitiesKlong Lad Pha-Shi, Ra-sri, Sirapraya, Sirin and

Friend, Witsampham, Wat Chan Ket 1 and WatChan Ket 3.

Rangsit municipalityRangsit Nimitmai, Rattana Pathum, Sang-sanNakorn Rangsit, Cha-reon Sin, Klong NuengPattana, Klong Sawaan, Sapann Keaw, BehindMaKro, and Lakhok Railway

Bang Pu municipalityKlong Mai Tai, Sam Haung,Nangnoal,

Bangsamran, Srang Ton Eang and Klong Ta Kok

Rattanakosin IslandBaan Bart, Pom Mahakan, WatSumtonthammatan, Jakkaphatdephong, WangKrom Phra Sommootamompan, Wat Saket, WatDusitaram, and Ta Wang..

Working with fellow Thai students strengthenedour language skills and developed culturalknowledge.

Cooperation with the BUDD group C and studentsof UDP was a great proof of what an effectivecommunity means.

To all of you:SAWASDIKA and BIG KOPKUNKA !!!

สวัสดีคะ/ครับ และ ขอบคุณคะ/ครับ



viii INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Aim

This report has three objectives:

First, it seeks to develop an analytical perspectiveembedded in a broader theoretical discourse of the social and the spatial which would help withunderstanding transformative processes in thecontext of the urban, formulate a vision of a justtransformation and enable a critical evaluation of ndings and proposals.

Second, it aims to assess the transformativepotential of The Baan Mankong Secure HousingProgramme as envisioned and implemented byThe Community Organizations DevelopmentInstitute in the wider context of the city of Bangkok, Thailand.

Third, based on a contextualized diagnosis of thechallenges and opportunities of the Programme,it intends to design strategic interventions meant

to strengthen its transformative potential in order to reach the envisioned goal of transformation associal justice.

Findings

The identication of relevant actors at differentscales along with the insights about major pressures and drivers of change provided byeld-work in six sites, has exposed the followingissues as being the most inuential for thetransformative potential of the Programme:

1. The Programme is successful in mobilizingand empowering communities but the capacity tonegotiate is constrained

2. The pressures of rapid urban growth posea signicant challenge for land accessibilityand affordability, which hinders the ability of communities to participate in the Programme3. The Programme fosters and builds onnetworking and knowledge sharing, however theprocess appears to be uneven

4. Even though the Programme’s success lies

in collective problem solving this is not fullytranslated into design responses

Based on extensive preparatory research andinformed by data collection during the eldworkin Bangkok, Thailand, this report represents aprocessed and synthesized outcome of a four months long learning process, undertaken bythe students of Building and Urban Design inDevelopment (BUDD) at University CollegeLondon (2010/2011) in collaboration withcolleagues from the Urban Development Planningand under supervision of the Development

Planning Unit academic staff.



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK ix

Recommendations

Informed by the analytical diagnosis four strategies with detailed proposal have beendesigned:

1. Increase land accessibility and affordabilitythrough densication, intensication and higher productivity of land

2. Strengthen networks and capitalize designsolutions through a knowledge sharing processby creating a Skills Bank, Community ResourceNodes and Channels of Effective Communication

3. Decrease vulnerability of communities byexpanding accessibility to alternative funding likeBooster Funds.

4. Develop alliances among the actors tooptimize the capacity of negotiation based on theredenition of roles and areas of responsibility.

The added value of the individual proposals liesin the potential of not only complementary butsynergic reinforcements between them. As such,these connections can multiply strategic effectsover time and scale.

Conclusions

The set of actions meant to re-shape nancialpolicies, land and knowledge managementprove to be successful to some extent, but theassessment of the strategic proposals showsthat they can only reach their full transformativepotential if supported by the active involvement of the usually marginalized in the decision makingprocess. Building on CODI’s advocacy for peoplelead transformative processes, it is recognizedthat the ultimate result of the demand drivenparadigm shift is appropriation of political spacethat enables people to participate in the shapingof city-wide urban transformations.



x INTRODUCTION รายงานฉบับย่อ

1.1รายงานฉบับย่อรายงานฉบับนี ้อางอิงมาจากการท ี่ได��าการศึกษาอยางครอบคลุมและไดรับการยนืยันจากการวิเคราะหขอมูล ที ่ ไดจากงานภาคสนาม

ในกรงุเทพฯ เพื ่อแสดงใหเหน็ถงึขั ้นตอนการ��าเนนิงานและผลลัพธจากการสังเคราะห ภายในระยะเวลาสี ่เดือนที ่��าการศึกษา รายงานฉบับนี ้จัด��าโดย นักศึกษาภาควิชาการออกแบบอาคารและเมืองเพื ่อการพัฒนา มหาวิทยาลัย University College London ประ��าปการศึกษา 2010/2011 โดยรวมมือกับนักศึกษาภาควิชาการวางแผนเมืองเพื ่อการพัฒนา ภายใตการควบคุมของอาจารยและทมีงานจาก กองการวางแผนเพื ่อการพัฒนา

วัตถุประสงค์

วัตถปุระสงคของรายงานฉบับนี ้ประกอบไปดวย 3 องคประกอบหลัก- เพื ่อพัฒนาและวิเคราะหมุมมองที ่เปนสวนหนึ ่งของทฤษฎทีี ่เกี ่ยวกับสังคมและที ่วาง เพื ่อที ่จะไดชวยใหเขาใจถงึขั ้นตอนการปฏริูปภายใตบริบทของเมือง ในขณะเดียวกันก็ สังเคราะหออกมาเปนวิสัยทัศนของการปฏริูปอยางยุติธรรม และ��าการประเมินองคความรู เพื ่อ��าไปสู ขอเสนอแนะ��าหรับโครงการ- เพ ื่อประเมินศักยภาพทางการปฎิรูปของโครงการบานมั ่นคง ที ่ ไดรับการพัฒนาและ��าเนนิการโดยสถาบันพัฒนาองคกรชมุชน ในบริบทที ่ซับซอนของกรงุเทพมหานคร

- อางอิงจากการวิเคราะห ถึงความทาทายและศักยภาพของ โครงการโดย��านงึถึงบรบิทและสภาพแวดลอม รายงานนี ้ประสงคที ่จะออกแบบกลยทุธ ในการ��าเนนิการ ที ่จะสามารถ เสริมความแข็งแกรงใหกับ ศักยภาพในการปฏริปูของโครงการ เพื ่อ��าไปสู เปา

หมายที ่วางไวของการพัฒนาอยางมีความยติุธรรมทางสังคม

ผลจากการศึกษา

การศึกษาและแยกแยะขอมูลที ่เกี ่ยวของเชน องคกรและผู ที ่เกี ่ยวของกับโครงการในแตละระดับ รวมไปถึงขอมูลเชงิลึกเกี ่ยวกับแรงกดดันและแรงขับดันที ่กอใหเกดิการเปลี ่ยนแปลง ที ่ ไดจากการ��างานภาคสนามในหกพื ้นที ่ ได��าไปสู ประเด็นตางๆตอไปนี ้ซึ ่งเปนสวน��าคัญที ่สงผลกระทบตอศักยภาพในการปฏริปูของโครงการ1. โครงการมีความ��าเร็จในการผลักดันใหเกิดการขับเคลื ่อนของชมุชนและภาคี แตศักยภาพในการตอรองยังถกู��ากัดอยู 2. การขยายของเมืองกอใหเกิดแรงกดดันไปสู ความสามารถ

ในการครอบครองที ่ดิน ซึ ่งสรางขอ��ากัดในการเขารวมโครงการบาน

มั ่นคงของชมุชน3. ภาคีและการกระจายความรู ถึอวาเปนโครงสรางหลักของ โครงการ แตวาขั ้นตอน��าเนนิการยังคงไมทั ่วถงึและไมเสมอกันในแตละพื ้นที ่4. ถึงแมวาความ��าเร็จของโครงการเกิดจากการมีสวนรวมในการแกปญหา แตวาประเด็นนี ้ยังไม ไดรับการ สงเสริมอยางเต็มที ่ ในดานการออกแบบเพื ่อตอบสนองตอปญหา



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK xi

ข้อเสนอแนะ

กลยุทธและรายละเอียดของแผนการ��าเนินงานไดรับการออกแบบจากการวิเคราะหขอมูลเชิงลึก1. เพ ิ่มศักยภาพในการครอบครองที ่ดินดวยการเพ ิ่มความหนาแนนทั ้งทางนอนและทางตั ้ง และการเพิ ่มประสิทธภิาพของที ่ดิน2. เพิ ่มความแข็งแกรงของภาคีและการออกแบบเพื ่อเพิ ่มผลประโยชน ผานขั ้นตอนการกระจายและแลกเปลี ่ยนความรู ดวยการสราง ธนาคารทักษะความสามารถ ศูนยรวมทรัพยากรชมุชนและ ชองทาง��าหรับการสื ่อสารอยางมีประสิทธภิาพ3. ลดความเสี ่ยงโดยการขยายชองทางในการเขาถึงเงินทุน

ผาน โครงการกระตุ นกองทุน4. เสริมสรางพันธมิตรระหวางผู เกี ่ยวของเพ ื่อเพ ิ่มศักยภาพในการตอรอง บนพื ่นฐานของการ นิยามบทบาทและหนาที ่รับผิดชอบของแตละฝายใหมแผน��าเนินงานแตละแผนที ่��าการ��าเสนอภายในรายงานฉบับนี ้วางอยู บนความเปนไปไดที ่ไมเพียงแตละแผนจะสามารถครอบคลุมประเด็นตางๆ แตละแผนยังสามารถเติมเต็มและสงเสรมิกันและกันซึ ่งจะชวยขยายศักยภาพของกลยุทธ ์ิให กาวผานระดับและชวงเวลาตางๆได

สรปุ

แผนการ��าเนินการเหลานี ้ถูก��าหนดขึ ้นเพ ื่อเปลี ่ยนรูปแบบของนโยบายทางการเงิน ที ่ดิน และการจัดการขอมูล ซึ ่งไดรับการพสูิจน

ในระดับหนึ ่งแลววาประสบความ��าเร็จ แตจากการประเมินชี ้ ใหเห็นวา กลยุทธิ ์จะสามารถถกูใช ไดเต็มประสิทธภิาพกต็อเมื ่อไดรับการสนับสนนุจากฝายที ่เปนผู ออกนโยบาย กลยุทธิ ์เหลานี ้ถูกวางขึ ้นจากแนวคิดของสถาบันพัฒนาองคกรชมุชน บนพื ้นฐานที ่เชื ่อวาผลลัพธที ่ยิ ่งใหญของ มุมมองที ่เปลี ่ยนไปสู การขับเคลื ่อนจากอุปสงค(ชมุชน)นั ้นเหมาะสมกับพื ้นที ่ทางนโยบายท ี่ใหโอกาสประชาชนในการมีสวนรวมในการปฏริปูเมือง



xii INTRODUCTION

1.2 VISION

“People Become The SolutionPeople Are The Scale”

-Somsook Boonyabancha

VISION



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK xiii



xiv INTRODUCTION

1.3 INTRODUCTION

Bangkok is not necessarily a place where ‘jayyen yen’ (Thai phrase meaning: keep calm) iseasily applicable. Rather it is a city that never sleeps and constantly has a lot to offer. Streetsfull of vendors, walls ashing with colours, cableshanging over one’s head – all these makes apromise of connectivity and efciency. This dreamis carried along with the construction of yovers-overshadowing the city with their monstrouspresence they do not necessarily fulll their

purpose. It seems that always- smiling Bangkokcitizens did not allow themselves to frownthinking about the possibility and consequencesof the urban sprawl.

Launched in 2003 “Baan Mankong CollectiveHousing Program” carried out by CODI(Community Organizations DevelopmentInstitute- a public organization under the Ministryof Social Development and Human Security) hasa certain role within the metropolis: it supportsprocess of ‘developing long-term, comprehensive

solutions to problems of land and housing’affecting the poorest within the vibrant urbanstructure of Bangkok (CODI website).

CODI’s methods evolve primarily aroundchannelling governmental funds so thatcommunities (being a part of the program), will

have a chance to carry out necessary housingimprovements along with other issues, such as:tenure security, environment, and basic access toservices. This complex process requires buildingmany bridges (not necessarily yovers) betweenthe communities and other actors involved (localauthorities, NGOs, Academia and the nationallevel of politics).

Baan Mankong ideals go further than just a

housing programme: it is about the power of thepeople being a part of the collective exercisingfreely their rights.

In order to assess the Baan MankongProgramme, an intensive exploration of the city of Bangkok was undertaken by the DPU BUDD andUDP MSc students. Fieldwork was carried out inBang Khen, Khlong Toey, Pasi Chaloen, Rangsit,Bang Pu and Rattanakosin Island, all of whichare included in the BM programme. Furthermore,this helped envisage the reality of the conditions

within these communities before, during and after the programme.

Figures below and on the following pages areillustrating the nal presentations held at CODI`sheadquarters in Bangkok the 22nd May 2011.

Figure 1.2 Community mobilisation issue based presentation Figure 1.3 Community leaders participating in the feedback

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK xv

Figure 1.5 Rangsit site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students

Figure 1.6 Bang Pu site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students

Figure 1.7 Pasi Chaloen site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students

Figure 1.8 Rattanakosin Island site presentation by BUDDand UDP MSc students

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i

P h o

t o b y

S i l v i a C h i

Figure 1.4 Somsook Boonyabancha participation in our presentations in Bangkok

P h o

t o b y

S e p

i d e

h H a

j i s o

l t a n

i



THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY

“NULICO puts into practice the Baan Mankong ideals of

“information exchange” and “learning by doing”

- Diane Archer

Photo by Silvia Chi



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK 17

THEORETICAL

FRAMEWORK ANDMETHODOLOGY



18 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND METHODOLOGY

2.0 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

AND METHODOLOGY2.1 DEFINITION OFTRANSFORMATION

After being exposed to Bangkok we can freelysay that it is an evolving, constantly movingorganism that undergoes uncontrolled processesof various metamorphosis.

Having said that, our interest was the conditionof the poorest citizens living in this particular cityand being a part of the Baan Maankong projectcarried out by CODI.

The task of this theoretical framework is toestablish a certain understanding of socio-spatial‘transformation’ and it’s criteria within an urbancontext. This kind of framework should be usedas a tool to see the potential ‘gaps’ for additionalinterventions that would bring about a visiblelevel of improvement (for us, these will be the

strategies including the vision).

It has to be underlined that our ‘transformation’denition had undergone many changes andvarious modications. It was understood that ithas to meet three characteristics: time/scale andspace that will combine different componentsand criteria.

This discourse is embedded within an analyticalthought that will enrich further discussion over potential interventions.

2.2 TRANSFORMATION/METAMORPHOSIS

TRANSFORMATION

It was quickly understood that transformation isan ongoing (innite?) process, with a possiblyutopian goal. Instead of meeting only the spatialcriteria (Lefebvrian transformation denitionas “liberation time- space” understood as

reappropriation of space to ght the capitalistfalse consciousness) or the social criteria(Rawlsian distributive “ A Theory of Justice” talkingabout rights and freedoms chosen by individualsunder the condition of ‘veil of ignorance’), it wasgrasped that transformation denition requires acombination of both: socio-spatial componentsin the context of time.

Result: Transformation (metamorphosis) is along term process (time) of social and spatialimprovement.

This supposedly simple denition had to involvecertain conditions. After careful assessmentTransformation was additionally elaborated as anaction of:

re-designing the structure of power relationsby applying a knowledge-sharing scheme thatwould ensure greatest possible degree of social justice.

This discourse was led by the notion of freedom(specically: freedom of choice) and waysto achieve its highest possible degree in thecommunal context within the structure of social justice (can individual freedom be maximizedin such conditions?). This thought links directlywith the theory of ‘Development as Freedom’introduced by Amartya Sen what reminds usSomsook Boonyabencha’s work, who speaksof Development being Freedom (a pro-activeapproach).

“Development requires the removal of

major sources of unfreedom: poverty

as well as tyranny, poor economic

opportunities as well as systematic social

deprivation, neglect of public facilities

as well as intolerance or overactivity of

repressive states”. (Sen, 3)




TRANSFORMATION/

METAMORPHOSIS

POWER RELATIONS

IS A LONG TERM PROCESS OF SOCIAL AND SPATIAL IMPROVEMENT.

IT MEANS THE RE-DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE OF POWER RELATIONS

BY APPLYING A KNOWLEDGE-SHARING SCHEME THAT WOULD ENSURE

GREATEST POSSIBLE DEGREE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE.

SOCIAL JUSTICEENSURE EQUAL ACCESS TO RIGHTS AND

LIBERTIES WITHIN A DEMOCRATIC

COMMUNITY ATTEMPTING TO ACHEIVE

HIGHEST INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.

KNOWLEDGE SHARINGRE-DESIGN POWER RELATIONS

THROUGH LEVERAGING

ENGAGEMENT OF STAKEHOLDERS

IN DECISION MAKING PROCESS.

ENGAGE STAKEHOLDERS IN

EFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE -SHARING

SCHEME.

POWER RELATIONS | Re-design power relations through leveraging engagement of stakeholders in decision making process

KNOWLEDGE SHARING | Engage allstakeholders in efcient knowledge-sharingscheme

SOCIAL JUSTICE | Ensure equal access torights and liberties within a democratic communityattempting to achieve highest individual freedom

Figure 2.1 Envisioning the transformation denition




P OWE R R E L A T I ON S

S O C I A L J U

S T I C E

K N O

WL E D GE S HA R

I N G

COOPERATIVE INTELLIGENCE

GENERATION BRIDGE

PRECEDENT SETTING

PARTICIPATIVE DESIGN

ENFORCING NEGOTIATION

COMMUNITITY NETWORKING

TRANSPARENCY OF STAKEHOLDERS

SOCIAL INCLUSION

SPATIAL INCLUSION

ADAPTABILITY

EFFECTIVE INVOLVEMENT OF ALL

GENDER

MARGINALIZED

DIVERSIFIED AGE STRUCTURE

LIVELIHOODS ENSURED

PHYSICAL CONNECTIVITY

ACCESSIBILITY

QUALITY OF COMMUNAL SPACES

RESPONSIVE BUILT TYPOLOGIES

OF PROGRAM/POLICIES TO NEEDS

OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS AT DIFFERENT STAGES

EQUALITY OF ENGAGEMENT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS

ROLE OF COMMUNITY ARCHITECT AS DESIGN ENABLER

NEEDS HEARD/LIMITS AKNOWLEDGED

CREATE SPACE FOR NEGOTIATION

CROSS CUTTING HORIZONTALLY & VERTICALLY

ENGAGEM. OF PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS

SPREADING KNOWLEDGE ACROSS SCALES

SCALING -UP

Figure 2.2 Criteria and Indicators for our denition of transformation

TRANSFORMATION




How do we then envision the transformationdenition?

POWER RELATIONS | Re-design power relations through leverage engagement of stakeholders in decision making process+KNOWLEDGE SHARING | Engage allstakeholders in efcient knowledge-sharingscheme.=SOCIAL JUSTICE | Ensure equal accessto rights and liberties within a democraticcommunity attempting to achieve highestindividual freedom.

It was clear from the very beginning that the twocomponents of: power relations and knowledge-sharing are absolutely crucial to reach thedesirable level of social justice (the ultimate goalof transformation/social development). They alsogo hand in hand with the Foucaldian thought of “Space, Knowledge and Power” interlinkage:“Space is fundamental in any form of communallife, space is fundamental in any exercise of power.” ( Foucault, . 254). These two notions:power and knowledge within spatial context areinseparable, therefore, improving one meansimproving the other ones as well. To reach thehighest desirable outcome all of them should beat the same level (can they ever be?).

Balancing components will hopefully lead toenhancing the importance of freedom in Sen’sunderstanding achieving the ultimate goal seenas Social Justice: “(..) exercise of people’sfreedoms, through liberty to participate in socialchoice and in making of public decisions that

impel the progress of (…) opportunities” (Sen, p.5). Development is precisely what we would liketo see within the transformation denition: shiftinghuman condition so that the highest possiblefreedom (social justice in practice) through spatialand social components within a societal structurecan be obtained.

It should take place within a structure of community seen as a web of beings: “The‘networked individual’ is part of a continuum,

[therefore] a web of beings” (Manickam).Individuals should have an opportunity to enjoytheir freedom through exercising their capabilities/capacities and knowledge within a structure of democratic community.

This notion could possibly target the conditionof ‘democracy to come’ (sort of a ‘promise’)advocated by Derrida: “ (…) idea of a democracy:equality, freedom, freedom of speech, freedomof the press - all these things are inscribed aspromises within democracy. That is why it is a

more historical concept of the political - it’s theonly concept of a regime or a political organizationin which history, that is the endless process of improvement and perfectibility, is inscribed inthe concept. (…) that is why I call it ‘to-come’”(Derrida, Politics of Friendship, p. 5).

Such a discourse can be observed vividlywithin the current transformation of Thailand’spolitical structure struggling to establish a setof applicable norms and codes. Hopefully,the broader implication of the ‘transformation’denition will bring a stronger meaning to the‘democratic’ system that Thailand continuouslyworks on.




s h o r t

t e r m

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G

E

S H A R I N G

SPATIAL OUTCOME SOCIAL OUTCOME

cooperave i n t

e l l i g e n

c e

precedent s e

n g

generaon b r i d g

e

low

p a r c

i p a t o

r y design

stakeholders

t r a n

s p a r

e n c y

o f

networking

c o m m u n i t y

negoaon

e n a b l

i n g

m e d i u m

t e r m

l o n g

t e r m

c o m m u n i t y

d i s t r i c t

c i t y /

m e t r o p o l i t a

n

medium highlowmediumhigh

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

2.3 DECODER

As a methodological tool to portray and assesstransformational processes, we propose ahexagonal diagram, the Decoder, with threesubjects of investigation.

The rst axis represents the interplay betweenthe two components dened as prerequisitesfor social justice, power relations re-design andknowledge sharing, to be measured throughappropriate criteria (participatory design,transparency of stakeholders, communitynetworking, enabled negotiation and generation

bridge, precedent setting, cooperative intelligenceaccordingly).

The second one shows the extent of social andspatial outcomes of investigated processes in thesocio-spatial continuum based on a qualitativecomparison.

And the last one expresses the magnitude of change across scale (community, district, city/metropolis) and the estimated time needed toachieve that change as well as the on-goingnature of it (short, mid and long term).

In order to assess transformational processes, the impactsof their outcomes are to be analyzed along all of the threeaxis. According to the proposed denition of transformation,social justice is achieved when all criteria are met and social as well as spatial improvements achieved across time and scale.

Figure 2.3 DECODER: a methodological tool to assess transformational processes

DECODER




Figure 2.4 An example of how the DECODER works

Figure 2.5 Ideal situation: transformational processes result in social justice

s h o r t

t e r m


cooperave i n t e l l i g

e n c e

precedent s e

n g

generaon b r

i d g e

low

p a r

c i p a t o

r y design

stakeholders

t r a n

s p a r

e n c y

o f

networking

c o m m u n i t y

negoaon

e n a b l i n

g

m e d i u

m

t e r m

l o n g

t e r m

c o m m u n i t y

d i s t r i c t

c i t y /


n


s h o r t

t e r m

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O N S


cooperave i n t e l l i g

e n c e

precedent s e

n g

generaon b r

i d g e

low

p a r

c i p a t o

r y design

stakeholders

t r a n

s p a r

e n c y

o f

networking

c o m m u

n i t y

negoaon

e n a b l i n

g

m e d i u

m

t e r m

l o n g

t e r m

c o m m u n i t y

d i s t

r i c t

c i t y /


n


T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G

E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O N S




2.4 METHODOLOGY

During a two- week eld trip in Bangkok we hadan opportunity to visit 6 distinct sites involved inthe Baan Mankong programme.

Our methods of gathering important informationvaried from site to site ( site visits being one of the methods). Through this different modes of data collect, we were able to triangulate theinformation in order to cross-check the ndings inthe sites.

METHODS

1. Site visits2. Interviews(Inhabitants & Institutional Actors): structured/unstructured/ semi-structures/ informal3. Site and house mapping4.Visual recording of the sites (photos, videos)5. Participative workshops6. Final presentations to the communities.

SITE VISITS

Visited 6 sites ( number of communities visitedwithin the site):• Bang Khen (8)• Klong Toey (8)• Phasi Chaleon (6)• Bang Pu (7)• Rattanakosin Island (8)• Rangsit (8) INTERVIEWS

Common system of retrieving data was a

simple interview that involved an interviewer/interviewee(s) and a translator(s). Interviewsconsisted of a set of simple questions helping toget the overall picture of the assessed issue:

• Interviewed people were inhabitants of thecommunities occasionally accompanied byinstitutional actors. Average number of (informal)interviews per site: 10-15

• Sites where interviews with local authoritiestook place: Klong Toey, Phasi Chaleon, Bang Pu,Rangsit (4 interviews)

• Type of the interview that occurred the most:semi-structured (48 interviews) with communityleaders, community comitees, Crown PropertyBureau staff, NULICO staff.

SITE AND HOUSE MAPPING

Site and house mapping (drawings/ sketches)

were produced to help in understanding thespatial components of the sites and be a part of necessary documentation.

VISUAL RECORDING OF THE SITES

The whole experienced was accompanied bya series of photos and occasionally videoscapturing what was visible within the sites.

PARTICIPATIVE WORKSHOPS

Sites where PARTICIPATIVE WORKSHOPSoccurred: Bang Pu (1 workshop)Sites where a different type of WORKSHOP tookplace: Rangsit (1 workshop)

FINAL PRESENTATIONS

The nal presentations to the communities withinthe week of the eldwork as well as the nalpresentations held at CODI`s headquarters at theend of the eldtrip were essential for assessingwhether the initial impressions and assumptions

met the reality and communities expectations/common knowledge. The feedback of thesenal presentations were core in reframing andadjusting the strategies that we tested in the eld.

The recording of the eldwork is elaborated in amore extended way in the annex of this report.

METHODOLOGY




Figure 2.6 Visual recording of the sites Figure 2.7 Site visits

Figure 2.8 Interviews Figure 2.9 Final presentation with the communities

Photo by Silvia Chi

Photo by Tareq Razouk

Photo by Silvia Chi Photo by Kade Wanida



ANALYSIS

‘There is a gap between the people and the system, let the

people ll the gap’


Photo by McKenzie O`Neill




ANALYSIS



28 ANALYSIS

3.0 ANALYSIS

3.1 PRESSURES ANDDRIVERS OF CHANGE

As a major hub in South East Asia with a visionof becoming a global city, Bangkok is facingincreasing pressures on land. Gentrifyingforces in the central historical, commercial andresidential districts have led to an increase in realestate value. These rapid urban developmentpressures pose great challenges for allocatingaffordable land and securing land tenure for theurban poor.

At present, many communities are beingexcluded from the goods and services of the cityand are often forced to look for housing solutionsthat are spatially and economically disconnectedfrom the urban centre. Migration and squattinghave become emerging forces within Bangkok.

At the same time, megaprojects including

transport expansions have greatly inuenced thecity’s form and the sprawling conditions at the

urban periphery, attempting to address the city’ssymptoms of high-density vehicular travel andlong commute times.

As a country, Thailand is experiencing a time of great internal rift. The country’s hub, Bangkok isthe setting for these conicts and therefore oneof the focal points of our investigation. The highlycontroversial political scenario in Bangkok hashad a large inuence and impact over the BM

Programme’s activities and the roles of severalactors. More importantly, it is vital to note thatBM is a government funded programme, andit is somewhat vulnerable to being affected byfrequent power shifts in the political arena.

Several of the dominant transformative actorshave experienced a greater position of power dueto the nature of this conict, increasing CODI’svulnerability but also its strength in overcomingthese struggles. In the future of the Programme,this will continue to be the greatest inuence that

underlies all relationships between actors.

PRESSURES AND DRIVERS OF CHANGE

Figure 3.1 Megainfrastructure and housing in Koh Klang Klong Pra Ka Nhong Photo by Silvia Chi




Figure 3.4 Coexistence of slums, mega projects and new developments in Klong Toey

Figure 3.2 Drivers of change and pressures on Bangkok

Figure 3.3 Touristic activities in the central area of Bangkok,Rattanakosin Island

Photo by Silvia Chi Photo by Silvia Chi



30 ANALYSIS

3.2 ACTORS

While identifying the key actors involved in theprocess of transformation, we recognize howseveral actors were involved on different levels,with multiple and varying roles. In order torepresent the multi-scalar processes involvedbetween actors we have conceptualized theBM Programme as a “machine.” We haverepresented these complex relations through adiagram — the poles represent the multi-scalar actors, the size of the gears relate to the power or dominance of each actor, and the “belts” betweeneach actor explain the quality of their relations

and how closely they are working together.

This “machine” has become a critical tool for our analysis: it has helped us to diagnose actor relations and how they have evolved over time,as well as to understand how these relationshipshave changed or were claried through our experiences in the eld (The differences betweenthe gure 3.6 and 3.7 point out these changes).

As illustrated through the diagram, CODI isposited at the centre because it is a dominant

actor in distributing funds to communities andone that has remained before and after theeldwork experience. However, CODI’s level of involvement at the community scale is less visiblethan originally anticipated.

Within the diagram we have illustrated howNULICO has become the strong-hold of theProgramme in coordinating and organizing

community activities, and acting as theemergency generator of funding and communitydriven processes.

COOPERATIVE

Several actors have been allies of theProgramme. One important example is ACHR,as an organization they share similar strategiesto the initiatives of CODI, but address the larger scale. The programmes of knowledge sharingand regional funding opportunities of large-scaleACHR projects have had an immense positiveimpact on the BM Programme. This has beenparticularly important on the community level.

ACTORS

Figure 3.5 Actor timeline Figure 3.6 Actor mapping before Bangkok

1950s

1960s

1980s

1990s

2000s

The Royal Patronage

of H.M. the King

Thailand Rural Recon-

structurction Movement

PREM

NESDBMisintry of

Finance

Misintry of

Interior

Misintry of SOCIAL DEVELOPMENTand HUMAN SECURITY

National Rural Development

Committee (NRDC)

Local Development Foundation

(LDF)

Urban Development Community

Office (UCDO)

Urban Development Community

Office (UCDO)

Rural Development Fund

(RDF)

Local Develpoment Assistance Program (LDAP)

Community Development

Department

National Committee on Decentral-

ization Policy for Provincial and

Local Development (NCDP)

National Housing Authority (NHA)

Government Housing Bank1970s




G O V E R N M E N

T

M I N I S T R Y O F

S O C I A L D E V E L O

P M E N T

a n d H U M A N

S E C

U R I T Y

M I N I S T R Y O F

I N T E R I O R

M I N I S T R Y

O F

F I N A N C E

G H B

CODI

NULICO

MUNICIPALITY

/BMA

CITY DEVELOPMENT

COMMITTEE

COMMUNITY NETWORK

COMMUNITY

UNIVERSITY/

EXPERTS

ACHR

NHA

LANDLORD

COMMUNITY

ARCHITECT

ACHR

INTERNATIONAL

NGOs(IIED, etc.)

MONEY (From big end to small end)

MONEY (Indirect)

Part of but no control over

Coordinate

Support

Service (resourse and knowledge)

Negotiate

Figure 3.7 Actor mapping after Bangkok



32 ANALYSIS ACTORS

Equally, NULICO has had a very strong presencein supporting CODI activities, many times llingthe voids where CODI cannot act. As NULICO is

born out of and imbedded within the communities,their involvement at the community level isstrongest and this was made evident in our eldvisits to many of the communities.

CODI also has a good relationship among localand larger university networks. This relationshipis particularly important to the design processof CODI projects. For example, the role of Universities in the design and capacity buildingcould be benecial for both parties and should befurther explored by CODI, especially in the case

of architects and planners.

NEUTRAL

Several actors assumed to have a muchstronger relationship with the Programme astheir large roles and responsibilities that havebeen undertaken. However, many of theserelationships do not possess the synergies thatwe originally assumed in our analysis. This isspecic in the position of the GHB, NHA and

NESDB with CODI. While we recognize there is noconict between these actors, their relationshipshave been out of necessity and under pressureto support CODI due to their similar ‘positions’within the government structures. In this sense,the national scale of actors is primarily made upby these existing support roles.

CONFLICTING

There is one relationship within all scenarios thatis characterized by high tension: that is between

the landlord and the communities. While manytimes the relations are positive and cooperative,the nature of these relations are not immediateor assumed. The role of the landlord is the mostdynamic of any actor as it ranges from CentralGovernment, Local Municipality, private entities,Royal Family lands or religious institutions.Further, the nature of the actor also lends itself to be dynamic in scale in the “machine.” Thisconnection is therefore the most contingentto communities to enter the Programme asUpgrading or Reblocking strategies requiretenure agreements and the greatest potentialindicator for the level of transformation collectivelysought by the community. The case of CPB is

exceptional, in its positive and proactive role inadvocating communities to join the programmeand establishing leasing agreements, serving the

interest of both parties.

Another highly dynamic relationship is onebetween the Municipality and the community.Several communities had a cooperativerelationship with members of the Municipality, or where NULICO was also collaborating with theMunicipality. However, this relationship is onethat is constantly evolving, and often times thelandowner is highly disruptive of local relations.In many cases such as Klong Toey, this has madeit especially difcult for communities to establishlong-term collaborative relations with the localMunicipality. Further, the Municipality oftenperceives communities as unorganized or limitedin ability and have disregarded the needs of thecommunity for the incentives of the landlord.As communities continue demonstrating their organization through their upgrading strategiesthis is shifting the perception, however the impactof the landord can still be highly problematic.

FINANCIAL

CODI’s provision of funding has two-foldlimitations. One is the amount of savings acommunity is able to acquire in order to enter the programme. The other limitation is the largescal cut that the government agencies haveendured. As a result, CODI’s ability to fullysupport as many communities as possible isnot always sufcient. The reductions in fundingimpact the very idea of transformation, potentiallyincreasing vulnerabilities within communities andlimiting their ability to effectively respond.

NULICO has been helping to establish City/Community Development Funds at the municipallevel. These funds act as a revolving fund for communities to access, and essentially are an“emergency resource generator” to act withoutCODI.

Other important nancial relationships thatcommunities rely on include donations fromACHR to CODI and to CDFs that have someimpact in the community level. Additionally,the relationship between GHB and CODI wasestablished as a result of the scal crisis, whereGHB purchased several community loans from




CODI. This is the primary aim of the relationship,and is one in which CODI and communitiesmostly benet.

POWER

At the level of communities, the network of NULICO is perhaps the most empowered of anyagency in the Programme. This actor has themost exibility of roles and responsibilities, abilityto mobilize and inuence the community directly.In fact, this actor acts primarily to organizecommunity processes. It is important to clarifythat CODI lacks any major role at this scale, and

highly relies on community self-organization.

While there are tense relationships in the overallactor map, there are also several strainedrelationships that are not characteristic of beingin direct conict to the program’s efciency butrather to the extent of leveraging transformation.Specically, important is the role of theCommunity Architect. At present, this actor hasnot been empowered by communities or fullyintegrated in CODI’s agenda of design.

Therefore, the community architect actor has astronger role in consulting community relationsrather than actually being a part of the designand building process. The relationship betweenactors has disempowered the role of theCommunity Architect more than any within theProgramme.

The City Development Committee is a forumcomposed of members from communities,NULICO, CODI, Academia, and Municipality.On site, the presence of this team was nearly

imperceptible. However, while this committeelacks power of decision-making over issuesof development, it is an existing space for negotiation and discussion within the Programme.

MUNICIPALITY

/BMA

GOVERNMENT

MINISTRY OF

SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

and HUMAN SECURITY

MINISTRY OF

INTERIOR

MINISTRY OF

FINANCE

GHB

CODI

LANDLORD

NHA

NULICO

COMMUNITY NETWORK

MUNICIPALITY

/BMA

LANDLORDCODI

CITY

DEVELOPMENT

COMMITTEE

NULICO

COMMUNITY NETWORK

MUNICIPALITY

/BMA

CODI

CITY

DEVELOPMENT

COMMITTEE

UNIVERSITY/

EXPERTS

ACHR

NULICO

COMMUNITY NETWORK

NULICO

COMMUNITY NETWORK

MUNICIPALITY

/BMA

UNIVERSITY/

EXPERTS

ACHR COMMUNITY

ARCHITECT

LANDLORD

MONEY (From big end to small end)

MONEY (Indirect)

Part of but no control over

Coordinate

Support

Service (resourse and knowledge)

Negotiate

Figure 3.8 Main actors in the national level

Figure 3.9 Main actors in the metropolitan level

Figure 3.10 Main actors in the district level

Figure 3.11 Main actors in the community level



34 ANALYSIS SITES




3.3 THE 6 CASE STUDIES

As part of a collective of urban practitioners, our experiences in the eld gave us the opportunityto connect our theoretical analysis with eld-based research.

During our experiences in the eld we renedour broad understandings of transformation tocentre around four highly specic approaches:Partnerships and infrastructure, Land andHousing, Finance, and Community Mobilizationand Capabilities.

The aim of this approach was to lter and cluster the dense information gathered across the sixsites and shape it into a synthesized analysisand proposal. Further, we sought to highlight theopportunities, concerns, and threats across sitesrespectively identifying recurrent and resonantthemes throughout.

Figure 3.12 Location of the 6 sites within Bangkok region

Rattanakosin Island

Bang Pu

Ban Khen

Pasi Chaleon

Rangsit

Khlong Toey



36 ANALYSIS

3.3.1 BANG KHEN

Bang Khen District known as the largest district inBangkok is located at the centre of the city withinproximity of the main highways, infrastructureand transport arteries.

The communities in Bang Khen District have astrong spatial bond with the canal. Since its one

of the pilot projects of BM Programme there iswith a well-grounded community organizationand mobilizationand also, there is a the lackof inuence from the municipality and localauthority. It was here that they pioneered therst CDF in Bangkok setting precedent for self sufcient and nancial independence from CODIwhilst mitigating the repercussion of any futurenancial instability.

SITES

Figure 3.13 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Bang Khen district

Figure 3.14 View from Bang Bua canal

Communities visited

M a j o r r o a d s

Photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani

C a n a l




Figure 3.15 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang Khen district

•Although Bang Khen has

relatively strong partnerships with

the district and local authority

there still appears to be problems

in terms of division of equal roles

and relations between local

authority, municipality and the

communities.

•Partnership with Action Aid for

financially supporting the Bang

Bua nursery. (only NGO)

•Uneven knowledge among the

communities can create misunder -

standing and fragment partner -

ships as one example indicates acommunity member employee of

government opposing to BM

project due to not being aware of

the project being supported by

government.

•Uneven awareness of resources

and information available in other

districts due to scarcity of

networks and partnerships.

•Originating the first CDF only for

housing costs to constitute a self

sufficiency and less dependency

acting as a support to CODI funds.

•There are welfare funds available

which provides for elderly care,

support for families facing difficul-

ties with loan payments, acts as

security for irregular incomes of

community members.

•Philanthropy: when government

funding doesn’t come through,

communities/individuals donate

money to neighboring communi-

ties. (e.g. bridge in Som Chai’scommunity)

•CDF has scaling up limitations

which self-sufficiency is a motiva-

tion, but the fund is inextricably

linked to CODI for continuity.

•CDF is also being used to bypass

funding from CODI (e.g. Ruamjai

Patthana Klang, where community

does not have collective land title)

•Timing is another factor that

associates with communities

choosing CDF vs. CODI depend-

ing on how much money CODI

has at any given time. (e.g. acquir -

ing more from CODI in 2008,

immediately following the

successful protests)

•While observing the overall

picture design aspects have been

neglected.

•The communities with partnership

with municipality agreed on the

New Building Codes for govern-

mental projects which gives more

room for maneuver in terms of

design aspects and planning.

•‘Baan Bang Khen’ is an example

of more developed design aspects

using outside architects to design

mid-rise apartments and also

currently maximizing their area. (in

line with growth of the city)•Since 2007 there has been no

visit from CODI architect which

shows a disconnect between Codi

architect and community.

•According to design standards

the fact that the communities are

not adapting to changing city

landscape.

•Longevity of the buildings, quality

of construction and design may

not be desirable in the future.

•There has been a definite loss of

public spaces after the BM project

which requires more design

feature.

•Establishing the local community

builders (CCC - 100 local

construction labor in 5 teams

)which construct the BM projects

in the district as well as broader

boundaries and setting up ‘Home

Service Centre’ which where

looking to set up a call centre in

future.

•Builders network – build knowl-

edge by implementing the first

phase and teaching the locals as a

process for knowledge transfer.

•Their capacity as a collective

community to change Newbuilding codes and be the catalyst

for further policy changes in

government.

•Using protest as a means of

communication which can be

related to need of capacity for

negotiation.

•Long time to get administration

funds and depends if you have

good relations with government.

•Canal cleaning every month with

borrowing the BMA boats which

can on the contrary indicate the

imbalance sharing of relationship

and roles resulted in the communi-

ties acting like a municipality

which might result with over burden of work and an isolated city

perception.

Partnerships and Infrastructure Finance Land and Housing Capabilities



38 ANALYSIS

3.3.2 KHLONG TOEY

A site full of tensions, Khlong Toey district hasone of the largest and most dense slums inBangkok, adjacent to the nation’s main port.

Decades of eviction struggles have resultedfrom clashes with the Port Authority, as themain landowner of slums settlements and major

infrastructure projects that are planned for here.

The high pressure on the land results not onlyfrom these external forces but also the increasingdemand for housing. For the past 30 years thissite has been a major entry point for migrantsto the city, due to its proximity to the port andlarge opportunities for work. These pressures,both internal and external have resulted inmultiple conicts and a lack of cohesion acrosscommunities.

SITES

Communities visited

Port

Figure 3.16 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Khlong Toey district

Figure 3.17 Khlong Toey: spatially fragmentated

M a j o r r o a d s




•There are weaker network

linkages between non-Baan

Mankong communities,

and with communities beyond the

district.

•One of the best communities we

visited in terms of infrastructure

and housing improvements was

on the site of Crown Property

Land, as there was an alliance

with Baan Mankong.

•Strong presence of local, national

and international NGOs, which are

providing support to communitiesthat Baan Mankong cannot reach

•They have little power to negoti-

ate with or influence the Port

Consequently, have weak

linkages to communities on Port

land.

•The Port and the Market also

serve as important sources of

livelihood for communities in the

district.

•43 registered communities

squeezed in between this, some-

times on undesirable land (e.g.

underneath expressways), other

times on land targeted for devel-

opment.

•Baan Mankong does not address

communities that are living in the

most precarious situation, in areas

without secure tenure, under the

threat of eviction.

•Or communities that are socially

and spatially fragmented, included

migrants.•Families are afraid of investing in

their homes, because they don’t

know when they might need to

leave We also saw entire commu-

nities living in temporary-looking

structures for over 40 years,

because the Port actually visits the

community every year to make

sure they don’t build permanent

structures.

•Global City Competitions

demands a certain type of

infrastructure and Development –

conflicting vision for the area.

Land security lease through out

the site.

•Communities got mobilized

during events, such as eviction

and fire and port authority

evictions.

•Livelihood committee, Trash for

cash in communities that were not

part of BM.

•The district office is under -

resourced

•The communities were weak in

terms of mobilizing against

evictions at first due to their suspi-

cion and trust in getting land

tenure and negotiation.


Figure 3.18 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang Khen district



40 ANALYSIS

3.3.3 PASI CHALOEN

Located within the metropolis, Pasi Chaloensits on the edge of a rural past facing a rapiddevelopment future.

Once agricultural land characterized by severalcanals, urbanization is now occurring and the cityhas consumed this site. Most of the communities

living here have been relocated here from other parts of the city.

As a result, while the relationship between thelocal authorities is good the network is fairlyweak due to this recent development. However,due to the highly speculative nature of the land,acquiring it is perhaps the largest challenge here.

SITES

Communities visited

Figure 3.19 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Pasi Chaloen district

Canal

Figure 3.20 The community leaders of the district plays animportant role facilitating comunication within and betweenthe communities

Photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro

M a j o r r

o a d s




Figure 3.21 In Sirin & Friend Community Codi funded thecommunity partly through loans to the cooperative (whichrepays Codi @ 2% interest and keeps 3% prot for Welfare).There is also a subsidy that Codi addresses directly to theCommunity of 5.000.000 B$ (of which 3.000.000B$ to level ground and 2.000.000 B$ to build road).

Figure 3.22 In Ra-Sri Tum Community the loans throughthe cooperative will be repayed to Codi @ 4% interest.Cooperative will keep 3% prot for Welfare. Additionally Codi will provide 2 subsidies: 6.900.000 B$ for land and road construction. and 250.000 B$ for housing construction

•Roles and Responsibilities on

environmental issue, such as

waste management, are not

clearly defined, which creates

gaps of management that is

reflected on the precarious condi-

tions of marginalized pockets of

poor settlements.

•Opportunity to create partner -

ships among communities and

with local authorities as well as

with inhabitants of other parts of

the district affected by same issue.

•Cooperatives for welfare mecha-

nisms within the community give

opportunity to scale-up to mecha-

nism for wider inclusion of

individuals and groups which are

currently excluded from BM…don’t constitute a viable solution

to overcome the gap between the

members of communities and the

poorest of the poor that still can’t

access for financial difficulties.

•Increase density in an area of

rapid urbanization could consti-

tute a long term viable response to

the scarcity of available land in the

urban area of Bangkok

•Tax incentive for vacant land•Network based Land Bank

•Economical constrain to acquire

land for the Land Bank

•Scarce design response to

community’s needs as a conse-

quence of marginality of design in

list of BM’s priorities.

•Design could play an active role

in strengthening spatial and social

linkages within the community as

well as between the community

and the surrounding area as

•Design plays a marginal role intoBM agenda but Community

Architects have limited range of

action within the existing priorities

of BM.


Figure 3.23 Problems and opportunities within Pasi Chaloen district

Sirin & Friend Community

Ra-sri Tum Community

Photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro Photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro



42 ANALYSIS

3.3.4 RANGSIT

Situation just outside of Bangkok, Rangsit is of a highly suburban and disconnected nature as itwas once agricultural land dominated by irrigationcanals.

At the periphery of the city, the issues of

migration and urban sprawl collide here.Similar to Pasi Chaloen, land speculation highlyaffects communities in this region resulting in alandscape dominated by gated communities andempty land.

However, this community is exceptional in itsstrong community network and close relationshipwith the municipality.

SITES

Communities visited

Figure 3.24 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Rangsit municipality

M a j o

r r o a d

C a n a l

Figure 3.25 Rangsit position in Bangkok peri-urban area




Figure 3.28. Khlong Toey: actors

•Potential better relations between

NHA schemes and communities to

share facilities (daycare, etc) that

they are exploring at city wide

level.

•Experimenting with Private

contractors as the market is highly

competitive in Rangsit right now

for this and current success

however careful not to detract

from capacity training schemes.

•Infrastructure: lack of connectivity

of sites, especially relocation sites

to services as land is cheapest inthese dis-connected areas as a

result of private ownership and

partnerships.

•More developed CDF expansion

to include Welfare Fund already,

but also “Occupation” training as

well as Insurance.

•Lack of criteria, while an opportu-

nity to completely bypass CODI,

this can also be seen as danger -

ous in terms of lack of land tenure

and high risk.

•Land sharing schemes- 4

communities coming together to

share cost of purchasing land on

one site. “Sang Saan community.

•Lack of available land (large

amount of private ownership i.e.

land speculation)

Lack of regulation by municipality

addressing migration and urban

sprawl

•Very Strong Network working in

cooperation with municipality,

NULICO, CODI etc. All on very

good terms and in strong commu-

nication and alliance on all issues.

•“Knowledge Center” specific to

each site, in some examples is a

concrete block making unit, in

others it is helping with accounting

for the community, etc.

•Working issue based networks

which is connecting canal

communities together specifically.

•The one point that the municipal-

ity is not speaking across the

province with other municipalities,

otherwise no weakness at

Community Network level.


Figure 3.26 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Rangsit Municipality



44 ANALYSIS

3.3.5 BANG PU

Like Rangsit, Bang Pu is located outside of Bangkok Municipality, directly on the Thai coast.Environmental hazards in the coastal mangrovesand canals that dominate the Bang Pu haveaffected land availability for communities.

A satellite of Bangkok, this site is expected togrow as several megaprojects are planned for the skytrain, airport expansion, and plans of theDepartment of Treasury.

Bang Pu is of a peri-urban nature, with manycommunity residents working in the nearbyfactories or in shrimp and clam farming industries.

SITES

Communities visited

Figure 3.27 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within the Bang Pu municipality

M a j o

r r o a d

Figure 3.28 Floating platform used for public gathering inBang Pu municipality.

Photo by Parvathi Nair




•Community leaders in Bang Poo

have strong relationship with local

authorities, although transparency

of information can be questioned

at some point while perceived in

responses to specific questions

asked in the shared meetings.

•Potential for future linkages

between communities through the

exchange of knowledge and

information about the BM process

in terms of different forms of

upgrading and the challenges that

appears during the process.Through building new roads and

infrastructure and megaprojects,

communities are directly effected.

•Ta Ko canal community success-

ful cost cutting project by using

recycling materials - cuts 25% of

construction

•15000 Baht can be saved by

using recycled material – reducing

cost of construction process as

well as translating it to financial

assets.

•Excluded members of community

not having access to BM due to

affordability

•‘Ta Ko canal’ community is not

allowed to have any commercialactivities in the area or lower level

of their houses which has

constrains on their livelihoods.

(Design from CODI)

•Large amount of recycling

material on sites that can be used

for housing – cuts 25% of

construction

•In the slum formation they had

more space, but got lost in the

process of appropriation of near

home spaces when they got

relocated.

•The houses are on dirty water but

they are still being rebuilt on the

same water with the idea of having

stronger foundation to substitute.

CODI provides the solid base for the house, however they are

located on the filthy mud water

which is quite hazards and insani-

tary.

•The community leaders across

Bang Poo know each other while

on the contrary the members of

community are not familiar with

each other.

•As a tactic the leaders take

members from one community to

another.


Figure 3.29 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang Pu Municipality



46 ANALYSIS

3.3.6 RATTANAKOSIN ISLAND

Formally Phra Nakon, Rattanakosin is the oldestarea in Bangkok and is saturated with historicalallures such as The Grand Palace and Wat PhraKaew (Emerald Buddah Temple). The largestlandowner is the CPB who is responsible for managing the King’s land assets. There is aunique rental system particular to the CPB land

that has driven the CPB to sign a memorandumof understanding (MOU) with CODI to upgradethe communities due to preserving the character of the site with participatory conservation. Over the years, there has been a multitude of plans for the area.

These plans have had an increasingly disparagingbearing on tenure for most of the Rattanakosincommunities as it failed to recognise the “heritageof local people, such as a daily life landscape,market, and shop house” excluding them fromthe master plan.

It is this notion of culture as building anddisregard for people that is the driving forcebehind communities in Rattanakosin Islandperusing upgrading that supports culture asliving heritage in order to not only secure their tenure; but to demonstrate their capacity to setprecedent to be outstanding responsible goodcitizens and change the way they are perceivedby the local area and the city, as emphasised byone community leader.

SITES

Communities visited

Figure 3.30 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Rattanakosin island

Touristic node




•Community centre was part of

infrastructure proposal to CODI

and therefore supported by the

grant

•Community collaborating with

universities: children’s activities,

art gallery.

•Partnership with private sector in

palace: community is able to use

space for community activities

outside of working hours

(agreement is between CPB and

private company)

•CODI and CPB partnership

walking in the alley.

•Temple does not grant receipts

meaning residents have no proof

of occupancy

•CODI architect warned TAT

should be on board but worried

they will get too involved and

disrupt peoples lives and

livelihood as they want to keep site

not the people.

•CPB prefer educated profession-

als to take lead on tourism

•Private funding from other

savings group as well as interest

from investment/banking. (wat

saket)

•Started grading housing grade a

and grade b inputting their own

design guidelines for quality and

preservation.

•Loan has been granted but

remains in the bank as they have

no proposal for plans.

Community level comes down to

whose funding, receiver you get

this but with conditions, develop-

ment done for hidden agenda,

need to change model of commu-

nity development with plan and

find sponsor.

•Materials used can increase

heights. (currently buildings are

concrete on the bottom and

wooden on the top)

•By law, land owner owns building,

if they are evicted, the CPB will

reimburse them.

•Split in land ownership has split

community.

•CPB puts restrictions on building

heights.

•No community space yet (sitram)

•If you have a fighting chicken

farm how can you live in a high

rise? Thai massage how many

people will go upstairs, ceramics

need oven, how would you

integrate that in high rise.

•Middle class contribute to savings

group to help others out

•Part of a network of a historic

walk (between the 6 communities)

– eco-tourism walk.

•CPB tried to hold training session

for each community position but

not successful.

•Various government departments

hold training for 2 comm. Repre-

sentatives who should relate to

rest of comm.. but the skills are not

transferable and community

members not interested anymore

•Rely on existing asset e.g.

accountant but what if he goes?

Need to build peoples capacity

more.


Figure 3.31 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Rattanakosin Island



48 ANALYSIS DIAGNOSIS

3.4 DIAGNOSIS

In the process of distinguishing between thesymptoms and the fundamental underlyingcauses of the concerns.

Challenging, the scale at which they should beaddressed and recognizing the involvement of actors, clarifying the extent of their roles andresponsibility.

This enhanced grasp, informed our collectiveclustering of these underlying triggers shiftingthe initial scope to encompass these new four

overarching categories; negotiation, networking,land and alliances with design being inherit in allof these.

3.4.1 NEGOTIATION

The BM Programme has given communitiestremendous capacity to negotiate with actors,for instance by collecting and owning data thatenhances their power to negotiate when enteringdiscussions with different actors. If communitiescannot enter such dialogue with actors theycollectively default to mass demonstrations inorder to voice their demands.

Figure 3.32 Shack by the canal in Bang Khen.


Photo by Silvia Chi

Figure 3.34 View from the Klong Toey District Authority building

Figure 3.33 A bridge in Bang Khen community: anexample of community mobilisation to fullll the role of themunicipality

Photo by Mahya Fatemi




While this represents an example of exercisingtheir freedoms it also highlights that there islack of space for negotiation. This was evident

in the case of Khlong Toey where the insecurityof land and tenure, as well as the complexity of urbanization suppressed the community frombeing fully integrated into the decision makingprocess surrounding the development plansmade by the Port Authority. In order to avoidthe instrumentalisation of the community andcreate a balance of power in the decision makingprocess the roles and responsibilities of actorsneed to be claried and redened.

Highlighting this tension between supply and

demand is the example of Bang Khen (Figure3.33) where for four years the communityrequested the local municipality to rebuild abroken bridge that was essential for connectivityon the site. However, even after making their needs clear the municipality failed to acknowledgetheir request.

Consequently, the community self-mobilizedand collected donations from visitors in order to nance the construction, thus successfullyrebuilding the bridge. While this illustrates thestrength of the community to proactively respondto infrastructural challenges, it raises importantquestions of how far these communities arebeing asked to mobilize and at what point theyare being asked to fulll the responsibilities of theMunicipality.

National level

Metropolitan level

District level

Household level

Community level

Levels in which the problem is present

Figure 3.35 The main issue in Rattanakosin Island concerned the lack of willingness of CODI to start or helpfacilitate negotiation with the Temple land to include the poor communities in the BM Programme.

Figure 3.36 View of the port in Khlong Toey. Thecommunities have little power to negotiate with or inuencethe Port Authority in terms of Land Tenure and the pressures of the Global City Competition master plan.

Photo by Dhrin Anantamongkolchai

Photo by Silvia Chi



50 ANALYSIS

3.4.2 LAND ACCESSIBILITY ANDAFFORDABILITY

The rapid urban development pressures on landpose great challenges for allocating affordableland and securing land tenure within the citycentre.

Land owners are not willing to negotiate on theprice of land to accommodate the urban poor andthe price of land is the result of its centrality to thegoods and services of the urban centre.

Additionally, there are a lot of interstitial spaces

that are not being fully utilized. Therefore, thereis a need for land readjustment on these unlled,open space fragments in order to establishgreater productivity and connectivity, particularlywithin the superblocks.

There have been emerging symptoms of gentrication and densication in Khlong Toeydue to the intense pressures on the centralbusiness district, forcing residents to cluster onundesirable land, such as spaces underneathexpressways or land that is earmarked for

development. These communities are priced outof decent land as there is greater return and protto be made by landowners, as a consequence of this, private developers negating the possibility of negotiation.

DIAGNOSIS

Figure 3.37 Land speculation spurred by the majority of private ownership in Rangsit with plans to develop privateresidential units restricted negotiation for the price of land.

Figure 3.38 Different communities in Rattanakosin Island are

facing the same problems in terms of the tourist and master plan; however they have no forum to discuss for collective

solutions. ( for more information refer to Annex page 141)


Photo by Dhrin Anantamongkolchai

Figure 3.39 Interstitial spaces in the city

Photo by Silvia Chi




3.4.3 UNEVEN KNOWLEDGE SHARING &NETWORKING

Changing the space but not changing theslum values

Knowledge sharing within communities provedto be strong, however, there was a weakcorrelation of knowledge transfer between certaincommunities regardless of their status with theBM Programme. This is a missed opportunity asinformation regarding the BM Programme and thelessons learned by communities, the resourcesand skills that they possess that could build their

capacity are not capitalized on.

Rangsit represents a highly organized communitywhere they efciently utilized their network of community’s skills of building construction anddesign in order to inform their design process.However, Rangsit networking strength raises theimportant question of why this is not happeningelsewhere and how come there are so manyprojects being developed in the scale of thecommunity without knowledge sharing takingplace in the scale of the district, losing the

opportunity to strengthen the network within thedistrict and the city.

In the same district, there is a strong presenceof CDF´s that has emerged as an alternative andautonomous nance mechanism to CODI’s loanin the districts where it is implemented. However,this initiative presents the risk of being itself counterproductive as communities are obtainingCDF nancing to build/ upgrade their homesregardless of land title, that can lead to potentiallyrecreate ‘slums’-maintaining and multiply an

insecure land tenure settlement. Considering thisrisk, the production of knowledge is central for acommunity that is managing CDF`s funds.

Figure 3.40 Bang Pu Community workshop Lack of

networking within Bang Pu as community memberswere not acquainted with one another and one of the

community was not aware of the different strategies that

BM Programme offers to address their housing problem in

terms of upgrading.( Refer to Annex page 154 for further

detail on community workshops held in Bang Pu)

Figure 3.41 Rangsit Community building

Figure 3.42 Rangsit community homes in progress



Photo by Parvathi Nair



52 ANALYSIS

3.4.4 LIMITED DESIGN RESPONSE

“Planning for communities but design for individuals”

When land is allocated and the communities beginthe building process there is an overemphasison the planning and design of individual plots.The BM Programme’s success originates fromits value of collective problem solving, whereconsensual decision-making is an integral aspectof each project. However, the housing typologywithin communities is detached housing.

There is a need for more community input inthe design process in order to develop housingstrategies that would represent the localvernacular and could accommodate changesin household needs over time. Equally, on thelarger scale land plots are not being designedas cohesive spaces with appropriated areasfor recreation, places of gathering and socialenterprise. Additionally, there is a need for designstrategies that would improve the productivityof the site through utilizing ecological servicessuch as the reclamation of water or the onsite

production of food. Also, the community architectcould be a vehicle to promote greater knowledgesharing within the community and betweencommunities.

The longevity of buildings, quality of constructionand design may not be on par in the future,due to the forward thinking design motto of thecommunity that captures what they can afford atthe given timeframe. This incremental built formwill be stark contrast to the rest of the competingcity skyline that has plans leveraging vertical

scenarios.

DIAGNOSIS

Figure 3.43 Walkway through Pasi Chaleon

Figure 3.44 Pasi Chaloen housing design Land is a limited resource however the ineffective conguration of housing plots does not allow the community to capitalise on the full potential of their space; this can be addressed through anefcient design response. (Refer to Annex page 136)

Figure 3.45 Khlong Toey open spaces The prevalence of interstitial spaces in Khlong Toey presented for a fragmented urban fabric where there were disjointed pockets of unused space

Photo by Silvia Chi






3.4.5 DISTILLING THE DIAGNOSIS: AGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION

As a graphic synthesis of our diagnosis, wedevelop these diagrams to compare the problemsand opportunities across the six sites and identifythe common denominators throughout. Thusclustering them according to the nature of theproblem relating to: design, access, partnership,roles and relationships knowledge network andresource. Stacking these cubes adjacently,each being a representative of an issue makesit easier to compare the sites and see visuallythe density of each problem according to not onlythe site but to the overall distribution. Following athorough analysis, we identied four entry pointsto address this array of issues.

Figure 3.47 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunitiesabout NETWORKS across the six sites

Figure 3.46 Key for the cubes in the graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities across the six sites




Figure 3.48 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunitiesabout ACCESS across the six sites (explanatory chart in thenext page)

Figure 3.49 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about RESOURCES across the six sites




• O r i g i n a t i n g t h e f i r s t C D F

o n l y

f o r h o u s i n g c o s t s t o c o n s t i t u t e

a

s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y

a n d

l e s s

d e p e n d e n c y

a c t i n g

a s

a

s u p p o r t t o C O D I f u n d s .

• T h e r e

a r e

w e l f a r e

f u n d s

a v a i l a b l e

w h i c h

p r o v i d e s

f o r

e l d e r l y

c a r e ,

s u p p o r t

f o r

f a m i l i e s

f a c i n g

d i f f i c u l t i e s

w i t h

l o a n

p a y m e n t s , a n d

a c t s

a s

s e c u r i t y

f o r i r r e g u l a r i n c o m e s

o f c o m m u n i t y m e m b e r s .

• T i m i n g

i s

a n o t h e r f a c t o r t h a t

a s s o c i a t e s

w i t h

c o m m u n i t i e s

c h o o s i n g

C D F

v s .

C O D I

d e p e n d i n g

o n

h o w

m u c h

m o n e y C O D I h a s a t a n y g i v e n

t i m e ( e . g . a c q u i r i n g m o r e f r o m

C O D I

i n

2 0 0 8 ,

i m m e d i a t e l y

f o l l o w i n g

t h e

s u c c e s s f u l

p r o t e s t s )

• B a a n

M a n

K o n g

d o e s

n o t

a d d r e s s c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t a r e

l i v i n g

i n

t h e

m o s t p r e c a r i o u s

s i t u a t i o n ,

i n

a r e a s

w i t h o u t

s e c u r e t e n u r e , u n d e r t h e t h r e a t

o f e v i c t i o n .

• C o m m u n i t i e s t h a t a r e s o c i a l l y

a n d

s p a t i a l l y

f r a g m e n t e d

i n c l u d i n g m i g r a n t s .

• C o o p e r a t i v e s

f o r

w e l f a r e

m e c h a n i s m

s

w i t h i n

t h e

c o m m u n i t y

g i v e

t h e

o p p o r t u -

n i t y t o s c a l e - u p t o m e c h a n i s m

f o r w i d e r i n

c l u s i o n o f i n d i v i d u -

a l s

a n d

g r o u p s

w h i c h

a r e

c u r r e n t l y b

e i n g

e x c l u d e d

f r o m

B M

d o

n o t

c o n s t i t u t e

a

v i a b l e

s o l u t i o n

t o

o v e r c o m e

t h e

g a p

b e t w e e n

t h e

m e m b e r s

o f

c o m m u n i t i e

s

a n d

t h e

p o o r e s t

o f t h e

p o o r

t h a t s t i l l c a n n o t

a c c e s s f o r

f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s .

• E c o n o m i c a l

c o n s t r a i n

t o

a c q u i r e l a n

d f o r t h e L a n d B a n k .

• I n f r a s t r u c t u r e : l a c k o f c o n n e c -

t i v i t y o f s i t e s , e s p e c i a l l y

r e l o c a -

t i o n s i t e s t o s e r v i c e s a s l a n d i s

c h e a p e s t

i n

t h e s e

d i s - c o n n e c t e d

a r e a s

a s

a

r e s u l t o f p r i v a t e o w n e r s

h i p a n d

p a r t n e r s h i p s .

• M o r e

d e v e l o p e d

C D F

e x p a n -

s i o n

t o

i n c l u d e

w e l f a

r e

f u n d

a l r e a d y ,

b u t a l s o

“ O c c u p a t i o n ”

t r a i n i n g a s w e l l a s I n s u

r a n c e .

• L a n d

s h a r i n g

s c h e m e s -

4

c o m m u n i t i e s

c o m i n g

t o g e t h e r

t o

s h a r e

c o s t o f

p u r

c h a s i n g

l a n d o n o n e s i t e .

“ S a n

g S a a n

c o m m u n i t y .

“

• L a c k

o f a v a i l a b l e

l a n d

( l a r g e

a m o u n t o f p r i v a t e

o w

n e r s h i p

i . e .

l a n d s p e c u l a t i o n )

• E x c l u d e d

m e m b e r s

o f

c o m m u n i t y n o t h a v i n g

a c c e s s

t o B M d

u e t o a f f o r d a b i l i t y .

B a n g K h e n

K h l i o n g T o e y

P a s i C h a l o e n

R a n g s i t

B a n g P u

R a t t a n a k o s i n I s l a n d

A C C E S S




Figure 3.50 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunitiesabout KNOWLEDGE SHARING across the six sites

Figure 3.51 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about DESIGN across the six sites(explanatory chart in the next page)

Figure 3.52 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about ROLES AND NEGOTIATION acrossthe six sites






Figure 3.54 Summary of problems and opportunities across the six sites

Figure 3.53 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about PARTNERSHIPS ANDINFRASTRUCTURE across the six sites (explanatory chart in the next page)






Figure 3.55 Multi scalar entry points of analysis diagram ( see next page for key and explanation)

Lack of

r e g u l a on

by the municipality

addressing migraon

and urban sprawl

within the community give opportu-

nity to scale-up to mechanism for wider

inclusion of individuals and groups which are

currently excluded from BM …don’t constute

a viable soluon to overcome the gap

between the members of communies and

the poorest of the poor that cant access

for financial difficulty

Started grading

housing grade a and

grade b inpung their

own design guidelines

for quality and

p r e s e r v a o n

Global city

compeon demands

a certain type of

infrastructure and development- conflicng vision for

the area. Land security

lease throughout

the site

CDF

is also being

used to bypass

funding from CODI (e.g.

Ruamjai Pahana Klang),

where community does

not have collecve

land tle

Increase density

in an area of rapid

urbanizaon could

constute a long term

viable response to the

scarcity of available land

in the urban area of

Bangkok

C o m m u n i e s

squeezed into and in

between undesirable

land such as underneath

expressways, other mes

on land earmarked for

d e v e l o p m e n t

Families are afraid

of invesng in their homes, insecurity over

evicon, enre communies

living in temporary- looking

structures for over 40years,

because the port actually visits

the community every year to

make sure they don’t build

permanent structures

Ta-Ko canal”

community is notallowed to have any

commercial activities in

the area or lower level of

their houses which has

constrains on their

l i v e l i h o o d s

Excluded

members of

community not

having access to BM

due to affordability

In

the slum

formaon they had

more space, but lost in

the process of appropria-

on of near home

spaces when they

get relocated

BM does not

address communies

that are living in the most

precarious situaon, in

areas without secure

tenure, under the threat

of evicon

Scarce design

response to

communies needs as

a consequence of

marginality of design

in list of BM

priories

Longevity of the

buildings, quality of

construcon and

design may not be

desirable in the future

priories

NATIONAL/CODI

CITY

MUNICIPALITY

COMMUNITY

FINANCE LAND AND HOUSING CONSTRUCTION

DISTRICT

NETWORK




Infrastructure lack of

connecvity of sites, especially

relocaon sites to services as land is cheapest in these

disconnected areas as a

result of private

ownership and

partnerships

Roles and responsibili-

es on environmental issues,

such as waste management, are

not clearly defined, which creates

gaps of management that is reflected on

the precarious condions of marginalized

pockets of poor selements. Therefore

this gives opportunity to create partner-

ships among communies and with

local authories as well as with

habitants of other parts of the

district affected by the

same issue

CPB prefer to

have profession-

als take the lead

on tourism

U n e v e n

awareness of

resources and informaon available in other

districts due to scarcity

of networks and

partnerships

CPB aempted for

two years to get

different communies

to network, however

this top down

approach has been

unsuccessful

Lile power to

negoate with or

influence the Port

consequently, have

weak linkages to

community on

Port land

Lile power to

negoate with or

influence the Port

consequently, have

weak linkages to

community on

Port land

Imbalance of roles and relaonships, canal

cleaning every month with

borrowing the BMA boats which

can on the contrary indicate the

imbalance sharing of relaonship and

roles resulted in the communies

acng like a municipality which

might result with over burden

of work and an isolated city

p e r c e p o n

There are

weaker network

linkages between BM

and non BM communi-

es and those

beyond the

district

Potenal for

future linkages between

communies through the

exchange of knowledge and

informaon about BM

process in terms of upgrad-

ing and the challenges

that appears during

the process

The community

leaders such as in

Bang Poo know each

other well whilst the

communies are not

as familiar with

each other

The municipal-

ity is not communi-

cang across the

province with other

municipalies

Design in CODI

could play an acve

role in strengthening spaal and social linkages

within the community as

well as between the

community and the

surrounding areas

Design in CODI

could play an acve role

in strengthening spaal

and social linkages within

the community as well as

between the community

and the surrounding

areas

One architect for

the whole of Bangkok

and lack of professionals

means the community can be

misguided and are not fully

informed about the effects

and consequences of having

certain developments

Uneven knowledge

between the communies

can create misunderstanding

and fragmented partnerships as

one example indicates a commu-

nity member employee of govern-

ment opposing to BM project

due to not being aware of the

project being supported

by government

Various government

departments holdtraining

for communies with two

representaves from each elected

to aend, however they are

expected to relate to the rest of the

group; but the skills they are taught

are not easily transferable at mes

irrelevant, thus the community

has lost interest in this

o p p o r t u n i t y

C o m m u n i e s

squeezed into and in

between undesirable

land such as underneath

expressways, other mes

on land earmarked for

d e v e l o p m e n t

The district

office is under

r es o u r c ed

PARTNERSHIPS AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMUNITY MOBILIZATION AND CAPACITY BUILDING

Using protest as

a means of commu-

nicaon which can be

related to need of

capacity and space

for negoaon




Figure 3.56 Key of the Multi scalar entry points of analysisdiagram ( previous gure, page 60)

MULTI SCALAR ENTRY POINTS DIAGRAMEXPLANATION

Comparing the different stacks of density thatreect the opportunities and problems, wewere able to identify the entry points that wouldaddress these problems. For example, in Rolesand Partnerships the lack of concession andcooperation between the actors is partly due tothe fact that roles and responsibilities are notclearly dened. Therefore we see negotiation canbe the entry point towards solving these factors,as people can understand their responsibilitiesand be able to reach agreements for their needsby making partnerships and alliances and better delimit the space for negotiation.

On the horizontal axis is the initial lens throughwhich we analysed the sites. The vertical axisindicates the scale at which the problems couldbe addressed according to where the relevantactors are positioned, and additionally require amulti-scalar response. The spheres are colour coded according to the entry point by whichthey could be resolved. The different sizes of the spheres reect the importance of issues

with regard to the horizontal axis, large being adominant factor, medium size being signicantand small being dormant.

Here, the common denominators of opportunitiesand constraints across the sites have beenidentied and classify the resonant issues. Itis important to challenge the scale at whichthey should be addressed and recognize theinvolvement of the actors and clarify the extentof their roles and responsibility. This enhancedgrasp, informed our collective clustering of

these underlying triggers, shifting the initialscope to encompass these new four overarchingcategories: Negotiation, Networking, LandAccess and Alliances with design being inherit inall of these.




3.5 CONCLUSION

Through our exposure to the work of CODI wehave seen how Soomsook Boonyabanchapromotes a “paradigm shift in housingdevelopment by people building new localpartnerships.” This process of transformationemphasises the change from supply to demanddriven housing development by the community.However, in order to ensure the long-term successof this project there needs to be more room for manoeuvre, spaces for negotiation and a clearer denition of the roles and responsibilities of actors. This will be essential in order to increase

accountability and promote good governance of citywide responsibilities.

The rules of the formal game exclude manyoptions presented by informal solutions.“In summary – the urban poor rely, for their survival, on their capacity to break the rules,whilst the state relies for its success onenforcement of the rules. Neither side succeedsin solving the problem and other players such asformal nancial institutions remain on the outsidenot knowing how, why and where they can t in.

No one wins”. (McLeod & Mullard, Bridging theFinance Gap in Housing & Infrastructure, 2006)

Since housing design regulations are madeto t the middle class, CODI is using politicalnegotiation to redene standards to better suitpoor communities. This is conicting to BMpractices as there is a limited design response onCODI’s behalf. Communities are given an optionfrom a catalogue of housing design, neglectingthe full capacity of community architects, focusingtransformation on prioritising the social attributesof the programme and overlooking the power of design as a means to reinforce the social aspectof it.

A recurrent matter in all this issues arose, theneed of a more effective knowledge-sharingscheme that is crucial for the communities toopen opportunities for negotiation and makeinformed decisions about design, land acquisition,and manage various nancing systems thatthey are actively engaged in. The outcomes of these analyses will inform the strategies in thenext chapter, building upon the strengths andopportunities whilst effectively addressing theproblems and issues at a multi-scalar level and

with the inclusion of the relevant actors.



STRATEGIES

“ Networks have power, they are visible unlike individuals

who are invisible.”


Translation: “Economically Sustainable Community”, Photo by McKenzie O’Neill




STRATEGIES



66 STRATEGIES

4.0 STRATEGIES4.1 VISION

In this report we have sought to identify themain issues of the BM Programme in the widecontext of the city of Bangkok. Our analysis alsoappraised the opportunities and challenges of theProgramme.

Among the latter, we identify: land accessibility

and affordability, spaces of negotiation, rolesand responsibilities of the various actors, limiteddesign responses, and production of knowledge.All these challenges are vitally connected tovarious nancial systems being the main driver for further possibility of development.

Therefore, our vision is to build a strongnetwork of communities able to negotiate their spaces of participation in a political arena. Thisshould happen through an effective process of knowledge-sharing which would also ensure

better design responses with impacts on differentscales – from community, through district andnally a city level.

VISION

In order to achieve this vision, we propose thefollowing strategies for community development:

• Increase land accessibility and affordability • Strengthen networks and capitalize design

solutions through a knowledge sharing

process

• Decrease vulnerability of communities byexpanding accessibility to alternative funding

• Develop alliances among the actors tooptimise the capacity of negotiation and toredene responsibilities

Within these strategies, we develop eightproposals to address the different challengesin the variety of scales of the urban processes:

community, district and city. Some of our proposals present a synergy among them and arecrosscutting through several of the challenges weidentify in the diagnosis.




F i g u r e

4 . 1 S t r a t e g

i c V i s i o n :

“ B u

i l d a s

t r o n g n e

t w o r k o

f c o m m u n

i t i e s a

b l e t o

n e g o

t i a t e t h e

i r s p a c e s o

f p a r t i c

i p a

t i o n

i n a p o

l i t i c a

l a r e n a

”



68 STRATEGIES

4.2 STRATEGIES ANDPROPOSALS

4.2.1 INCREASE LANDACCESSIBILITY AND AFFORDABILITY

In Bangkok, the urban-rural interface is a highlydynamic space, affected by multiple forces, bothhuman and environmental. The urban footprintis expanding outwards impacting surroundingterritories while a constant inux of rural migrants

are drawn inwards towards the city centre. Thecombination of these two opposing forces hasresulted in the urbanisation of agriculture. Thepressures between sprawl and migration placedemands on land, so there is a great need todevelop mechanisms that could accommodategrowing urban populations.

Due to restricted accessibility of land plots,communities are forced to live in isolated areaswith insufcient infrastructure. This social andspatial disconnection consequently results in

difculty accessing economic opportunities. Eventhough some communities, such as Rangsit,listed a set of criteria for livelihood, includingproximity to their original site and accessibility tochildren’s schools, in most instances the decidingfactor was the price of the land. As large portionsof land are developed over time this could leadto an increase in urban sprawl and a lack of productivity within communities.

LAND

With this being said, there is a great willingnessamongst communities for alternative buildingtypologies. In our interviews with the Bang Pucommunities there was a positive response to our proposed ideas of housing typologies that would

offer more exibility and higher density,

GOAL OF OUR STRATEGY

Based on observations of the multiple realitiesin Bangkok that affect its markets and people,the acknowledged necessity to address notonly permanent residents but also temporaryones and the challenges, current limitations andpossibilities of the BM Programme, we proposethree actions oriented towards densication,intensication and increased productivity of land.They would not only result in improved affordabilityand accessibility of land for communities, butaim to have positive implications in the social,economic, spatial and environmental spheres atthe citywide level.




Figure 4.2b Land to be developed in Pasi Chaloen

Figure 4.2a Community over water in Bang Pu

Figure 4.2c Canal community in Bang Bua


Photo by Jennifer Cirne




70 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 1. DENSITY

Increasing density for better affordability and

accessibility

Where there is scarcity of land, like in PathumThani and Pasi Chaloen, the potential of increasing density for better affordability andaccessibility needs to be explored. Morecommunities can join together to acquire landsimilar to several communities in Rangsit (SeeFigure 4.4, note this image does not depictRangsit). However, instead of opting for an areathat would have normally been used, they canchoose a smaller plot, possibly in a more central

area (applicable also for individual communities),and a design solution that allows for higher density(See Figure 4.3).

However, these re-densication schemes canonly be successful if they accommodate thecommunity’s social and livelihood needs. This

would be achieved with the active involvement of the community in the design process and a re-denition of the role of the community architect.

The main actors involved in the implementationof this strategy are the municipality, localauthorities, CODI and the community architects.This neighbourhood design proposal at thecommunity scale needs to be incorporated in andfacilitated by a densication policy framework

at the metropolitan level as a coordinated workamong the several municipalities that formBangkok city. We recognize that the mitigationof urban sprawl requires cooperation betweenlocal and district authorities following a nationalstrategy for sustainable urban development.

Figure 4.3 Illustration of how half the amount of money can be used to purchase land by increasing density.

LAND




Figure 4.4 Representation of how densication can provide housing, social and livelihood responses in restricted land availability or more opportunities of land for various communities.



72 STRATEGIES LAND

PROPOSAL 2. INTENSITY

Increasing productivity of interstitial spaces

Interstitial space, meaning “in between”characterizes many of Bangkok’s urbanlandscape. There is an opportunity for landreadjustment on these unlled, open spacefragments that would offer greater exibility of spatial uses in the city centre. Exploring strategiesfor possible community usage is highly attractivefor various reasons — the potential of the land, asseen by the landowner, has already been fullled.They have been subjected to market forces andthe estimated prot has already been achieved

therefore interest in further investment is lost.

They do however remain under-developed,forgotten and unrecognizable as placessuitable for additional, alternative use. As such,they represent an opportunity for adjacentcommunities to appropriate or negotiate with thelandowner. Recognizing the risks of pollution andtrafc, the opportunity of these sites lies in theparadox of their centrality contrasting with their state of oblivion. Increasing the intensity of thesespaces by incorporating them for community usehas positive implications on various scales.

Figure 4.5 Interstitial space under raised houses used as community space.

In the city scale, they function as cohesivetransitions between landscapes, which resultsin a better integration of urban fabric. Theyhave been created with the fragmentation of infrastructure in Bangkok and could work towardsreconnecting it again; in the district scale, theyrepresent the opportunity of bridging communitiestogether; in the community scale, they dissolvethe strong boundaries between the differentcommunities and open up communities to eachother. The actors involved in this process are

the communities, public and private landowners,municipalities and district authorities.

Interstitial Spaces: Figure 4.5 demonstrates a possible useof the abandoned space under the raised homes that arebuilt above water. Some people use this space for storageor garbage disposal, which was observed on site in Bang Pu. This interstitial space can be used in many ways that best ts the community, such as communal meeting space,and/or children’s play area. It can also be used for individual family use, such as dining area, living area, and/or storage.Figure 4.6 demonstrates another type of interstitial spacesadjacent to communities that have no specic use, asobserved in some communities in Khlong Toey. This can

be used as space for community social activities, art performances, and commercial market activities.




F i g u r e 4

. 6 L a n

d a

d j a c e n

t t o c o m m u n

i t i e s u s e

d f o r c o m m u n

i t y a c

t i v i t i e s .



74 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 3. PRODUCTIVITY

Rental schemes as social enterprise

Many individuals do not have the capability or willingness to enter the BM Programme. There isa lack of opportunities for temporary immigrantsor migrants to rent a house, and as a resultthey are squatting in the central areas of thecity. Others are reluctant to join the Programmebecause they are afraid of getting into debtwithout having another means of increasing their incomes.

At the community level, this could be solved

through rental schemes in the form of anongoing social enterprise as demonstrated inFigures 4.8 and 4.9. Recently there was a newscheme developed in the Programme that wasestablished in the rural Chom Pare community inKhonkaen Province. It will be important that this

LAND

scheme is further developed so that it could beexpanded and applied to communities in urbanareas.

Initially investing money in building rental facilitiesand later collecting the revenue represents anoption for communities to reduce its debt to CODI.This proposal is also suitable for areas with highmigration rates such as Rangsit and Bang Pu.It would not only provide housing opportunities,but facilitate social integration of migrants as

well. We do however recognize that this processcannot only be community driven — there is aneed for a migrant policy at the city level or atleast at municipal level in most affected areassuch as Rangsit and Bang Pu.

Figure 4.7 Existing rental units overlooking the Khlong Toey market demonstrate a rental demand in the Bangkok metropolis

Photo by Silvia Chi




LOAN LOAN LOAN

Figure 4.8 Rental SchemesThe diagram shows that by communities investing together in potential rental locations within thesite, the return can be used towardscommunity based activities or maintenance costs.

Figure 4.9 Intensifying Rental Schemes: As the community enterprise grows it can improve the social and spatial conditions of the community



76 STRATEGIES

4.2.2 STRENGTHEN NETWORKSTHROUGH KNOWLEDGE SHARING

PROCESS

In order to empower communities and individuals,knowledge has to be communicated andexchanged in a transparent and effective manner.Communities can take advantage of their existingassets, thus providing community members withthe opportunity to learn from past experiences,knowledge, skills, and capabilities (See Figure4.11). Although many of the communities wevisited have adopted a highly effective means for

knowledge sharing (See Figure 4.10), there is stilla demand for a more efcient scheme that wouldprovide better distribution of problem solvingapproaches and issue based information.

The main actors involved in the implementation of the following proposals would be the communityand NULICO. Most of these proposals would beimplemented at the community level. NULICOaims to connect various communities who arein process of undergoing the BM Programme.Further, NULICO has initiated a forum on their site

to exchange information between communities.These strategies aim to enhance networking atdifferent scales as well as the upgrading processat large.

KNOWLEDGE





Figure 4.10a

Figure 4.10b

Figure 4.10c

Figure 4.10d

Figure 4.10a- 4.10d Community members and leaders inBang Pu participating in issue based meetings and designworkshops with regional community leaders and MSc BUDDand UDP students.




Figure 4.11 Networks at ScaleDiagram representing the community networks at different scales. Working from community tocommunity, community to metropolitan scale of Bangkok, and to the national scale reaching Thailand.



78 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 1. SKILL BANK

In examining a number of communities

undergoing the BM Programme, there is a greatvariety in their level of organization. Some of them have been successful in sharing knowledgeand collectively improving their communities.Through community collective action, thisscheme illustrates how people can work together and invest time and effort in exchange for agreater benet. However, in some communitiesthere is an abundance of skills, but a lack of community networking among members. Thishas resulted in a lack of productivity within thecommunity and has isolated them from creatingcollaborative relations and knowledge sharingwith other communities.

Skills Bank is a strategy designed to poolresources where communities have access to theservices they need and in exchange offer a skill of their own such as gardening, cooking, or building.This exchange is done through a mediator thatconnects participants together based on their demands and capabilities. Every individual in thecommunity is registered with what they can offer,as well as what they need in terms of skills andservices; tangible and intangible. A communitycredit system is also adopted. Through themediator, a skill holder is linked with the recipientbased on whatever service that can be providedand on that basis earns credit with the Skills Bank(Lets link UK, 1991). The participant can then useearned credit on a skill or service that is offered inthat scheme.

Figure 4.12 diagrams how people connect witheach other through their skills. One side of the

box illustrates their desired skill or service, whilethe other illustrates what they can offer. Theskill holder connects on one side with the skillreceiver, while on the other side connects withanother desired skill as shown in gure 4.14,which also illustrates how different skills banksfrom different communities can connect for awide pool or resources.

Bringing this proposal on a larger scale, mediatorsof each community Skills Bank can connect their pool of resources together and link individual

needs and capacities across communities. Thesenetworks could eventually extend beyond BMcommunities to address vulnerabilities of those

KNOWLEDGE

Figure 4.12 Diagram of each participant in the skills bank

Figure 4.13 Diagram of each community skills bank hublinking to other skills bank hubs from other communities

Figure 4.14 Illustration of individual participants inrelationship to each other

excluded from the services provided by the city.

In a time where traditional crafts are diminishing,it is more important than ever to nd ways tosafeguard communities from turning awayfrom ancient skills and sacred traditions. TheSkills Bank presents the opportunity to shareknowledge across communities and generations.




Figure 4.15 Sharing skills: Bow tie making

Figure 4.16 Sharing skills: Carpenter Figure 4.17 Sharing skills: Belt making



80 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 2. COMMUNITY RESOURCENODE

Through the observation and evidence gatheredfrom the eld, it is demonstrated that capacityof design to act as a tool to improve the livingconditions of these communities is not beingfully explored. This is where the communityarchitect could be part of a process of productionof knowledge that engaged the community in theprocess of design. For example, in our eldwork,in the Khlong Mai Tai community, a workshopwas conducted to share information about thelogistics of a survey that proved that the cost of construction could be reduced by 50,000 Baht if recycled materials were used.

The proposal

The Community Resource Node is a structurecomposed of a team of practitioners, communityarchitects, and academia that gives technicalsupport to communities on the most pressingissues they identify. The practitioners alsofacilitate the communication within eachcommunity as well as among the members of

different communities from different districts.

Furthermore, these practitioners act as facilitatorsin the decision making process by giving informedadvices on specic matters, such as designsolutions, nance, agriculture, environmentalissues, recycling options, etc.

The Community Resource Node would beinitiated at the community scale. Each nodewould then connect with the others and create awider pool of resources: a network of Community

Resource Nodes would be created at thedistrict and metropolitan level, allowing roomfor communities to share successful as well asunsuccessful practices of how singular casesfaced and eventually solved particular issuesthey had to deal with, in order to be able to adopta solution that best ts community’s conditionsand collective needs.

This proposal gives the opportunity for peopleto express their physical housing problems anddiscuss design solutions. Figures 4.19, 4.20

and 4.21 illustrates the type of suggestions or informed design solutions that are discussed inthose community resource nodes. Use of spaceis a wide issue, for example, since people in

many of the communities visited are alreadyexperts on efcient use of space. These designrecommendations take these capabilities toanother level, where people can utilize thespace for community meetings, markets, andcommunity theatres.

Implementation on site

Community Resource Nodes would arise fromthe recognition and improvement of existinginformal and fragmented practices of knowledgesharing already in place. The existence of suchpractices partly relies on the activity of NULICOnetwork of communities and partly on the gureof community architects.

The scaling-up of these scattered practicesinto a formal hub for the creation and sharingof knowledge on technical matters wouldoccur with the inclusion of universities, throughspecic educative programmes for the training of young community architects, nancial advisers,agriculturalists and so on, as well as throughmore advanced research programs. CODI wouldalso play a role, mainly in the initial phase, interms of facilitating the connection between theactors, but may drop out once the network isstrong and able to rely on itself.

KNOWLEDGE

Figure 4.18 Community architect facilitating informed knowledge sharing on design solutions




Figure 4.19Optimising the use

of communal spaceswithin community for group meetings

Figure 4.20 Optimising the useof communal spaceswithin community for commercial and market activities

Figure 4.21

Optimising the useof communal spaceswithin community for community theatre and arts activities



82 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 3. CREATION OF CHANNELSOF EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

The following strategy proposes to enhancenetworking at different scales, resourcemanagement and nally to address thedocumentation and dissemination of informationrelated not only to the upgrading, but other lessons learnt among the communities. The latter will be implemented through a multimedia librarywhere communities will have access. This wouldwork as a hub where they can see what other communities have been doing and what issuesthey had faced to learn from them and to identifysolutions or potential improvements to their community, through channels of communications.

Figure 4.23 represents a proposed communitylibrary where archives of different communitiesare stored through different medias for easyaccess by all people. Figure 4.22 illustrates the‘information hubs’ within the districts and theexchange of resources and knowledge on thewider city scale addressing issues and lessonslearned throughout the different communitiesundergoing or have already undergone BM

Programme. These hubs are accessible by allpeople and can also offer information to people

KNOWLEDGE

who don’t know much about BM and how toconnect with other communities.

The main actors in this process would beNULICO, who has interest in the informationexchange and who represents the wider scale,and the community who represent issue basedgroups at the micro scale. Other actors suchas, the media, local authorities, ACHR, andacademia are already documenting a largeamount of sites, which could set a precedent for this scheme. As community residents who havealready completed upgrading and know best whatthe experience entails, they are better placedto inform their counterparts than governmentbureaucrats who view things from afar.”(Archer,2010)

The process will primarily start within the districtand branch out to the wider city scale. Theuse of mix-media such as video, cartoons andrecordings will help deliver the message to allmembers of community in terms of addressing

members with illiteracy or other disabilities.

Figure 4.22 Diagram illustrating different community libraries connecting together on a wider city scale




F i g u r e 4 . 2

3 C o m m u n

i t y l i b r a r y w

h e r e a r c

h i v e s

a r e s

t o r e

d t h r o u g

h d i f f e r e n

t m e

d i a s



84 STRATEGIES

4.2.3 DECREASE VULNERABILITYOF COMMUNITIES BY EXPANDING

ACCESSIBILITY TO ALTERNATIVEFUNDING

Cooperatives form the basis of the BMProgramme. In order for communities to jointhe Programme, they must form savings groupsbeforehand. In 2008 when CODI’s funds driedup and there was no money to loan out to newprojects, communities saw the importanceof having CDFs in order to establish nancialindependence as well as help others in need.

FINANCE

“The GHB nances CODI to provide loansfor low-income communities gathered under

savings groups. These are the borrowersand CODI evaluates their ability to repay in the long term. CODI charges a two per

cent interest to the groups and they chargea six per cent to the individuals interested

on taking loans. The margin is used by thesaving groups mainly to develop a welfare

system within the communities.

The main difculty is that cheap funds canonly come from the government basically

from tax money. The market is not able to dothat because the operational costs and risksare too high. Then, the main issue is to use

tax money wisely as CODI is doing.”

-

Kitti Patpong-pibul, Chairman of theHousing Finance Association in Thailand

Photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani Photo by Silvia Chi

As shown in the photos in Figure 4.24 demonstrate how BaanMankong communities are organising and administering funds

within the savings groups.

Figure 4.24 Savings across communities




Photo by Farida Farag

Photo by Elian Pena

Photo by Noor al Ghafari

Photo by Noor al Ghafari

Photo by Elian Pena

Photo by Farida Farag



86 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 1. BOOSTER FUNDS

The Booster Fund is a community collective fund

that enables the poor of the poor to access theBM Programme through a form of welfare in order to reach the 10 % of the total amount they needto join. The residents of the community wouldpool together their resources to help excludedhouseholds to join the Programme. In return,these members would have to offer a serviceto the community, rather than having a 4 %interest per annum, as in the CDFs. The Booster Fund would expand upon the existing CDFs asalternative sources of funding. This would act asa mechanism to empower the communities, by

reducing their vulnerability and integrating theminto the larger collective network.

As illustrated in gure 4.25, in order to supportmarginalized community members, the sponsors(i.e other community members) may at their owndiscretion give more money to the savings groupsto allow those marginalized to be part of theupgrading scheme with the rest of the community.Through the joint input of the community, thosewho are excluded are given the chance to joinBM Programme, as illustrated in gure 4.26. Inreturn, those nancially supported members willoffer a service to their community in return, for example gardening, to pay off that “loan”.

A similar example was conducted in theSamki Ruam Jai (SRJ) Community. “Thecommunity savings group in SRJ has a welfareprogram, which was nanced partly by member contributions (in which each member puts in 1Baht every day) and partly from a portion of the

interest margin the community earns on CODI

housing loans (we borrow from CODI at 2% buton- lend to families at 6%), and this added marginsupports most of our community activities, addsfunds to our welfare program, and provides abuffer fund to take care of repayments in caseswhere individual members have problemsrepaying.” (ACHR, 2008) SRJ is an importantreference as to how community savings groupsare addressing reoccurring nancial challengesfrom an effective and new position.

The main actors involved in the implementation

of this process would be the community andNULICO. The criteria of this strategy requiresthat households be in close proximity to thecommunity being upgraded and that their ownsavings groups should be formed to contributean affordable amount and to demonstrate their ability to self-organize.

The rst stage of the process depends on thelength of time it takes to raise enough money toreach the 10 % needed to join the BM Programme.These members will continue to be supportedby welfare, until their debts are paid, but are stillexpected to contribute whatever they can, aswell as provide a service to the community thatis supporting them. NULICO will act as an agentto spread this practice across the communities tohave a simultaneous development.

FINANCE

Figure 4.25 Illustration of marginalized community member in relationshipto the rest of community in termsof booster loans or services.




F i g u r e

4 . 2 6

I l l u s

t r a t i o n o

f b e

f o r e a n

d a

f t e r e

f f e c t o

f t h e

B o o s

t e r

F u n

d p r o p o s a

l



88 STRATEGIES

4.2.4 DEVELOP ALLIANCESAMONG THE ACTORS TO

OPTIMISE THE CAPACITY OFNEGOTIATION AND TO REDEFINERESPONSIBILITIES

The basis of the BM Programme is a communitydriven process addressing specic social,physical and nancial needs. This approach iseffective in its nature and the fact that they areproviding their own services can help build thecommunity’s capacity and ability to self-organize,as well as open a space for participation in the

decision making process. However, this alsorepresents a risk of instrumentalisation of thecommunities, so there needs to be a balanceof power between the local authorities and thecommunities.

The city planning and the development of mega-projects that have a major impact acrossdifferent scales and actors also requires afurther engagement of all of this actors that arebeing impacted, in a new denition of their rolesin the decision making process. Figure 4.27

exhibits actors across scales and roles withincommunities and inuencing communities intransformation.

ALLIANCE

Figure 4.27 Space for Negotiation: Community Members and Leaders across Bangkok

“Citizens ‘should be able to choose freely the conditions of their own association’

and determine the ‘form and direction of their polity’. This implies certain rights and obligations from the side of citizens and ‘acommon structure of political action’ that is

‘a “neutral” basis of relations and institutionswhich can be regarded as impartial of even-handed with respect to their personal ends,hopes and aspirations’”. (Held, 1995: 153-6)

(Patomaki, 2003: 349)






90 STRATEGIES

PROPOSAL 1. REDEFINITION OF ROLESAND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY

In order to address these concerns, the role of thestakeholders must be redened to have a moreresponsive system of governance. The aim of theinitiative is to include the communities affected bythe city planning in the decision making process.This proposal will help to bridge the gap betweentop-down and bottom-up strategies through theeffective transfer of knowledge and information.

Furthermore, this would re-involve the stateand others actor to participate in communitymobilization and capacity building. The localauthorities must enhance their own capacity toprovide effective solutions and basic services tothe communities. In order to ensure the futuresuccess of this initiative, it will be important tocreate a platform that monitors and evaluates thecommunity governance system.

At the city level, the City Development Committee(CDC), which is comprised of representativesfrom the municipality, the community, CODI,

universities and experts, creates space for negotiation and acts as a neutral third party whilestill maintaining the insight given by the differentactors involved (See Figure 4.28).

The role of the CDC needs to be redened andtheir responsibilities expanded. Furthermore,involving other actors depending on the natureof the situation can also increase the capacityof this committee. A methodology to monitor andevaluate the community governance system canbe created with the help of the CDC.

Additionally, within the Committee, communitiesand local authority can negotiate andbalance areas of responsibility, priorities andimplementation of strategies and visions fromthe community to citywide level. Finally, with thisstrengthened partnership, the community couldbe able to negotiate and nd alternative solutionsfor multi-scalar conicts at the national level.

ALLIANCE

Figure 4.28 Bridging mechanics which connect Top Down (Blue) and Bottom Up (Orange) Agendas and Governance.




Figure 4.29 Combining top down plans with community input in Rattanakosin Island within national level conservation planning



92 STRATEGIES

4.3 SYNERGICCONNECTIONS BETWEENSTRATEGIC PROPOSALS

The added value of the individual proposalstackling land mechanisms, network knowledgemanagement, funding issues and possiblealliances at city level, lies in the potential of notonly complementary but synergic reinforcementsbetween them. As such, these connections canmultiply strategic effects over time and scale:

Rental scheme as social enterprise (Land) -Booster Fund (Finance)

The rental schemes will provide revenue toreduce its debt to CODI, which will strengthen thecapacity to access land and housing. Moreover,the capital going back to the community savingsgroups will reinforce the booster fund.

Community Resource Node (Knowledge

Network) - Land

The Node can help provide technical supportfor land strategies, i.e. advise how communitiescould shift their approach for housing towardsdensication to t with the urban grain, suggestideas to increase the productivity of interstitialspaces or help develop skills to manage therental scheme.

Multimedia Library (Knowledge Network) -Land

Document all the land negotiation methods todistribute them to other communities.

Alliance - Land

Providing the space to discuss the role of actorsby involving the community in the planningprocess can support negotiation for the use of interstitial spaces and institutionalize bottom-updensication schemes.

Knowledge Network to Alliances - Alliancesto Knowledge Network

The Node can use the Multimedia Library as arepository of individual skills at local communityand district level to distribute innovation,intervention and experiences city-wide. Thecooperation of the Node and CDC (a platformthat involves professional and academic expertsas well as authorities representatives) willprovide a dynamic mechanism that can distributeknowledge between all levels.

Also, involvement in the Node activities is a

way to expand CDC’s role and responsibilitiesin balancing community tasks. Throughmultidimensional networking, this three-partitesystem will enhance horizontal as well as verticalknowledge sharing.

SYNERGIES




DENSITY:Increasing density for better

affordability and accessibility

PRODUCTIVITY:Rental schemes as social enterprise

INTENSITY:Increasing productivity of

interstitial spaces

Creations of Channels of

Effective Communication

Bank of skills

COMMUNITYResource NODE

Redefinition of roles and

areas of responsibility

BOOSTER FUNDS

< < < < < S p a c e f o r n e g o t i a t i o n

+ D e c i s i o n m a k i n g

> > < < N e t w

o r k o f K

n o w l e d

g e > > < <

E x p a n d i n g

t h e r o l e> > >

< < < A d d s p e c i a

l i s t a s s e t t o t h e n o d e

D o c u m e n t a

n d d i s t r i b

u t e

LAND

KNOWLEDGE

ALLIANCE

FINANCE

STRATEGY PROPOSAL

N A T I O N A L

L E V E L

M E T R O P O

L I T A N

D I S T R I C T

C O M M U N I T Y

> > < < N e t w

o r k

o f K n o w l e d

g e > > < <

> > < < N e t w o r k

o f K n o w l e d g e> > < <

< < < < < <

< < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <

v R e s o u r c e i n

p u t

< < < I n c r e a s e c a

p i t a l >

> >

I n c r e a s e c a

p i t a l > > > > > > > > > >

A d d r e s s e d i s s u e

S T R A T E G Y



94 STRATEGIES

4.4 DE-CODI-NG STRATEGICPROPOSALS

To evaluate if the strategies here proposed arereaching the predened transformation goal of social justice, the interventions’ social and spatialoutcomes need to be tested against a set of criteria assessing changes in power relations andimproved knowledge sharing over scale and time.

Clearly, none of the proposals alone can and ismeant to address the full transformation process.They were however envisioned to tackle mostpertinent issues (as identied in the diagnosis)

at different scales. Only the combination of allproposals can possibly ensure the fullment of thedevelopment goal.

As shown in the de-codied representation of the proposals’ assessment, even though the setof actions meant to re-shape nancial policies,land and knowledge management are successfulto some extent, they can only reach their fulltransformative potential if supported by the activeinvolvement of the usually marginalized in thedecision making process. The appropriation of political space is the ultimate result of the demanddriven paradigm shift.

this pageFigure 4.30 Assessment of proposals:top to bottomCombination of Land strategy proposalsCombination of Knowledge proposals

next pageFigure 4.31 Assesment of Land proposalstop to bottomIncreasing density for better affordability and accessibility Increasing intensity of interstitial spacesIncreasing productivity: Rental schemes as social enterprise

Figure 4.32 Assessment of Knowledge proposals:top to bottomSkills Bank Community Resource NodeChannels of Effective Communication

DECODING PROPOSALS

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G

E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

Figure 4.30 Combined Assessment of proposals

Combined Land Schemes

Combined Knowledge proposals




T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W

L E D G E

S H A

R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R

E L A T I O N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W

L E D G E

S H A

R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

Figure 4.31 Assessment of Land proposals Figure 4.32 Assessment of Knowledge proposals

Density

Productivity

Intensity

Community Resource Node

Channels of Communication

Skills Bank



96 STRATEGIES

this pagetop

Figure 4.33 Assessment of Finance proposals:Booster Fund

bottom

Figure 4.34 Assessment of Alliance proposals:Redening Roles

DECODING PROPOSALS

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

T I M E

S C A L E

K N O W L E D

G E

S H A R I N G

P O W E R

R E L A T I O

N S

SPATIAL

OUTCOME

SOCIAL

OUTCOME

Figure 4.33 Assessment of Finance proposals:

Figure 4.34 Assessment of Alliance proposalsRedening Roles

Booster Fund




Figure 4.35 Assessment of Proposals:Combination of all proposals: Land, Knowledge, Finance, and Alliance Strategies



REFLECTIONS

“Slum is not in the people, it is in the system”






REFLECTIONS



100 REFLECTIONS

5.0 REFLECTIONS

We came to Bangkok as a collective of urbanpractioners, aiming to connect our theoreticalanalysis with a eld based understanding of urban transformation. Our time in the eldled us to learn of extraordinary examples of social mobilisation, where communities joinedtogether to build an entire house in one night,or exhibited such dedication to building their community network that they would travelfor days just to be included in the NULICO

meetings.

Our ideas of transformation were greatlyinuenced by our time spent in the eld. Wesaw that design is part of a collective processof promoting urban change across actors andscales. Visiting communities in various stagesof the Baan Mankong Programme, allowed usto see how communities change before, duringand after their involvement in the Programme.

We saw that design cannot stand alone,it must be linked with both top-down andbottom-up processes that are working toaddress urban inequalities. For example,even the most inspired design strategies mustbe supplemented by municipal policies thatexpose obstacles and address vulnerabilities,at the local and metropolitan level. But,perhaps more importantly we learned thatsocial mobilisation and space are profoundlyinterrelated. For the case of the BaanMankong Programme, the establishment of

community networks is an integral aspectof reaching scale. In our time in the eld our

perspective shifted from a more spatial analysisto recognizing how communities organize andknowledge production is an underlying driver of sustained change.

On the community level, it became clear that inorder to create effective change, whether thatis through our proposals for alternative housingtypologies or participatory planning practice itis important to develop interventions that are

part of a continuous process of change. Werecognize that the Baan Mankong Programmeis an ongoing process and our proposedintervention is addressing one specic momentin time.

In the eld, our design responses led us toconsider the various challenges of urbanpractitioners such as — how are we meant toshift our spatial strategies to better respondto more embryonic programmes, versusprogrammes that are much more mature and

have been part of urban processes for manyyears? And, how is it possible to be part of propelling long-term sustainable change if the design intervention is only taking placein a specic moment in time? In responseto these questions our interventions aimedto be catalytic in nature, seeking to leveragecommunity based initiatives and link our designstrategies with ongoing community goals. Byrelating spatial strategies with participatoryprocesses of local knowledge production, weseek to promote initiatives that would become

embedded in wider movements of change.




As urban practitioners we recognize that thechallenge of promoting change on small andlarge scales calls for a responsiveness that iscurrently not possible in many existing legal,political and economic frameworks. Thesesystemic and political limitations make itdifcult for spatial strategies to be implementedand sustained over time. In Bangkok, wefound that the points of insertion and theroom of maneuver for spatial interventions to

be signicantly inuential and involved in thecontinuous process of urban transformationare highly limited.

Further, it is difcult to determine how it ispossible for the participation of architects,landscape architects and urban designers tobe fully embedded in the processes of urbanchange. While we acknowledge that limitationswithin current frameworks are signicant, werecommend that the greater empowermentof design is not only essential for urban

livelihood and organizational purposes, butbecause design thinking teaches people toreinterpret existing problems and developsolutions that were previously inconceivable.Like the multiplier effect created through socialmobilisation and the production of knowledge— we recognize that design thinking could re-shape normative ideas of knowledge shareingor how spatial transformations are beingapproached.

To conclude, our eld-based study of urbanchange had a transformative effect on our outlook as practitioners. Our eldworkin Bangkok was both provocative andtransformative — it left us changed, but italso left us with larger curiosities and bigger questions. We saw that the roles of theurban practioner and the community areevolving. These changes in both the outlookof the practitioner and the participation of the

community are placing bottom-up pressureson existing frameworks and normativedevelopment practice.

In examining the future planning of Bangkok,not only in terms of space but also in termsof cultural identity and economic livelihoodit would be interesting to consider the larger implications of bottom-up movements andinformal productivity. We found that self-motivated productivity creates a dynamicquality to the city, giving a temporal identity

to each space where movement and changeis the only constant. This seems to be anintegral aspect of the culture of Bangkok andan essential element in promoting urbanlivelihoods. In looking to the future we wouldbe interested in better understanding the larger implications of informal productivity and howthis could relate to the process of reachingscale.



102 REFLECTIONS

BMK

SOCIAL JUSTICE

POWER RELATIONS

PRODUCTION OF

KNOWLEDGE

TRANSFORMATION

TOP

BOTTOM

S P A T I A L

S O C I A L

TOP

S

P A T I A L

S

O C I A L

TRANSFORMATION

SOCIAL JUSTICE

PRODUCTION OF

KNOWLEDGE POWER RELATIONS

BOTTOM

BMK

Figure 5.2 Our Paradigm Shift of Transformation post Site Analysis

Figure 5.1 Our view of Transformation before Site Analysis

SHIFT IN TRANSFORMATION




T O P

B O T T O M

S P A T I A L

S O C I A L F i g u r e 5

. 3 O n

S i t e T r a n s

f o r m a

t i o n



REFERENCES

Photo by Silvia Chi




REFERENCES



106 REFERENCES

6.1 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Envisioning transformationFigure 1.2 Community mobilisation issue based presentation (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 1.3 Community leaders participating in the feedback (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 1.4 Figure 1.3. Somsook Boonyabancha participation in our presentations in BangkokFigure 1.5 Rangsit site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 1.6 Bang Pu site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 1.7 Pasi Chaloen site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students (photo by Silvia Chi)

Figure 1.8 Rattanakosin Island site presentation by BUDD and UDP MSc students

Figure 2.1 Envisioning the transformation denitionFigure 2.2 Criteria and Indicators for our denition of transformationFigure 2.3 DECODER: a methodological tool to assess transformational processesFigure 2.4 An example of how the DECODER worksFigure 2.5 Ideal situation: transformational processes result in social justiceFigure 2.6 Visual recording of the sitesFigure 2.7 Site visitsFigure 2.8 InterviewsFigure 2.9 Final presentation with the communities

Figure 3.1 Megainfrastructure and housing in Koh Klang Klong Pra Ka NhongFigure 3.2 Drivers of change and pressures on BangkokFigure 3.3 Touristic activities in the central area of Bangkok, Rattanakosin IslandFigure 3.4 Coexistence of slums, mega projects and new developments in Klong ToeyFigure 3.5 Actor timelineFigure 3.6 Actor mapping before BangkokFigure 3.7 Actor mapping after BangkokFigure 3.8 Main actors in the national levelFigure 3.9 Main actors in the metropolitan levelFigure 3.10 Main actors in the district level

Figure 3.11 Main actors in the community levelFigure 3.12 Location of the 6 sites within Bangkok regionFigure 3.13 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Bang Khen districtFigure 3.14 View from Bang Bua canal (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure 3.15 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang

Khen districtFigure 3.16 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Khlong Toey

districtFigure 3.17 Khlong Toey: spatially fragmentatedFigure 3.18 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang

Khen districtFigure 3.19 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Pasi Chaloen

districtFigure 3.20 The community leaders of the district plays an important role facilitating comunication

within and between the communities

6.0 REFERENCES

FIGURES INDEX




Figure 3.21 Funding Mechanism of Sirin and Friend Community in Pasi Chaloen(photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)

Figure 3.22 Funding Mechanism of Ra-Sri Tum Community in Pasi Chaloen

(photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure 3.23 Problems and opportunities within Pasi Chaloen districtFigure 3.24 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Rangsit

municipalityFigure 3.25 Rangsit position in Bangkok peri-urban areaFigure 3.26 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Rangsit

MunicipalityFigure 3.27 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within the Bang Pu

municipalityFigure 3.28 Floating platform used for public gathering in Bang Pu municipality.

(photo by Parvathi Nair)Figure 3.29 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart within Bang

Pu MunicipalityFigure 3.30 Location of the communities visited and signicant elements within Rattanakosin

island

Figure 3.31 The pictures on top illustrate the problems and opportunities of the chart withinRattanakosin IslandFigure 3.32 Shack by the canal in Bang Khen. (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure 3.33 A bridge in Bang Khen community: an example of community mobilisation to fulll the

role of the municipality (photo by Mayha Fatemi)Figure 3.34 View from the Klong Toey District Authority buildingFigure 3.35 The main issue in Rattanakosin Island concerned the lack of willingness of CODI to

start or help facilitate negotiation with the Temple land to include the poor communitiesin the BM programme. (photo by Dhrin Anantamongkolchai)

Figure 3.36 View of the port in Khlong Toey. The communities have little power to negotiate with or inuence the Port Authority in terms of Land Tenure and the pressures of the GlobalCity Competition master plan (photo by Silvia Chi)

Figure 3.37 Land speculation spurred by the majority of private ownership in Rangsit with plansto develop private residential units restricted negotiation for the price of land (photo byMcKenzie O’Neill)

Figure 3.38 Different communities in Rattanakosin Island are facing the same problems in termsof the tourist and master plan; however they have no forum to discuss for collectivesolutions. ( for more information refer to Annex page 141) 9Photo by DhrinAnantamongkolchai)

Figure 3.39 Interstitial spaces in the city (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 3.40 Bang Pu Community workshop Lack of networking within Bang Pu as community

members were not acquainted with one another and one of the community was notaware of the different strategies that BM Programme offers to address their housingproblem in terms of upgrading.( Refer to Annex page 154 for further detail on

community workshops held in Bang Pu)Figure 3.41 Rangsit community building. (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)



108 REFERENCES FIGURES INDEX

Figure 3.42 Rangsit community homes in progress. (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)Figure 3.43 Walkway through Pasi Chaleon (photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure 3.44 Pasi Chaloen housing design can be addressed through an efcient design response.

(Refer to Annex page 136) (photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure 3.45 Khlong Toey open spaces The prevalence of interstitial spaces in Khlong Toey

presented for a fragmented urban fabric where there were disjointed pockets of unused space (photo by Silvia Chi)

Figure 3.46 Key for the cubes in the graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities across thesix sites

Figure 3.47 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about NETWORKS across the sixsites

Figure 3.48 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about ACCESS across the six sitesFigure 3.49 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about RESOURCES across the six

sitesFigure 3.50 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about KNOWLEDGE SHARING

across the six sitesFigure 3.51 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about DESIGN across the sixFigure 3.52 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about ROLES AND NEGOTIATION

across the six sitesFigure 3.53 Graphic synthesis of problems and opportunities about PARTNERSHIPS AND

INFRASTRUCTURE across the six sites (explanatory chart in the next page)Figure 3.54 Summary of problems and opportunities across the six sitesFigure 3.55 Multi scalar entry points of analysis diagram ( see next page for key and explanation)Figure 3.56 Key of the Multi scalar entry points of analysis diagram ( previous gure, page 60)

Figure 4.1 Strategic Vision: “Build a strong network of communities able to negotiate their spacesof participation in a political arena”

Figure 4.2a Community over water in Bang Pu (photo by Noor Al Ghafari)Figure 4.2b Land to be developed in Pasi Chaloen (photo by Jennifer Cirne)Figure 4.2c Canal community in Bang Bua (photo by Noor Al Ghafari)Figure 4.3 Illustration of how half the amount of money can be used to purchase land by

increasing density.Figure 4.4 Representation of how density can provide housing, social and livelihood responses

in restricted land availability or more opportunities of land for various communities.Figure 4.5 Interstitial space under raised houses used as community space.Figure 4.6 Land adjacent to communities used for community activities.Figure 4.7 Existing rental units overlooking the Khlong Toey market demonstrate a rental demand

in the Bangkok metropolis (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure 4.8 Rental Schemes: The diagram shows that by communities investing together inpotential rental locations within the site, the return can be used towards communitybased activities or maintenance costs.

Figure 4.9 Intensifying Rental Schemes: As the community enterprise grows it can improve thesocial and spatial conditions of the community

Figure 4.10 Community members and leaders in Bang Pu participating in issue based meetingsand design workshops with regional community leaders and MSc BUDD and UDPstudents.

Figure 4.11 Networks at Scale: Diagram representing the community networks at different scales.Working from community to community, community to metropolitan scale of Bangkok,and to the national scale reaching Thailand

Figure 4.12 Diagram of each participant in the skills bankFigure 4.13 Diagram of each community skills bank hub linking to other skills bank hubs fromother communities

Figure 4.14 Illustration of individual participants in relationship to each other




Figure 4.15 Sharing skills: Bow tie makingFigure 4.16 Sharing skills: Carpenter Figure 4.17 Sharing skills: Belt making

Figure 4.18 Community architect facilitating informed knowledge sharing on design solutionsFigure 4.19 Optimizing the use of communal spaces within community for group meetingsFigure 4.20 Optimizing the use of communal spaces within community for commercial and market

activitiesFigure 4.21 Optimizing the use of communal spaces within community for community theatre and

arts activitiesFigure 4.22 Diagram illustrating different community libraries connecting together on a wider city

scaleFigure 4.23 Community library where archives are stored through different mediasFigure 4.24 Baan Mankong communities are organising and administering funds within the

savings groupsFigure 4.25 Illustration of marginalized community member in relationship to the rest of community

in terms of booster loans or servicesFigure 4.26 Illustration of before and after effect of the Booster Fund proposalFigure 4.27 Space for Negotiation: Community Members and Leaders across BangkokFigure 4.28 Bridging mechanics which connect Top Down and Bottom Up Agendas and

GovernanceFigure 4.29 Combining top down plans with community input in Rattanakosin Island within national

level conservation planningFigure 4.30 Combined Assessment of proposalsFigure 4.31 Assessment of Land proposalsFigure 4.32 Assessment of Knowledge proposalsFigure 4.33 Assessment of Finance proposalsFigure 4.34 Assessment of Alliance proposalsFigure 4.35 Assessment of Proposals: Combination of all proposals

Figure 5.1 Our view of Transformation before Site AnalysisFigure 5.2 Our Paradigm Shift of Transformation post Site AnalysisFigure 5.3 On Site Transformation

Figure A1.1 Interview at Baan Ban Khen Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.2 Skilled female construction workers on U tid a nusorn community

(photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

Figure A1.3 Interview at Bang Bua Community Centre (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.4 Building material survey on Krong Lumpai communityFigure A1.5 Mapping the process of reblocking on Krong Lumpai communityFigure A1.6 Group Presentation for Krong Lumpai Brief Figure A1.7 A barber shop attached to a house before upgrading in Sapan Mai Community

(photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.8 Use of space in a house before upgrading in Sapan Mai Community

(photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.9 Use of space in a house before upgrading in Sapan Mai Community

(photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.10 Sketch of the use of space in the same houseFigure A1.11 Nursery and Bang Bua Community Centre (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

Figure A1.12 Bang Bua Community CentreFigure A1.13 Ongoing constrcution work in Krong Lumpai Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)Figure A1.14 Plan of the new BM Programme house in Krong Lumpai Community



110 REFERENCES

Figure A2.1 Movement of people through the Khlong Toey Market (Sketch by Sadiqa Jabbar)

Figure A2.2 Koh Klong Pra Ka Nhong Community ( photo by Farida Farag)Figure A2.3 Klong Toey Market 24/7 (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure A2.4 Ruam Jai Pattana Community (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure A2.5 Communities under the railway ( photo by Farida Farag)Figure A2.6 Family cleaning sh in Penang community, where livelihoods are focused around

market activities (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure A2.7 Interview in community member’s home discussing how design of the house affects

the temperature within the home. (photo by Silvia Chi)Figure A2.8 Drawing showing community how ventilation can work better in a community home

(sketch by Silvia Chi)Figure A2.9 Koh Klang Klong Pra Ka Nhong community interview

(photo by Silvia Chi)

Figure A3.1 Sirin and friend community (photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure A3.2 NHA programme (photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure A3.3 Design proposalsFigure A3.4 Policy advisor for Klong Lad Pha-Shi communityFigure A3.5 DPU meeting the communityFigure A3.6 NHA programme (photo by Azzurra Muzzonigro)Figure A3.7 Notes on Baan Mankong and NHAFigure A3.8 Design principlesFigure A3.9 Design principlesFigure A3.10 Notes on Klong Lad Pha-Shi community

Figure A4.1 Nimit Mae Community (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)Figure A4.2 Chareon Sin community Children (photo by Katja Starc)Figure A4.3 Community leader describing the pressures of the metropolis on Rangsit

(photo by McKenzie O’Neill)Figure A4.4 Sketch of existing Chareon Sin community and relationshipsFigure A4.5 Slum behind Macro moving in 3 stages, community member sketching

(photo by McKenzie O’Neill)Figure A4.6 Sang San Communty Housing Construction in progress (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)Figure A4.7 View form Khlong sawaan Canal Communty (photo by Katja Starc)

Figure A5.1 Design participatory workshop

Figure A5.2 Space between houses (photo by Parvathi Nair)Figure A5.3 Design principle workshop (photo by Parvathi Nair)Figure A5.4 Design principle workshop (photo by Noor Al Ghafari)Figure A5.5 Design principle workshop (photo by Elian Peña)Figure A5.6 Recyclable construction material workshop (photo by Parvathi Nair)Figure A5.7 Recyclable construction material workshop (photo by Elian Peña)Figure A5.8 Recyclable construction material workshop (photo by Parvathi Nair)Figure A5.9 Ta-bae ka mai second hand woodshop (photo by Josue Robles)Figure A5.10 Ta-bae ka mai second hand woodshop (photo by Josue Robles)Figure A5.11 Diagram of built form and usageFigure A5.12 Diagram of built form and usageFigure A5.13 Diagram of built form and usage

Figure A5.14 Survey of recyclable materialsFigure A5.15 Second hand market value

FIGURES INDEX




Figure A6.1 Contrast between slum, mid-class, and temple/tourism (photo by Jose Di Girolamo)Figure A6.2 Narrow pathway in community (photo by Su-Ann Tan)Figure A6.3 Self-designed houses (photo by Jose Di Girolamo)

Figure A6.4 Community by river Figure A6.5 Detailing of existing houseFigure A6.6 Contrast between slum and palace (photo by Jose Di Girolamo)Figure A6.7 Improvised kitchen at historic wall (photo by Su-Ann Tan)Figure A6.8 Wall between community and city (photo by Dhrin Anantamongkolchai)



112 REFERENCES

6.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Angel, Shlomo & Somsook Boonyabancha. ‘Land Sharing as an Alternative to Eviction:The Bangkok Experience’, in Third World Planning Review, Vol. 10, No. 2, May 1988,pp, 107-127. (http://web.mit.edu/urbanupgrading/upgrading/issues-tools/tools/Reg-of-land.html) Accessed 10 January 2010

• Archer, D.A. (2010) Empowering the Urban Poor. ISOCARP Congress. P. 1-11. Availablefrom: [www.isocarp.net/Data/case_studies/1648.pdf]

• ACHR (2011) The Asian Coalition for Housing Rights [online]. Available from: http://www.achr.net/ [Accessed: 6th June 2011]

• Asian Coalition for Housing Rights, ACHR. (2008). A Conversation About Upgrading at Bang

Bua. ACHR [online](September). P. 1-10. Available from [http://pubs.iied.org/G02376.html]

• Asian Coalition for Community Action (ACCA). ‘Third ACCA Program CommitteeMeeting’, Surabaya, Indonesia, 24-26 October 2009.

• Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Evictions in Seoul, South Korea’, inEnvironment & Urbanization, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 1989, pp. 89-94.

• Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Housing by People in Asia: CommunityFunds’, No. 14, February 2002, 32 pages.(http://www.achr.net/ACHR%20newsletter%2014%20with%20photos.pdf)

• Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Housing by People in Asia’, No. 13, June2001, 36 pages.(http://www.achr.net/ACHR%20Newsletter%20No%2013%20with%20photos.pdf)

• Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR). ‘Negotiating the Right to Stay in the City’, inEnvironment and Urbanization, Vol. 16, No. 1, April 2004, pp. 9-26.

• 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.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook for UN-HABITAT. ‘Community Development Fund inThailand: A Tool for Poverty Reduction and Affordable Housing’, Nairobi, 2009.(http://www.unhabitat.org/pmss/getElectronicVersion.asp?nr=2782&alt=1) Accessed 31January 2011.

• 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.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘Land for Housing the Poor – by the Poor: Experiences fromthe Baan Mankong Nationwide Slum Upgrading Programme in Thailand’, in Environmentand Urbanization, Vol. 21, No. 2, October 2009, pp. 309-329.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘Scaling Up Slums and Squatter Settlements Upgrading inThailand Leading to Community-Driven Integrated Social Development at City-WideLevel’, a paper presented at the Arusha Conference, New Frontiers of Social Policy,

BIBLIOGRAPHY




Arusha, Tanzania, 12-15 December 2005.(http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/Resources/Boonyabanchapaper.rev.1.pdf) Accessed 31 January 2011.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook, ‘The Causes and Effects of Slum Eviction in Bangkok’, in ShlomoAngel, Raymon W. Archer, Sidhijai Tanphiphat and Emiel A. Wegelin (Editors), Land for Housing the Poor, Select Publications, Singapore, 1983, pp. 254-283.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘Upgrading Thailand’s Urban Settlements: A Community-Driven Process of Social Development’, in Caroline O. N. Moser, Caroline Moser & AnisA. Dani (Editors), Assets, Livelihoods, and Social Policy, World Bank Publications 2007,pp. 195-214, available online (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bia-DERFf6IC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false) (Enter page 195) Accessed 31 January 2011.

• Boonyabancha, Somsook. ‘The Urban Community Environmental Activities Project andits Environment Fund in Thailand’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 11, No. 1,April 1999, pp. 101-115.

• Bruneau, Michael. “Mode of Production and Spatial Organization in Thailand: Processand 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) Accessed03 February 2011

• CODI (2011) Baan Mankong Collective Housing [online]. Available from: http://www.codi.or.th/housing/ [Accessed: 5th June 2011]

• Daniere, Amrita & Lois M. Takahashi. ‘Poverty and Access: Differences andCommonalities across Slum Communities in Bangkok’, in Habitat International, Vol. 23,No. 2, 1999, pp. 271-288.

• Derrida, J. (1997). The Politics of Friendship. Verso: London

• Foucault, M. ( 1995) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage

• Held, David (1995). Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to CosmopolitanGovernance. Oxford: Polity Press.

• Jenks, Mike. ‘Above and Below the Line: Globalization and Urban Form in Bangkok’, in TheAnnals of Regional Science, Vol. 37, No. 3, 2003, pp. 547-557.

• Khan, Shahed Anwer. ‘Attributes of Slums Affecting their Vulnerability to Eviction: AStudy of Bangkok’s Informal Settlements’, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 6, No. 1,April 1994, pages 25-39

• King, Ross. ‘Bangkok Space, and Conditions of Possibility’, in Environment and Planning D:Society and Space, Vol. 26, 2008, pp. 315-337.

• Kungsawanich, U. (2001). Cash for Trash. Bangkokpost. [Online]. 13th March. Availabefrom: http://www.bangkokpost.com/outlookwecare/130301_Outlook01.html.[Accessed: 5th June 2011]



114 REFERENCESBIBLIOGRAPHY

• Lets Link UK. (1991). UK Local Exchange Trading and Complementary CurrenciesDevelopment Agency [Online]. Available from: http://www.letslinkuk.net/index.htm.

[Accessed: 5th June 2011]

• Lefebvre, H. (2003). The Urban Revolution University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis/London

• Manickam, Nadarajah. ‘Meditations on Culture, Cosmology and Sustainability in Asia’, inAre We Up to the Challenge?: Current Crises and the Asian Intellectual Community, TheNippon Foundation 2008, pp. 238-250.

• Mcleaod, R (2011). “Humpty Dumpty “, lecture notes distributed in the topic BENVGBU4.University College London, Building on 28 February.

• Mitlin, Diana. ‘Civil Society and Urban Poverty – Examining Complexity’, in Environmentand Urbanization, Vol. 13, No. 2, October 2001, pp. 151-173.

• Mitlin, Diana and David Satterthwaite. ‘Strategies for Grassroots Control of InternationalAid’, in Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2007, pp. 483-500.

• Mitlin, Diana & David Satterthwaite. ‘The Role of Local and Extra-Local Organisation’, inDiana Mitlain and David Satterthwaite (editors), Empowering Squatter Citizen: LocalGovernment, Civil Society and Urban Poverty Reduction, Earthscan, London 2004, pp. 278-306.

• Nathalang, Sowatree. ‘Rangsit in Transition: Urbanisation and Cultural Adaptation inCentral Thailand’, a paper distilled from the PhD thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney1999.(http://std.cpc.ku.ac.th/delta/conf/Acrobat/Papers_Eng/Volume%202/Sowatree.pdf)Accessed 31 January 2011

• NESDB (2011) National Economic and Social Development Board. [online] Available from:http://www.nesdb.go.th/ [Accessed: 8th May 2011]

• Patomaki H. (2003). Problem of Democratizing Global Governance: Time, Space and the

Emancipatory Process, European Journal of International Relations. Vol.9(3): pp. 347-376.

• Rabinow, P. (1984). The Foucault Reader. Penguin Books: London

• Ranciere, J. (2010). Dissensus. Continuum: New York

• Rawls, J. ( 1999) A Theory of Justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press

• Sintusingha, Sidh. ‘Sustainability and Urban Sprawl: Alternative Scenarios for aBangkok Superblock’, in Urban Design International, Vol. 11, 2006, pp. 151-172.

• Sirisrisak, Tiamsoon. ‘Conservation of Bangkok Old Town’, in Habitat International, Vol.

33, 2009, pp. 405-411.




• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press: Oxford

• API Fellows (2005-2006). Are We Up to the Challenge?: Current Crises and the AsianIntellectual Community. [Online] Available from: http://www.api-fellowships.org/body/international_ws_proceedings/year5.pdf#page=264 [Accessed: 31st January 2011]



Figure A1.0 A view of the Bang Bua Canal (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)



dpu | budd | eld trip report BANGKOK A116

A1.0 BANG KHENannex



annexBANG KHEN

BANG KHEN: Interviews

INTERVIEW 1: GROUP Community leaders of the six sites withinBang Khen district (16 women and 15 men):

• We believe that BM programme is not about

building your own house but it is about helping

others to have a house as well. We do our best to

manage our time and contribute to the programme

as much as it is required. We all know that each

of us have to sacrice something to be a part of

this programme but we are ne with this because

after all what makes a sense of community are

these sacrices by the members. Some of us work

nearby so we can come to the community centre if

they need us during the day. Some others who own

a business like a shop ask their family members

like their spouse or their children to take care of

the shop while they are here. So far we have never

had problem with time and volunteer work issue.

• Most of the members of this district are governmentemployees, cleaners, waitresses, construction

workers and owners of small stores.

• The highest income within this district is about

50,000 TBH and in the lowest is about 10,000 TBH.

• The ones who work for the government are more

secure in terms of paying their loan because they

have a secure job and they can count on the total

income in advance.

• They formed the network of Bang Bua Canal in

1999. At rst only 6 communities were involved in

this network but now this network is active beyond

this canal.• After they cleaned the canal they recycled the

trash that they had removed from the canal and

then they sold the trash and managed to buy a

boat for the community with the prot

• They applied for their own city fund not from CODI

because they criticize the procedure of applying

• For CODI fund as it is rigid and they don’t want to

have lots of paper work. They are demanding a

more exible process. City Fund can act as a short

cut for communities. In some cases the CODI

funding is not enough for nishing the house and

there are people in this community who could notmanage to nish their houses.

• The Sky Train Project is a threat for one of the

communities it is the main reason for eviction of

about 45 houses. They are fully aware of the

project so they are considering relocation as an

option but still trying to negotiate with developers

because the last station would occupy their land

so they are still hopeful to be able of changing it.

They are still ghting for it.

• In this district there are two leaders for each

community: one as community leader and theother one as BM programme leader. Although

in most cases these two leaders work perfectly

together there are some cases where there is

conict between the two leaders.

INTERVIEW 2: A female Community Leader

• In the past some families who did not have access

to water used to collect water when it rained. They

even used the water from the canal for drinking.They used to boil it rst and it was considered to

be clean.

• 13 years ago they paid to have access to water

through water line system. They had to pay for

their own pipes and taps. Not all of them were

directly connected to the water line.

• 3 years ago the government announced that if the

monthly water consumption of a family is less than

80 units they would be exempted from paying the

water bills but this community could not benet

from this scheme.

• Instead of having access to the main water line

a family had the main access and 3 or 4 other

families were connected to the main connection

so actually 4-5

• families were using the main access and therefore

their monthly consumption was more than the

announced amount. Collectively all these families

had to pay about 1000 Baht to the family who

owned the main access.

• Before the waste water used to be directly poured

into the canal but after the BM programme they

installed water waste tanks and they use grease

lter to collect the waste oil and they sell it to the

military for production of Bio Fuel.

ANNEXES BANG KHEN




INTERVIEW 3:A female Ban Mankong progarmme leader • If some community members do not join the

program because they are worried of being in debt

or do not have enough saving we try to help them by

the welfare fund so they can also join but in cases

when they don’t trust the program, if they are not

acting as an obstacle to the process of upgrading

we will just ignore them and sometimes they joinlater when they see the tangible outcomes of the

program. In cases when they have the money but

will not join and are an obstacle in the process

they the community will put pressure on them and

if they are land owners sometimes we even take

them to court.

INTERVIEW 4: GROUPA young Ban Mankong leader & young socialentrepreneurs sponsored by Unltd

• We are aiming to set up a construction company

and a home service center that gives maintenanceand repair service to the communities with a

cheaper price they want to share constrcution

knowledge within the communities to reduce the

costs as well. We have being cheated enough by

engineers. the workers employed by this center

would be all local.

• We want to build this portfolio within these

communities and then scale up this in other projects

like NHA. So far there are 100 local builders and 5

teams of these builders have been active beyond

the boundry of Bang Bua.

INTERVIEW 5: GROUPA female Community Leader

• we have been living on this land for more than

70 years. We had to negotiate our land with the

treasury department. After getting the land we did

a survey and found out that the mentioned land

is too small for these number of households. So

people decided to build a high rise building. As

CODI was not sure about going vertical we used

the bridge funding of CDF to start the project.

We think that they hesitated because they were

worried that people cannot pay the debt as it wouldbe more expensive to build a high rise.

• When it came to allocation of different oors to

different families the community decide to have

the rst oor for handicapped, elderly and shops.

• and then the rest of the families chose the rest. As

there would be no lift available for the building the

higher ats would be cheaper.

• They are building studio ats and families who do

not t into one studio at must save for two studios

next to each other. They are building 44 studios

in this 4 storey high rise. They know that they had

some other options when it comes to design theycould not afford the other alternatives.

• During the process one family decided to resign

Figure A1.1 Baan Ban Khen Community describing the plan of the

high rise building (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)



from the programme. The community members

decided to pay a bit more on behalf to have a shop

instead and then benet collectively from the shop

when the construction is over.

INTERVIEW 5: GROUPA thai architect student on the site

• I have never been in a slum before and had no idea

about the scale of BM programme. As an architectI am not fond of working as a community architect.

I prefer to work for a consulting rm where I can

work on architectural projects.

• I think generally reconsideration of the building

code and having exceptional building codes for

these communities who are in the BM programme

is not fair for others who are not involved with this

programme because after all it is a project by the

government and others are still stuck with the

existing strict building codes.

INTERVIEW 6: GROUPAn old lady in his BM programme house

• The whole process of construction for the new

house lasted for a month. Chang Chumchon

assisted them in construction of this decently

spacious house.

• The amount of repayment is ne for this family. An

extended family lives in the new house as they

were living together before upgrading.

• Before upgrading whenever it rained their house

would be ooded due to the rise in the water of

the canal.

• There is not a public space in this community butas the community has been living on this land for a

long time they know each other quite well and the

door of the houses are always open and people

interact with each other quite easily. What they

demand is a play ground for children within the

community.

INTERVIEW 7: GROUPLocal Authority

• Local authorities have monthly meeting for ood

prevention but there is no budget specically al-located for disasters. They have a prevention plan

and the police is another actor when it comes to

ooding.

• 5,000 TBH is given to the community by the local

authority per month for administration cost.

• 2.000 TBH is given to the community for garbage

collection by the local authority

INTERVIEW 8: GROUPLocal University

• Rajabhat Phranakhon University is directly intouch with BM programme community leader. It is

an informal collaboration between the community

Figure A1.2 Skilled female construction workers on U tid a nusorncommunity working on a row house project (photo by SepidehHajisoltani)

ANNEXES BANG KHEN




Figure A1.3 Sample model in Bang Bua Community Centre used inexplaining the design phase (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

and the university. Their communication is through

meetings with the communities

• This university is running a cultural centre built by

Chang Chumchon.

• The university design training courses after

receiving community requests. They send their

trainers to the community if needed.

INTERVIEW 9: GROUP

Sapan Mai Community members

• They had a wooden bridge that used to act as the

main entrance to this community that is located

alongside the canal. They asked the government to

replace this bridge but it took 4 years and nothing

happened and the community decided to start

collecting donation by the community members,

visitors and even other communities to build a new

bridge. The bridge is under construction.

• They would like to have the rst oating market in

the area.

BANG KHEN: Brief PresentationBased on the brief given by community leaders in Bang

Khen we were asked to look for alternative options for

reducing the cost of construction within this district.

This community is seeking for methods to reduce the

cost of construction or alternative funding for housing

loans. In order to do so we had to work in Krong Lump-

ai community. On this site there was a house under

construction where we had the opportunity to talk to

the builders and also the owner.

The group mapped the re blocking process on this siteand did a survey for listing the construction materials

before and during the upgrading.

Considering the data that we gathered on the site , the

group had the following suggestions that were simply

presented to the community the next day in simple

sketches:

1. Cost saving by reusing the construction materials:

Background: Materials costs are more than half of the

cost of the projects. Reusing some materials have

assisted some families to reduce the cost of construction and keep the overall costs below the loan

amount.

Idea:

• Organizing a categorized material yard as a

material bank

• Selling recycled materials through the network-

sUtilizing the networks or other organizations(CODI, NHA, Chang Chumchon) to buy materi-als when opportunities are present

2. Incremental constructionidea:based on the rise and fall of material costs the

construction can take place in different phases.You can build when material is cheaper or whenmaterials are present in the material bank.



3. Bulk buying

Background:

Bulk Buying allows the communities to minimize

the costs

Idea:

Buying in bulk through the existing networks and

keeping the materials with the suppliers to collect

them later when you need them on site

4. Knowledge sharing

Background :one family saved 80,000 THB by using a new

material called Shera. They learned about it by

chance

Idea:

Looking for alternative materials and partnerships

related to materials ( e.g. Architecture and Civil

engineering departments at universities)

5. Integration with the spatial transformation

process

Background:

Though CODI as monthly visits the last time CODI

architects visited the site was in 2007, the samedesign of 2006 is being used today on this site and

there are challenges in implementing that design

Idea:

• Community apprentice can start working

with CODI architects to gain experience and

carrying the process through

• Reassessment before every phase of

construction (design, material, cost )

Figure A1.4 Sketch of building material survey on Krong Lumpai

community

Figure A1.5 Mapping the process of re blocking on Krong Lumpai community

ANNEXES BANG KHEN




Figure A1.6 Sketches used in Group Presentation for Krong Lumpai

Brief



Figure A1.7 A barber shop attached to a house before upgrading inSapan Mai Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

Figure A1.8 Use of space in a house before upgrading in Sapan Mai Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

ANNEXES BANG KHEN




Figure A1.9 Sketch of the use of space in the same house

BANG KHEN: Use of SpaceUse of Space

During the site visit of Sapan Mai community we had

a chance to go inside some of the house that were

a part of BM programme but were not yet upgraded.

Figure ? shows the use of space within this household.

The family livelihood is based on a barbershop that is

located inside their house without any wall or partition

separating it from their living space. Having similar shops attached to houses is quite common in this

district.

BANG KHEN: Videos

Visiting Bang Khen communities this group has

recorded some videos that can be accessed through

the following links:

• Bang Bua Canal 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkUGdUhYVlg

• Bang Bua Canal 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCzLuhstRSs

• Singing at Bang Bua Community center:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu55j54NBDo

• Walking in Krong Lumpai Community:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZGuHmCqcDs

Figure A1.10 Use of space in a house before upgrading in SapanMai Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)



Figure A1.12 Sketch of Bang Bua Community Centre

BANG KHEN: Bang Bua CommunityCentre

This building is being used by the communities in

Bang Khen for several activities. We mapped out the

following activities:

• Meetings of the communities, committees and

other subgroups like housewives groups

• Kitchen for the catering service of the housewives

• Nursery funded by ActionAid

• Administration ofce for the community and BM

programme leaders

• Accommodation for visitors

• Sports – there are some sport facilities in the open

space

• A place for selling the community products like

T-shirts, perfumes and washing liquids

• Community Celebrations

• Informal gathering of the community for singing or

even watching TV together

• Training courses for the community

Figure A1.11 Nursery and Bang Bua Community Centre run by ActionAid (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

ANNEXES BANG KHEN




BANG KHEN: Krong Lumpaivisiting an ongoing construction

Project information:

• Scale of household: 5

• Number of workers required: 5

• Project time: 1 month/ 8 hrs per day

• Number of oors: 2

• Number of Bedrooms: 2

• Structure: Concrete

• Distance with the canal edge: 40 minutes

• Recycled items that have been used: wooden

frames for doors and windows

• Amount of load: 150,000 TBH

• Additional fund required for nishing the

house: 24,000 TBH

• Last visit of CODI architects: 2007

• Contractor: CCC

Figure A1.13 Ongoing construction work in Krong Lumpai Community (photo by Sepideh Hajisoltani)

Figure A1.14 Plan of the new BM programme house in Krong Lumpai Community



Figure A2.0 Khlong Toy (photo by Silvia Chi)




A2.0 KLONG TOEYannex



ANNEXES KLONG TOEY

annexKLONG TOEY

KLONG TOEY: Interviews

INTERVIEW 1: GROUP Sang Sun Phatana community

Q: How did your community reach consensus and

negotiate land tenure?

• Some people decided to stay and refused to

relocate to this plot (the current one) and kept

negotiating with the port to get an alternative land.

Each one we picked, the port did not grant us. This

current land was offered because it used to be

where a private company stored its containers. As

the contract with the private company had expired

the port gave us the land.

• They gave us a 30 year rent to be renewed every

3 years. But if the port wants the land back, we will

have to get relocated again.

Q: Is the community worried about this possible threat

of eviction?• No. the area is still registered as a residential

zone, so technically the port cannot take it back

and use it. Also, the community is still in debt after

upgrading their homes, and so they cannot be

relocated.

Q: What was the impact of relocation on people’s

livelihoods?

• It helped them be in a better living environment

and motivated them to do something for the

community.

• Earlier people didn’t have bills or loans to pay.

When they started BM programme, more people

had to get jobs, including women who opened

shops selling food or merchandise.

Q: What is the relationship between this community

and the adjacent one, which is not part of BM?

• They had a very bad relationship at rst, because

while this community was upgrading their ground

level raised and that affected ooding in the

adjacent community, which is next to the canal.

Water stayed on their side and ooded their homes.

Later on that community asked municipality for a wall to be built by the canal to keep their part

Figure A2.1 Movement of people through the Khlong Toey Market (Sketch by Sadiqa Jabbar)




of land from ooding. Even though this affected

community is not supported by CODI, they still

managed to get that wall/barrier built.

INTERVIEW 2: GROUPRim Klong Wat Sapan community ( not partof Baan Mankong)

Q: Why can this community not join BM?

• They can’t because they don’t have secure tenurebecause the port owns the land and is not willing

to negotiate.

• The port knows they are living in that land and

is trying to be blind about it, as they don’t have

function for it at the moment. But every year they

go to this community and remind them that they

will be evicted whenever the port demands the

land.

• The port wont allow them to be part of BM because

it’s a permanent long term process

• Some households don’t want to join BM at all

because it will make them reorganize plot size, sosome might end up with smaller plots. Others just

don’t want to be in debt and have to repay loans.

Q: How did the upgrading of the adjacent community

(part of BM) affect this community?

• They kids now use the public space and playground

of the upgraded community as well as hold events

there and meetings together.

INTERVIEW 3: GROUPInterview with Ruam jai pattana community

Q: Who designed the houses and what was the role of the architect?

• The architects were involved in dividing the

plots. CODI architects gave the design and the

community agreed to it. In reality when they started

building them, everybody did their own thing and

only one house actually followed that model.

• Observation: houses had limited design response

and were not in favor of the community. People did

not follow any design guidelines or building codes.

The port allowed them to do that.

• They did not use CODI money but used their own

savings and external funding. The loans they gotfrom CODI was used for infrastructure only.

Q: How did the community change after BM

programme?

• They had a better moral but it is still hard to get the

people involved. The number of people employed

is still the same and has not changed after the

upgrading.

INTERVIE

W 4: GROUPMeeting at the District ofce:

Q: What is the vision for the Klong Toey district?

• Because the director is new in the district ofce,the personal vision is no just to build for the people

but it is important to get people to participate and

do it themselves. People would be much stronger t



Figure A2.3 Klong Toey Market 24/7 ( photo by Silvia Chi)

ANNEXES KLONG TOEY

due to their strong networks and experience with

gaining the knowledge they need. In terms of

physical upgrading, the port in the future would

be collaborating with the district in favor of the

people’s wellbeing.

Q: What are the problems and opportunities faced?

• The biggest problem is the communities on the port

land. It’s hard to do any physical changes because

port has more power and controls decisions.• The district ofce wants to be part of the

environmental change: providing more public

spaces while having more participation from the

people.

Q: What is the status of the port’s Mega Project and

how does it work?

• They think it would be hard to implement. It’s still a

plan and it depends on the government. This might

change depending on the next government. There

are also some plans on making the district green

and many organizations are proposing parks to thearea.

Q: How do you see the decentralization movement?

What capacity do they have?

Some duties have been transferred to them form

ministries. They are in charge of taking care of welfare

now, as well as education and quality control. The

ministries wanted to send more people to work but the

people don’t want to work in the district ofce and so

they’re moving around to avoid working with the district.

What about housing and land?

• City planning development of the BMA is being

taken care of here at district ofce. BMA releases

the zones and the district ofce builds and takes

control. There’s a city planning department controlling

development projects small in scale. If the scale is too

big, the BMA takes control of it.

Q: How are they dealing with the challenge of slums of

the Klong Toey district?

• The big issue is that people don’t want to move and

there’s nothing they can do but be in the middle

supporting the people and improving currentconditions. But overall they have to listen to the

port. Eviction is still on.

Q: What has been the experience of the district ofce

in dealing with eviction?

• People used to relocate on private land and got

evicted. They district ofce helped people in the

process and negotiated land by NHA but it’s far

away by the airport, which people refused to

relocate to.




Figure A2.5 Communities under the railway ( photo by Farida Farag)Figure A2.4 Ruam Jai Pattana Community ( photo by Silvia Chi)



Figure A2.6 Family cleaning sh in Penang community, wherelivelihoods are focused around market activities (photo by Silvia Chi)

ANNEXES KLONG TOEY

Q: What is the role of the district ofce in that process?

• Quality control, send garbage collectors in the

green spaces in the city, and use the fresh garbage

for compost.

• It is part of the policy of the BMA to make more

green spaces. Bangkok is growing and they think

improving health is a priority and so green spaces

are very important. Earlier, people used to travel

outside of Bangkok to use green open spaces.

INTERVIEW 5: GROUPMeeting with the leader of the market unionKlong Toey Market (biggest market inBangkok, 24/7)

• The owner of the land is the port who has given the

concession of the land to a private investor. The

private investor rents to the vendors the “space”

for their stalls. An area of 2x2 (4sqm) cost about

60,000 Baht per year. The vendors also pay for

garbage collection 50Bath per day. There are5000 registered stalls.

• The area of the market is an attractive point for

migration, because the job opportunities and the

exchange and delivery of goods from all Thailand

and some adjacent countries. Therefore, the area

has a strong present of rooms for rentals.

• There is a high concentration of livelihoods in the

market, and its specialization ( there are products

from all the country, organized by provinces) is

an allure for many restaurants and hotels of all

Bangkok.

• Even when the market has been there for 14

years, there is a risk of eviction because the porthas a development plan for the area, but as in

other areas of Klong Toey, this risk has been there

since the beginning of the market.

• The surrounding area also has a political

connotation, is where the bigger demonstrations

take place.




Figure A2.9 Koh Klang Klong Pra Ka Nhong community interview (photo by Silvia Chi)

Figure A2.8 Drawing showing community how ventilation can work better in a community home (sketch by Silvia Chi)

Figure A2.7 Interview in community member’s home discussing how design of the house affects the temperature within the home.(photo by Silvia Chi)



Figure A3.0 Sirin and friend community ( photo by Azzura Muzzonigro)




A3.0 PASI CHALOENannex



annexPASI CHALOEN

PASI CHALOEN: Interviews

INTERVIEWS DAY 2: By Amrita Koonar

INTERVIEW 1: Name Pranee (f) Age 52

[There are 4 people in the household and 3 of them

work; there will be work for them at the new site]

She has lived in the area for 20 years, she is moving

to the new site because her current landlord has givenher notice to leave the house which she rents; he has

allowed her to stay until the Ban Mankong project is

complete and she is able to move to the new house.

Q: How was the monthly payment for the savings

group decided at 3000bt per month?

A: The amount was calculated before she joined the

savings group

Q: Were people unable to join the savings group due

to the amount of monthly payment?

A: Yes, some people could not join, and 5 people

dropped out of the savings group because they could

no longer afford the payments.

Q: How long have you been saving?

A: 8 months

Q: Do you want to move?

A: I like living here

Q: Do you know other people that are moving to the

new site?

A: Yes, there are some others moving

Q: Have you visited the relocation site?A: Yes I have visited the site

Q: How did you get there?

A: I travelled by car

Q: How was the monthly installments amount decided

A:The payment was decided by the committee and

CODI

Q: Do you ever meet with the savings group and if so

what do you discuss?

A: Yes we meet once a month to talk about the project

and what will happen.

ANNEXES PASI CHALOEN

Figure A3.1 DPU meeting the community




Figure A3.2 NHA programme ( photo by Azzura Muzzonigro)

INTERVIEW 2: (M) Occupation – Taxi Driver

Q: How long have you lived in this house?

A: 3 years, but I don’t own the house. It is rented from

the owner. He does not live in the area anymore.

Q: How much rent do you pay each month?

A: 4000bt per month. I also pay for my own electricity

and water.Q: What do you like and dislike about living

here?

A: I like living here because I know everyone, I amhappy to live here but it’s too quiet.

Additional:

The owners tend to work most of the day and just come

back here at night to sleep.

In general the community is for low to middle income

people. The people in the community have come here

from different areas/ provinces.

INTERVIEW 3: (F) 18 years old

Q: How long have you lived here?A: I was born here and have lived here all my life

Q: Do you go to school?

A: No, I am not educated

Q: What do you do in the day?

A: Nothing much.

Q: How many people live in your house?

A: There are 2 people

Q: How many bedrooms are there in your house?

A: There are 2 but it’s exible

Q: Do you go out of the community?

A: Yes, I go around the site but I don’t really leave the

area.

Q: Is there a hospital nearby?

A: Yes there is a clinic but its private. I go to the

government hospital which is free.

Q: How do you travel outside of the community?

A: I walk or ride a motorcycle.

INTERVIEW 4: (F)Home owner Runs general shop from front of the house

Q: How long have you been living here?

A: I have been here for 2 years, but the project started

5 years ago.

Q: Why did you move here?A: There was a re at my old house and I was moved

here by the government.

Q: Did you know anyone else when you moved here?

A: No, I was the rst from my old community to move

here and I didn’t know anyone. Now more people from

the old community have followed.

Q: Was this shop here when you moved, or did you

open it yourself?

A: I made this shop to earn money; I also sell sea food

from here in the evening. Before I moved here I was a

trainee pharmacist.

Q: Did you get permission from the local authority toopen the shop?

A: No I didn’t get permission from them but I pay 900bt

a year in tax.



Figure A3.3 Design proposals

Figure A3.4 Policy advisor for Klong Lad Pha-Shi community





Figure A3.5 NHA programme ( photo by Azzura Muzzonigro)

INTERVIEW: Community Leader at Site 4

• Recycling project – people sell their garbage at

a market every Sunday, they are not given any

money, but useful items such as a broom.

• Not many people have joined the savings group

yet but they are advertising through posters and

trying to get people to join. The group is open for

anyone in the district with a problem to join

• They are relocating from Temple land to Templeland 20 km away. The yearly lease will be 200bt

per household.

• Livelihoods will be established at the new site

through markets, sewing workshops etc…

• There are currently 80 people in the savings group.

1080 people in the community.

• They haven’t yet negotiated housing design with

the L.A yet.

• They are not able to make changes to the house/

extend… if they need a bigger house they will have

to buy a bigger one elsewhere.

• Some people are being evicted from their currentresidences- also temple land and some people are

choosing to move so they can have larger homes

which they will own.

• Outside space has been factored in to the design,

they have a large plot of land to allow for communal

areas , livelihoods, kindergarten.

• They are allowed to run businesses from home,

selling food, laundry services etc…

• Savings group – they save 3000bt per month, this

can be done through installments, throughout the

month.

• 250,000bt for building the house including

decoration – of that 65,000 goes to the contractors

(labour)

• If people have trouble saving money – there is a

penalty fee, although this is never enforced. 5

people have left due to being unable to pay.




Top Figure A3.6 Notes on Baan Mankong and NHA Bottom Figure A3.7 Design principles




Top Figure A3.8 Design principles Bottom Figure A3.10 Notes on Klong Lad Pha-Shi community



Figure A4.0 A view from Chareon Sin, a canal community in Rangsit (photo by Katja Starc)




A4.0 RANGSITannex



annexRANGSIT

RANGSIT: Interviews

INTERVIEW 1: PANEL Municipality Meeting

The main issues identied at the meeting are:

• Local authorities don’t communicate between

each other horizontally

• No policy to deal with migrants

• Large scale infrastructure coming from the

provincial level, indicates that it is very top down

• Land speculation and majority private ownership

• No program for the CDF in municipality

• Political pressure on municipality- low income

on the media campaigning against eviction has

caused some issues on specic sites

• Land tenure and insecurity

• Municipal Pawn Shop as a mechanism for

payments at Low interest rates is of high interest

• Sustainability program; question whether

municipality or community driven• They implement the Creative “city” as a strategy

for creative “economy”

INTERVIEW 2: GROUPNimit Mae

• Nearby site relocated as a result of a re.

• Middle low income community has several

community members also working for the

municipality.

• They chose the land layout themselves and the

plots are detached or semi-detached• housing units.

• There is a large community area in the center that

is utilized by some local craftsman

• Many plots have only a small of amount of

construction that has been left. This is a result of

a community policy that if no development occurs

within the year, the land will revert back to the

community.

• The mayor helped knock down the price of the

land for the community and the municipality

contributed to the infrastructure. The land was

previously private land that was purchased withthe assistance of CODI.

Figure A4.1 Nimit Mae Community (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)

ANNEXES RANGSIT




INTERVIEW 3: GROUP Rattana Pathum

• There are 82 households in this community that is

currently in “phase 2” of its nearby relocation.

• Currently located above a linear drainage canal,

this community has purchased land immediately

adjacent to the site.

• The plan includes having a community area in the

middle of the site for laundry like activities.

• While the site is extremely close to the existing site,

but not located close to any other communities or

amenities.

• The construction underway will be 8 months

in total. As the market is currently favorable for

those building in the community, they have hired a

private contractor to carry out the construction with

a community member on site to supervise.

• The contract also has exibility in their payments

and is backed by CODI.

Figure A4.2 Chareon Sin community Children (photo by Katja Starc)

• The sanitation will be maintained by the community

after construction.

• The design of the homes itself also considered

frequent ooding on side- with raised foundations

as well as a exible design for a shop in the front

of the home.



INTERVIEW 4: GROUP Sang Saan

• This community was unique as it is a nearby

relocation of 4 communities pulling together to

purchase the land.

• The land used to be agricultural land before the

community began building. First savings group

started in 2003, and building began in 2008.

• CODI funding is going towards the site’s community

center.

• As it was four communities merging into one, there

were different saving levels before BM programme

started and therefore exible repayment.

• The homes are being built on a 15 year mortgage,

with 2500 Baht per month for the entire community

land payment. Solid waste is managed by the

community.

• As a community they are currently sharing

expertise with outside construction workers and

making their own concrete block for construction.

• Additionally they want to access the adjacent NHAland housing to share their daycare facilities.

• The housing typologies onsite are detached,

semi-detached or 3-in-a-row houses. Like other

sites for relocation, their criteria for site selection

was 4 elements: proximity to original site and job,

proximity to schools, price and access.

INTERVIEW 5: GROUP Site Workshop with Chareon Sin Community

• 65 households live in this canal community located

on Department of Irrigation and school land.• The community wished to start onsite upgrading

but has been struggling to coordinate the savings

groups of all households in the community.

• This particular community is very dense on 5 RAI2

and has been living there for 75-100 years.

• Many community members are families.

• The focused issues of the community are the risk

of ooding, sanitation concerns with the canal, and

lack of access into the site.

• They are hoping to negotiate with the landlord by

taking care of the canal in exchange for tenure.

• Currently the landowner doesn’t desire developingthe land, however this relationship is subject to

change.

• They wish to raise their houses to deal with the

ooding issues.

• Canal is no longer a viable connection to the

greater community as dams have blocked off their

use and access.

• Other issues related to this site are why their

previous involvement in the programme began in

2004 and then stopped in 2006.

INTERVIEW 6 GROUP Slum behind Macro site

• The largest slum in Rangsit, this community of Figure A4.3 Community leader describing the pressures of the me-tropolis on Rangsit (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)

ANNEXES RANGSIT




Figure A4.4 Sketch of existing Chareon Sin community and rela-tionships

over 400 residents has lived here for over 20 years

and entered the BM Programme in 2005.

• The landlord on this site notied residents in 2009

that they would be developing this central site into

private residential units and have until the end of

2011 to move.

• Due to its size, residents have been relocating in 3

“phased” savings groups, some to the Sang Saan

community.

• The relationships with the landlord on this site,while tense has been facilitated by the building of

a “negotiation” facility on-site to allow households

to meet with the landowner.

• The landlord has marked the homes with a number

in 3 colours to indicate: blue (negotiated) red(not

move) or white (empty).

• NULICO and local government ofcials have

• become involved to help persuade other houses to

join the programme and assist in relocating.

• Local NGO’s have been working on this site with

youth programmes as well.

• Very small community centers and a few shopsare located within the site for gathering.

• Loudspeakers placed throughout the community

as well helped organize the community and

activities.

• Once residents have relocated, their plots are

completely demolished and marked to prevent

other residents or migrants from taking over their

sites.

• In the BM scheme, they are saving 200Baht a

month per household in order to relocate.

INTERVIEW 7 GROUP Train Community

• There were 117 households under threat of

eviction notied in October 2010 by a large banner

placed on the site telling residents to move.

• State railways hired private consultants to negotiate

with the community, as it has existed for 20 years.

• The community had already joined BM in 2008

at the encouragement of local authorities to start

• funding.

• Four Regions NGO, geared towards railway

squatter communities, has been assisting 15

households to date in the community.• They have been working with CODI as the NGO

has land to accommodate 40 households.

• Recycling activities are the main source of income,

and stable for most community members.

INTERVIEW 8 GROUP Fahmaisival Community

• This community has a cooperative relationship with

the municipality who is asking them to relocate as

part of a canal beautication system.

• They are relocating nearby to a community beingbuilt on treasury land.

• The community started saving a year a



• go 600Baht/month per household.

• The housing are being constructed by the

municipality, they had no say in the design on the

site and two choices offered.

• They can make changes to the inside to a certain

extent- as it is limited by cost.

• As a community, they are responsible for paying for

the infrastructure on site, which they are connecting

directly to the municipal provided infrastructure for

the other portion of the site, and they are the rst

community that will relocate there.

• Community members felt the process was too

slow, and too much bureaucracy. Most community

members are content with the houses being built.

• There is a programme within the community to

train member in different skills and trades.

• There is a successful programme for Thai massage

training that many women in the community have

participated in.

Figure A4.5 Slum behind Macro moving in 3 stages, community member sketching (photo by McKenzie O’Neill)

INTERVIEW 9 GROUP Khlong Sawaan Community

• The land is owned by the Department of Irrigation

and the community is struggling with their existing

lease agreement.

• While before the landowner agreement was

acknowledged, as more migrants came into the

community, and greatly increased the size of the

community, the Department of irrigation will no

longer acknowledge the agreement.

• The community has done some basic upgrading,

but not been able to get funding from CODI as

their tenure is not secure.

• They are also hesitant to pursue tenure agreements

with the landowner now as becoming ofcially

recognized also puts them at risk.

• Generally, the elders on side are included in the

social welfare program of the municipality and arevery attached to the land has they have been there

for many years.

ANNEXES RANGSIT




Figure A4.7 View form Khlong sawaan Canal Communty (photo by Katja Starc)

• Younger generations seem to lack interest in the

site and are not as attached as the older community

members.

• The community is unique in that is says it is not

part of any network unlike most other communities

visited.

Figure A4.6 Sang San Communty Housing Construction in progress(photo by McKenzie O’Neill)



Figure A5.0 Design participatory workshop (photo by Elian Peña)




A5.0 BANG PUannex



annexBANG PU

BANG PU: Interviews

INTERVIEWS DAY 1: By Felipe LarachINTERVIEW 1

• They are living there since 50 years.

• Main occupation is shing, selling of food and

factories.

• They are not immigrants

• One year ago the treasury department told themthat they have to leave and they began the saving

group.

• They have to save 10%

• They have a verbal agreement with treasury

department but cannot sign the agreement until

they get into BM

• When they were notied the network approached

them and that is because they knew that the

eviction was affecting the communities around.

• There were people who didn’t want to join BM so

they will move the day that they will be evicted.

• 50 households and 200 people in 5 sub-groups.• Only 3 poor households couldn’t join the BM

because they

• The proposal was made by the CODI-NETWORK

to present the cooperative to the authorities.

• 2 design of 3 offered were selected by community.

• The layout of the new community was not yet in

production. The rst to reach 10% choose the

rst house. But if someone has less than 10%

and other has more, while they have the 10% as

community they are ok.

INTERVIEW 2: Old couple that are not in BM

• They have lived there all their life, namely natives.

• They have 4 children

• Their job was daily workers, but now they don’t

work and their children support them.

• They were very afraid with the eviction because

they didn’t know where to move.

• They knew that was real when some ofcial came

to measure the site.

• Their children will join the programme and they

will go to live with them. They are the one who

participate in the programme.

INTERVIEW 3: Lady with 4 children

• Her daughter has the right and they will go live with

her.

• They have lived there for 35 years. She move

there when she got married.

• The rst problem was this eviction. The rest is ‘just

ne’

• She has been involved in BM although she cannot

join the programme.• She doesn’t believe in BM because is just starting.

Maybe later....

• Minimal activities of BM yet.

• Her husband worked renting a truck.

• The whole family has to save 2.000 B. They parent

put 1.000 while the daughter put the other 1.000 B.

• The BM reduced their monthly budget. It’s not that

they are working more.

• Not a lot of participation yet in planning of BM

because it is in a previous stage.

INTERVIEW 4: Couple of factory workers.

• They have 3 children

• Their parents built the house there because there

was vacant land.

• They save 500-700 monthly to saving group.

• Both of them together earn around 10.000 B

• They relations with neighbourhood is relatives,

family or cousins.

• They don’t have relation with other communities.

Only with other relatives.

• They have to join BM because they didn’t have

another choice.

• They involved in BM in march2010• They believed in BM because they went to visit

other communities and saw that was real and

possible.

• They still don’t participate a lot in the process

because it has not started yet. Just saving.

• The feel rural people.

• They would prefer stay where they are. Not move.

• Municipality is very supportive of them.

• They buy food from the market or from the truck

that comes every day. They have electricity and

water with meters.

ANNEXES BANG PU




Figure A5.1 Space between houses ( photo by Parvathi Nair)

INTERVIEW 5: Lady in the shop• She lives there since 10 years

• Works every day from 6am to 8pm

• She has two children. One nished the school

and is a driver and the other didn’t and works in

a factory.

• She the best member of the community because

she saves more than the rest. The earns around

12.000 monthly, where 10.000 is prot. 2.000 to

saving group and the rest to the bank.• She assist to all the meeting (every Sunday)

• She has a lot of relations with other people because

the sells products.

• Municipality support them. CODI only known

because the loan.

• She feels urban not rural.

• She would prefer to stay there and not move.

INTERVIEW 5: GROUP

• CODI is quite new for them

• Before this eviction that have suffered fromeviction of landowners and authorities. But nothing

serious. • The help each other with this network

of communities (NULICO)

• They know each other due to community network.

• Men are not in NULICO because they are in charge

of the income which WOMEN manage.

• Women make BM possible

• They know each other due to community network.

• Men are not in NULICO because they are in charge

of the income which WOMEN manage.

• They have reduced their budget to be able to save.

They use the BOOK KEEPING from CODI.

• Community for them is: Brotherhood, participation,

help, support among community members, sense

of unity, work side by side.

• In the participation they were offered a lot of

templates but at the end only three of them t the

requirements of land and space.

• If they need infrastructure they go to the municipality

to ask for it.

INTERVIEWS DAY 3 By Felipe Larach

INTERVIEW: Local Authorities

• Local Authorities are to support community

mobilisation in the relocation and also act as a

partner where all department of the municipality

work together.

• The Municipality, CODI and the Community work

as a triangle but the municipality is in charge of

notication and eviction.

• Before BM the municipality’s roles was to support

the infrastructure of the community.

• Statistics on the roads show that there is not a real

impact of the airport. Only in the 2 street that arearound the airport.

• Industrial area still growing.



the community as health and education.

• They use to live in a bigger house but now they are

ok, They sign an agreement to not expand in order

to preserve the environment.

• They are pushing their children to live outside this

community.

• The cost of the house is 160.000 – 170.000 less the

foundation because they come from the subsidy of

infrastructure from CODI.

• They want to do maintenance of the house every 6months to prevent termites.

• There is an agreement to not use the space

between houses but some of them are using it to

join the family in the next house.

• They will have a community centre near the shop.

They also use a space between the community

and street allowed by highway department.

• Time: It takes 1 month with a proper constructor.

However, they only hire the constructor for

foundations and frame. The rest it is made by

themselves and it take nally like 4 months.

Workers are hired from other communities and arepaid.

• Bangkok is far away, crowded.

• They transport in vans.

• In the past their parents had relations with

communities. However they lost them due to

urbanization. BM is allowing them to have again

that relation.

• Local authorities help them in measures the sites.

Before they felt as a barrier with LA. Today they

don’t feel it.

INTERVIEW: Making the third survey. ByKitty Kam

Q: Since when have you lived here? How many people

are there in your family?

A: Both of us work in a factory. 3 children, the oldest is

13, today is holiday.

Q:Did you build the house by yourselves? Why live in

this area?

A: When people came, they just looked for vacancy.

They moved in the house more than 70 years ago. The

house was their parents who passed it on to her. The

river is not a canal but just water. The water has beenblocked, so there is no way to get out. Now this level

is at all the time.

Q: What do you think about Bangton project?

A: The member of Bangton project. They save 500

Thai Baht per month. But this month school starts so

more expenditure for children. Income is over 10,000

Thai Baht.

Q: What do children do after school?

A: Nothing special since the project started. So there

are not special activities for children.

Q: Do children have places to go after school?

A: Just paying around here. The children do not moveout.

• The area might grow with the expansion of the

road.

• They are moving ofcials to the area in order to

decentralise the centre.

• They relocate them because they don’t have land.

Also because is part of the development of the city

to reorder the city. And nally because the royal

treasury wants to use the land.

• Also because they didn’t have secure land they

now have secure housing, secure basic services,and secure tenure for the next generation.

• Cannot relocate them in another place because

they already have plans for that area. Also because

there is a lot of bureaucracy in the government and

lack of capacity. They are trying to deal with this

bureaucracy.

• The Bang Pu municipality is part of the

comprehensive plan of the district plan so they

have inuence but they don’t make the design of

the plan.

• They don’t have to compensate them because

they have been living there for many years withoutpaying anything.

INTERVIEW to leader of other community:

• They have been living there for 80 years. 3

generations of family and relatives.

• A lot of people are waiting for expropriation in order

to be paid but the rest think that that’s an illusions.

• They joined the programme in 2006.

• They bring their food from the truck, from shing

or market.

• Their main occupation is shing (15%), factories

(70%) and feed animals (sh) (15%)• The highway department notied them and they

started the savings group with the help of other

communities.

• In the beginning only a few joined the programme

(10/56). The others were not sure but after a while

they joined the programme because they were

receiving too many notication from highway

department.

• They joined the saving groups of CODI with the

help of others communities which have been

trained them. They taught them how to save, how

to make a cooperative, about the design of thehouses, set the lay out.

• The role of women is making BM possible and

help in the construction. The role of the men is to

bring the income.

• The income is 10.000 B monthly

• The most signicant change has been to have

secure housing, secure welfare, self-sufciency,

and a network of friends (inside and outside the

community) that allow them to have help, support

materially when they don’t have enough money or

materials for their houses.

• Their monthly payment is 1.700 which divides in1.400 to CODI to pay the land and housing and 300

B for saving group which is used for the welfare of

ANNEXES BANG PU




Figure A5.2 ( photo by Parvathi Nair) and Figure A5.3 ( photo by Noor al Ghafari) Design principle workshop

Q: Is there any neighbour passing to another

community?

A: In the community, relatives know each other but

in the past, they didn’t. Now, there is the network

between them.

Q: Saving for them is so difcult. What have they

charged? What difculty do they save? Do they keep

records of what their saving?

A: It’s hard. But they have to. No matter what they

keep records for every member.Q: When did they start to save?

A: Since March last year. Every family registered. They

wanted to join in.

Q: Does she believe in Bangton?

A: Bangton project is a community that offers others.

The project convinces of them. They are hard to

believe.

Q: How did they convince her to believe?

A: At the beginning, no one believed that this project

can be true. When they face threats, they pay more

attention.

Q: How do they feel about the connection with theoutside world?

A: Rural people love to live here. They feel like brothers

and sisters, different social environment, and near the

coast.

Q: When did they move here? Did they feel change?

A: No.

Q: What is her role in Bangton?

A: Years ago, she worked with her father in a farm but

it didn’t work out. So she changed the job to a factory.

No kids in school so they do not have a problem.

Q:The house?

A: The former house was not this size. They expanded.

It is bigger than before. The bedroom is small. This is arelaxing space, children sleep in this room. They play

in other place.

BANG PU: Workshop

The Design Workshop

After two days of research and observation

our group was eager to understand the relationship

between the people and the spaces surrounding their

homes as well as within their homes. In order to testour assumptions about the uses of these spaces, we

conducted a workshop, which allowed us to capture

a better idea of that relationship. This workshop is

designed not only for our own personal information

collection, but also for the community to realize the

importance of the in between spaces in their community

in order for them to have a positive inuence on the

design of their new homes in order to adapt it to their

needs as individuals and as a community.

The First thing we had to do for this exercise was to

produce a land use map. A few members of the groupwent around to map the physicality of the households

from an aerial perspective with the guidance of a



Google map image. However this mapping process

was not complete until the workshop started. The

base map was made simple and adaptable to their

corrections as well. We began to understand the uses

of the spaces not only from our eyes but also from

those of the residents.

The community was invited to participate

primarily by identifying their own homes and those

of their neighbors. Together they mapped out thelocations of their home to familiarize themselves with

the context of the map.

Once this part of the process was complete, the

community was asked to take a piece of the provided

paper and write different uses around their homes and

neighborhood. This process didn’t include many men,

but mostly women of all ages; from the very young,

to the very old. There was a mix of personalities,

some very eager and some very shy, but the energy

remained enthusiastic and positive from the round

table to the construction material-recycling workshop.

The Design Workshop: Findings• List of activities

• Talking

• Exercise

• Swinging ad taking care of baby outside of the

home

• Children Swimming

• Eating

• Washing and talking in front of home

• Selling groceries in front of Home and talking

and sleeping on balcony

• Talking and Watching Children• Children playing (many wrote this one too)

• Drinking and listening to Music

• Shopping

• Meeting Community in Large open Space

• Barber shop

• Party

• Washing

BANG PU: Recycling WorkshopThe Recyclable Construction MaterialWorkshop

Surveys to 5 houses were conducted in the

community of Klong Mai Tai. The survey strategy

documented each household at tree levels; recyclable

materials, built-form usage and social structure of the

family. This approach allowed the surveying team to

grasp and document the use and behavior of a number

of dwellings of this community. The team developed a

system to quantify and qualify the materials of each

household. The list of construction materials were

compared to their value at a second-hand wood

market, Ta-bae Ka Mai market, to generate a value

of each house’s recyclable construction materialsavailable.

ANNEXES BANG PU

Figure A5.4 Design principle workshop (photo by Elian Peña)




In an effort to share the system and ndings

with the community members, the team suggested that

a community workshop should be held.

The community workshop that was facilitated

is composed of two parts; a design workshop and a

recyclable construction material workshop. The

workshop consisted of teaching the community how to

conduct a housing material survey to see how much

of their existing homes could be used towards theupgraded product. After having done a few examples,

our group came to the conclusion that the cost of

construction could be reduced at an estimated number

of 50 000 BAHT (~1,030 GBP).

BANG PU: VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkV-SV0atGA

Figure A5.5 ( photo by Parvathi Nair), Figure A5.6 (photo by ElianPeña) and Figure A5.7 Recyclable construction material workshop( photo by Parvathi Nair)



ANNEXES BANG PU

Figure A5.8 and Figure A5.9 Ta-bae ka mai second hand woodshop(photos by by Josue Robles)

Figure A5.10, Figure A5.11 and Figure A5.12 Diagram of built formand usage




SECOND HAND MARKET VALUE

ta-bae ka mai. Second-hand wood shop.|UNIT |AREA/ QUANTITY |PRICE |HOUSE 2 |USABLE % |VALUE

A. 2 X 2 Lumber |3.5 linear meters |50฿ |130lm |90% |1,679฿

B. 2 X 4 Lumber |2.5 linear meters |100฿ |150lm |60% |1,285฿

C. 2 X 6 Lumber |6 linear meters |580฿ |157lm |60% |9,106฿

D .5 X 8 Lumber |3 linear meters |80฿ |99sqm |90% |11,866฿

E. 1 X 8 Lumber |3 linear meters |300฿ |48lm |100% |8,640฿

F. 1 X 12 Lumber |3.5 linear meters |400฿ |218sqm |50% |45,780฿

tong-fu. New construction material shop.|UNIT |AREA/ QUANTITY |PRICE

A. 5mm roof panel |.36 sqm |29.4฿ (-30%) |218sqm |100% |3,793฿

B. 4mm wall panel |2.88 sqm |105฿ (-30%) |68sqm |90% |2,231฿

Total |51,804฿

SURVEY OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS House NO. 1|USAGE |TYPE |MATERIAL |AREA/ QUANTITY |QUALITY

1.Walls |lap siding |wood |27 sqm |75%

2.Roof |corrugated roof panels |ber glass |61.75 sqm |100%

3.Floor |1x8 boards |wood |42.5 sqm |70%

4.Beams |2x4 lumber |wood |61.75sqm/ 1m. on ctr |60%

5.Rafter |2x2 lumber |wood |218sqm/ 1m. on ctr |60%

6.Studs |2x2 lumber |wood |167sqm/ 50cm. on ctr |90%

House NO. 2.1 + 2.2|USAGE |TYPE |MATERIAL |AREA/ QUANTITY |QUALITY

1.Walls 2.1 |ber cement panels |ber glass |68 sqm |90%

2.Walls 2.2 |lap siding |wood |99 sqm |90%

3.Roof |corrugated roof panels |ber glass |218 sqm |100%

4.Floor |1x10 boards |wood |218 sqm |50%

5.Columns 2.2 |columns 4x4 |wood |16 units, 3m length |80%

6.Beams |2x4 lumber |wood |218sqm/ 1m. on ctr |60%


8.Studs |2x2 lumber |wood |167sqm/ 50cm. on ctr |90%

House NO. 3|USAGE |TYPE |MATERIAL |AREA/ QUANTITY |QUALITY

1.Walls |lap siding |wood |127 sqm |75%

2.Roof |corrugated roof panels |ber glass |155 sqm |100%

4.Floor |1x10 boards |wood |147 sqm |50%

5.Columns |columns 4x4 |wood |28 units, 3m length |80%

6.Beams |2x4 lumber |wood |155 sqm/ 1m. on ctr |80%


Figure A5.13 Survey of recyclable materials

Figure A5.14 Second hand market value



Figure A6.0 Contrast between slum, mid-class, and temple/tourism(photo by Jose di Girolamo)




A6.0 RATTANAKOSIN ISLAND annex



annex

RATTANAKOSIN ISLAND Interviews

INTERVIEWS: DAY 1WangkromprassommutamormphanCommunity

54 households

267 people

• Land is owned by CPB. The palace located in

the community belonged to Rama IV son, when

Thailand became a constitutional monarchy, and

many properties got sold off.

• Had already upgraded before Baan Mankong,

Programme is addressing land issues.

• Livelihoods: Royal servants

• Sub-renters from 1st generations

• Residents are a mix of low and middle-income

occupants• Land ownership is a mix of CPB and private

ownership

• Spatiality: shop houses, courts, narrow streets, no

formal community space

• Communities know each other but don’t really

interact all that much except at events

• CPB has no eviction policy but if sub tenants do

not agree to negotiate rents after upgrading they

can be evicted.

Land and Housing Construction:

• Ownership belongs to CPB. residents rent land

from CPB but (may or may not) own house• 2600 baht per year property tax

• pre-upgrading surveys must be done by CPB so

that land rental price can be raised

• Under the Baan Mankong programme land rental

prices may be stabilised.

Finance and funds:

• Multiple sources of funding: CODI and CPB

(200,000 baht from each)

• Loan has been granted but remains in the bank as

they have no proposal for plans

• Confusion over minimum savings groupcontribution

Community mobilisation and capacity building:

• Savings group was set up before Baan Mankong

Programme by CPB

• 2 ½ years old

• 200 baht per month

• Middle class contribute to savings group to help

others out

• Many committees: activities, accountants, CPB

coordination

• Partnerships with other actors and infrastructure:• Entered into Baan Mankong for infrastructure

upgrading

• Mapping the different sources of funding that may

overlap

Ban Batt Community

• Focus is on rebuilding on the same land

• Project started 4 years ago but it took them a year

to understand the programme

• They are looking to strengthen local economy with

a tourism initiative• Community seems to have strong ties to each

other, perhaps reinforced by community centre

• It is one of the oldest communities

• Livelihoods: Monk bowl production


• Ownership belongs to CPB and Temple

• Temple residents are part of the second phase

of baan mankong programme in this community-

cannot get grant until they have proof of acceptance

from temple but negotiations with institution of

Buddhism are proving difcult

• Temple does not grant receipts meaning residentshave no proof of occupancy

• Split in land ownership has split community

• Temple land residents seem to feel insecurity of

tenure and as a result oppose upgrading

• Proof of occupancy has to be provided to avoid

eviction (receipts or old objects)

• CPB puts restrictions on building heights

• Materials used can increase heights (currently

buildings are concrete on the bottom and wooden

on the top)

• By law, land owner owns building, if they are

evicted, the CPB will reimburse them.

ANNEXES RATTANAKOSIN ISLAND




Figure A6.1 Narrow pathway in community (photo by Su Ann Tan)

Finance and funds:

• 90% of community is in savings group

• Temple land residents are not part of savings group

• Savings group was set up before Baan Mankong

Programme by CPB

• 2 ½ years old

• 200 baht per month (100 for membership and 100

minimum for welfare)

• Can contribute more to savings group if you want

the loan quicker

Community mobilisation and capacity building:

• Community networks

Partnerships with other actors and infrastructure:

• Entered into Baan Mankong for infrastructure

upgrading

• Mapping the different sources of funding that may

overlap

• Use traditional wells as a water source and as part

of their livelihood (monk bowls)

• Local authorities are starting to talk to thecommunity and negotiate

• MOU between BMA and CPB has been proposed

for the community- BMA seems to see them as an

important example of housing intervention

• Community centre was part of infrastructure

proposal to CODI and therefore supported by the

grant

• Elections for community board roles- crown

representative must be present

Wat Saket: Community:

2 year of Baan Mankong65 households

37 in Baan Mankong

40 shop houses

• Huge diversity between economic status of

residents

• Internal differentiation between residents and

their interests/objectives/expectations of the

programme

• Economic interests in upgrading community

• Livelihoods: Cofn making, 90% of resident own

shops there

• Spatiality: Normal street, not an alley way for entrance/ exit


• Land ownership is CPB and Temple

• Land is not a major issue, Baan Mankong is being

used as a tool to mobilise people and address

issues they have with the local economy

• Upgrading had already been done without CODI

grants

• Private businesses contributed some materials

• 300,00 baht paid from their own money to upgrade

• 120 baht per month to rent land

Finance and funds:

• Private funding from other savings group as well

as interest from investment/ banking



participate in CM yet, need for more understanding

of programme and its benets


• Partnerships with university for activities purposes

• TAT under ministry of tourism and sports as an

established partnership

Watsuntornthammathan Community:

233 households

800 people

• 129 members of saving group

• 13 problematic houses: very poor, drugs, theft and

living on temple land

• Want to involve richer people in the community to

improve perceptions

• They approached house holds door by door to

promote Baan Mankong

• Signicant problems with children as a result of

abandonment (teenage parents)

• Some people have more than one unit• Shop houses and lower-income housing seem to

have some conict

• Middle income households are interested in Baan

Mankong for the sake of getting an extended lease.

• Perceived as a poor community


• Ownership belongs to CPB and temples

Finance and Funds:

• Baan Mankong fund

• Village fund: used for daily needs and livelihoods

Community mobilisation:

• Part of a network of a historic walk (between the 6

communities) – eco-tourism walk

• Organisation of community activities and events

•

Jakkrapadipong Community:

Interview outside of migrant renters house

We spoke to some migrants from Cambodia who are

yet to join the BM programme.

They discussed several points that explained their position about not joining:

• They were uncertain about renting through the

programme, as they rent directly from CPB and

not a sublease. Also they were apprehensive as

this is a long term commitment that would require

the next generation to continue this.

• They would rather observe other communities rst

to see what challenges they would face so they

could learn from them and mitigate potential risks.

• There is a concern for the future power structure,

as they have trust in today’s leaders but not sureabout tomorrows.

• The challenge that they will face is not with the


• Collaborating with universities: children’s activities,

art gallery

• Partnership with private sector in palace:

community is able to use space for community

activities outside of working hours (agreement is

between CPB and private company)

Sitaram Community:

65 houses including 40 shops

37 houses not participating in BM

• CPB owned land

• Transfer of rights after old lady’s dad passed away,

only right to plot behind

• Spatiality: narrow entrance on main road, behind

shop house.

• Started savings groups 3,5 years ago

• 100 B / month per household

• 40 members of savings groups, including residents

of shop houses and other houses. Residents of

shop houses participate in savings groups for infrastructure improvement.

• Funds: politicians, CODI, municipality

• Fund for infrastructure approved by CODI but not

received yet

• Shop houses/middle class vs. poor behind the

shop houses. Lack of interactions, fragmentation

• No community space yet

• There seems to be no connection between the

other houses.

• Using culture as a tool

Jakkrapadipong Community:

52 shop houses

27 wooden houses at the back

• Tension between shop owners and people behind.

• Residents behind not ready to join the programme.

They are skeptical, while shop houses really

wanted infrastructure grants.

• Diversity within community, in terms of income,

also origin (Lady was Cambodian)


• CPB owned land

• Houses built after WWII. “typical” housing types,wooden architecture etc.

• Upgrading of shophouses funded by CPB (facades,

6 years ago)

• Some were individually funded upgrading (house

behind coffee house)

Finance and funds:

• 90% of people are part of BM and savings groups

• 100, 000 Baht have been collected in one year and

a half

Community mobilisation and capacity building:• Network different than NULICO

• People behind the shop houses: not willing to





Figure A6.2 Self-designed houses (photo by Jose di Girolamo)

savings group but when they move on to a

cooperative. Although CODI help them to scale up,

it is complicated for them to understand as they

only get step-by-step information of the stages

rather than full information.

• It is not hard to save up every months but it is hard

for people to be consistent when paying.



This was a highly lively exchange between different

communities that enabled them to identify the common

obstacles they faced and possible collective solutions,

with premature plans of a tourist cycle route being

proposed by the community as a way to spatially

integrate the fragmented communities.

What was made clear is that culture and tourism are

being used as a soft entry point to addressing the hard

pressing issues such as land tenure and livelihood.Hosting this workshop at this highly resilient community

proved inspirational to other communities, as although

they are not participating in the BM programme they

are in great solidarity, which is a living testament to

what they themselves can overcome and achieve.

WORKSHOP : Phom Mahakan CommunityNon-Baan Mankokng on BMA Land

The community requested that we make a master plan

of the site and make recommendations to how they

could landscape some of the community grounds to

accommodate their vision of tourism whilst acting as a

functional space to support their daily life.

This required us to divide into two groups, and explorethe site with the community listening to how they

envisioned the area and elaborate on their interaction

with the spaces and each other. From this we were

able to propose extending the canal walkway, a café

at the bottom of the planned NESDB centre and

the incorporation of interactive facades to host the

communities planned workshops for visitors.

We started the workshop by asking each community

representative three questions, as a way to actively

engage them as opposed to them being passive

observers to the presentation. This allowed us to gather data and compare where they think they are to where

they actually are positioned. The nature of questions

such as “what challenge are you facing?” gave the

communities a platform to which they discussed

multiple issues, the majority of which interlinked.


Figure A6.3 Community by river




Figure A6.4 Detailing of existing houses




Figure A6.5 Contrast between slum and palace(photo by Jose di Girolamo)

Figure A6.6 Improvised kitchen at historic wall (photo by Su Ann Tan)




Figure A6.7 Wall between community and city (photo by Dhrin Anantamongkolchai)



Documents

De-Codi-Ng Baan Mankong