Assigment 3: Policy evaluation

By Lorena del Castillo

Carnival of Barranco: The fight for public space

In 2005, the collective "Proyecto Barrio" attempted to rescue the Carnival of Barranco. They
claimed that the Carnival belonged to a popular heritage and that celebrating it, was an
opportunity for local population to revive a long tradition and to recover public space in the
district. According to the Peruvian architect Gonzalo Daz, this kind of initiatives was not
frequent in central areas of the city. While in peripheral areas, events tend to be promoted by
local groups, in the central districts of Lima, the activities in public space were usually
sponsored by private companies or local authorities. This situation can be observed in the
picture bellow, while the red spots belong to local initiatives, the blue spots belong to
initiatives from municipalities or private companies (Diaz, 2010).

Figure 1. Map of Lima that shows activities in public space (Diaz, 2010)

After several efforts to co-organize the Carnival with the local municipality, the collective
Proyecto Barrio declined. They explained that city officials were not willing to offer facilities;
moreover, they were constantly threatened with fines if they would break the behavioral
rules(El Comercio, 2012).

Regardless the intervention of Proyecto Barrio, in 2010 the residents of Barranco started to
celebrate the Carnival on their own. Some residents claimed the necessity to preserve the
tradition and they argued that the eldest families of the district always promoted similar
collective expressions in the streets where neither control nor discrimination existed. In
addition, they maintained that the carnival made them feel closer, special and increased their
sense of belonging to the district. Finally, they held that the carnival was an opportunity to
share and know the other neighbors (Diaz, 2010). Despite the desire of the residents, year
after year the municipality forbade the carnival and responded violently against the
population that insisted on participating in the celebrations. The major titled the carnival as
an illegal threat to the public order. He claimed that the carnival lacked the corresponding
municipal permits and he sent police contingents to repress the festivities. The confrontation
between the residents and the police force took place on the street. On the one hand, the
police throw tear gas bombs and use cudgels to restrain the population. On the other hand,
the residents throw the elements that they have in hand such as water pumps and bottles
(Diaz, 2009). The municipality justified their actions by arguing that after the celebrations,
public ornamentation was wrecked and the participants left the place dirty with bottles and
trash. Finally, municipal officials pointed out that foreigners were frequent visitors of
Barranco. In that regard, they argued that it was their responsibility to preserve an image of
order and security to promote the tourism sector in the district (El Comercio, 2015). The
pictures bellow show the contrast between the scenes during the celebrations and after the
police interventions.

Figure 2. Pictures of the before and after of police intervention (Diaz, 2010)

In this case, there are two opposite rationalities of the use of public space. On the one hand,
local population believed that streets and squares are the milieu for create collective
memory, strengthen their sense of community and reinforce their identity. On the other hand,
the municipality considered that public space is something to be preserved and controlled to
increase the perception of security and make it appealable for economic sectors (i.e. the
tourism sector).

This case is an evidence of what recent urban studies have proven over the past years.
They evidenced that there is an unprecedented disposition to reduce and regulate public
spaces. One illustration is the mall effect, whereby only the largest consumers are worthy
of using a kind of public space that lacks of its principal functions. In that regard, Kohn
argued that the proliferation of shopping malls promoted new forms of social interaction in a
simulated version of public space. This new space is controlled by those who own property
rights and limits the freedom that existed in real public space (Kohn 2004, pp. 76).
Furthermore, the excessive control of public space tends to standardize the users and also
reduces the changes to exercise the right to be different. The latter integrates the set of
rights required to fulfill the right to the city. In that regard, Dike argues that difference
cannot be categorize, reduced and banned from public spaces because the use of public
space has always been based on representations of originality, diversity, variety and
distinction (Dike 2001, pp. 1790).

Likewise, Mitchell claims that public space had been significantly fortified in name of
security. He claims that the fear of inappropriate users has established a solution where the
combination of environmental change, behavior modification and stringent policing have
become the methods of assurance that public space will remain public rather than hijacked
by undesirable users (Mitchell 2003, pp.2). In the carnivals celebrations, the police
intervention to repressed the residents is an example of how mechanisms of power are used
to segregate unwanted users and certain type of behaviors from streets and squares.

However, it is not a question of removing the guidelines to manage the aspects related to the
security and risks of the neighborhoods. The damage of the streets resulting from carnival
celebrations cannot be overlooked in the design of a future public policy. Still, it is necessary
to discuss if potential violence is managed or turned toward either regressive or progressive
ends. In that regard, order should be more a product of social practice than a simply result of
a normative argument. When order encourages self-determination and freedom and comes
from the design of quality spaces, it can consolidate respect, democratic values and
citizenship. Likewise, it can promote an ethical awareness towards the necessity to live in a
more just urban environment.

References:

Daz, G. (2010). Map of Lima that shows activities in public space.

Retrieved from http://blog-citio.blogspot.nl/2010/03/una-mirada-urbana-al-carnaval-
de.html

Daz, G. (2010). Pictures of the before and after of police intervention.

Retrieved from http://blog-citio.blogspot.nl/2010/03/una-mirada-urbana-al-carnaval-
de.html

Dike, M. (2001). Justice and the spatial imagination. Environment and Planning
A, 33(10), 1785-1805.

El Comercio, (2012). Colectivo Proyecto Barrio no organizar el carnaval de

Barranco. Retrieved from http://elcomercio.pe/sociedad/lima/colectivo-proyecto-
 barrio-no-organizara-carnaval-barranco-noticia-
1377534?ref=flujo_tags_256084&ft=nota_5&e=titulo

El Comercio, (2015). "Carnaval de Barranco": municipio conden daos a su

patrimonio. Retrieved from http://elcomercio.pe/sociedad/lima/carnaval-barranco-
municipio-condeno-danos-su-patrimonio-noticia-
1794753?ref=flujo_tags_256084&ft=nota_1&e=titulo

Kohn, M. (2004). Brave new neighborhoods: The privatization of public space.

Psychology Press.

Mitchell, D. (2003). The right to the city: Social justice and the fight for public space.
Guilford Press.