1 Peace Through Parks: The Challenge of Overcoming Social Frictions and Ecological Tensions in the Development of Parks in Post-Conflict Bogotá By Marcela Angel Lalinde B.A. Architecture, Andes University (2011) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2018 © 2018 Marcela Angel. All Rights Reserved The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. Author_____________________________ Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 23, 2018 Certified by __________________________ Associate Professor J. Phillip Thompson Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor Accepted by_________________________ Professor of the Practice Ceasar McDowell Department of Urban Studies and Planning Chair, MCP Committee 2 Peace Through Parks: The Challenge of Overcoming Social Frictions and Ecological Tensions in the Development of Parks in Post-Conflict Bogotá By Marcela Angel Lalinde. MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning, May 2018. Thesis Submitted as part of the Requirements for the Master in City Planning Degree. Abstract In the development of parks in Bogota, legacies of conflict pull the environmental and post- conflict equity-building agendas apart. This thesis interrogates the relationship between post- conflict, equity-building and the ecology of public parks in order to propose a framework for the development of green open spaces that advances both agendas simultaneously, through everyday city-making processes. In particular, using a case study of Bogotá’s park system, this research explores the challenges when maximizing the benefits of ecological services, while fostering spatial equity, social cohesion, and civic formation in the development of parks in post- conflict contexts. This thesis employs an inductive research methodology that combines qualitative methods with spatial analysis and case study inquiries to identify key assumptions obscured in the everyday city-making processes. This reveals a phenomenon observable in the development of parks in Bogotá, whereby forces of social exclusion and fear of the other, in combination with ideas of order and security, end up provoking a simultaneous restraint on biodiversity and human diversity. This thesis explores the position of the different actors—both mainstream players and alternative organizations—involved in the design, planning, and operation of parks in Bogotá, and reveals how decision-making tools reinforce their theoretical positions. By doing so, it uncovers competing frameworks and priorities at play in a fragmented institutional context. A selection of exemplary parks, illustrate where legacies of conflict (such as associating nature with crime, and expressing nervousness towards “the other”) still over- determine the ways in which parks are designed, programmed, and maintained. These environmental tensions are mostly present in the development of large parks in ecologically vulnerable areas, and are generated by rigid assumptions that treat ecological functionality and security as mutually exclusive. Simultaneously, small neighborhood parks face class-based social frictions that reflect differences between neighborhood-centric preferences and the function of parks as city services for all, and a trend for increased agency of neighborhood associations threaten to make parks less inclusive. Nevertheless, alternative practices are emerging in the development of natural recreational settings that are promoting ecological conservation, high- use, and civic formation. By identifying opportunities, promoting collaboration, and seeking new processes and decision-making tools, this thesis offers a set of planning strategies and an implementation framework of social inclusion and ecological biodiversity to overcome fear (or perception of fear) and reinforce the potential of parks as peace-building tools. Thesis Advisor: J. Phillip Thompson, Associate Professor Reader: Lawrence J. Vale, Ford Professor Marcela Angel Lalinde // Colfuturo Fellow 2016 3 Table of Contents Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 5 Research Question ...................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 7 3. Methodology: Case Study of Bogotá’s Park System ..................................................... 12 Methods: Qualitative Grounded Theory, Site Visits, Participant Observations and Spatial Analysis ..... 12 Semi-structured interviews ...................................................................................................................... 13 Constructing meaning .............................................................................................................................. 15 Choosing the sites ..................................................................................................................................... 15 Observant participant at the Botanical Garden of Bogotá ...................................................................... 17 Limitations ................................................................................................................................................ 18 4. Context: Post-conflict, Landscape Inequalities, Political Shifts, and Institutional Context ............................................................................................................................. 19 National Post-conflict: Legacies of Conflict in the Perceptions of Nature and of the Other .................. 19 Bogotá’s Landscape inequalities: Uneven Growth, Inconsistent Quality ................................................ 20 Municipal Political Shifts: Change in Priorities and Upcoming Transformations in the Park System ..... 23 Who builds the park? Institutions and roles of actors developing and operating parks in Bogotá ....... 26 Mayor Enrique Peñalosa ........................................................................................................................... 26 Municipal Planning Secretariat (SDP) ....................................................................................................... 27 Recreation and Sports Institute (IDRD) .................................................................................................... 27 Public Space Defense Administrative Department (DADEP) ................................................................... 28 Citizen Participation Institute (IDEPAC) .................................................................................................... 28 Botanical Garden of Bogotá (JBB) ............................................................................................................ 28 Aqueduct Company of Bogotá (EAAB) ..................................................................................................... 29 Friends of the Mountain (ADM) ............................................................................................................... 29 Unclear Roles: Fragmentation and Ambiguous Responsibilities in the Current System ........................ 30 5. Results: Competing Frameworks and Priorities ........................................................... 32 The social purpose of parks and meanings of success in Bogotá: Urban democracy, high use and ecological conservation ............................................................................................................................ 32 Parks illustrative of the theoretical positions .......................................................................................... 37 Type I: Metropolitan and large zonal parks under IDRD´s jurisdiction .................................................... 38 Type II: Smaller zonal, neighborhood and pocket parks under DADEP’s and local municipalities jurisdiction ................................................................................................................................................ 40 Type III: Natural recreational settings under EAAB’s and IDRD’s jurisdiction ......................................... 43 Putting competing frameworks and priorities in perspective ................................................................. 45 Decision making tools reinforce theoretical positions ............................................................................ 47 6. Discussion: Designing for fear ...................................................................................... 49 Environmental Tensions: Parks with High Ecological Value Developed Under High-Use Principles ...... 49 4 Social Frictions: Differences Between Neighborhood Preferences and Function as City Services ........ 53 7. Conclusions: Overcoming “Fear” .................................................................................. 57 Overcoming Institutionalized Fear: Implementing a Framework of Social Inclusion and Ecological Biodiversity ..............................................................................................................................................