Closure, stratification and exclusion - a concept of modern housing?

Gated communities are usually inhabited by very privileged social groups gathered in economically and socially homogeneous communities. We can, therefore, understand them as a form of selected self-segregation of the rich who realize their ideals of living in the city. However, the effects and consequences of such choices are also suffered by the less privileged and more vulnerable population, leading to reconsider the role of the state in enabling the spread of such a housing concept, but also the commodification and privatization of spatial resources in our cities. As a form of residential segregation, closed communities are both an expression and one of the factors maintaining socio-economic and spatial inequalities. The cycle works as follows: growing differences in income, in a situation where the real estate market is almost the only option for obtaining an apartment and there are not enough affordable alternatives provided by the state, leads to the fact that households, depending on their income, will secure housing in different zones of the city, but also of different quality of housing and accompanying services and contents. So, for example, someone who uses an apartment in a public housing complex in Jabučko rit live without direct access to basic communal infrastructure, public transport, sources of income, educational and health facilities, because the state does not implement policies that will provide them with this. Someone more privileged, on the other hand, far from such a location, will have a luxurious apartment surrounded by greenery, a kindergarten, a modernly equipped playground and recreational facilities at their doorstep, because the investor sold them a package with the apartment and communal and social infrastructure (instead of the state providing it ). Although we use extreme situations as an illustration, this also applies to all those who live in much more numerous settlements around the city, and the existing policies lead to such extremes becoming a paradigm. Residential segregation, furthermore, repeatedly reproduces economic inequality through the so-called "neighborhood effect" (the influence of the socio-economic conditions of a settlement on the opportunities that its residents have in life) - in short, residential segregation directly limits opportunities for social mobility for populations with lower incomes, because differences in the availability of opportunities largely determine the possibilities for changing their position and economic status. In this sense, both the chosen spatial segregation of the rich (closed communities), as well as the forced segregation of the marginalized and the poor (through the neglect of informal settlements and the implementation of social housing projects) have the effect of a fragmented and polarized society and reduce social cohesion. 

In addition, in closed communities the public space is practical abolished, which completely eliminates the possibility of meeting with different, with to others. This abolition does not only occur through physical walls but also through "softer" means such as distancing and isolation, digital and human surveillance, or architectural design that surrounds and encloses the complex. Further effect of suspension the public is the depoliticization of social life and reduced civic engagement. Through disciplining and more or less imposed codes of behavior and social norms, residents of closed communities become less inclined to participate in wider political discussions, and especially participate in struggles for the public interest (and not only their own or the interest of the closed community). Therefore, those who "have it all" through private infrastructure are less motivated to demand the public infrastructure they use to all.

Gated communities not only preserve the current state of social stratification, but also establish a new, long-lasting system of differentiation in the spatial planning of cities. In addition to the fact that in the short term we need to start a wider and more complex (than this text can provide) public discussion about whether we need gated communities, they also raise the question about the future of our cities - do we really want these cities to turn into archipelagos settlements that are drastically different from each other and completely separate?

Kosmajski vrtoti on their website, somewhat carelessly, in the promotion of nearby "attractions", move our attention from the concept of a closed community to the Monument to the Fighters of the Kosmaj Detachment from 1971, from the time when all its citizens participated in the planning of the city, and the construction of social housing and public infrastructure were some of the primary responsibilities of the state and the entire society. This can be only one possible source of inspiration for us in thinking about an ideal future city, but what is certain is that the appearance of closed communities and similar products, as an expression of neoliberal urban development, will not disappear until the basic assumptions of shaping and planning cities are radically changed. , as well as sectoral spatial policies.

Ministry of Space - Maria Minić, Jovana Timotijević

Text originally published on the portal Forbes