Leisure, open spaces and territorial protection
in the Distrito Federal

Research Question and Topic

The topic "Leisure, Open Spaces and Territorial Protection" in the Distrito Federal deals with the appropriation of certain spaces by the people. The main research questions arise from three different but interrelated sub-aspects that address different dimensions of "appropriating": The first step is to find out which open spaces are appropriated by the population of the Distrito Federal.
Based on the local reference, the question of who appropriates the open spaces of the Distrito Federal will take a look at the actors: Do residents from the satellite cities or from the Plano Piloto tend to spend time in different open spaces and are there any recognizable patterns? Finally, the question of how the population of the Distrito Federal appropriates open spaces and how access to these spaces differs between the residents of the satellite cities and the Plano Piloto will be explored. The study also aims to find out how the use of the different spaces is reflected in the daily life of the inhabitants.
Consequently, a synthesis of the three aspects will provide insights into whether equitable access is evident in the use of open spaces in Brasília or whether a privileging of the residents of the Plano Piloto becomes noticeable and what role territorial protection plays in this.

Theory

(Urban) Open Spaces

In general, open spaces can be divided into green spaces, leisure and recreational spaces, and other open spaces (Nöst 2019). The functions of an open space can be divided into the ecological (climatic cooling effect), economic (attractive design of the open space) and social (places for recreation and leisure activities) functions (Hartz 2018).
In times of digitalization, open spaces create important opportunities for interpersonal contact (Schwarting & Frisch 2012) that can counteract the isolation of society through shared use (Johnson & Glover 2013).

Green and Blue Spaces

At the macro level, the blue-green space is composed of blue space, i.e. all water areas, and green space, i.e. all green areas that shape the landscape pattern of the city (Wu, He & Yang 2020). Examples include the Parque Nacional de Brasília (PNB), which is part of the Cerrado and thus consists of an enormously large green space in the middle of which lies a lake (the Santa Maria reservoir) and is crisscrossed by rivers (Doyle 2009). Lago Paranoá is an artificial lake and probably the best known blue space in Brasília (Struck 2017/Epstein 1973). The Parque da Cidade also offers extensive green and blue spaces and thus plays an important role in the recreational use of the population.

Leisure Time

The focus of our research is primarily on the leisure use of public, urban spaces. Public spaces in cities, for example streets, parks and squares, can provide important opportunities to meet, interact and mingle (Young 2014/Lamond & Lashua 2021). Urban open spaces are increasingly taking on the function of individual and informal places for exercise and recreation (Krüger & Kreutz 2018).

Territorial Protection

The Distrito Federal is located in the Cerrado, which contains 36 protected areas, 12 of them are under full protection and 24 under sustainable use; 72 parks designated for leisure use and ecological observation, and three areas are under special protection: the Zoological Garden, the Botanical Garden and the Embrapa Cerrado Reserve. The Distrito Federal is a member of the Brazilian Network and the World Network of Biosphere Reserves through the Cerrado Biosphere Reserve - RBC-DF. The RBC-DF covers an area of approximately 230,000 hectares, or about 40 percent of the territory of the Distrito Federal (Doyle 2009). It consists of five conservation units: the Águas Emendadas Ecological Station, the Jardim Botânico Ecological Station, the Brasília National Park, the IBGE Ecological Station, and the Água Limpa Farm (Brasília Ambiental - Governo do Distrito Federal 2019). However, the RBC-DF faces significant challenges. In the immediate vicinity of some protection units are either urban consolidation areas or urban areas with controlled uses (Doyle 2009). In addition, these areas are threatened by invasions and irregular occupations, illegal forest clearance, trash, forest fires and more (Brasília Ambiental - Governo do Distrito Federal 2019). In addition, the population often does not know what a biosphere reserve is or that the RBC-DF exists or what its significance is (Doyle 2009).

Methods and Limitations of the Methods

The study group was collecting the data via photointerviews as well as interviews conducted with experts on different topics. The combination of those two methods allows to generate a greater base of information during the really restricted time in the vast area of Brasília. According to these two barriers, it was not possible to visit many more of the so-called satellite cities or administration regions. Even if the combination of the methods has a positive impact on the range of our results, it was nonetheless not complicated to gain an extremely deep insight into people’s leisure activities and how they appropriate space through their activities.
One might identify the language to communicate to each other as a barrier, due to a lack of portuguese on the side of the study group and some difficulties to express oneself in English by the counterparts. Language has also been a topic through the series of interviews conducted with different experts. Some of them have been fluent in English and surprisingly even once in German. Since the study group took the chance to prepare questions in Portuguese – similar to the other format of interviews – and the supporting translations by Univ.-Prof. Dr. Coy it was possible to gain some very detailed information on a wide range of the different topics.

Results and Interpretation with Reference to Theory

The subject of "Leisure, Open Spaces and Territorial Protection" in the Distrito Federal does not only cover the three already mentioned interrelated subaspects but it also refers to the discussion of how the production and appropriation of space occurs in Brasília, an icon of modernity. The question of appropriation is deeply connected to this research topic. When it comes to the discussion about who is appropriating spaces, the study group noticed that all of Brasília’s population somehow is taking part. Though, the interesting point about it, is the way how different parts of the population are appropriating space. First of all, people who live outside of Plano Piloto tend to spend their time in parks there only at weekends and/or if they have enough time to get there, since it is a long way to go using public transportation. Beside distances, a weak network of public transportation, restricted opening hours in some parks can be seen as a barrier which is mainly encountered by people living outside of Plano Piloto. Another problem of using free green spaces is the lack of information about them and the lack of space at all. The urbanistic concept of satellite cities is poor in terms of infrastructure, trees and overall environmental quality in green areas. Expanded infrastructure is only found in rich areas like Plano Piloto, Águas Claras or Asa Sul and Asa Norte. To solve these problems it requires cooperations with poorer communities to co-build, occupy and promote infrastructures. Maria Rossi (Secretariat of Environment, Governo do Distrito Federal, Brasília) emphasized, that the concept of “public” is misunderstood - it is the synonym of “nobody”. But as you start involving people in a process, they feel more connected to certain places. In addition, the interviews conducted with students made clear, that people use public space differently to what it was meant to be. A concrete example is playing rugby at a big green area at the “eixo monumental”, the central axis. There was no area planned for free public use. This shows, that planned as well as not planned appropriation differs from initial plans. The interview with Maria Rossi showed, that areas in Brasília are under human pressure for occupation. Ricardo Peng, environmental analyst at the Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (icmbio), illustrated this northeast of the Parque Nacional (see Figure 1). A very common process in whole Brazil is the construction of houses without permissions or altercation in advance. This phenomenon is spread through all socioeconomic patterns, from poor to rich. A counterexample is the satellite city Samambaia, where much of the ownership of the land belonged to the government, so the building process was rather political.
To put it in a nutshell, the kind of appropriation varies by the interests of different castes. Furthermore, there are different time spans of appropriation. It can be spontaneous only for some leisure activities or a longterm period when it comes to illegal housing at the National Park as well as trying to expand the private parcell in a way to reach Lago Paranoá. These disparities between the upper class and low-/ middle class, between residents of Plano Piloto and most of the administration regions underline open space in Brasília as being a non-democratic, fragmented good.

Picture 1: Ricardo Peng shows where illegal construction is taking place in the Área de Proteção Ambiental (APA) near the Parque Nacional, source: own picture
Picture 1: Ricardo Peng shows where illegal construction is taking place in the Área de Proteção Ambiental (APA) near the Parque Nacional, source: own picture


All illustrations, graphics, tables and photos used in connection with the topic Leisure, open spaces and territorial protection in the Distrito Federal as well as the present text were created or taken by Lena Enders, Lena Schneider and Theresa Keller.

References

Brasília Ambiental - Governo do Distrito Federal (2019): Reserva da Biosfera, [https://www-ibram-df-gov-br.translate.goog/reserva-da-biosfera/?_x_tr_sl=pt&_x_tr_tl=de&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=sc], 28.12.2021.
Doyle, P. (2009): Reserva da Biosfera do Cerrado no Distrito Federal, [https://www-ibram-df-gov-br.translate.goog/reserva-da-biosfera/?_x_tr_sl=pt&_x_tr_tl=de&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=op,sc], 28.12.2021.
Epstein, D.G. (1973): Brasília, plan and reality: a study of planned and spontaneous urban development. Berkely, Los Angeles, London.
Hartz, A. (2018): Freiraum. In: ARL – Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (Ed.): Handwörterbuch der Stadt- und Raumentwicklung. Hannover, pp. 717-733.
Johnson, A.J., Glover, T.D. (2013): Understanding urban public space in a leisure context. Taylor & Francis Group. In: Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal. London, pp. 190-197, DOI: 10.1080/01490400.2013.761922.
Krüger, T., Kreutz, S. (2018): Urbane Freiräume – Qualifizierung, Rückgewinnung und Sicherung urbaner Frei- und Grünräume. Handlungsempfehlungen für die kommunale Praxis. Hg: Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung (BBSR) im Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung (BBR), Bonn.
Lamond, I.R., Lashua, B. (2021): Leisure, activism, and the animation of the urban environment. Leisure Studies, 40(1), pp. 1-12, DOI: 10.1080/02614367.2020.1869291.
Nöst, M. (2019): In welcher Weisen betreffen urbane Grünräume die Menschen und wie können diese erschaffen und gestaltet werden? Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz. Graz.
Schwartring, H., Frisch, A. (2012): Freiräume entwickeln – Lebensräume erschaffen. Hessisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Landesentwicklung. Hessen.
Struck, E. (2017): Brasilia: eine Utopie als Repräsentation einer Supermacht. Von der Vision einer Stadt zum musealen Relikt. PKG. Passau.
Wu, Y., He, X.S., Yang, L. (2020): Compilation conception of special planning for blue and green space system at city and county level under the background of land space planning system. Landsc. Archit. 27, pp. 30–34.
Young, I. M. (2014). City life and difference. In J. J. Gieseking, W. Mangold, C. Katz, S. Low, & S. Saegert (Eds.), The people, place, and space reader. Routledge, pp. 247–251.