The city and its environs - paths of socio-ecological transformation, needs for action and governance structures in the urban-environs context

Research question & used methods:

The socioeconomic contrasts as well as urban planning and planning aspects of the Distrito Federal have been investigated and analyzed in numerous studies. In contrast, the large-scale development of the metropolitan region has been little researched. This is the point that this contribution aims to address, with the research question:
How does Brasília, in its capacity as capital city, manage inter-municipal cooperation and the spatial development of the metropolis?
In order to better understand the role of the Federal District and its current challenges, it is important to take a closer look at the administrative structures.
• What collaborations exist between the Federal District and the surrounding municipalities?
• How can the Brasília metropolitan region be spatially delineated?
In order to find this out, primarily existing literature was evaluated and open content aspects on site were covered with expert interviews. Furthermore, on a smaller scale, local observations and walk-throughs were conducted in the administrative regions of Ceilândia and Samambaia. Due to the complexity of the topic and the short development history of Brasília, the literature research was limited by the small literature spectrum.

The special character of the Districto Federal:

Meaning of Districto Federal: Due to its hybrid character as an administrative body, the Distrito Federal contains competences to act at the federal level and at the state level. It is divided into 31 Regiões administrativas, including the central administrative zone of Plano Piloto. In addition, the Distrito Federal has a special status under the Constitution (1988) in that it is prohibited from governing autonomous municipalities. The active decision-maker is the Governor of the Distrito Federal and his representatives. Since the Distrito Federal includes state and municipal powers, they cannot be separated, which makes the aforementioned administrative regions dependent on the governor of the Distrito Federal. The surrounding states, on the other hand, have a state constitution with autonomous municipalities.

Governance structures and areas of action:

NOVACAP (Companhia Urbanizadora da Nova Capital do Brasil) (1956): State-created authority that had a headquarters in a city that did not yet exist in the beginning. Main actor for all development processes in the spatial production (landowner) of the Distrito Federal and single decision maker for all administrative matters possesses bureaucratic self-government right in the urbanization process. NOVACAP was considered the sole owner of almost all the land in the new Distrito Federal until 1964. Consequently, the institution retained any right to act as an independent decision-maker. With bureaucratic authority, NOVACAP was able to decide how the capital city would continuously expand in its development. This includes, among other things, the course of development of future business locations or industrial sites. The role as the main actor in the state's interest to control the development process in the socioeconomic context show the result of incidents of abuse of authority in the sense of corruption allegations within the area of responsibility from land acquisition and land allocation. One of the central tasks in the newly formed Distrito Federal was to communalize the land market by buying up the entire land area. The intended nationalization of land ownership by the Federal Government in order to be able to carry out unimpeded implementation of planning administration has not been settled to date. The unresolved ownership issues highlight the current different types of land ownership in the state, such as private ownership or expropriated land. They pose a problem not only for the administrative structure, but also for settlement development (Bose 2017).

TERRACAP (Companhia Imobiliária de Brasília) (1973): Authority that manages the land area in the Distrito Federal as a public decision maker and administrator, acting in the interest of the capital administration (1960) Governo do Distrito Federal. The fields of action include the areas such as building permits for space production and concession granting (Fig. 1-6) (Terracap 2022).

Figure 1: Terracap property marking for commercial purposes. Source: own picture (2022).                                Figure 2: spatial appearance picture of the space production Samambaia Sul. Source: own picture (2022).
Figure 3: Outlook spatial structure towards Samambaia Sul. Source: own picture (2022).                                                                                         Figure 4: View from the metro station of the use of space to Samambaia Norte. Source: own picture (2022).
Figure 5: Samambaia metro station. Source: own picture (2022).                                                  Figure 6: spatial appearance Avenida Segunda Norte Samambaia. Source: own picture (2022).

What happened in the region?

The Distrito Federal has the highest growth of population in Brazil and a strongly increasing wealth. It is now the 3rd largest metropolitan area in the country. The surrounding municipalities of the Distrito Federal form a belt of underdevelopment. This periphery grew with all those who cannot afford to live in the Plano Piloto. This is easily seen in the distribution of average income and completed college degrees in the region. Most of the residents of the surrounding municipalities work in the Distrito Federal, or the jobs in the municipalities depend on the officials of the capital who live there (Sasse 2020).
The emerging problems due to the increase in people are only solvable through public policies, job creation and infrastructure development. But until now, no way has been found to integrate these municipalities around the Distrito Federal and create a metropolitan region. In fact, there is an institutional mess, there has been research, debates, political negotiations and projects for legal support and integration of the region, but little has been done in practice. Integration of the periphery needs a functioning institutional arrangement, and it needs agreement on the actual size of the Distrito Federal's sphere of influence. To create an integrated region, there have been different approaches to delineate the region and, in addition, attempts to create a legal legitimacy/foundation for the region (Paviani 2019).

Experiments for an integrated region

1998:Região Integrada do Districto Federal e Entorno (RIDE) (fig. 7) was created, it initially consisted of 21 municipalities and was expanded to 33 in 2018. The intention was to build a socio-economic relationship between the neighboring states of the Entorno and the Federal District. RIDE is a governing board for the development of the area surrounding the Federal District. However, the gigantism of RIDE, do not make its operation easy. RIDE's successes have been rather minimal, and many projects have been reinstated or have never been implemented (fig. 8) (Distrito Federal 2014).

2014: In the Codeplan, the Área Metropolitana (AMB) (fig. 9) was planned, this consists of 12 neighboring municipalities in Goiás. The metropolitan area serves as a template for the construction of an interconnection network that should enable the progress of socio-economic transformation within the periphery. It is hoped to foster regional cooperation and promote stagnant regional development. However, the members of the AMB do not recognize the existence of RIDE and no public policy is established (Paviani 2019).

2015: Metropolis Statute Law 13.089 for the creation of a metropolitan region, for which it requires federal authorization and public policy based on state laws and district law. Then-President Dilma Rousseff vetoes the law.

2018: Provisional Measure (MP) 862/2018 to amend the Metropolitan Statute to create the Distrito Federal Metropolitan Region and surrounding municipalities. However, the MP must comply with the 1988 Constitution and the dispute over government funding the Fundo Constitutional do Distrito Federal (FCDF) and the Fundo de Financiamento do Centro-Oeste (FCO) blocked the MP (fig. 10). As a result, the MP lost validity and there are no new projects (Sasse 2020).

What happened in regional development?

Cooperation:
Intermunicipal cooperation does not exist in an official way, because coordination between neighboring municipalities is difficult, even coordination within the Distrito Federal works in a limited way. Accordingly, the top-down problem emerges. As a result of the fact that official forms of regulation do not work, special-purpose associations are formed out of necessity to cooperate on a sectoral and topic-specific basis. Especially in the waste management and health sector (Carvalho de Souza 2022 & Pires 2022).
Finances:
The federal district receives tax funds for self-government of the region. The available financial resources should be transferred to neighboring municipalities in the interest of regional development. However, the money remains in Brasília, which is used for non-priority projects (fig. 11). The inconsistencies in the regulation of financial resources lead to contrasts and social fragmentation within the region (Carvalho de Souza 2022).

Conclusion

At the moment Brasília hardly controls inter-municipal cooperation and spatial development of the metropolitan region, since all projects and schemes are not implemented or fail. Therefore, Sudeco, as the superintendence for the development of the Midwest, should be strengthened so that resources are targeted. Sudeco, Goiás and Distrito Federal have not been able to work out a joint solution to date. Nevertheless, there is a need to work together to find solutions so that political rivalries are resolved. According to the Experts these are the main factors the region is progressing so slowly in its development and being abandoned by many action representatives. Consortia are needed to manage the region (waste, health, etc.). The amendment of the Constitution (PEC) allows delimiting micro-regions around cities with more than one million inhabitants. The goal is to integrate the organization, planning and execution of public tasks of common interest. Funds would be used exclusively to finance infrastructure investments and costs in the metropolitan region (Sasse 2020, Paviani 2019, Carvalho de Souza 2022 & Pires 2022).

Further figures and pictures

Click here to go back to the text section about RIDE

Click here to go back to the text section about AMB

Figure 10: Fundo de Financiamento do Centro-Oeste (FCO): Midwest Financial Fund is a loan fund created by the 1988 Federal Constitution with the aim of promoting the economic and social development of the Midwest. Fundo Constitutional do Distrito Federal (FCDF): Constitutional Fund of the Federal District for the financial support of the implementation of public health and education services receives, as well as safety in the Federal District. Source: Sasse (2020).

Click here to go back to the text section about FCO and FCDF

All illustrations, graphics, tables and photos used in connection with the topic Governance as well as the present text were created or taken by Max Covino and Mery Pocrnja if not stated differently.

References