1

Learning from a Bosnian experiment: Suggestion for in-process housing

Igor Kuvač1, Isidora Karan2

1University in Granada, PhD student, Calle Duquesa 21/3-3, 18002 Granada, Spain, igropop@gmail.com 2UNAM, PhD architect, Slobodana Dubočanina 1, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina,

isidora_karan@yahoo.com

Photo by Authors

ABSTRACT

Increased migrations together with capital flow and housing market have caused the misbalance between housing construction and people's real needs. This problem registered in the cities worldwide is mostly related to the developing countries, but is also present in Europe, especially in the Western Balkans. The paper explores housing development in the conditions of the post-war recovery in Bosnia and Herzegovina (B-H) during the last 20 years, focusing on the experience of `informal neighborhoods’, which are not very common in developed European countries. Those are understood as an experiment whose outcomes may be of broader relevance. We state that a valuable characteristic of housing may be found from this 'self-created' model. This paper analyses the characteristics of urban patterns of low cost housing which have emerged and developed within an informal urban fabric in B-H. The analysis highlights positive values such as: flexibility in self-organization of small spatial units, the use of interactive 'collective' space, gradual development and in-process housing construction. It is expected that these results may find the purpose in improving the existing planning legislation in the context analyzed, but also in EU.

2

KEYWORDS

informal neighborhood, in-process, housing, Bosnia and Herzegovina (B-H), Mađir

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY

Igor Kuvač is a PhD student at the Department of Urbanism and Spatial Planning, University of Granada researching cultural influences on spatial identity. Isidora Karan is a PhD Architect of University of Granada currently engaged in Postdoctoral research at UNAM (Mexico D.F.) dealing with the issues of place intensity.

1 Introduction Housing market developed within neoliberal politics and dictated by capital flows, very often, does not consider real needs for housing: doesn´t fit with people’s habits and possibilities neither corresponds to the social, cultural or geographical conditions. The main objective of residence production in that context, as states Angotti (2015), has become speculation instead of inhabiting, so we are witnessing many obsolete residential areas worldwide. It should be considered that even in the case the pressure of housing market is low, a planning system cannot cope with all aspects of reality (Bobić, 2004). On the other hand, informal housing offers possibility for the many people to have “roof over the head”. That is why the informal urban growth has become the reality of cities and metropolis worldwide. It occurs, above all, in the developing countries of Latin America, Asia and Africa. However, due to the increased migration during the last years, it may become the reality of the old continent. Mostly related with informality of life, informal housing is uncritically assessed as negative and discarded. We consider that by learning of the particular and analyzing different examples of informal construction can help to understand its principles and to approach to the formality. This way it would be possible to create approaches in which the two opposite ways meets. Between Davis (2006) who criticizes negative effects of informality and Saunders (2014) who emphasizes an optimistic narrative about the issue, this analysis tries to take an open critical attitude. As it state Sieverts (2003) and Urhahn (2010) experiments should be allowed, open for different approaches, attempts and changes.

2 In-process housing in Mađir neighborhood The subject of the study is “no cost” housing emerged in the specific conditions of the post-war recovery in B-H during the last 20 years. “No cost“ refers to the housing devoleped within informal urban fabric and without big investment (public or private ones). The paper goes from the position that within B-H 'self-created' model a valuable characteristic of housing may be found. The study aims to express how this form of housing has emerged, evolved and maintains itself. After 20 years of a strong informal housing dynamics of the experience of `informal neighborhoods`, which is not common in developed Europe, can be observed as a kind of experiment. Its outcomes, same as the results derived from it, may be of broader relevance. The study highlights the positive characteristics of urban patterns of the Bosnian self-created low cost housing of informal urban fabric and draws suggestion for improving these as an experiment model for further developments in both Bosnian and/or European context.

The research is conducted on the case study of Mađir - informal neighborhood developed on the periphery of the city of Banjaluka, which is the second largest city in B-H. Within the framework of qualitative analysis (Mason, 2006), the characteristics of urban pattern are analyzed considering aspects of: urban morphology, planning policy documents and experience of informal space production `in situ`. In order to approach these, different techniques and analysis were used. A semi-structured interview was done with smaller sample of participants. Ten in-depth interviews have been conducted with inhabitants of Mađir in Banjaluka, in the periods from 22nd to 30th December 2014 and from 17th to 25th August 2015 [1]. They were six men and four women varying in age, occupation and social status.

Mađir neighborhood is situated at the right bank of the Vrbas river, 4 km away from the city centre, between protected natural elements, Mađir's field on the West, and Trapist's forest at the North-East (Figures 1, 2, 3). The neighborhood with the rural character has existed for centuries. However, in the last two decades, new "urban" construction was developed reflecting the context marked by the war (1992-1995), following dynamic migrations and ongoing transition. New housing emerged from the need of urgent resolving of "roof over the head" problem out of the planning system. Urban structure is developed with the small private investments of dozens of displaced and refugee newcomers' families, which were main agents of construction. Interviewees

3

state that their "problem should be resolved within a shortest time possible and with minimum resources"[1] so the habitat is placed as priority. In such conditions the informal self-builder is focused only on himself[1], he doesn't realize the relationship with authorities, and neither has the conscious about other forms of life and spaces that should be constructed, except of housing.

Neither the state nor the city were prepared for for this process and did not offer any systematic program which would satisfy needs for new constructions. Outdated planning policy documents didn't suit conditions for new neighborhood expansion. New population could not wait for systematic reaction, so spontaneous informal self-construction has been going on according to a kind of a bottom-up system. Considering limited financial resources, as one of the key elements, inhabitants say they "could not pay expensive technical documents and building permit"[1]. However most of them at least have started the process of getting a permit for the construction and later legalization[1], since they had the need to formalize and regulate their activities (Figure 4). On the other hand Skote et al. (2015) points out that authorities acknowledged the situation, and were in a way helping the settlers - by not intervening, what Meili et al. (2012) defines as stability of informal. Given that informal construction has a long and strong tradition from the period of socialist Yugoslavia, this stability is just more strengthened during the period and continued to the nowadays.

The plan emerged from land in relation between tenure, ownership and land acquisition in a direct 'in situ' process. As the land on the periphery was mostly agricultural without (basic) urban infrastructure, the price was minimal. The custom of buying a larger parcel for the group of family members (cousins) also reduced the price. Previous agriculture parcels of an approximate 2.500-5.000 m2 were transformed into the smaller ones that allowed flexible organization of groups of 5-10 spatial units. Parcellation was organized to meet the needs and the economic power of inhabitants, allowing construction of single-family house and outbuilding with garden, as a kind of adopted traditional housing model (Figure 5). This helps new residents to get used to new livelihood conditions. Therefore, the land occupation on a 'first-come-first-serve' basis has produced areas that seem immune to the plagues of lifestyle. In an improbable proximity inbuilt or agricultural plots can be found next to redbrick houses, marble mansions next to illegal apartment buildings, etc. Wild reach, farmers and paupers live next to each other in a relaxed configuration that makes this informal urbanism looks like a successful social project (Meili et al. 2012). New self-produced pattern has interpolated into existing mastering field configuration and stretched grid of streets. The fragmented urban structure spread dispersive and pervades with natural and existing low density. The vernacular builder intuitively respects local context by recycling inherited land plan, so traditional qualities show positive effects on spatial identity (Figure 5).

Self-constructed house is the only type of housing and the basic unit of the neighborhood. It is an individual single-family, free-standing building on a unique plot, measuring 8/10 m, G + 1 + M, and approximately 200 m2. The house has a simple plan, cubic form and a gabled roof. As it is intended for two or three generations of one family, its important characteristic is redundancy and incompleteness. In the contrary with the context, new self-builders have begun to build large houses, but without possibilities to finish them in short-term. Therefore, the construction becomes a lifelong project that undertakes several generations of one family, which invest in the future, relate to the house and live in a kind of family community that is more economically profitable. During the time, temporal construction transforms to "quality time" and energy of ceaseless construction becomes culture, a social space and a way of life (Meili et al., 2012). Mainly unfinished houses may not contain what is considered to be aesthetic qualities, but the way of living and relationship towards the environment owns qualities which are product of tradition. On the other hand informal self-builder relates with neighbors participating in the process, and in a way activating constitution of the society. By gradual and slow process of building a house, people build themselves in relation to the neighborhood and releasing the spirit of place (Altman & Low 1992, Hidalgo & Hernandez 2001) in a kind of coexistence. This pattern of housing construction is directly transformed to the gradual development of urbanization. The inhabitants are used to spatial changes and in a way support and promote continuous development and improvements of conditions for everyday life (Figures 6, 7, 8).

The same is reflected towards the creating and using open space. Since it has not been in the focus of informal builder nor the formal urban fabric, it was not constructed. Given the informality and the inability of standard categorization, public space is defined as a space in-process. In addition to extensions by street, bus stations or yards' fences, these are conditionally abandoned parcels, parcels in the long urbanization processes, 'urban voids' and 'bits of plot' as well as nearby hills, forests, fields, river banks and agricultural land in the location between urban and rural area (Figure 7, 9). As they self-constructed their houses, residents considered that

4

they also have right to occupation these spaces, so it begins spontaneously[1]. They state that process of "conquer" and subsequent creation of a kind of "public" space was a need and natural sequence of constructing a neighborhood[1]. Social interaction occurs by acupunctural actions of arranging these spaces and meetings across them. As conquest spaces can never be definite, this turns to be constantly open collective process strengthening social interaction and contributing to place attachment. But at the same time this temporality and uncertainty is negative, because there is never fully finished open public space that would fit standards.

Bosnian no cost housing example also has many negative characteristics. Although minimized costs were advantage in specific context, on the other hand there was not real investment. The economy development on the basis of housing construction was just ostensible and temporal. It was not created any additional value because it meant exchange. Funds earned by the property sale on one side (previous place of residence) was immediately invested in the construction of new one at the other side (new place of residence). Considering informality of the process this means that there was no-cost for the municipalities in the construction period, but meanwhile was an important vehicle for the local economy and real estate market. Property tasks and the fees for building land were a kind of long-term loans that have come to collect a few years after, so informal urban fabric somehow was helping the local budgets. Meanwhile, informal urban development on the periphery, previous agricultural land increased its own price by converting it to the building land so the budgets of local municipalities couldn't have losses. (Un)planned system of construction as well as other factors like economics is obvious in terms of efficiency of identity construction of neighborhood. Twenty years after construction has begun, apart from unfinished houses, everything else is missing in Mađir (basic infrastructure, transport communications and public facilities - Figure 10). Number of unresolved spatial problems and livelihood conditions are causing growing discontent so the social interaction is declining.

2.1. Contextualise (Conference outcomes)

Setting up the study in contemporary global context[2] shows that the largest number of comparative researches relate to the no-cost housing in the conflict zones and zones within the post-disaster recovery. All of these are also the features of the complex context of B-H, and therefore the study is a very competitive in the current discourse. At the same time it shows Bosnian example as a significantly different from the others, but also that it has already applied and tested specific recommendations of the authors presented as Barthes, Blair Howe, Brickman, etc.[3], to name a few.

Despite of the scale, which was including approx. half of the population of B-H, the analyzed process almost had no temporary solutions, so the construction of refugee camps was a rarity. Given the specificity of the process of exchange of population and territory, the temporary situation was relatively short compared to the international standard. It took only 5 years- until 2001, when when the returning of pre-war properties was allowed, i.e. 10- by the end of 2006, when the process is essentially completed by verifying the property laws in most of municipalities. This is also the time when the greatest number of people resolved the "roof over the head" problem permanently by starting with the in-process housing. Although the experience of forced migration, and resolving of housing problem in B-H was very traumatic, it can be concluded that in some way it took place with dignity. Bosnian experiment seems as an exclusive and comfortable according to a number of characteristics, including some above-listed values of housing that are not related to the marginalized settlements and poverty only. In addition, there are some values of urban settlements that contribute to this: short distance from urban centres; low density; and ecologic that does not classify them as "unhealthy", despite the lack of infrastructure.

While other studies observe problem from its own context mainly, the Bosnian experiment is placed in a broader framework, trying to emphasize its universal values and broader relevance. Unlike other studies, about informal constructions 'from the fringe', the Bosnian experiment, on the contrary, is the mainstream in its context. Accordingly further researches should analyse it from regulation perspective, so the model could be improved on the experience of EU standards. It is also recommended to observe it from European perspectives, because the model forms part of the broader European geographical and cultural space including the concept of the city, scales, urban lifestyle, etc.

Finally, this contextualization confirms that the Bosnian experiment is a rare example of recent post-disaster recovery, that is after 20 years of experience, still more or less unknown and unexplored, and therefore its effects (neither good nor bad) have never been applied nor used. Given that experience of construction of

5

Mađir shows a certain vitality, universality and competitiveness at the global level, there emerges a need for further research of the Bosnian experiment, whose results could be useful, applicable and of broader relevance.

3 Conclusions The analysis shows positive values of the Bosnian experiment , but also highlights some negative aspects, whose valuable lessons can be learned and solutions can be improved. 20 years of experiencing informal housing are used to draw suggestions for new in-process housing towards minimizing costs and upgrading everyday life conditions in them. Characteristics mentioned contribute to the notion of Alexanders' mosaic city, Jacobs' walk-able city, Zardinis' sensational city, Urhahns' spontaneous city and others that give an advantage to the traditional, organic and informal growth of the city in relation to the "artificially" and institutionally planned ones. Since the neighborhood analyzed is recognized as the unit of the city, it gives the legitimacy to the to proposed suggestions.

The elements researched, could form the model to be applied in the contemporary processes of emerging lack of housing for immigrants across the Europe. But this model, as an experiment, could also be applied in different forms of planned long-term and medium-term development of contemporary cities. The positive characteristics of Bosnian in-process housing example that we can identify with are: flexibility in self-organization of small spatial units (5-10 houses); the use of their 'collective' space which strengthens social interaction; gradual development of urbanization and in-process housing construction. However, the example should be improved to minimize negative characteristics, to get better values and more sustainable system. The proposal provides experiment application under controlled conditions in a certain formal frameworks, in which formal agents and planners should help rather than stifle dreams of vernacular builders. It is expected that urban planners and architects understand the values of a real-time needs of the emergent informal urban fabric and to develop practices according to a relevant set of priorities in urgent expansions of new housings.

Model implies three groups of necessary elements to be incorporated in the process: (1) groups of inhabitants in searching for the urgent housing solutions, interested in the role of construction agents in a slow and gradual process; (2) group of spatial potentials including the free (non-urbanized) land in certain framework of urbanization with basic infrastructure available for occupation and using and (3) formal agent of construction (urban planning agency) to monitor an informal pattern of land division, new construction, space using and further development. After that community is constructed and patterns adopted this way, system of formal planning (for a long-term development) should be involved. It should recognize specific values of the space developed and to improve it together with the inhabitants in a way of open collaboration.

Observed Bosnian experience an proposed suggestions which increase flexibility and minimize costs may be incorporated in the planning legislation of different contexts and further planning processes. Suggestions promote the integration of formal and informal housing construction as a kind of experimental approach to housing across contemporary Europe.

Acknowledgement The authors thanks to Join EU-SEE scholarship scheme and Professor Jose Luis Gomez Ordonez (Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Granada, Spain).

References [1] Interviews with inhabitants of Mađir were conducted in Banjaluka (Bosnia and Herzegovina) in the

period from 22nd to 30th December 2014 and from 21st to 22nd December 2015. [2] No Cost Housing Conference, 30th June - 1st July 2016, ETH Zurich, ONA Oerlikon. [online] Available at:

http://www.nocosthousing.arch.ethz.ch/program.html [Accessed: June 20, 2016]. [3] Proceedings for No Cost Housing Conference, 30th June - 1st July 2016, ETH Zurich. [online] Available at:

http://www.nocosthousing.arch.ethz.ch/program.html [Accessed: June 20, 2016].

Abrams, C. 1967. La lucha por techo, En un mundo urbanizado. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Infinito.

6

Altman, I., & Low, S. M. 1992. Place attachment. A conceptual inquiry. New York: Plenum Press.

Angotti, T. 2015. “Mercado global, territorio urbano, derecho a la vivienda y los mitos del norte”. In Habitabilidad y política de vivienda en México, edited by Ziccardi , A. and González, A., 589-597. Ciudad de México: Facultad de Arquitectura, Programa Universitario de Estudios sobre la Ciudad, UNAM.

Bobić, M., 2004. Between the edges: Street- building transition as urbanity interface. Amsterdam: THOTH Publishers.

Davis, M. 2006. Planet of slums. New York: Verso.

Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. 2001. Place attachment: conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 273–281.

Kucina, I. 2009. “The Art of Balkanization”. In Food and Grid: Space and Design Strategies, edited by Elsa, P. Kunstuniversitat Linz. [online] Available at: <https://whatiscosmopolitandesign.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/wk7the-art-of-balkanization1.pdf> [Accessed: Jan. 10, 2014].

Meili, M., Diener, R., Topalović, M., Muller-Inderbitzin, C. 2012. Belgrade: Formal/informal, Research on Urban Transformation. Bazel: Verlag Scheidegger & Spiess.

Saunders, D. 2014. Ciudad de llegada. Barcelona: Debate

Sieverts, T. 2003. Cities without cities, An interpretation of the Zwischenstadt. New York: Spoon press.

Skotte, H. 2004. Tents in Concrete. What internationally funded housing does to support recovery in areas affected by war; The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Doctoral thesis. Trondheim, NTNU.

Urhahn, G. (et. al) 2010. The Spontaneous city. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers B.V.

Graphic Work, Images

7

Figure 1. Position of neighborhood in the City. (1) Mađir; (2) Center. (Illustration by Authors)

Figure 2. Satellite image of Mađir neighborhood. Source: Google maps

8

Figure 3. Actual situation of built structure. (Illustration by Authors)

Figure 4. Detailed Regulation Plan of Mađir neighborhood. The Plan for the planning period from 2001 to 2010 was

adopted in 2007, after 12 years of neighborhood expansion. It mainly adopted situation of built structure, involved the state at the field and determined further development with the same character. It has been 9 years since the Plan was

adopted, but almost nothing of the new planned solutions were realized, and the neighborhood only continues to grow within planed regulations. Source: The Institute of Urbanism of Republic of Srpska.

9

Figure 5. Gradual development of neighborhood according to inherited matrix of parcellation and built structure. It

respects traditional qualities of housing and allows construction of the house, auxiliary building as well as front yard and backyard. Light gray - constructed land until 1992; Dark gray - new development after 1995; ANSI - still inbuilt or

agricultural plots. (Illustration by Authors)

Figure 6 - Oversized and unfinished self-constructed houses spontaneously form urban structure with the qualities of

mahallas (traditional Bosnian neighborhoods with three basic characteristic: views, the search for sun and protection from wind) (Photo by Authors)

10

Figure 7 - public space in the process (abandoned parcels, parcels in the long urbanization processes - 'urban

voids' and 'bits of plot') (Photo by Authors)

Figure 8 - interaction in the occupied public space in the process. (Photo by Authors)

11

Figure 9: Open spaces in Mađir: F- forest; Fi- Field of Mađir; A- agricultural land; B- Bus station; C- direction of city center; O- Occupied space that is used as public space; Pg- children's playground; Pf- public facilities; Sf-

sport facilities; Sq- improvised squares; (+) - potential public spaces. (Illustration by Authors)

Figure 10: Infrastructure situation in the neighborhood characterized by the fact that there is no even meter of

sidewalks nor a sewage. (Photo by Authors)