Participatory Mapping Comes to Borel

INTERVIEW / Francesco Notarbartolo di Villarosa

Italian sociologist Francesco Notarbartolo di Villarosa first came to Brazil in 1989 to work in a Public Health project for the Italian Development Cooperation. He has lived in the country ever since, consulting for the United Nations, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, among others.

Di Villarosa has a Masters degree in Sociology from the London School of Economics and a PhD in Development Studies from Sussex University, where he first became interested in participatory appraisal mapping. "Sussex is where many of the participatory techniques emerged in the 1970s," he says. Participatory appraisal mapping is a research technique that involves community members in assessing various factors affecting quality of life in a given area, and integrates results onto a map.

Today, di Villarosa is piloting a participatory mapping project in Borel, in Rio's Zona Norte. The program, which began in October, is being funded as part of the World Bank's Strengthening Citizenship through Upgrading Informal Settlements program, and is being implemented through UPP Social—first through the state secretariat of social assistance and human rights (SEASDH) and now through the municipal-level Instituto Pereira Passos (which in January 2011 became the agency that oversees the UPP Social, which accompanies the Police Pacification Units in Rio's favelas). The mapping project collects data on infrastructure, access to social services, security concerns, and employment prospects, among other things, in order to make social assistance in the area more effective.

How did rapid participatory mapping come to Rio?

UPP Social was founded to integrate and strengthen different social service programs in order to improve living conditions in pacified favelas. Participatory appraisal mapping emerged as a potential useful tool [to support planning and management of UPP Social programs] because it integrates different information, different uses onto one map; it helps different sectors sharing information to target a common space.

We discussed this with the World Bank at the time, and in October, we began the project in Borel. There was some lag time while the UPP Social was moved from the state level to the municipal, but now that it's up again, we've presented the project in Borel and there are talks with the UPP about expanding in scale and seeing if the project can be extended to other parts of the city.

Why did you choose to launch the program in Borel?

We chose Borel among the 10 to 12 favelas that had pacified when we began the project in October, because it is pretty average, in terms of living conditions, size, and problems. The idea is to extend mapping to all UPP communities. We're still discussing how to do it in practice with the IPP.

How is the program executed?

We created a team of five people from the SEASDH, including a Borel "focal point". We organized our ideas, information, questions that would go on the questionnaire; we put together a matrix with relevant information and included sources, statistics, and registrations, etc.

We generated questionnaires for the field, a script for interviews with the community, residents associations' leaders, and for professionals, people in charge of services—like schools and health, etcetera—in the communities. Then we went into the field to gather key information, to find people from the area with a strong knowledge of the community. We conducted interviews, took photos, walked in the community and observed the area, and through this we created a map, showing different divisions, different living conditions as well as a database with the numerical content we had gathered. At the same time, a geographer plugged the information into a GIS (Geographic Information System), and within two weeks [our findings were] ready.

What are you mapping?

We're not just mapping access to services, we're mapping [variances in] infrastructure, problems related to low income, a lack of communication, and access in general to the rest of the city.

What have you learned?

We're learning basically what we have to learn. We've been doing rapid participatory mapping for several years, and it's very structured. We're learning new ways to develop this community and identify priorities and planning next steps with the community. And I think the government is learning to use this information to make decisions.

What specifically, are you learning about Borel?

We're learning about how much variance there is within Borel. Borel isn't homogeneous. Extreme poverty exists side by side with relative poverty. We didn't know this before. It's very important to understand this before making decisions, because it helps us to determine priorities. 
[With participatory mapping] you're not just doing a study. You're involving the community in the discussion about their problems and opportunities. You're building bridges between decision-makers and communities.

Do certain conditions make mapping more or less successful in a given community?

Success depends on receptiveness and demand among public powers. This is the case for any instrument. The community's point of view is always important. If you go to a violent area, of course it will be difficult. Borel was very receptive.

What do you hope to achieve in this process?

We hope to  contribute toward improving and strengthening the implementation of public policies by helping targeting and integrate them.

How is mapping changing with new technologies?

New technologies are allowing us to do new things. Everything we're doing can be placed online. New tools allow us to integrate questions of space, with videos, photos, and audio. This helps to improve the processing of information.

But the real advances in this field are in human software, which is really changing. Dialogue between communities and public officials—they're learning to use this information to improve public policy.