Urban entrepreneurialism in fifa World Cup host cities: the case of Porto Alegre

Empreendedorismo urbano em cidades sedes da Copa do Mundo: o caso de Porto Alegre.

Abstract

The aim of the study that gave rise to this paper was to analyse the practices in place in Porto Alegre in relation to Large Urban Projects (LUPs) linked to the 2014 FIFA World Cup. An instrumental case study was performed, incorporating three units of analysis: mobility, stadiums and the waterfront, comprising 18 projects. Following the introduction, a presentation on the methodological procedures and two theoretical sections are given: on the concepts of urban entrepreneurialism and urban marketing, and on definitions and practices of planning and their expression in cities. The case of Porto Alegre then follows. Lastly, is an analysis indicating how each project is connected to urban entrepreneurial strategies. It concludes, indicating that the fact of being a host city was used to disseminate the image of a modern, developed and efficient city; the choice and management of projects was interconnected to economic growth, entrepreneurialism and the creation of an environment favourable for business; and the selection of LUPs led to a fragmented treatment of the territory. Under the aegis of speculation, urban planning lost relevance and the public administration renounced its position as market regulator.

Keywords
Urban entrepreneurialism; Large Urban Projects; the FIFA World Cup; Porto Alegre; Urban planning

Resumo

O objetivo do estudo do qual se originou este artigo foi analisar as práticas vigentes em Porto Alegre em relação aos Grandes Projetos Urbanos (GPUs) vinculadas à Copa do Mundo 2014. Foi realizado um estudo de caso instrumental com três unidades de análise incorporadas - mobilidade, estádios e orla – na qual estão contidos 18 projetos. Após a Introdução seguem uma apresentação dos procedimentos metodológicos e duas seções teóricas – sobre os conceitos de empreendedorismo urbano e marketing urbano, e sobre definições e práticas de planejamento e sua expressão nas cidades. Na sequência vem o caso de Porto Alegre. Por fim, a análise, indicando como cada projeto se vincula às estratégias de empreendedorismo urbano. Conclui-se indicado que o fato de ser cidade sede foi utilizado para difundir a imagem de uma cidade moderna, desenvolvida e eficiente; que a escolha e a gestão dos projetos se articulou ao crescimento econômico, ao empreendedorismo e à criação de um ambiente favorável aos negócios; e que a opção pelos GPUs levou a um tratamento fragmentado do território. Sob a égide da especulação, o planejamento urbano perdeu relevância e o poder público abdicou de regular o mercado.

Palavras-chave
Empreendedorismo urbano; Grandes Projetos Urbanos; Copa do Mundo; Porto Alegre; Planejamento urbano

Introduction

The International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) announced that Porto Alegre would be one of the 2014 FIFA World Cup host cities on 31^st May, 2009. Hosting mega-events is usually associated to benefits such as the improvement of urban infrastructure and gains for some economic sectors, mainly those involved with tourism and construction. However, it is necessary to consider a context in which, as Harvey (2007) summarises, the free market, by fostering competition, becomes a vehicle for the consolidation of monopoly power. In addition, this is a new scenario, unlike that of the 1990s, in which there was an important set of revitalisation projects of historical centres in various Brazilian cities (for example, see FERNANDES and GOMES, 1995; FISCHER et al., 1995; VIEIRA, 1999 and 2000; GONDIM, 2007; SOUZA and VIEIRA, 2011).

The expansion of monopoly power and incentives to competition on a global level had repercussions in urban organisation. Sassen (2010), based on Friedmann (2010), develops the theme of hierarchies in city networks: major cities, such as Tokyo, London and New York, compete on a global level; peripheral cities seek to gain prominence on a national scale and, simultaneously, have the functions of global cities, configuring a peripheral geography of centralities. According to this reference, Porto Alegre could be classified as a peripheral city. However, as it is located in the centre of the Southern Common Market (Mercado Comum do Sul - MERCOSUL) it holds a valued status to exercise the functions of a peripheral global-city.

Even before becoming a candidate for hosting matches, the Porto Alegre government had associated the mega-event to opportunities to invest in infrastructure and urban development, in addition to prestige and global dissemination of the city’s image. This process took place in a context of widespread adoption of business administration concepts and practices by the public administration, a movement that had also reached urban planning.

Fernandes, in 1977, already discussed how local governments developed actions in partnership with the business sector, aimed at the commodification of urban life. He considered the case of Salvador between 1992 and 1994, showing the consolidation of a project for a tourism-based city directed towards the cultural and leisure consumption markets. This article is interesting because the author used Harvey (1989) as a reference, but mixing the concepts of ‘entreprisation¹’ and ‘urban entrepreneurialism’ (a topic that will be covered later on in this paper).

A further set of studies was marked by the topic of Rio de Janeiro’s strategic planning from the case of Rio de Janeiro. Vainer (2000a) and Novais (2010) highlighted that this trend originated in Barcelona, when the strategic business planning model was used to plan interventions for the 1992 Olympic Games (a kind of model in the history of mega-events). In Brazil, a milestone of this trend was the Strategic Plan for Rio de Janeiro, financed by a consortium of 46 companies and business associations who, in turn, hired a Catalan consultancy firm (VAINER, 2000a).

Focusing on the organisational aspect of the process to elaborate the above-mentioned plan, Guanais and Fisher (1999, p. 60) concluded that the fundamental prescriptions of the literature on “a model whose origins are found in the business world” were fulfilled. In the same direction, Novais (2010, p. 21) examined “the ways in which the strategic planning for cities became a reference for urban practices in the early 1990s”. The author reviewed the origins of urban planning at Harvard University and the transference of a business management model to the public sphere, in the pioneering case of the plan for San Francisco, California (1981). This was precisely the model disseminated in the cases of Barcelona and Rio de Janeiro.

Novais (2010, p. 21) examined “the ways in which the strategic planning for cities became a reference for urban practices in the early 1990s”. In turn, Vainer (2000b) discussed urban marketing as an aspect of strategic planning and the latter as a model in the globalised world. The author puts forward analogies in which the city appears as a commodity in its relation with urban marketing practices; as an enterprise that is submitted to market logic, under the aegis of productivity and competitiveness; and as a homeland, defined by depoliticisation and social peace, both needed to ensure increased efficiency.

Like Vainer (2000b), Compans (2005) adopted the analogy of the city-enterprise, studying the political-argumentative practices of the implementation process for the city of Rio de Janeiro project displayed in the 1996 Strategic Plan. To the author, it was a competitive entrepreneurial project that favoured the interests of the private real estate sector and elites in general. The concept of competitive entrepreneurialism came from Moura (1998, p. 2) and refers to “a movement that redefines local governments’ roles and activities, with emphasis given to developing comparative advantages and seeking greater efficiency in urban management, aiming for competitive integration in the global market”. This latter author highlighted other characteristic elements which appear as innovation, adding contributions by authors such as Harvey (1989) on urban entrepreneurialism, Borja (1993) on urban protagonism, and Osborne and Gaebler (1993) on entrepreneurial government. The aim of the study² that gave rise to this article - the analysis of the practices in place in Porto Alegre and their relation with Large Urban Projects (LUPs), linked to hosting the 2014 FIFA World Cup - was defined taking this context into consideration.

According to Lecroart and Palisse (2007, p. 6), a LUP “involves a relatively concentrated public action both in space and in time, and whose end purpose is to develop a chunk of city through renewal, intensification, or new development from scratch”. Therefore, “the idea of a ‘large’ project is a convenient language to call very diverse realities”, which may be of a physical, symbolic, programmatic and political nature.

In the following sections, a description of the methodological procedures can be found. In the sequence, two sections deal with the theoretical object: the first clarifying the concepts of managerialism and urban marketing, concluding with the definition and choice of the reference of urban entrepreneurialism; and the second, covering the definitions and practices of planning and its expression in cities. The next section deals with the case of Porto Alegre. Lastly, an analysis is made, indicating projects that are linked to entrepreneurial urban strategies.

Methodological procedures

The research strategy adopted was the single case study. A case study is “an empirical investigation which researches a contemporary phenomenon within its real context and specifically when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly defined” (YIN, 2002, p. 29). According to Stake (1995, p.134), “the decision to do a case study is not methodological”. In fact, according to the author, what we choose to study is the case, irrespective of the methodological nature. “We could study it analytically or holistically, entirely by repeated measures or hermeneutically, organically or culturally, and by mixed methods – but we concentrate, at least for the time being, on the case”. This study is analytical, with multiple data sources.

Stake (1995) identifies three types of case studies: (1) intrinsic – seeking the best understanding of a specific case; (2) instrumental – a specific case is examined, primarily in search of information on the topic, the case is of interest and plays a supporting role; (3) collective – it is an instrumental study extended to multiple cases. This is an instrumental case study, as it may shed light on similar processes that take place in other places, whether in the other eleven 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazilian host cities or in those which adopt LUPs as an intervention practice.

Therefore, a single case study was performed, incorporating three units of analysis which, in turn, contained sub-units. The units of analysis mobility (1), stadiums (2) and the waterfront (3) contain the 18 projects related to the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Porto Alegre. The criterion to define these units was their urban-architectural typology.

The mobility unit (1) comprises fourteen sub-units (projects), and only one does not have a relation with the 2014 FIFA World Cup Responsibility Matrix signed by the City Hall with the Federal Government. The stadium unit (2) comprises facilities of Sport Clube Internacional and Grêmio Foot-Ball Porto Alegrense. The waterfront unit (3) comprises the Guaíba Waterfront Renewal and the Mauá Harbour projects sub-units.

The selection of sub-units was not related to a specific period, as some projects have existed for 20, 30 or 40 years. It was done on account of their direct relation with the mega-event, as for projects which are listed in the Responsibility Matrix, or their indirect relation established by statements given by the Porto Alegre Municipal City Hall (Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre - PMPA) affirming the importance of these projects to host the championship in the city.

The fieldwork started in 2009, parallel to the confirmation of Porto Alegre as a host city. The database was established between May 2009 and December 2013. The data collection included semi-structured interviews; participant and non-participant observations at events, seminars, public hearings and meetings; and internet research on sites, blogs and social networks, public documents and legislation.

All of the interviews were semi-structured but there were two types: (1) focused – appropriate for obtaining responses from people exposed to a previously analysed situation, and (2) investigative – carried out with “competent people, in which it is sought to bring together both useful data for the hypotheses raised and possible results” (ROSA and ARNOLD, 2008, p. 32). Type 1 interviews were held with the delegate of the Planning Region 1 (Região de Planejamento 1 - RP1), the Head of Planning at the Urban and Environment Development Council (Conselho de Desenvolvimento Urbano e Ambiental - CDMUA); members of the MetrôPoA Office team, at the Public Enterprise of Transportation and Circulation (Empresa Pública de Transporte e Circulação - EPTC); a technician at the Secretariat of Urbanisation (Secretaria de Urbanização - SMURB); a technician and project manager at EPTC. Type 2 interviews were held with John R. Gold, School of Social Science and Law at Oxford Brookes University; Mike Collins, associate researcher at the Centre for Olympic Studies and Research, Loughborough University; Graeme Evans, professor and director at The Cities Institute, London Metropolitan University; and Iain MacRury, associate dean at the School of Arts and Digital Industries, University of East London – all based in England.

Non-participant observations were carried out at the following events: Public Hearing on the Impact of the 2014 World Cup; 2014 Road Show – seminar held by the Architecture and Engineering Trade Union and the 2014 Cup Site; Urbanisation, Transportation and Housing Committee (Comissão de Urbanização, Transporte e Habitação - CUTHAB) and Consumer Defence, Human Rights and Public Safety Committee (Comissão de Defesa do Consumidor, Direitos Humanos e Segurança Pública - CEDECONDH) at the City Council of Porto Alegre (Council) Seminar; Porto Alegre’s Cup Popular Committee meeting; meeting at the Urban Development Sector (Setor de Desenvolvimento Urbano - SDU) at the former Municipal Planning Secretariat (Secretaria de Planejamento Municipal - SPM); Public Hearing at the Health and Environment Committee (Comissão de Saúde e Meio Ambiente - COSMAM) at the Council to discuss the cut of trees on Edvaldo Pereira Paiva Av.; the Porto Alegre Under Analysis Seminar held by ObservaPoa, PMPA; Public Hearing in the Council on the Guaíba Waterfront Renewal project. Participant observations were also carried out, with interventions during the activity: COSMAM work meeting and public hearing at the State Public Prosecution Office (both on the cut of trees mentioned above); and the Reflections on the Development of Porto Alegre – 2014 Cup Seminar held by the Economy, Finances, Budget and Mercosul Committee (Comissão de Economia, Finanças, Orçamento e do Mercosul - CEFOR) at the Council.

Documental sources related to actions by leading actors in the case study were consulted: Zero Hora newspaper – a printed form of information belonging to Grupo RBS, a company directly interested in the event and in the modernisation project for the city because construction entrepreneurs are among its controllers; alternative media blogs; PMPA site; PMPA transparency site; World Cup Transparency Site – focusing on Responsibility Matrix projects, participating companies, schedule and work statuses; Grêmio Foot-Ball Clube and Sport Clube Internacional sites; Cup Popular Committee blog; Ministry of Sports site; 2014 World Cup Management Executive Committee site; Citizen Support Service (SIC) site, in search of documents not available on the Transparency site; Urban Trains of Porto Alegre Enterprise site (Trensurb); State Government site; State Public Prosecution site; City Council site; federal and municipal laws; Master Plans; Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) System Manual; and Urban Mobility Master Plans prepared by the Ministry for the Cities.

The information was systematised in a database organised per specific project and in further two, separately, for the political and institutional dimensions. The most relevant information to analyse the dimensions was highlighted, so as to visualise the specifics of each one. The logic for presenting the results was guided by the three units of analysis presented above: mobility, stadiums, and the waterfront.

The units and their sub-units were analysed exploring the multiple dimensions which form the LUP: political; symbolic; urban-architectural; economic; institutional and social and environmental, following Vainer’s (2012) recommendations summarised in Figure 1. The political dimension deals with the context in which the project arises; the symbolic with the project justification and the relation with the urban entrepreneurial strategies proposed by Harvey (2006); the urban-architectural with the design adopted as a reference and the projects’ relation with city planning; the economic with the investments needed and the funds origins; the institutional with new legal and institutional arrangements; and the socio-environmental with the participation and/or exclusion of the population and with possible socio-environmental impacts.

Figure 1
Analytical matrix of evaluation proposed by Vainer (2012)

As all of the dimensions comprise the same process, they are clearly related. Therefore, the analysis cannot be carried out in isolation and its combinations are made in accordance to the facts related to each unit. It is important to note that the aim is not to consider each dimension separately but to be guided by them, in order to understand the phenomenon. However, not all of the dimensions put forward were dealt with, as the focus was on the process itself and not on the impacts. Thus, the dimensions considered in the analysis were: political; institutional; urban-architectural; symbolic; financial and economic; and socio-environmental.

Urban entrepreneurialism

The field of public administration has been invaded by managerialism³ in the context of the capitalist crisis during the 1970s. A marker was the Reinventing Government movement in the United States, whose key authors are Osborne and Gaebler (1993)⁴. To them, the bureaucratic model was suitable in periods of intense crisis (the Great Depression and the Inter-War period) in which the North Americans’ interests converged on the same objective and mass culture did not exist. However, this setting changed and the public institutions needed flexible and adaptable practices, no longer responsible for serving citizens but for building environments in which they could create conditions for themselves.

Given the relevance of the Reinventing Government movement to understand urban entrepreneurialism processes as defined by Harvey (1989; 2006; 2012), its main characteristics should be summarised (Table 1).

Table 1
Principles of Reinventing Government, according to Osborne and Gaebler (1993)

Catalytic government	Steering rather than rowing - conducting and orientating, instead of providing services, privatisation, outsourcing and public-private partnerships (PPPs).
Community owned government	Empowering the citizens rather than serving - training and encouraging communities to take control of services, providing resources and technical assistance.
Competitive government	Injecting competition in services delivery - encouraging innovation and quality and strengthening organisations.
Mission-driven government	Transforming rule-driven organisations - making regulations flexible and taking the mission and strategic planning as a reference, as carried out in private enterprises.
Results-oriented government	Funding outcomes, not inputs - replacing reward parameters, focusing on the control of results, not resources.
Customer-driven government	Meeting the needs of the customer, not bureaucracy - based on techniques of Total Quality Management (TQM), emphasising customer relation techniques.
Enterprising government	Earning rather than expending - creating means to make profit, charge taxes for services provision and investing in financial return.
Anticipatory government	Prevention rather than cure - anticipating problems through managerial tools, such as budgetary control and strategic planning.
Decentralised government	From hierarchy to participation and teamwork - sharing decisions with customers, NGOs and communities, TQM and decentralising.
Market-oriented government	Leveraging change through the market - cities are vast and complex clusters of people in which each individual adjusts to the other's behaviour, based on incentives and information and, therefore, should be structured as markets.

The idea of entrepreneurialism used by Osborne and Gaebler (1993) is in agreement with Schumpeter (2003), for whom the entrepreneur’s role is to revolutionise production standards, creating new means, materials or products.

Harvey (2011), also in dialogue with Schumpeter’s (2003) proposals, but in another direction, relates entrepreneurialism with modernity and its urban expression. Mentioning creative destruction as one of the characteristics of innovative entrepreneurialism in the modernist project, he shows the entrepreneur’s importance: “considered a heroic figure, he was the creative destroyer par excelence because he was prepared to take the consequences of technical and social innovation to vital extremes. And it was only through this creative heroism that human progress could be guaranteed” (HARVEY, 2011, p. 26).

The fascination for innovation, embellishment and modernisation is part of the logic of the production of cities and circulation of capital until today. However, this fascination reaches a new level when the competitive logic between cities is introduced. It is noted that a transition from the Fordist system to advanced capitalism, with its economy based on floating capital and third sector activities, transformed the cities’ role: no longer as a support for developing productive activities but as raw material to accumulate capital (HARVEY, 2006). In the same direction, Logan and Molotch (1993) consider that the space is a growth machine capable of increasing aggregate rent and ensuring wealth for the elites who use the growth consensus to eliminate any alternative. Therefore, the city must be prepared to become a favourable place for capital accumulation. As part of this context, marketing gurus have created the marketing of localities⁵.

Kotler, Haider and Rein (1994, p. 85) explain that urban marketing has abandoned the function of attracting industry since the 1990s, to focus on creating products and adhering to the competitive logic between cities. The authors present a set of tools to sell a place: business planning and four intervention strategies in the urban space to prepare “the setting for efforts that are generally riskier and more opportunistic, to compete for economic advantages” (KOTLER; HAIDER; REIN, 1994, p. 107). These four strategies are: urban design; improved infrastructure; basic services, such as safety and education; and specific attractions (location, history, consumption, culture, sports, and events). These strategies may or may not be related to planning; if they are not, they will be riskier and more opportunistic.

The entrepreneurial government (OSBORNE and GAEBLER, 1993), urban marketing (KOTLER, HAIDER and REIN, 1994), and the city as a growth machine (LOGAN and MOLOTCH, 1993) are central approaches for Harvey’s (2006) formulation on urban entrepreneurialism, which has Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) as one of its basic elements. This is where the local government joins together with private enterprises, with the aim of generating investment for construction projects or even to maintain existing structures. Harvey (2006, p. 171) stresses that PPPs are “subject to all of the obstacles and risks associated to speculative development, as opposed to rationally planned and coordinated development”. It is also a common practice that risks are incurred by the public sector and profits are for the private sector. To Harvey (2006), entrepreneurialism focuses more on the political economy of the place than on the territory, stating that the construction of a place can generate impacts beyond its specific territory and change the city’s image worldwide. The author systematised four basic strategies related to urban entrepreneurialism (Table 2), emphasising that they are justified in isolation, but it is their combination which provides rapid and unequal changes in the urban system.

Table 2
Summary of urban entrepreneurial strategies according to Harvey (2006)

Creating environments to exploit particular advantages for the production of goods and services	When they do not derive from resource base or location, they are created through public and private investments in physical and social infrastructures. For this, coalitions between the three levels of government encourage private investments offering packages of aids and assistance, as well as investing in education and technology, and training the labour force with public funds.
Spatial division of consumption	Attracting consumption by the construction of sports stadia, shopping and convention centres, etc., and/or encouraging entertainment and cultural activities6.
Control and command functions	Heavy investments in transportation (such as airports) and communications technology are required. The provision of infrastructure that make the speed and quality of internal and external connections viable is fundamental for inter-urban competition.
Redistribution of surpluses	Competitive edge with respect to redistribution of surpluses through central governments is still very important.

Harvey (2006) also shows concern with the rapid changes in urban space generated by innovative and competitive responses of the ruling class, resulting in a series of uncertainties and, as a consequence, instabilities in the urban system. These instabilities can be expressed in various ways, including the growth of social inequality and urban impoverishment.

The urban entrepreneurialism criticised by Harvey (2006) relates to Osborne and Gaebler’s (1993) prescriptions for entrepreneurial government. In addition, it also relates to the marketing of places. It is important to note that at no time does Harvey (2006) refer to the use of tools such as strategic planning but only to strategies that, without being part of a planning system, are riskier and more opportunistic (in Kotler, Haider and Rein’s (1994) terms). The strategy of urban marketing is connected to the turn to post-modernist styles of architecture and urban design, mentioned by Harvey (2006) when he refers to the spatial division of consumption. He also makes reference to the the improvement of infrastructure and basic services, such as safety, needed for the strategy of obtaining control activities; and to attractions, such as exploiting specific advantages to produce goods and services.

At this point, it is necessary to clarify the specific Brazilian context regarding the translation to Portuguese of Harvey’s From managerialism to entrepreneuralism: the transformation in urban governance in the late capitalism (Geografiska Annaler - 1989). In the first translation, the idea of entrepreneurialism was confused with the idea of entreprisation⁷ (empresariamento, in Portuguese). Many Brazilian authors adopted this translation as a reference, such as Vainer (2000b) and Compans (2004), already mentioned. Vainer (2000b) was key in popularising this confusion among Brazilian researchers. However, in 2005 it was released the book “A produção capitalista do espaço”, including a chapter with a new translation of the same text. This time, the idea of entrepreneurialism was included⁸. The use of the term ‘entreprisation’ instead of ‘entrepreneurialism’ is relevant because it involves a conceptual difference. The term ‘urban entreprisation’ can lead to contradictory conclusions, such as treating the city as an enterprise. The problem with this idea is clearly stated by Harvey (2006, p. 167): “It makes it seem as if ‘cities’ can be active agents when they are mere things. Urbanisation should, rather, be regarded as a spatially grounded social process in which a wide range of different actors with quite different objectives and agendas interact through a particular configuration of interlocking spatial practices”. Additionally, the definition of urban entrepreneurialism goes beyond the use of business management technologies. What defines it is the organisation of coalitions that use the place to produce new spaces of accumulation.

Urban planning practices

To Souza (2010, p. 46), “planning always refers to the future”; it means “trying to foresee the evolution of a phenomenon” or “trying to simulate the developments of a process, with the aim of gaining better protection against probable problems or, to the contrary, with the aim of making the most of probable benefits”.

In Brazil, with the end of the dictatorship, the theme of popular participation gained strength and advocacy planning movements appeared, including the National Movement for Urban Reform. As a result, the 1988 Constitution defined the Master Plan as the basic instrument for policies of urban development and expansion. With this, as Ferreira (2010, p. 190) points out, “the municipal governments gained unprecedented autonomy to conduct urban policies”. In this new context, some developed progressive policies such as the Participative Budget (Orçamento Participativo - OP) but, simultaneously, implemented market-led policies. Some adopted urban planning practices related to strategic business planning; others followed the propositions of urban reform, seeking quality of life for the population and arranging legal instruments to do this. Ferreira (2010) analysis these contradictions and recognises that it is easy to understand that LUPs and PPPs appeared in that setting as a type of salvation for those who opposed urban reform and democratic urban instruments. The opportunity to implement great modernising projects also opened up a perspective for political-electoral success, in addition to favouring the real estate sector, traditionally involved in financing electoral campaigns. Therefore, Ferreira (2010) identifies the phenomenon of “urbanism in reverse”, inspired by the idea of “hegemony in reverse” proposed by Oliveira (2010, p. 27). Urbanism in reverse expresses the ambiguity of government positions, said to be popular and democratic but adopting “market-led planning” (Table 3). In this, the regulatory role of “trying to domesticate or discipline capital” is substituted to the contrary, to the better adjustment to its interests, including immediate ones.

Table 3
Sub-types of market-led planning, according to Brindley, Rydin and Stoker (2004)

Trend planning - flexibilisation	Although it is based on regulations, it should respond to private interests and land use policies, responding to market trends and forces.
Leverage planning - flexibilisation and entrepreneuralism	The public sector should encourage weakened markets through, tax reductions, land donations and selling land under the market value, etc.
Private management planning	The public sector transfers the management of urban renewal processes to specific areas of the private sector.

Another relevant concept comes from the French school of urban project or project planning (l’urbanism de projet), which arise from a criticism of regulatory planning. According to Avitabile (2005), project planning is associated to the notion of urban strategy and PPPs because it seeks immediate results and values the capacity to undertake them. It includes a city project (urban project) that integrates urban forms and landscaping, categories that are absent from regulatory planning. However, even if a city project exists, urban projects are for specific areas in the expectation that its effects would expand to the territory as a whole, or to large sections of it as a minimum. This is what Ascher (1992) calls a city in pieces which is, therefore, contradictory to the idea of planning.

In this context, LUPs appear as tools for interventions which result in flexibilised planning, although it may formally co-exist with the master plan or master plans. Vainer (2012) confirms that LUPs cause ruptures in the city understood as a multiple social space.

The term LUP is used in this article, according to Lecroart and Palisse’s (2007) definition presented in the Introduction. Therefore, the main characteristics of LUPs are: (1) procedures using management instruments and public-private partnerships; (2) being a political project, as well as a project in space and time; (3) considering the scale of social and spatial impacts, in addition to their immediate surroundings; (4) recognising the connection of multiple actors and complexity of uses. The multiple dimensions (presented in Figure 1) proposed by Vainer (2012) are added to these characteristics for the analysis of the case presented in the following item.

The case of Porto Alegre

A wide range of projects was elaborated; some were on account of FIFA’s requirements, such as the Internacional Stadium; and some had existed for more than 30 years, but they had not been executed due to a lack of resources or other reasons. Others were elaborated focusing on the opportunity for investments to resolve city’s problems and, at the same time, to guarantee profits for the private sector. This study highlights projects that are related to holding this mega-event: 17 LUPs and a surrounding project, with 12 being part of the Responsibility Matrix (MR) and the remaining 6 because they were highlighted by leaders as being very important or even fundamental for the hosting FIFA World Cup. These projects were included into the three units of analysis mentioned above: mobility, stadiums and the waterfront (Table 4).

Table 4
Summary of projects related to the FIFA World Cup in Porto Alegre

UNITS OF ANALYSIS	PROJECT	MR*	UNITS OF ANALYSIS	PROJECT	MR
MOBILITY	Tronco Av.	YES	MOBILITY	BRT- Padre Cacique	NO
	3rd Perimeter Av.	YES		3 Beira-Rio surrounding roads	YES
	Padre Cacique Av.	YES		Airport	YES
	BRT - Protásio Alves	YES		Aeromovel	NO
	BRT - João Pessoa	YES		Subway Line 2	NO
	Voluntários da Pátria St.	YES	STADIUM	Giant Forever	YES
	Extension of Severo Dullius Av.	YES		Grêmio Stadium	NO
	Bus Station Complex	YES	WATERFRONT	Mauá Harbour	NO
	BRT - Bento Gonçalves	YES		Guaíba Waterfront Renewal	NO
TOTAL	18 Project, with 12 from the Responsibility Matrix

• Source: prepared on the basis of Brazil (2010).

The recent trajectory of urban planning in Porto Alegre should be contextualised before progressing further. This city was governed for 16 consecutive years (1989-2003) by coalitions led by the Worker’s Party (PT). Olívio Dutra’s (1989-1992) period was marked by actions, such as confrontation with urban transport entrepreneurs, social housing policies that promoted the on-site urbanisation of shanty towns, and the creation of Participative Budget. He was followed by Tarso Genro’s (1993-1996) government, that started the revision of the 1^st Urban Development Master Plan (1^st PDDU). The Porto Alegre Project – Constituent City was then introduced, with the aim of discussing the city’s future.

The publication As ideias que vão mudar a cidade nos próximos anos (Ideas that will change the city in the coming years) edited the first set of panellists invited to Constituent City activities. Among these, the Catalan consultant, Jordi Borja that, along with Manuel Castells, disseminated the new role that Latin America cities should take. Borja’s talk introduced topics such as inter-urban competitiveness and coalitions with the private sector to create local anchoring for globalisation. Borja (1993, p. 15) stated that large investments in infrastructure would be “capable of generating jobs, resources for distribution or taxes for monitoring purposes, counting on the private sector’s interests and generating profits”, having presented the case of Barcelona and exalted hosting the Olympic Games as an opportunity to create new dynamics. On the relation with the private sector, Borja (1993, p. 16) stressed: “I am convinced that a city cannot be made democratic and efficient from the market, but it is also impossible to construct a city without the market, and this fact imposes some renouncement”. Therefore, the strategic planning should be flexible and market-led. Besides that, large projects – understood as LUPs – would be the strategies required for economic growth and competition between cities.

Borja’s influence is noted in the elaboration of the 2^nd Urban and Environmental Development Master Plan (PDDUA). In the first part, different strategies are described: urban structuring, environmental qualification, economic promotion, the production of the city, and the planning system. One of these strategies is of particular interest for the aim of this paper: the production of the city. This sector comprises a framework of laws and two attachments: Social Housing Programme, in which the Special Areas of Social Interest (AEIS) and the Special Projects Programme are included. If, on one hand, a public policy for urban reform is formalised, on the other, flexibilisation towards market interests takes place. According to Article 55, Special Projects are those “which involve large areas (can cover a whole district); large projects carried out by a single company or even those in small areas which have special characteristics. This means that areas or pieces of land with problems or conflicts will be resolved through special projects, while normal situations will be analysed using general regulations” (PORTO ALEGRE, 1999). Therefore, it is observed that the 2^nd PDDUA makes the Master Plan flexible in order to avoid administrative controls that would limit opportunities for economic growth. Managerialism is also present, in the critique of the supposed inflexible public administration bureaucracy and in the adoption of practices that allow leverage planning – in Brindley, Rydin and Stoker’s (2004) terms. Perhaps this strategy is the one that best explains the practice of urbanism in reverse, in Ferreira’s (2010) terms.

From Fogaça’s government, which started in 2005, the PMPA adopted a management model based on the so-called integrative organisation of programmes, in order to gain agility. Part of this model was the transformation of the OP into Local Solidarity Governance and the support of PPPs, even if informal. To clarify, according to Lawless (1994), there are also informal PPPs – variable financial and administrative legal arrangements between various partners which, generally, are represented by the government, economic world, local media and higher education institutions.

The modifications of the PMPA organisation can be understood as part of the set of projects related to hosting the FIFA World Cup, including the creation of new institutions. One of these was the Special Secretariat for the Cup (Secretaria Especial da Copa - SECOPA). When it was created, the Secretariat was led by the deputy mayor at the time. Fortunati was in charge until 2010, when he took office in the City Hall; he was then elected mayor in 2012. It is important to note that before leading SECOPA, Fortunati was assigned to the Secretariat of Municipal Planning (SPM) and worked on the revision of the 2^nd PDDUA, which was completed in 2009 and transformed into law in 2010. New evaluation instruments for the Special Projects Programme, mentioned above, were incorporated in this review. After Fortunati left SECOPA in 2010, the Secretariat lost relevance, although, along with the EPTC, the Municipal Secretariat of Public Works and Highways (Secretaria Municipal de Obras e Viação - SMOV), the Municipal Health Secretariat (Secretaria Municipal de Saúde - SMS), and the Municipal Housing Department (Departamento Municipal de Habitação - DEMHAB), it formed part of the Porto Alegre 2014 Cup Programme – the institution for urban planning (SPM), however, was not included.

Therefore, it is noticed that the transformation of urban planning practices that started during the Popular Front’s second term in the 1990s, incorporated managerial practices of flexibilisation and facilitation, and opened the path to the urban entrepreneurial practices which followed. In the context, the SPM fell to the wayside. In the new organisation of PMPA, through specific projects, other departments took on a central role. So much so that immediately after the last municipal election the organisation by projects has been consolidated, with the creation of the Projects Office, emptying the functions of the Secretariat of Municipal Planning further and giving rise to the Secretariat of Urbanism.

The analysis of the Strategic Map of PMPA Actions (MAPA ..., 2011) showed that the FIFA World Cup was a strategy to boost tourism, transform urban mobility infrastructure and, at the same time, to create a favourable business environment, speeding up urban environmental licences and promoting innovation and entrepreneurialism. Therefore, it was consolidated a practice of city’s public administration that fully incorporated market logic and gradually reconfigured the government structure to favour specific initiatives of business sectors with privileged ties to key decision-making centres. Besides strategic planning following business administration models, what was constituted in Porto Alegre was the logic of a business desk, in which formal spaces for the population’s participation and for the professional practice by technicians were undermined.

In this context, the opportunity for investments and worldwide visibility, coupled with the mega-event, stimulated the use of urban marketing (KOTLER, HAIDER and REIN, 1994) and urban entrepreneurial strategies (HARVEY, 2006) in particular, which may be identified in the following analysis of each of the three units.

A) Mobility

When Porto Alegre was confirmed as a host city, the Municipal Government had less than one year to prepare projects to be included in the MR. In an interview with an EPTC technician, it was reported that the projects were elaborated at meetings behind closed doors with top PMPA directors and some EPTC technicians. According to this report, the ten projects were created by referring back to old projects that had not been implemented, without evaluating their pertinence for contemporary Porto Alegre. In addition, no territorial impact study for any of these projects was carried out.

The discourses of the Department of Strategic Planning director and of the EPTC’s Traffic Planning manager at public hearings and events on urban mobility or public works for the FIFA World Cup, corroborated with this information. They defended the projects because they were included in earlier plans that would finally be put into practice after 20, 30 or 40 years. Any study that proved the needs of these works was never presented. As Porto Alegre did not have any study which covered the different means of circulation and transportation in a comprehensive way, conditions for carrying out opportunistic projects that favoured individual transportation by car and the immediate interests of politicians and businessmen were created.

When presented by the municipal authorities, the BRT projects were associated to passengers’ increased comfort, thanks to a combination of various aspects. However, the majority of them will not be implemented in Porto Alegre⁹. The PMPA and the State’s Metropolitan and Regional Planning Foundation (Fundação Estadual de Planejamento Metropolitano e Regional - Metroplan) work on optimising lines, so that many buses do not circulate to the city centre. As the city already has electronic ticketing, this optimisation could have been done independently of introducing the BRT system. Apart from this, the city already has bus lanes. Only 4.7km of BRT would be added to the existing system. Therefore, the main function of the BRT is to change the image of the public collective transportation system, modernising it and showing the contemporary architecture of the new bus stations and terminals, with no relevant impact on the service provision.

The remaining MR projects gave priority to cars, with the construction of overpasses and widening avenues. Some would include cycle and bus lanes, on account of Federal Government requirements, which did not detract from its focus on highways, as they are disconnected from these structures. On comparing the projects for all of the host cities for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in MR, it is seen that Porto Alegre was the one which invested most in individual transportation by car.

A further aspect refers to important projects to boost the city’s expansion. An emblematic one led to the eviction of 1,400 families from Grande Cruzeiro (located alongside Barra Shopping Sul and in the vicinity of the Iberê Camargo Museum, which benefited the local real estate market) and their replacement in periphery areas. Another two projects directly benefited the Grêmio and Internacional stadiums, apart from private sector investors responsible for constructing them, exempted from carrying out any mitigating work.

The Subway Line 2 project have specific characteristics. Originally the layout was established in the Integrated Mobility Plan. In this, the project should be introduced in two phases. When the formulation of the MR was announced for the World Cup Line, the Phase 1 layout was altered to pass by the last access point for Beira-Rio during World Cup matches. In principle, the World Cup Line would be qualified as a MR project but the Federal Government vetoed it. If the World Cup Line was approved, it would benefit Internacional, Andrade Gutierrez and Melnik Even, as well as Grêmio Empreendimentos-OAS¹⁰. With the infrastructure improvement, the price of land would increase and the football clubs who were negotiating their land with construction companies would have their values increased, as well for the companies that were going to exploit them. In addition, it would contribute to the PMPA Innovative City Programme, which aims to promote the development “of innovation and technology, in search of new vocations to the city, boosting the economic matrix and stimulating productive sectors, taking advantage of the concentration of universities and research centres and producing new opportunities for jobs and income” (O PROGRAMA..., 2013). This programme fits in with the strategy of urban entrepreneurialism defined by Harvey (2006, p. 172) and refers to the “creation and exploitation of particular advantages for the production of goods and services”. As part of the creation of this environment, in 2012 the Municipal Government presented a project to the City Council that altered the PDDUA, recording Zones of Technological Potential (Zonas de Potencial Tecnológico – REPOT) in which urban parameters were made flexible, and including benefits for real estate enterprises. When cross checking the map that defines the REPOT in the Attachment to PL 004/2012 with the World Cup Line, it is noted that the route permeates the whole area to be recorded as a REPOT.

To Harvey (2006), urban entrepreneurial strategies are also based on PPPs. This is the case for the majority of these projects, whether formal or informal (Table 5). The only exceptions are the Salgado Filho Airport and the Aeromovel. The vast majority of the PPPs are informal, with only the Subway Line 2 Project being formal. Partnerships also permeate BRTs, conceding the use of spaces in exchange for maintenance. The vast majority of informal partnerships for urban mobility projects are characterised by the Term of Technical Cooperation signed between the PMPA and the Centre for Industries in the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Centro das Indústrias do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul - CIERGS) on 26^th October, 2009, three months before signing the MR. Table 5 also shows the projects which receive public funds.

Table 5
formal and informal PPPs related to mobility projects

Project	Participation		PPP
	Public Sector	Private Sector
Tronco Av., 3rd Perimeter Av., Padre Cacique, Voluntários da Pátria St., Extension of Severo Dullius Av., Bus Station complex and 3 Beira-Rio surrounding roads	Federal Government Funds	Basic project donated by CIERGS	INF
BRT Protásio Alves, João Pessoa, Bento Gonçalves and Padre Cacique	Federal Government Funds	Basic project donated by CIERGS and transportation enterprises	INF
Salgado Filho Airport	Federal Government Funds	—	—
Aeromovel	Federal Government Funds	—	—
Subway Line 2	Federal Government Funds	Enterprise that wins the bidding	FOR

• Source: Prepared on the basis of Brazil (2010). Caption: INF-Informal; FOR-Formal.

It is no accident that all of the projects related to control and command activities are based on PPPs. Except for the Subway Line 2 and the Aeromovel projects, they are all on the MR and their basic and executive projects were donated by the CIERGS. According to the Term of Cooperation, it was the private initiative that approached the PMPA, offering to become partner to “speed up the implementation of projects considered a priority and required in terms of the Municipality’s road and urban mobility system” (PORTO ALEGRE, 2009). However, this alleged agility was not achieved. The State Court of Auditors (Tribunal de Contas do Estado - TCE) analysed the MR projects until July 2013, determining that “the generalised delay in projects and public works shows failures in planning and organisation” (MOREIRA, 2013). The person responsible for preparing the contracts for CIERGS rejected TCE’s critiques, stating that the projects “were implemented with great care and within the minimum timeframe. If they were carried out with 100% precision, they would take 10 years. They are basic projects” (MOREIRA, 2013). It is important to note that the projects implemented were only those related to mobility that prioritised cars. None of the BRT system projects were completed until December 2015.

When comparing the enterprises that won biddings with those which donated financial resources to José Fortunati’s 2010 electoral campaign, significant data can be found, such as the fact that one third of the enterprises that won biddings for urban mobility projects were donors, reaching a total of BRL 1,049,000.00. The construction enterprises, representing 11 companies, financed 35% of the previous campaign, increasing to 605 in Fortunati’s campaign through 29 companies of the sector (PRESTAÇÃO ..., 2013).

The population, which receives information on projects almost exclusively through corporative media, was invited to public hearings, usually held when the projects had already been finalised and the public bidding had been carried out, generating demonstrations by groups affected and critically worried with the city’s future. The projects express the PMPA’s disregard for the environment, basic living conditions and the right to housing of low income population, as well as the practice of implementing evictions, whether to remove obstacles to business or because the poor and their ways of living should become less visible.

The non-availability of information from the PMPA, also determined by the lack of response to formal requests is convenient, so that the projects do not suffer from any interferences. Valuation of alleged technical neutrality is also noted, when some technicians (usually the same ones) say that they represent the professional team at the PMPA and that they knew more about what is best for the city, even without having carried out the studies required by legislation (such as alternative projects and impact studies). The population does not have a voice and should not give their opinion as, unlike what the PMPA confirms, the projects are not for all of Porto Alegre. The projects may even be distributed throughout the territory but always favour identifiable corporate groups. Typical entrepreneurial urban strategies (HARVEY, 2006) are put into practice. The combination of their speculative nature with the lack of urban planning instruments which opposes the privilege of specific groups in some way, as well as flexibilising environmental impact studies and the lack of openness to the population when taking decisions, characterise the practices of levarage planning (BRINDLEY, RYDIN and STOKER, 2004).

B) Stadiums

The stadium unit of analysis obviously has a more direct relationship with the mega-event. In visits to the state capital, even before announcing the selection of the host cities, the FIFA committee put forward the S.C. Internacional’s Beira-Rio Stadium to host the World Cup. Even so, the “World Cup opportunity” was used by Grêmio Football Porto-Alegrense to build new installations. For PMPA, it was an opportunity to “provide the city of Porto Alegre and the Metropolitan Region with an extremely modern sports, events and business complex” and “consolidate a new centrality of regional importance, redefining the profile and development potential for all of the north zone” (PORTO ALEGRE, 2008). According to Harvey (2006), sports stadia fit into the urban entrepreneurialism strategy related to the spatial division of consumption.

The two clubs associated with two Brazilian multi-national engineering companies which would exploit the business for 20 years¹¹ and benefit from National Economic and Social Development Bank (BNDES) credit. Both negotiated land at the former stadiums as a source of funds. Olímpico and Grand Park Eucaliptos Developments are exploited by the construction companies OAS and Melnick Evens, respectively. Although the PMPA was not financially responsible for constructing the stadiums, it had a direct participation through tax exemption, land donations, release from mitigation work and changes of urban parameters, among other measures. The laws approved in the City Council altered the urban parameters for these specific areas, being important to note that this took place on 29^th December, 2008, when Porto Alegre had not yet been selected as a host city. Even so, the city would receive two “FIFA standard” football stadiums, when FIFA only required one. The football clubs, real estate speculators and councillors favourable to these projects knew how to take advantage of the context to approve alterations to the 2^nd PDDUA. It also contributed the historic rivalry between the two teams’ supporters, since both needed to be approved so as not to dissatisfy any of them. As a result, the movements that criticised their adverse impacts were silenced by a massive support from the population and corporative media. The forces and actors involved articulated what Logan and Molottch (1993) define as a coalition to grow, with the elites and media pressuring for their interests and taking advantage of those passionate about football.

The leverage planning practices in the case of the Grêmio Arena included increases in building density, construction of road infrastructure by the public authorities and flexibilisation of environmental parameters. As a consequence, the State Public Prosecution Service recommended the suspension of the surrounding work carried out by the PMPA due to problems with the Environmental Impact Study and Report. This process is still in dispute. In addition, there is an investigation by the Prosecutors Office related to acts of improper conduct by the public government for unjustified exemption of OAS’s obligations that were part of the agreement to obtain the environmental permit. As a consequence of this exemption, public works in the surrounding area had been financed by public funds (RECOMENDAÇÃO…, 2013).

The Beira-Rio Complex is located in a strategic position: alongside the Guaíba waterfront and close to the city centre, and has associated ventures, such as the events centre and hotels. Urban parameters alterations were approved for the Giant Forever area: permission to construct higher buildings (from 18 to 33 metres) and higher construction rates (1.3 to 1.9); the section of Permanent Protection Area which was at least 500m from the watercourses was reduced to 255. In other words, leverage planning is found to be exercised, with the public authorities actively taking part in resolving the problem of over-accumulation by urban renewal processes, which includes the exploitation of depreciated land, expulsion of the poorest sectors of the population and lack of consideration for environmental aspects.

C) Waterfront

The Mauá Harbour and the Guaíba Waterfront LUPs¹² are also related to old projects that went through several municipal and state administrations.

Legislation was altered in order to make the Mauá Harbour project viable, authorising new land uses and granting attractive urban parameters. The bidding process resulted in the company Consórcio Cais Mauá (led by the Spanish group responsible for Port Vell in Barcelona and including the Brazilian architect Jaime Lerner’s office) winning the contract and gaining the right to exploit the area for 25 years. The main organiser was the state government and the PMPA’s role was to legalise the new business in the PDDUA, making it attractive to the market. The PMPA was then responsible for approving the Urban Viability Study, among other licenses required. The PMPA’s administration was reorganised to guarantee agility and flexibility in the approvals processes, with the creation of the Development and Special Matters Office (Gabinete de Desenvolvimento e Assuntos Especiais - Gades), directly subordinated to the Mayor’s office. According to Article 5 of the Law, “the basic purpose of Gades is to raise external resources to expand the Municipality of Porto Alegre’s investment capacity, through liaison and promotion of PPPs, thereby making the execution of special projects viable” (PORTO ALEGRE, 2012, p. 2). Gades became the sector responsible for special projects, such as Mauá Harbour and Guaíba Waterfront Renewal.

The Mauá Harbour LUP is a major intervention that does not consider impacts on the territory. In addition, the PPP that will exploit the location is directed towards elitist activities, such as a shopping centre, Hyundai concessionaire and a micro-brewery. The RBS Group once again acted intensively. In a special report, it stated that the Mauá Harbour “[...] will be the stage for a kind of re-birth of the metropolis”, adding: “at mid-day, Governor Tarso Genro will transfer the ownership of more than 180,000 square metres of Mauá Harbour to private initiative, and the dream that it truly becomes a public place will start to turn into reality” (MELO, 2011). An inversion of terms and a mystifying rhetoric is observed. The place, which until that time housed various ephemeral, open activities, as well as permanent activities, such as a public marina, will become “a truly public place” when it is handed over to the private sector. With regards to the impacts on the city’s central region, apart from increasing the flow of cars, the phenomenon of gentrification may also take place.

The intervention on the Guaíba Waterfront is also an old idea: the first renewal project is from 1986 and it was recorded in the 2^nd PDDUA as a Revitalisation Area. When Fortunati was Secretary of Planning, he looked for entrepreneurs for a PPP, announcing a landscape design competition, which never took place. In December 2011, the PMPA hired the well-known architect, Jaime Lerner, and the project was then led by Gades.

The Rio Grande do Sul’s section of the Brazilian Institute of Architects (Instituto de Arquitetos do Brasil - IAB) asked twice the PMPA to hold a public hearing, so that the architect Lerner could explain the project. Faced with two refusals, it called for a public hearing via social networks, which was finally held in the City Council on 14^th October, 2013. Lerner and his team presented 3Ds dated April 2012; they explained very little or almost nothing about the project. Delegates and consultants from the Planning Region 1 and IAB, from the Gaúcha Association of Environmental Protection, and some local councillors expressed their discontent that can be summarised in the following aspects: the hiring of Jaime Lerner for BRL 2.15 million without holding a public bidding; the exclusion of SPM technicians and the population in general; the absence of environmental impact studies. In the following day, the Mayor declared that the municipal government would no longer take part in public hearings at the Council, justifying that the critiques were unacceptable because “Jaime Lerner is one of the most respected city planners in the world, receiving red carpet treatment everywhere” and in criticising him, the public had disrespected the mayor’s administration (ROCHA, 2013). However, it is necessary to clarify that this hearing was the calmest of all of those witnessed during this study, with specialised and technically accurate arguments. Furthermore, hiring Lerner is related to what Harvey (2011) calls urban spectacle, referring to the fetishisation of space via the designs of well-known architects.

Both of the projects are based on formal PPPs, granting exploitation of the area. The Mauá Harbour project will be constructed by private sector investments with the support of public development banks. The Guaíba Waterfront Renewal had investments from the Ministry of Tourism and federal funds from parliamentary amendments. Even so, the PMPA is studying the possibility of granting spaces to private initiative, in exchange for its maintenance or construction. This LUP is another example of urban entrepreneurialism strategy related to the competition for central government surpluses and both fit into the entrepreneurialism strategy related to the spatial division of consumption (HARVEY, 2006).

Lastly, the two cases, and the Waterfront in particular, exemplify that amid market-led planning practices, the public workers directly involved with urban planning had been displaced from the process, together with the population in general.

Conclusions

A summary of the projects which are associated to at least one of the entrepreneurial urban strategies proposed by Harvey (2006) are found in Table 6.

Table 6
Urban entrepreneurial practices in each of the projects

Unit of Analysis	Project	EEU1	EEU2	EEU3	PPP
Mobility	Tronco Av.
	3rd Perimeter Av.
	Padre Cacique Av.
	BRT - Protásio Alves
	BRT - João Pessoa
	Voluntários da Pátria St.
	Extension of Severo Dullius St.
	Bus station complex
	BRT - Bento Gonçalves
	BRT- Padre Cacique
	Beira-Rio surroundings roads
	Salgado Filho airport
	Aeromovel
	Subway Line 2
Stadium	International Stadium
	Grêmio Arena
Waterfront	Mauá Harbour
	Guaíba Waterfront Renewal

• Caption: EEU1 = Urban Entrepreneurial Strategy related to spatial division of consumption. EEU2 = Urban Entrepreneurial Strategy related to obtaining control and command activities. EEU3 = Urban Entrepreneurial Strategy related to the redistribution of government surpluses. PPP = Public-Private Partnership.

All of the projects from the mobility unit fit into the strategy related to the acquisition of key control and command functions. According to Harvey (2006) and Sassen (2010), investments in mobility and communications are paramount in order to attract business. In addition, all of the projects are based on formal or informal PPPs, with CIERGS appearing as the directly interested actor. The absence of planning instruments favoured the adoption of a speculative strategy that benefits private interests and privileges cars mobility, at the expense of the quality of life of the population as a whole. Besides, the legacy of the World Cup will not benefit the low income populations, as publicised. Also the BRT projects will provide very few improvements to the workers’ daily lives but will transform Porto Alegre’s image, displaying modern stations and terminals with contemporary architecture. Even the Subway project, before the Ministry of Cities’ intervention, would be constructed in an area with less passenger demands. As the PMPA affirms, the city of the future will have cable-stayed bridges and freeway roads for the comfort of car’s drivers. The pedestrian will be condemned to crossing wide strips of asphalt or even to make major detours to arrive from one point to another, due to overs and under passes. Not even the Guaíba Waterfront, one of the main popular leisure areas in the city, escaped and will have a six lane freeway and a cable-stayed overpass.

The increase in social inequality is clear when the cases of Vila Grande Cruzeiro and Dique are taken into account, being directly affected by the mobility projects. Families were evicted, as in the case of the residents of Grande Cruzeiro, without any guarantees of when they will receive a new house or even if they will receive one at all. Although the PMPA affirms that there is a housing policy for this situation, this policy is similar to early 19^th century hygiene policies, which had, among others, the aim of removing the poor from the urban centres and from the sights of the more privileged segments of the population, among others. Currently, the eviction of the poor has a direct relation with real estate market speculation, which is expanding to the south zone of the city, specifically in the case of Grande Cruzeiro. It is important to note that this is not the first episode of this type in the region in recent years. First of all, the inhabitants of Vila Foz, next to the Barra Shopping Sul, were removed to Vila Nova in a compensation agreed with the company Multiplan. Next, there was an attempt thwarted by a popular struggle to construct a luxury housing development at Morro Santa Teresa. Therefore, it is seen that this clean-up is necessary, not to improve the affected families’ living conditions but to make viable the accumulation of capital by major companies.

Practices such as these indicate the practice of trend planning (BRINDLEY, RYDIN and STOKER, 2004) directed towards private interests with the consequent processes of accumulation through dispossession (HARVEY, 2012a), creating new spaces for interventions by construction companies once freed of the informal city. In fact, planning practices that merely follow and reinforce market trends are in contradiction with the reason for planning to exist. In other words, if the planning practices - understood as an instrument for designing desired futures – are following trends and being subordinated to the interests of social actors with the capacity to define these trends, they become one more space for private interaction and communication (between public agents and selected partners) and abandon their reason of being.

Another example of leverage planning is public investment in public works, such as in Farrapos, Padre Cacique, and Edvaldo Pereira Paiva Avenues, and in the area surrounding the Beira-Rio Stadium and Grêmio Arena where the clubs and companies were exempted from the responsibility for the construction of mitigation projects.

The analysis of the Stadium and Waterfront units also demonstrates leverage planning and urban entrepreneurial strategy associated to the spatial division of consumption. These LUPs will have adverse effects on the territory as a whole. In the case of the Grêmio stadium, although the government has not transferred the management of urban renewal processes of specific areas to the private sector, the Grêmio Arena LUP was conceived entirely by this sector. Its effects on the territory are already being felt and mitigated by the public sector. Private management planning (BRINDLEY, RYDIN and STOKER, 2004) is fully applied for Mauá Harbour. Although the project has been driven by the public sector, the business model and exploitation of the area (construction and management for the next 25 years) are under the responsibility of the private sector.

To conclude, it can be confirmed that considering Vainer’s (2012) dimensions, presented in Figure 1, negative impacts both on the democratic and equality effect are clear.

This research was the first study on the meaning of the mega-event in urban planning practices in Porto Alegre. The indications are that the introduction of market-led planning is only starting. Further specific case studies would be able to evaluate the consolidation of these practices in the processes of urban renewal that will fallow LUPs and their impacts. It would also be relevant to analyse the impact of mobility projects and verify the formation of new centralities. Another phenomenon to be investigated is how these projects will alter real estate market dynamics and the city’s image. The impacts on 3,000 families in the cases of Grande Cruzeiro and Vila Dique should also be monitored. There are many possibilities to explore, but the main challenge will be to understand the consequences of the dismantling and decreased relevance of urban planning, the potentially adverse effects on the city’s organisation and vulnerable population groups; and to identify which practices will be instituted in replacing what has, so far, been defined as urban planning.

• 1
  ‘Empresarialismo’, in Portuguese.
• 2
  It was a Master Course dissertation supervised by Professor João Farias Rovati - PROPUR-UFRGS. It was presented in October 2013 and evaluated by Professors Heleniza Ávila Campos, Paulo Reyes and Sueli Goulart.
• 3
  To Murphy (2008, p. 154), managerialism deconstructs “issues of social life and organisations into a series of discreet problems that can be resolved through the application of technical expertise”. To Parker (2002), managerialism is the generalised ideology of management that, in turn, has multiple meanings. This concept could be related to a group of executives; a process or a management act, or an academic subject related to management and administration.
• 4
  The dissemination and specific differences with the post-bureaucratic movement, with the New Public Management in Anglo-Saxon countries, and with the Managerial Public Administration in Brazil cannot be ignored. However, the Reinventing Government movement is the most relevant approach for the purposes of this study.
• 5
  An example of this focus can be found in Muricy’s (2001) analysis on the sale of Porto Seguro as a paradise in the tourist market.
• 6
  In another formulation, Harvey (2011) explains the investments in this type of project as a search for symbolic wealth, such as the gentrification of specific areas, the restoration of urban landscapes and recovering history using images. Thus, the fetishisation of the urban space takes place, emphasising exchange-value, instead of use-value. When the state acts as a partner in the promotion of fetishisation, through the privatisation of spaces, favourable constructive parameters and tax exemptions, among others, it promotes accumulation by dispossession. In other words, it actively takes part in resolving the problem of over-accumulation in processes that include the exploitation of depreciated land, expulsion of the poorest sectors of society, gentrification and speculation in the financial and real estate markets (HARVEY, 2012b).
• 7
  The word ‘entreprisation’ has been used to refer to a process in which the enterprise is taken as a model for organising all human activities. It comes from the French and the main author of reference is Andreu Solé (see http://www.hec.fr/Faculte-Recherche/Membres-de-la-faculte/SOLE-Andreu). It should be differentiated from entrepreneurship or entrepreneurialism.
• 8
  The new title in Portuguese is “Do administrativismo ao empreendedorismo: a transformação da governança urbana no capitalismo tardio”. This time there is a new problem with the translation of ‘managerialism” as ‘administrativismo’ instead of ‘gerencialismo’. However, for the purpose of this paper’s discussion this new mistake is not relevant.
• 9
  Up until the date that this article was submitted (15 ^th June, 2015), the projects had still not been implemented. The same is valid for the highway projects also mentioned. That is why the sentence is in the future tense. An article published on 14 ^th June registers that only 5 mobility projects were completed and that part of the CIERGS projects were subject to price adjustments of at least BRL 9 million, according to the State Court of Auditors (TCE), for “technical or intentional malpractice” (PRORROGAÇÃO ..., 2015, p. 26).
• 10
  Enterprises involved with construction and the exchange of land to make the stadium projects viable.
• 11
  The new Grêmio administration has been trying to make an agreement for several months so that OAS sells the stadium to the club (for example, see: http://www.correiodopovo.com.br/Esportes/545630/Sinais-de-nova-negociacao-entre-OAS-e-Gremio).
• 12
  This work has not yet started although the space of the Mauá Harbour has been closed off to the public since the beginning of September 2014 (see, the following on this respect: http://www.sul21.com.br/jornal/arquiteta-apresenta-modelo-alternativo-ao-projeto-de-revitalizacao-do-cais-maua/). In the case of the Waterfront, the tender process had no results on more than one occasion (see: http://zh.clicrbs.com.br/rs/porto-alegre/noticia/2015/03/licitacao-para-revitalizar-a-orla-do-guaiba-deve-ter-o-preco-aumentado-4713033.html).

REFERENCES

• ASCHER, F. Projet publics et réalisations privées: Le renouveau de la Planification des villes. Les Annales de la Recherche Urbaine, n. 51, pp. 4-15, 1992.
• AVITABLE, A. La mise en scène du projet urbain: pour une structuration des démarches. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2005.
• BRASIL. Ministério dos Esportes. Matriz de Responsabilidade Rio Grande do Sul. Brasília 2010. Available at: http://www.esporte.gov.br/futebolDireitosTorcedor/copa2014/compromissosCopa2014.jsp Last access on 15^th May, 2013.
  » http://www.esporte.gov.br/futebolDireitosTorcedor/copa2014/compromissosCopa2014.jsp
• BORJA, J. Participação Popular e Planejamento Participativo: a experiência de Barcelona. In: As ideias que vão mudar a cidade nos próximos anos Porto Alegre. Publicação da Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre – Administração Popular, 1993.
• BRINDLEY, T; RYDIN, Y; STOKER, G. Remaking planning: the politics of urban change. Nova York: Routledge, 2004.
• COMPANS, R. Empreendedorismo urbano: entre o discurso e a prática. São Paulo: Editora UNESP, 2005.
• FERNANDES, A.; GOMES, M. A. A de F. Operação Pelourinho: O que há de novo além das cores? In: ZANCHETTI, Sílvio (Coord.); MARINHO, Geraldo; MILET, Vera (Orgs.). Estratégias de Intervenção em Áreas Históricas Recife: MDU/UFPE, 1995. pp. 46-52.
• FERNANDES, A. S. A. Empresarialismo urbano e qualidade de vida: mudanças estruturais na gestão em Salvador? Revista de Administração Pública, v. 31, n. 3, pp. 89-102, 1997.
• FERREIRA, J. S. W. Cidades para poucos ou para todos? Impasses da democratização das cidades no Brasil e os riscos de um “urbanismo às avessas”. In: OLIVEIRA, F; BRAGA. R; RIZEK, C. (Orgs.). Hegemonia às avessas São Paulo: Boitempo, 2010. pp. 185-213.
• FISCHER, T. et al. Centro histórico de Salvador: a gestão de parceria em novos tempos e novos espaços. In: Fischer. T. (Org.). Gestão contemporânea de cidades estratégicas Rio de Janeiro: FGV, 1995. pp. 165-82.
• FRIEDMANN, J. The World City Hypothesis. Development and Change, 1986. In: BRENNER, N.; KEIL, R. (Eds.). The Global Cities Reader Abingdon: Routledge, 2010. pp. 67-71.
• GONDIM, Linda M. P. O Dragão do Mar e a Fortaleza Pós-Moderna: cultura, patrimônio e imagem da cidade. São Paulo: Annablume, 2007.
• GUANAIS, F. C.; FISCHER, T. Entre Planos, Projetos e Estratégias: o caso Rio sempre Rio. Organização & Sociedade, v.6, n. 14, pp. 39-63, 1999.
• HARVEY, D. From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism. Human Geography, v. 71, n.1, pp. 3-17, 1989.
• ______. Do gerencialismo ao empresariamento: a transformação da administração urbana no capitalismo tardio. Espaço e Debates, ano XVI, n.39, 1996 p. 48-64.
• ______. A produção capitalista do espaço São Paulo: Annablume Editora, 2006.
• ______. A brief history of Neoliberalism Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
• ______. Condição Pós-Moderna: uma pesquisa sobre as origens da mudança cultural. São Paulo: Edições Loyola, 2011.
• ______. O novo imperialismo São Paulo: Edições Loyola, 2012a.
• ______. Rebel Cities: from the right to the city to the urban revolution. New York: Verso, 2012b.
• KOTLER, P; HAIDER, D; H; REIN, I. Marketing Público: Como atrair investimentos, empresas e turismo para as cidades, regiões, estados e países. São Paulo: Makron Books, 1994.
• LAWLESS, P. Partenariats public-privé au Rouyaume-Uni : analyse et critique. In : HEINZ, W (Org). Patenariats Public-Privé dans L’aménagement urbain Paris: Editions L’Harmattan, 1994. pp. 131-134.
• LECROART, P; PALISSE, J.P. Grands Projets Urbains em Europe: quels enseignements pour l’île-de-France. In: Les Cahiers de l’institut d’aménagement et d’urbanisme de la region d’ile-de-france Paris: Point 44, 2007. pp. 5-27.
• LOGAN, J. R; MOLOTCH, H. L. The City as a Growth Machine. In: FAINSTEIN, S. S; CAMPBELL, S. Readings in Urban Theory Oxford: Blackwells, 1993.
• MAPA estratégico. Gabinete de Planejamento Estratégico, Portal PMPA, Porto Alegre, 06 Oct, 2011. Available at: http://www2.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/gpe/default.php?p_secao=21 Last access on 16^th July, 2013.
  » http://www2.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/gpe/default.php?p_secao=21
• MATRIZ de Responsabilidade. Ministério dos Esportes, Governo Federal, Brasília, 2013 Available at: http://www.esporte.gov.br/futebolDireitosTorcedor/copa2014/compromissosCopa2014.jsp Last acess on 15^th July, 2013.
  » http://www.esporte.gov.br/futebolDireitosTorcedor/copa2014/compromissosCopa2014.jsp
• MELO, I. Pontapé inicial: Novo cais até a Copa. Zero Hora, Porto Alegre, 23 Nov. 2011, pp. 4-5.
• MOREIRA, P. Cinco das obras de mobilidade previstas para a Copa de 2014 na Capital podem ficar para 2015. Zero Hora, Porto Alegre, RS, 30 set. 2013c. Available at: http://zerohora.clicrbs.com.br/rs/geral/noticia/2013/09/cinco-das-obras-de-mobilidade-previstas-para-a-copa-de-2014-na-capital-podem-ficar-para-2015-4285415.html#cxrecs_s Last access on 30^th Sept, 2013.
  » http://zerohora.clicrbs.com.br/rs/geral/noticia/2013/09/cinco-das-obras-de-mobilidade-previstas-para-a-copa-de-2014-na-capital-podem-ficar-para-2015-4285415.html#cxrecs_s
• MOURA, S. A construção de redes públicas na gestão local: algumas tendências recentes. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, v.2, n. 1, pp. 67-85, Jan/Apr. 1998.
• MURICY, I. T. O Éden terrestre: o consumo da cidade como mito. Bahia Análise & Dados, v. 11, n. 2, pp. 180-193, 2001.
• MURPHY, J. The World Bank and global managerialism Londres: Routledge, 2008.
• NOVAIS, P. Uma estratégia chamada planejamento estratégico: Deslocamentos espaciais e a atribuição de sentidos na teoria do planejamento urbano. Rio de Janeiro: 7Letras, 2010.
• OLIVEIRA, C. Hegemonia às avessas. In: Hegemonia às avessas OLIVEIRA, F; BRAGA. R; RIZEK, C. (orgs.). São Paulo: Boitempo, 2010, pp. 21-27.
• O PROGRAMA. Planejamento Estratégico e Orçamento, Portal PMPA, Porto Alegre, 2013. Available at: http://www2.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/smpeo/default.php?p_secao=98 Last access on 23^rd July, 2013.
  » http://www2.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/smpeo/default.php?p_secao=98
• OSBORNE, D; GAEBLER, T. Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Plume, 1993.
• PARKER, M. Against management: organization in the age of managerialism. Oxford: Polity Press, 2002.
• PORTO ALEGRE. City Council. Complementary Law N.º 434, of 1^st December, 1999. Instituted the 2nd PLANO DIRETOR DE DESENVOLVIMENTO URBANO AMBIENTAL (PDDUA). Porto Alegre, RS, 1999. Available at: http://www.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/planeja/spm/default.htm Last access on 15^th Oct, 2012.
  » http://www.portoalegre.rs.gov.br/planeja/spm/default.htm
• ______. Complementary Law N.º 6.189 of 29^th December, 2008. Institutes a new urban regime for Grêmio Arena land. Porto Alegre, RS, 2008. Available at: (http://projetos.camarapoa.rs.gov.br/projetos/98737), last access on 25^th July, 2013.
  » http://projetos.camarapoa.rs.gov.br/projetos/98737
• ______. Complementary Law Project 04, 06^th August, 2012 institutes REPOT. Porto Alegre, RS, 2012b. Available at: (http://projetos.camarapoa.rs.gov.br/projetos/115301), last access on 13^th July, 2013.
  » http://projetos.camarapoa.rs.gov.br/projetos/115301
• PORTO ALEGRE. Municipal Attorney General’s Office. Term of Cooperation signed between PMPA and CIERGS. Porto Alegre, RS, 2009. (Made available by the PMPA Client Assistance Service.)
• PRESENTING the accounts for an electoral campaign. Superior Electoral Court. Porto Alegre, 2013. Available at: (http://inter01.tse.jus.br/spceweb.consulta.receitasdespesas2012/resumoreceitasbycomite.action), last access on 29^th Aug, 2013.
  » http://inter01.tse.jus.br/spceweb.consulta.receitasdespesas2012/resumoreceitasbycomite.action
• ROCHA, P. Após vaias a Lerner, prefeitura decide não participar de audiências na Câmara. Gaúcha, Porto Alegre 15^th Oct, 2013. Available at: http://gaucha.clicrbs.com.br/rs/noticia-aberta/apos-vaias-a-lerner-prefeitura-decide-nao-participar-de-audiencias-na-camara-27300.html Last access on 25^th Oct, 2013.
  » http://gaucha.clicrbs.com.br/rs/noticia-aberta/apos-vaias-a-lerner-prefeitura-decide-nao-participar-de-audiencias-na-camara-27300.html
• ROSA, M.C; ARNOLD, M.C. A entrevista na pesquisa qualitativa: mecanismos para validação de resultados. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2008.
• SASSEN, S. Locating Cities on Global Circuits. Environment and Urbanization, 2002. In: BRENNER, N; KEIL, R. (Eds.) The Global Cities Reader Abingdon: Routledge, 2010. pp. 89-95.
• SCHUMPETER, J. A. Capitalism, socialism and democracy London and New York: Routelegde, Taylor & Francis e-library, 2003.
• SOUZA, D. M. de; VIEIRA, N. M. Gestão de sítios históricos: o processo de implementação da política de recuperação do Pelourinho (Salvador-BA). Cronos, v. 11, pp. 79-102, 2011.
• SOUZA, M. L. Mudar a cidade: uma introdução crítica ao planejamento e à gestão urbanos. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2010.
• STAKE, R. E. The art of case study research London: Sage, 1995.
• VAINER, C. Os liberais também fazem planejamento urbano? Glosas ao “Plano Estratégico da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro”. In: ARANTES, O; VAINER, C; MARICATO, E. (Orgs.). A cidade do pensamento único: desmanchando consensos. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes, 2000a. pp. 105-120.
• ______. Pátria, empresa e mercadoria: Notas sobre as estratégias discursivas do Planejamento Estratégico Urbano. In: ARANTES, O; VAINER, C; MARICATO, E. (Orgs.). A cidade do pensamento único: desmanchando consensos. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes, 2000b. pp. 75-104.
• ______. Grandes proyectos urbanos. ¿Qué son y cómo evaluarlos? In: CUENYA, B; NOVAIS, P; VAINER, C. (Comps.). Grandes Proyectos Urbanos: Miradas críticas sobre la experiencia argentina y brasileña. Buenos Aires: Café de las Ciudades, 2012. pp. 181-224.
• UMA COPA com prorrogação. Zero Hora, pp. 25-30, edition printed on 14^th June, 2015.
• VIEIRA, N. M. A imagem diz tudo? O espaço urbano como objeto de consumo. Bahia Análise & Dados, v. 9, n. 2, pp. 39-44, 1999.
• ______. O lugar da história na cidade contemporânea. Bairro do Recife –v- Pelourinho. Master’s dissertation presented to the Post-Graduation Programme in Architecture and Urbanism at UFBA. Salvador: UFBA, 2000.
• YIN, R. K. Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2002.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  Oct-Dec 2016

History

• Received
  30 Sept 2014
• Accepted
  29 June 2015