Gated communities in Latin American cities have become the new normal. The streets bordered by fences, walls and the occasional gate, formed when two or more gated communities face each other, dominate the urban landscape today. Taking Bogotá with its 3500 gated communities as my case study, I create a novel typology focusing on the gated community’s spatial dimension, not portraying it as an isolated island but as an integral part of the urban realm. Using an empirically grounded typology formation process, I present five distinctive types of gated communities in Bogotá, varying widely in how they shape the surrounding public spaces. Some types have significant expected negative effects on activity and security in the adjacent streets and others hardly any. I show how future gated community research and policymaking would benefit from disaggregation of the concept and present some policy strategies to mitigate negative external effects of gated communities.
AngottiT (2013) Introduction: Urban Latin America: Violence, enclaves, and struggles for land. Latin American Perspectives40(2): 5–20.
2.
AtkinsonRBlandyS (2005) Introduction: International perspectives on the new enclavism and the rise of gated communities. Housing Studies20(2): 177–186.
3.
Becerril-SánchezTMéndezJGarrochoC (2013) Urbanizaciones cerradas y transformaciones socioespaciales en Metepec, Estado de México. EURE (Santiago)39(117): 191–213.
4.
BlakelyEJSnyderMG (1997) Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
5.
BlandyS (2006) Gated communities in England: Historical perspectives and current developments. GeoJournal66(1–2): 15–26.
6.
BorsdorfAHidalgoR (2010) From polarization to fragmentation: Recent changes in Latin American urbanization. In: LindertPVerkorenO (eds) Decentralized Development in Latin America. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 23–34.
7.
BorsdorfAHildalgoRVidal-KoppmannS (2016) Social segregation and gated communities in Santiago de Chile and Buenos Aires: A comparison. Habitat International54(1): 18–27.
8.
CaldeiraT (2000) City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in São Paulo. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
9.
CanIHeathT (2016) In-between spaces and social interaction: A morphological analysis of Izmir using space syntax. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment31(1): 31–49.
10.
CorbinJMStraussAL (2015) Basics of Qualitative Research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
11.
CoyM (2002) Condomínios Fechados und die Fragmentierung der brasilianischen Stadt: Typen – Akteure – Folgewirkungen. Geographica Helvetica57(4): 264–277.
12.
CozensPM (2011) Urban planning and environmental criminology: Towards a new perspective for safer cities. Planning Practice and Research26(4): 481–508.
13.
De la CarreraF (2014) Rejalopolis: Ciudad de fronteras. Masters Thesis, Universidad Los Andes, Colombia.
14.
De la CarreraF (2019) Rejalopolis. Lecture. Bogotá, Colombia.
DoveyKPafkaE (2020) What is walkability? The urban DMA. Urban Studies57(1): 93–108.
17.
EnríquezMA (2017) The effects of voluntary exclusion: Gated communities in Chihuahua Mexico. Masters Thesis, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany.
18.
EwingRCerveroR (2010) Travel and the built environment. Journal of the American Planning Association76(3): 265–294.
19.
GarcíaFAPeraltaMDP (2016) Las urbanizaciones multifamiliares cerradas y su entorno urbano: Una nueva geografía simbólica en la ciudad de Cali (Colombia). EURE42: 77–97.
20.
GehlJ (1987) Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
21.
GehlJ (2010) Cities for People. Copenhagen: Island Press.
22.
GerhardtU (1986) Patientenkarrieren. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
23.
GooblarA (2002) Outside the walls: Urban gated communities and their regulation within the British planning system. European Planning Studies10(3): 321–334.
24.
GrantJMittelsteadtL (2004) Types of gated communities. Environment and Planning31(6): 913–930.
25.
HansonJ (2000) Urban transformations: A history of design ideas. Urban Design International5(2): 97–122.
26.
HillierB (2004) Can streets be made safe?Urban Design International9(1): 31–45.
27.
HillierBHansonJ (1984) The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
28.
HillierBOzlemS (2007) Beyond hot spots: Using space syntax to understand dispersed patterns of crime risk in the built environment. In:Conference on Crime Analysis. Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: Institute of Pure and Applied Mathematic.
29.
Inter-American Development Bank (2016) Guía: Metodológica Iniciativa de Ciudades Emergentes y Sostenibles. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
30.
IossifovaD (2019) Borderland. In: OrumAM (ed.) The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118568446.eurs0028 (accessed 12 January 2021).
31.
JacobsJ (1972) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
32.
JanoschkaM (2002) Wohlstand Hinter Mauern: Private Urbanisierungen in Buenos Aires. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
33.
JanoschkaMGlaszeG (2003) Urbanizaciones cerradas: Un modelo analítico. Ciudades59: 9–20.
34.
KelleUKlugeS (2010) Vom Einzelfall zum Typus. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
35.
La GrangeA (2018) Classifying elements of a typology of gated communities. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis66(1): 142.
LandmanK (2020) Gated communities in South Africa: An emerging paradox. In: MasseyRGunterA (eds) Urban Geography in South Africa: Perspectives and Theory. Cham: Springer, pp. 55–72.
38.
LemanskiC (2006) Spaces of exclusivity or connection? Linkages between a gated community and its poorer neighbour in a Cape Town master plan development. Urban Studies43(2): 397–420.
39.
LloydS (2019) Urban upgrading, informal social control and crime prevention in marginalized neighbourhoods: Evaluating a multidimensional intervention in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. PhD Research Proposal, ETH Zurich, Zurich.
40.
LowSM (2008) Fortification of residential neighbourhoods and the new emotions of home. Housing, Theory and Society25(1): 47–65.
41.
MetsaluTViloJ (2015) ClustVis: A web tool for visualizing clustering of multivariate data using Principal Component Analysis and heatmap. Nucleic Acids Research43(W1): W566–W570.
42.
MorelloJHBuzaiGDBaxendaleC, et al. (2000) Urbanización y consumo de tierra fértil. Ciencia Hoy10(55): 50–61.
43.
ReynaldDM (2010) Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency47(3): 358–390.
44.
RieraALuccaCMBrusaJ, et al. (2016) Trip generation rates and mobility patterns in gated residential communities in Córdoba, Argentina. Riem7(14): 63–84.
45.
RoitmanS (2004) Urbanizaciones cerradas: Estado de la cuestión hoy y propuesta teórica. Revista de Geografía Norte Grande32: 5–19.
46.
RoitmanS (2013) Close but divided: How walls, fences and barriers exacerbate social differences and foster urban social group segregation. Housing, Theory and Society30(2): 156–176.
47.
RoitmanS (2016) Urbanizaciones cerradas a escala planetaria. Prospectiva. Revista de Trabajo Social e Intervención Social21: 13–22.
48.
SamperG (1989) Institucionalización en Bogotá del principio de las agrupaciones de vivienda: Ponencia al proyecto de Acuerdo No. 82 de 1967. Escala52(53): 24–26.
49.
SunGWebsterCChiaradiaA (2017) Ungating the city: A permeability perspective. Urban Studies55(12): 2586–2602.
50.
VealKC (2013) The gating of America: The political and social consequences of gated communities on the body politic. PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan.
51.
VilaltaCJ (2011) Fear of crime in gated communities and apartment buildings: A comparison of housing types and a test of theories. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment26(2): 107–121.
52.
WeberMRothGWittichC (1979) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, CA and London: University of California Press.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
