The emergence of new technologies in housing and urban development has enabled humanity to address many pressing issues. For example, development of vertical housing allows a large number of people to live within a limited amount of land. While this is advantageous from a utilitarian perspective, it often brings significant social challenges.

 

As an architect-trained researcher, I seek to understand how the built environment—particularly in housing—shapes one of the most intrinsic aspects of low-income populations: social capital.

In 2016, many residents from slum and kampong settlements in Jakarta Special Region, Indonesia were relocated to public housing as part of a river normalization project and land acquisition efforts. Some were moved to the first high-rise public housing specifically designated for low-income communities. My research revealed that low-income communities struggle to adapt to vertical living. Due to that, the move disrupts their social fabric in addition to feeling of displaced from their original homes. This eviction, labeled as a ‘housing relocation’ by the local governments, was then heavily criticized and met with strong resistance from the kampong residents. However, in a separate study, I also found that under certain conditions—such as desire for an improved living standards or better housing locations—low-income residents are willingly relocate themselves voluntarily.

 

Following the ‘success’ of the first high-rise public housing for low-income, the trend of its developments continues. My research found that although they initially faced difficulties adapting to high-rise living, they were generally able to develop new patterns of social interaction and rebuild their social fabric after several years. Yet, adapting lifestyles and reconnecting with neighbors is not the final challenge; Isolation emerges as the next issue. In many public housing complexes in Jakarta, the entrance are highly monitored, making it difficult for residents to interact with non-residents outside public housing. Based on my findings, more than half of the respondents are reported rarely interacting with non-residents, particularly those that they believe belong to higher income or social status. The new development of premium and higher-quality public housing does provides them with safer and more respectable living environments. However, this may lead to social isolation within the broader urban context.

 

Slums and public housing for low-income residents often carry a poor reputation and negative stereotypes among outsiders, largely due to issues commonly associated with poverty. Moving into a more respectable, better-designed public housing complex can help lift this stigma. In this sense, the status of living in such housing can serve as a kind of ‘social currency’, enabling residents to interact more easily and confidently with people of higher income or social status.

In the context of kampong life, however, such a currency is less relevant. Residents generally share similar income levels and social backgrounds. Nevertheless, other forms of social currency may emerge. For example, in the face of increasing urban heat, the presence of air conditioning offers not only physical comfort but also a subtle social advantage. For example, households with air conditioning may become more attractive venues or hosts for social gatherings. In this way, owning an air conditioner or other aspects tied to physicality of the houses—housing size, location, or other amenities—might create a significant privileges. Over time, these differences may influence patterns of social interaction and, ultimately, shape the social capital within the community.