C O N T E X T 1 5 0 : J U L Y 2 0 1 7 23 LINDA SHETABI Liveable Yangon: for whom? In regions stricken by years of instability, insecurity and unrest, the intangible aspects of liveability that support robust, connected and lively neighbourhoods are fundamental. Since Myanmar embraced the market economy, new investment opportunities and modern development projects inYangon have given rise to the need to modernise its long-neglected urban infrastructure.Ambitiously, this modernisation is pegged to the agenda of transforming Yangon into a ‘liveable city’. While a laudable intention, the agenda appears to focus on improving modern street infrastructure with pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and aesthetically pleasing streetscapes. Framed by Yangon’s rich collection of colonial and historic buildings, the vision of these streets portrays few pedestrians, a couple of sidewalk cafes, and a vendor here and there. Strikingly excluded is the vibrant orchestra of regulated and unregulated street vendors that compose the traditional street life ofYangon. From cooked food and basic necessities to secretarial services and books, the space between buildings is where life happens inYangon’s streetscape. It is in this space that everyday essentials are gratified; not just in material goods and services, but in all the intangible aspects that foster a sense of place. In this streetscape, the complex relationships between people and place weave a rich tapestry of contextual meaning that defines part of Yangon’s intangible heritage. Deeply embedded in this is na le hmu, defined by Jayde Lin Roberts1 as an understanding, an informal and unofficial agreement, a social contract. This understanding has for decades provided the structure that has given neighbourhoods the resilience to survive the uncertainties of political turmoil. This understanding is central to Yangon’s liveable neighbourhoods. Liveability combines and builds on the intangible and tangible facets of life. In its most simplistic definition, it describes a place where we would like to live, work, raise a family, and spend our leisurely days and nights. It is deeply rooted in context and cultural norms. But for decades, liveability has been assessed by non-contextspecific measures such as infrastructure, stability, health care, sanitation standards, environment, education and the arts. In countries with stable modern governments and infrastructure, these measures seem reasonable enough. But in regions stricken by years of instability, insecurity and unrest, the intangible aspects of liveability that support robust, connected and vibrant neighbourhoods are fundamental. Urban conditions and cultural norms play an integral part in guiding strategies for making cities liveable. For some places, it involves increasing the number of bike lanes and reducing vehicular traffic. For others, it is achieved by revitalising old city centres that have character and where the urban fabric is at a more human scale. Regardless of the approach, the primary goal should be to make the city liveable for those who already live and work there. In Yangon, however, the strategies adopted by official channels seem stripped from local context. Yangon, the former capital and currently the largest economic centre of Myanmar, covers about 780 square kilometres.The central business district, with most of the central urban functions such as administration, banking, business and commerce, occupies about one per cent of the area. This congested area with its rigid square The intersection of 26th Street and Maha Bandoola Street (Photo: John Siow)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=