Sasson, 1

Spaces of Identity
Migration, Identity (Trans)Formation and the Built Environment in
Limas Pueblos Jvenes

Camille Sasson
May 2016
JSIS 385
 Sasson, 2

Research Question

Nearly one third1 of Perus population of 30.5 million lives in the capital city of Lima

(The World Factbook 2016). In the mid-twentieth century, Lima underwent rapid population

growth due to high migration from the central highlands and the rest of the country2. As

newcomers arrived and began to expand and develop the urban space, they densified the historic

core, converted agricultural land, and established informal settlements on the edges of the city

(Carpenter 2015, 497). These peripheral areas have followed a general trajectory of integration

into the core urban model as inhabitants have worked to develop their infrastructure, extend

services, and take advantage of the opportunities for employment, education and social mobility

offered by greater proximity to the city (Lloyd 1980; Odegaard et al. 2016; Shaedel 1979).

However, the process of urbanization has been far from linear or uniform. Rather, the result has

been a dense and sprawling city consisting of many distinct zones with varying degrees of urban

integration and development (Lloyd 1980). While the experience of Lima has, in general,

followed a typical model of urbanization, its growth has been marked by land invasions giving

rise to informal settlements and by the tenacity of the invaders in developing their settlements

into residential suburbs (Lloyd 1980, 4, 40).

Since colonial times, urbanization in Latin America has occurred in various phases,

from the development of compact nodes in the colonial era, to sectoral growth in the nineteenth

century, cellular growth and income polarization in the twentieth century, and fragmented

1
Limas population is approximately 9.9 million. The next biggest city, Arequipa, has a population of 850,000.
Perus urban population is nearly 80 percent of the total population (The World Factbook 2016).
2
Migrants have moved to cities, in general, in search of greater opportunities for progress and/or as they flee
political instability and extreme poverty in their home region (Carpenter 2015; Lloyd 1980; Odegaard et al. 2016;
Sakay et al. 2011). In the 1940s and 50s, movement toward cities around Peru was influenced by the
mechanization of the hacienda economy, the drop in agricultural exports due to the Great Depression and later the
industrializing endeavors around the cities, and in the 1980s and 90s as a result of the forced displacement caused
by the countrys civil war (Odegaard et al. 2016, 1).
 Sasson, 3

growth in the early twenty-first century (Carpenter 2015, 499). Similar to its neighboring

countries of Bolivia and Ecuador, Peru remained a predominately rural country through the

1940s. The 1950s began a predictable pattern of urban growth as a boom in out-migration from

provincial and rural areas turned Peru into a predominately urban country (Shaedel 1979, 400).

As Limas population grew, the city transformed to accommodate the new arrivals. The heart of

the colonial city was turned into the commercial center and peripheral areas were cleared to

make way for highways and industrial areas. Saturated with newcomers, Limas pattern of

urbanization shifted from one in which migrants filled in available space and were absorbed into

the dominant institutions to one of fragmentation in which urban residents self-segregated into

neighborhoods divided by socio-economic status. Richer residents moved out of the city center

to develop affluent suburbs while poorer residents and migrants for whom neither state nor

private companies or landholders made provisions for housing filled in decaying inner-city

areas and settled along the periphery of the city (Lloyd 1980, 2; Shaedel 1979, 401). Land

invasions and the subsequent development of squatter settlements became increasingly common

as the fastest and cheapest solution to the lack of housing options for the poor (Sakay et al.

2011).

As it grew in population, Lima came to be divided into several distinct zones, succinctly

described by Lloyd (1980): first, an inner-city area in which decayed slums are juxtaposed with

modern commercial edifices; second, peripheral to this, we find an intermediate area of modest

and mixed housing; finally, on the outskirts and growing at a phenomenal rate, are two markedly

contrasting forms of urban development on one hand, the estates built by the large private

developers, and on the other, the squatter settlements constructed by the residents themselves

(3). Despite this physical segmentation of the city based on patterns of migration, most migrant
 Sasson, 4

communities underwent similar processes of integration into the city and an urban model of

development. This trajectory toward integration is particularly apparent in the histories of the

informal settlements, or pueblos jvenes, that make up much of the periphery of Lima and have

characterized the citys urbanization3.

Formal urban planning typically follows a descendant model, by which undeveloped land

is first integrated with the urban space through the development of infrastructure and extension

of utilities, then parceled for the development of buildings and houses, and finally settled. As

sites of informal urbanization, pueblos jvenes undergo this process of development in reverse.

Land is first settled by migrants, often as a coordinated mass invasion and illegal land occupation

by migrants from the same region. The land is then rapidly parceled out to the participating

families who build the huts of straw and tin that seem to typify urban slums around the world.

Rather than wait for legal recognition, these settlers build more permanent houses as they acquire

the necessary resources and materials. As the settlers or, perhaps more accurately termed,

residents establish and develop their neighborhoods, they seek legal recognition and the

extension of rudimentary services from the urban core (Palomino 2015a; Lloyd 1980, 6; Sakay et

al. 2011, 475). Though the process of development is in sharp contrast to that of the formal

model of urban growth, the goals of development are, ultimately, the same: residents seek to

formalize their neighborhoods, establish infrastructural facilities, and achieve upward social

3
While squatter settlements and shanty towns are common in developing cities as a way of housing the cities poor,
Lima is notable for the dramatic manner in which large areas of land have been invaded, the degree of government
toleration, and residents efforts to develop the settlements into residential suburbs (Lloyd 1980, 4). While in the
1930s and 40s land invasions were highly controversial and often involved violent conflict, over time this kind of
occupation seems to have been established as more or less common practice (Odegaard et al. 2016, 2) and tended to
be tolerated by the government as a relatively cheap way of easing the housing problem (Lloyed 1980, 4). Mass
land invasion has been common in Lima due to this degree of government tolerance as well as the dry climate and
relatively flat landscape that makes the development of informal settlements feasible (Ibid). Many settlements
established in the latter half of the twentieth century have been successful in obtaining services and land rights and
are now legally recognized as counties or districts (Sakay et al. 2011, 474).
 Sasson, 5

mobility for themselves and future generations (Odegaard et al. 2016, 2). This in turn relies on

integration, though not necessarily assimilation, with the urban core.

The defining feature of the residents of Limas pueblos jvenes as they seek this

development through integration has been an emphasis on collective action. Collective action is

necessary at all stages of the development of these settlements, from the initial mass invasion to

petitioning to gain legal rights (Odegaard et al. 2016; Lloyd 1980; Palomino 2015a; Palomino

2015b). Even the process of building houses has relied on community support and contribution;

residents build up their houses bit-by-bit as they have the resources, calling neighbors and

extended family to assist with the construction (Palomino 2015b; Sakay et al. 2011). The history

of Villa El Salvador itself the result of a mass invasion and now a formal district of Lima

provides a particularly clear example of the importance of community in building these

neighborhoods.

In 1971, hundreds of migrant families, predominately from the Andean highlands, staged

a mass invasion of Pamplona and eventually resettled to the area along the coast to the south of

Lima that is now Villa El Salvador. The community has prided itself on and been internationally

recognized for its high degree of solidarity which, even beyond active organizations, has been

encapsulated in the very layout of the district. Based on the design of architect Manuel Romero,

the community established a unique city plan consisting of residential blocks each with a

common courtyard-like park and space for schools, market, churches and other necessities. This

model of urban design was intended to foster community organization, with the structure of

clusters of homes within larger blocks representing expanding levels of community networks

(Vivanco Cuzcano; Palomino 2015a). As in other informal settlements, the collective work of

inhabitants and neighborhood associations was and continues to be vital in obtaining the
 Sasson, 6

government recognition and resources necessary to formalize, establish infrastructure, and

develop (Lloyd 1980; Odegaard et al 2016; Palomino 2015a). Villa El Salvador has been

particularly successful in gaining the attention of the central government, accessing government

programs and services purportedly as a result of its high degree of community solidarity and

collective action (Lloyd 1980, 45; Palomino 2015a).

As Villa El Salvador has fought for integration and infrastructural development,

continued land invasions by new migrants have filled the periphery of the now formalized core

of the district. The shacks that have characterized the initial stage of residency following an

invasion have overflowed into any available space, haphazardly filling cemeteries and perching

precariously on sandy hills. A visually striking contrast to the brick houses and paved roads of

the established district, these new settlements have not been integrated into Villa El Salvadors

model of development; rather, they have been excluded and looked down upon by the residents

of Villa El Salvador (Palomino 2015a). Similarly, pueblos jvenes throughout the city have

remained distinct even as their residents work for shared goals through methods emphasizing

collective action (Lloyd 1980).

This lack of inter-neighborhood solidarity appears inconsistent with scholarship

analyzing Limas urban development, which has shown that migration to the city has historically

followed a trajectory of integration wherein marginalized space is occupied and eventually

incorporated into larger governmental and social networks. Given this trajectory of integration,

their shared histories of formation through settlement, and their emphasis on community

organization, why have the pueblos jvenes remained separate and distinct from one another?

Specifically, why has the community of Villa El Salvador denigrated rather than integrated the

new settlements arising on the neighborhoods margins?

 Sasson, 7

Hypothesis

I argue that the disjunction between the trajectory toward integration and the emphasis on

community organization within Limas pueblos jvenes Villa El Salvador in particular and

the continued, if not strengthening, distinctions between these neighborhoods and new

settlements is emblematic of a new trend in Limas migration patterns toward heterogeneity and

an increasingly divisive contradiction between collective and individual progress. These

developments have manifested in physical borders, visible in geography and the built

environment, as well as more obscure cultural and socio-economic borders.

A few obvious explanations to why pueblos jvenes have remained distinct and why

established neighborhoods may look down on new settlements come to mind. The former

question could be a factor of the geographic separation between communities that would limit

inter-neighborhood organization, or of a difference in history and identity that limits the capacity

to work collectively. The latter question could be explained by a perception of insecurity arising

from proximity to new settlements, or a sense within the established neighborhoods of having

already done their part to the earn services new settlements are now in need of. However, these

explanations are not sufficiently broad or well-supported. Geographic separation and differences

in history have not kept neighborhood-based organization from engaging with the national

government or with international NGOs, statistics on crime rates within new settlements are too

elusive to support that hypothesis, and the emphasis on community-led development within these

neighborhoods seems contradictory to a mindset that each wave of arrivals to the city would be

left to integrate on their own. Thus, while each of these elements may certainly be a factor, it

seems they are more likely a symptom of a larger explanation that hinges on the construction of

physical and identity-based borders

 Sasson, 8

In tracing patterns of migration to Lima in the mid-twentieth century, anthropologist

Richard Schaedel (1979) identifies two distinct phases which he summarizes as

homogenization and heterogenization. The first phase, lasting up to about the 1970s,

Schaedel describes as a typical pattern of homogenous urbanization by which immigrants of

diverse culture and ethnicity were assimilated into the dominant criollo institutions and cultural

norms. This pattern was similar to that of other Latin American countries in their own

experiences of rapid urbanization as migrants adapted and integrated into the existing

institutional and cultural structures to take advantage of the opportunities available in the city

setting (Schaedel 1979; degaard et al. 2016; Lloyd 1980). However, by the mid-1970s Shaedel

(1979) argues that this pattern had broken down and was replaced by a pattern of

heterogenization arising from marked differences between immigrating groups and the urban

society and from the overwhelming of dominant urban institutions by the sheer number of

migrants. For Shaedel, this explains what he identifies as a rise in pluriethnic strands and

retention of regional identity. Carpenter (2015) identifies a similar pattern of cellular growth and

income polarization in the twentieth century, and of fragmentation in the early twenty-first

century. She explains this phenomenon as driven by the perception of vulnerability and the

desire for social exclusion and privatization (515), an explanation that does not seem in keeping

with the experience of migrants as they arrive in search of at least some degree of integration to

the city.

Schaedels conceptualization of migration to Lima focuses more on the initial experience

of migrants and contrasts these rural actors with the urban setting, whereas my area of focus is

the neighborhoods that have arisen as the result of migration. Thus, Shaedels hypothesis of

heterogenization is not sufficient to explain the puzzles proposed in my research question as it

 Sasson, 9

does not account for co-existing stages of urbanization. It is, however, a useful conceptualization

that, when integrated with an understanding of different perceptions and pursuits of progress and

development, can lead to a more comprehensive explanation for the borders at the root of the

contradictions in the ideology and actions within the pueblos jvenes.

In the context of urban Lima, and pueblos jvenes in particular, the concept of progress is

multifaceted and needs to be understood as a hybridized yet dichotomized concept or pursuit. In

pueblos jvenes, progress can be understood in the distinct yet overlapping categories of

individual and collective. This follows the distinction that Lloyd (1980) makes between

improvements that are seen as the responsibility of the individual, such as the construction of a

home or earning a higher income, versus improvements that require collective action, such as

obtaining official recognition and utilities for the neighborhood. As pueblos jvenes such as Villa

El Salvador have integrated and developed in terms of the built environment and economic

opportunities, the function and necessity of their collective action initiatives have changed. Lima

has become increasingly globalized and thus inevitably more exposed to the individual-focused

neoliberal conceptualization of progress. Meanwhile, an Andean conceptualization of progress

focused on the community has remained prominent, as is evident in the organization of pueblos

jvenes. Tested by the ongoing processes of urbanization, these conceptions of progress have

overlapped and contradicted to produce the seemingly contradictory behavior of the pueblos

jvenes, such as Villa El Salvador, in emphasizing collectivity while failing to integrate beyond

their own geographic boundaries.

Literature Review
 Sasson, 10

Many contemporary and late-twentieth century scholars have identified patterns of

migration, urbanization and assimilation unfolding in Lima, tracing trends over time and often

comparing the experience of Lima to these processes in Latin America more generally. While

each scholar has a different approach to conceptualizing these patterns, they tend agree that the

tendency of migrants to assimilate into criollo-dominated institutions and culture gave way

throughout the twentieth century to processes of fragmentation/pluralism/heterogenization

(Carpenter 2015; Shaedel 1979). In tracing these patterns, scholars of migration to Lima

emphasize different aspects of the experience including the motivations for migration (Sakay et

al. 2011; Odegaard et al. 2016), the process of boundary de- and re-construction (Odegaard et al.

2016; Lloyd 1980), and the formation of new sources and expressions of identity (Odegaard et

al. 2016; Sakay et al. 2011; Roberts 1997). Combining these elements of the processes of

urbanization we can begin to understand how migration is experienced.

Carpenter (2015) and Shaedel (1979) both understand the patterns of migration and

adaptation in Lima as taking different forms over time. Carpenter conceptualizes these patterns

in spatial terms, seeing the phases of urbanization as growing from a monocentric historic core,

absorbing smaller settlements and areas of the rural periphery, [and] eventually morphing into

polycentric urban forms (500). Shaedel puts a greater emphasis on culture and institutions,

identifying a two-phase sequence of urbanization from 1940 to 1975. The first phase he

identifies as a period of homogenization during which migrants assimilated into established

criollo institutions and cultural norms in a pattern typical of urbanization in Latin America at the

time. The second phase, which he summarizes as a pattern of heterogenization, saw the

development of a pluriethnic city. Though both scholars identify similar trends away from

assimilation toward fragmentation/heterogenization, their different areas of emphasis cause them

 Sasson, 11

to identify different causes for the change. Where Carpenter sees fragmentation as driven by the

perception of vulnerability and the desire for social exclusion and privatization (once common

only in the upper classes) among all social classes (515), Shaedel identifies the causes of

heterogenization as marked cultural differences between immigrating groups and the urban

society and the overwhelming of urban institutions by the number of migrants (401). While these

scholars analyses are useful for conceptualizing the shifting trends of migration, further

consideration of the motivations and adaptations of migrants is necessary to understand the full

experience of migration and its transformative power.

Sakay et al. (2011) and Odegaard et al. (2016) work toward such an analysis,

emphasizing the motivation for migration to Lima and the patterns of adaptation that migrants

and their aspirations undergo in the urban setting. Both groups of scholars similarly identify the

driving motivation for migration as the desire to be closer to opportunities (Sakay et al. 2011) or

the pursuit of progress (Odegaard et al. 2016). In the urban setting, these aspirations are

hybridized and re-contextualized. Sakay et al. understand urbanization as a process of integration

and identify how migrants utilize and adapt rural resources to build into the urban model of

development. On the other hand, Odegaard et al. emphasize how Andean notions of progress

both exert influence on and adapt to the urban experience. The concept of progress is used to

understand how migrants attempt to redefine their position in society by re-conceptualizing

self and identity in the attempt to become somebody different from who they were before (16).

For Odegaard et al. (2016), the process of migration involves the destabilization and

blurring of social categories as migrants pursue progress. At the same time, they are careful to

note that the processes of mobility and urbanization may also involve a re-creation of

peripheries and centres, or new dynamics of marginalization (9). Lloyd (1980) also addresses
 Sasson, 12

the idea of marginality, seeing the exclusion of poor migrants in culture, economics, and

housing. Focusing on housing options and the development of Limas slums, Lloyd identifies a

sharp contrast between the popular image of slums as belts of misery, cancerous sores, sources

of disease and violence and the aspirations of slum residents to build their own homes and to

educate their children, so that they may avail themselves of opportunities lost to their parents

(vii). In this, Lloyd hints at the geographically-determined nature of these attitudes. Similarly,

other scholars of migration to Lima make mention to the relationship between space and identity,

understanding how patterns of migration can be seen in Limas geographic divisions (Sakay et

al. 2011) and how imagined difference of identity has historically been spatially defined and

determined4 (Odegaard et al. 2016). These scholars hint at the importance of space in

understanding migration but do not go far enough to explain how space and physical borders

shape and are shaped by these popular attitudes and values.

Using a lens of geography to understand the relation between the physical environment

and identity can help reveal the multifaceted nature of the transformative experience that is

urbanization. Many scholars have expressed the interrelated nature of space and identity, noting

how identity is constructed through space even as space is constructed through identity such that

both are actively forming and being formed. Warf (2006) summarizes: Identities are both space

forming and space formed, that is, inextricably intertwined with geographies in complex and

contingent ways (240). Appealing to the spatial, Keith (2004) argues, is enabling scholars to

address questions about how the individual is understood to be placed located in society

(34-35). Keith expands on the notion of the spatial to include real spaces, imaginary spaces,

or symbolic spaces (ibid). Useful for understanding how space may give insight to the shifting

4
Odegaard et al. (2016) see imagined difference as manifesting spatially in the colonial distinction between criollo
and indigenous nations and in the contemporary understanding of a rural/urban divide to represent the perceived
difference between indigenous and mestizo.
 Sasson, 13

social systems resulting from urbanization, Keith identifies how space can now be recognized as

an active constitutive component of hegemonic power: an element in the fragmentation,

dislocation and weakening of class power, both the medium and message of domination and

subordination (37). Taking an approach more focused on the individual level, Jones (2012)

explores how memory is bound up with place, space, the body, practice and materiality,

arguing that memory is of geography and geography of it (10). For Jones, memory is a process

of the past manifesting in the present. As such, Jones focuses on the idea of becoming

through which identities in and of places are always being unmade and remade (2).

Conceptualizing identity as a process unfolding and manifesting through space lends

itself to understanding the formation and transformation of identity as a performance. Taylor

(2002) understands performances as vital acts of transfer, transmitting social knowledge,

memory, and a sense of identity (44). Additionally, she sees performance as the

methodological lens that enables scholars to analyze events as performance, thereby offering a

new way of knowing (45). While scholarship on performance theory is fairly ambiguous and

tends to focus on performances of the more conventional sort, such as plays or protests it can

be applied to everyday acts and spaces to enable a reading of the mundane as an

expression/performance of identity.

Scholars of migration to Lima have hinted at the way identity, culture, aspirations and

experiences can be observed and understood in the built/lived environment, where the built/lived

environment can then be conceptualized as a stage upon which performances of identity take

place. Sakay et al. (2011) understand the infrastructure of Limas squatter settlements as an

expression of phenomena of development and growth as migrants transform their

environments to meet desires and future needs (474). Also focusing on Limas informal
 Sasson, 14

settlements, Lloyd (1980) sees variation in house style as representative of the whims of the

owners and their affluence (42), and thus a manifestation of particular elements of the identity

of the inhabitants. AlSayyad (2001) looks more generally at the hybrid process of urbanization,

emphasizing that hybridity is best understood in the context of everyday practices and real life

experiences rather than discussed in abstract ways. Applying performance theory to these

observations can create a more complete understanding of the way identity, as it undergoes the

transformative experience of urbanization, is enacted through and can be read on the built/lived

environment.

Methodology
I will conduct several forms of primary research to support my hypothesis that continued

distinctions between and within Limas pueblos jvenes is the result of a trend in migration

patterns toward heterogeneity and the contradiction between collective and individual progress.

My conceptualization of these contradictions rests on how they have manifested in borders, thus

my data will include examples of physical examples of border formation as well as narrative

descriptions of the development and lived reality of migration in Lima. My analysis of the built

environment will be inspired by Rosalie Montoyas (2012) use of the concept of scenario as a

performance-based methodological lens by which to understand how daily social practices

and performances re-create and transmit cultural knowledge (23). With this understanding, I

will approach the built environment with a particular focus on the space and symbolism of

rooftops as the stage upon which identity is performed daily.

Much of my data will be drawn from photos and narratives I gathered while on a study

abroad program in Lima June-July 2015. As my final project for the program I created a photo
 Sasson, 15

essay exploring how rooftops can be analyzed as a space and symbol through which different

ideas of progress are enacted and juxtaposed. The cache of urban photos I collected for this

project as well as for my personal documentation of my experiences depicts residential

buildings and spans many neighborhoods of Lima. I will use these photos to look for trends in

development of the built environment and the ways space is used and lived in throughout areas

of the city with different demographic make-ups, from neighborhoods of predominately wealthy

limeos to neighborhoods with high migrant populations.

While I spent some time in Villa El Salvador, the neighborhood upon which my research

question is focused, I do not have a sufficiently comprehensive collection of photos from around

the neighborhood. Thus, as I gather additional data throughout the summer of 2016, I will seek

images of Villa El Salvador. Photography will be a particularly useful medium by which to

understand the built environment of the neighborhood because, in addition to being accessible

from afar, I expect to find images from various points in time in the development of the

neighborhood. Adding a temporal dimension to my data on the built environment of the city and

particular neighborhoods will enable a more direct parallel between the patterns of migration and

urbanization and the development of the built environment. My approach to the use of

photographs from across time will be inspired by that of Simpson (2012) who uses time-lapse

photography to approach cultural geography and understand the rhythms of everyday practice

and performance (423). Beyond images of residential buildings, which is where my existing data

is concentrated, I will use maps of the city and specific neighborhoods over time to trace how the

city has integrated newcomers. Brian Harleys postmodern critique of cartography will be useful

here to understanding how maps can be read as a text and a discourse (Peter Taylor 1992).
 Sasson, 16

My primary research will also draw on narratives I collected while in Lima and the

contacts I established in order to gather primary accounts related to the development of Lima,

specifically Villa El Salvador, and perceptions of new settlements. These narratives come from

contacts working in anthropology, community organization, and political art. I will use the

information I already have as well as asking these contacts more specifically about migration and

the development of Lima. Since my contacts work in community organization and thus providing

information in their professional capacity, I will not need approval from the Institutional Review

Board. In addition to a contact involved in community organization in Villa El Salvador, I have a

booklet and documentary telling the story of the establishment and development of the

neighborhood. I will use these narratives and perspectives to contextualize and humanize my

analysis of the built environment and establish how identity formation may be understood to be

related to the built environment.

I have chosen to focus my research on Villa El Salvador, in part, because it is where I

have the greatest existing knowledge and data from my time in Lima. Additionally, its history

has made it the subject of much domestic and international attention, thus further primary data is

readily available in the form of tourist accounts, NGOs involved in the neighborhood, and the

municipal government. This variety of narratives and perceptions will allow me to look for

patterns of identity expression and border formation as I conduct my analysis.

 Sasson, 17

Bibliography

AlSayyad, Nezar. 2001. Hybrid Urbanism: On the Identity Discourse and the Built
Environment. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
Altamirano, Teofilo, and Lane Ryo Hirabayashi, eds. 1997. Migrants, Regional Identities and
Latin American Cities. Vol. 13. Soceity for Latin American Anthropology Publication
Series. The Society for Latin American Anthropology and The American Anthropological
Association.
Barnard, Alan, and Jonathan Spencer. 2009. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Social and Cultural
Anthropology. 2nd ed. Florence: Taylor and Francis.
Carpenter, Ann. 2015. A Comparison of Economic and Social Implications of Rapid
Urbanization in Lima and Santiago de Chile. Perspectives on Global Development and
Technology 14 (5): 497518.
Cronologia. 2016. Amigos de Villa. Accessed May 16.
http://www.amigosdevilla.it/historia/cronologia04.html.
Dobbins, Lauralee. 2009. Lima: Villa El Salvadors Micro-Economic Success. The City
Traveler. November 27. http://www.thecitytraveler.com/2009/11/lima/.
Historia de Una Ciudad: Villa El Salvador, Lima - Per. 2016. Accessed May 26.
http://www.amigosdevilla.it/historia.htm.
Hull, R. Bruce, Mark Lam, and Gabriela Vigo. 1994. Place Identity: Symbols of Self in the
Urban Fabric. Landscape and Urban Planning 28 (2-3): 10920. doi:10.1016/0169-
2046(94)90001-9.
Jones, Owain, and Joanne Garde-Hansen. 2012. Introduction. In Geography and Memory:
Explorations in Identity, Place and Becoming, 123. Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.
Keith, Michael, and Steve Pile, eds. 2004. Place and the Politics of Identity (1). Florence, US:
Routledge.
Limas Villa El Salvador: A Story of Structured Informal Development. 2016. TheCityFix.
Accessed May 16. http://thecityfix.com/blog/lima-peru-villa-el-salvador-story-ordered-
informal-development-thomas-abbot-robin-king/.
Lloyd, Peter. 1980. The Young Towns of Lima: Aspects of Urbanization in Peru. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Meier, Sabine, and Lia Karsten. 2012. Living in Commodified History: Constructing Class
Identities in Neotraditional Neighbourhoods. Social & Cultural Geography 13 (5): 517
35. doi:10.1080/14649365.2012.704641.
Montoya, Rosario. 2012. Gendered Scenarios of Revolution: Making New Men and New Women
in Nicaragua, 1975-2000. University of Arizona Press.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt180r1r1.
Municipalidad de Villa El Salvador. 2016. Accessed May 26.
http://www.munives.gob.pe/WebSite/Municipalidad.html.
degaard, Cecilie Vindal, Revd Dr Graham Harvey, Ms Ines Talamantez, and Dr Afe
Adogame. 2016. Mobility, Markets and Indigenous Socialities: Contemporary Migration
in the Peruvian Andes. Farnham: Taylor and Francis.
http://washington.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=587873.
Palomino, Tonny. 2015a. History of Villa El Salvador.
. 2015b. History of Villa El Salvador.
 Sasson, 18

Sakay, Claudia, Paola Sanoni, and Toshihiro Hanazato DEng. 2011. Rural to Urban Squatter
Settlements: The Micro Model of Generational Self-Help Housing in Lima-Peru. Procedia
Engineering, 2011 International Conference on Green Buildings and Sustainable Cities, 21:
47380. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2040.
Schaedel, Richard P. 1979. From Homogenization to Heterogenization in Lima, Peru. Urban
Anthropology 8 (3/4): 399420.
Simpson, Paul. 2012. Apprehending Everyday Rhythms: Rhythmanalysis, Time-Lapse
Photography, and the Space-Times of Street Performance. Cultural Geographies 19 (4):
42345. doi:10.1177/1474474012443201.
Taylor, Diana. 2002. Translating Performance. Profession, 4450.
. 2003. The Archive and the Repertoire. Performing Cultural Memory in the Americas.
Duke University Press.
http://read.dukeupress.edu/content/9780822385318/9780822385318.
Taylor, Peter J. 1992. Politics in Maps, Maps in Politics: A Tribute to Brian Harley. Political
Geography 11 (2): 12729. doi:10.1016/0962-6298(92)90044-T.
The World Factbook. 2016. Accessed May 26. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-
world-factbook/geos/pe.html.
Vivanco Cuzcano, Alfredo. n.d. La Historia de Villa Y Muchas Cosas Mas... Contada Para
Ninos Y Grandes. Escuela Mayor de Gestion Municipal.
Warf, Barney. 2006. Identity, Geography and. In Encyclopedia of Human Geography, edited
by Barney Warf, 23941. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Reference.
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3469700153&v=2.1&u=wash_main&it
=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=e9bd6d063bd1ad7df4ac3691367ee264.