Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1984. / Bibliography: leaves [224]-233. / Microfiche. / xviii, 233 leaves, bound ill., maps 29 cm

Thesis (doctoral) - Universität, Münster. / Includes bibliographical references.

Metro Manila, Philippines is one of the densest and fastest growing metropolitan regions in the world, of which informal urbanization is a significant contributor. This rapid informal urbanization is a dynamic yet uncoordinated force shaping the city-region, in conflict with the vision of a modern, globally-competitive city-region painted in formal planning instruments. Despite manifold efforts, urban planning and housing mechanisms have been unable to adequately address the issue of informal settlements in the metropolis. In this degree project, I investigate how formal planning policy and housing governance practices in Metro Manila can better engage with urban informality towards sustainable and just urban development.While informality is a complex phenomenon that still eludes definition, theories suggest that it is a mode of urbanization that works between the gaps of formality in the production of the city. As they are recreated through the same structural conditions, it is possible to use informality as a lens to critically analyze urban formality and the direction of urban development. Building on this, I examine the generative context, social construction, and interactions of structure and human agency that shape formal and informal urbanization in Metro Manila through interviews and document review.Through this study, I propose three points to consider in the urban development of Metro Manila. First, I posit that urban planning based on land use regulation cannot enhance spatial justice when property is inaccessible to the urban poor. In a market-led property setting, land use planning becomes an instrument for gentrification. Second, I problematize the concept of property ownership being the basis of ‘formality’ in Philippine policy and consequently the perceived solution to the issues of informal settlements. Reconsidering informality as a way of claiming the right to the city, I argue that spatial justice entails addressing access to housing tenure, employment, welfare and social networks rather than ‘formalizing the informal’. Finally, I question the ability of current processes of democratic governance in securing the common good within a context of unequal power relations. Instead, I propose that political will should be constructed from the grassroots to redefine the desired direction of urban development.