ABSTRACT
The city of São Paulo in 2025 will join its tenth municipal management defined by direct election post-redemocratization. During 38 years of democratic representativeness in the Executive and Legislative branches, the technical and academic sectors have experimented and debated about several urbanistic tools whose aims were being to reduce the problems that historically affect the population in their daily lives in their different fields on the margins from the citizenship and the right to the city. Whereas the urbanism in São Paulo is subordinate to hegemonic interests that promote social segregation and exclusion, it is argued here that the weak performance of urban planning instruments in reducing inequalities does not result exclusively from their technical and legal formatting, but from the non-prioritization of making them effective in a redistributive and cooperative way, even if there are ways to do so.
KEYWORDS:
Cooperative urbanism; Corporate urbanism; Urban management; Urban planning instruments