The project Under Construction in Quito, Ecuador is about a form of “social economy” and its implications for people and the physical environment they inhabit. Despite contemporary global urbanization and its attendant economy, there are still rural areas today where barter is the main mode of exchange. The project draws on this tradition and proposes bartering as a practice in an urban context for the refurbishment of the historical center of the city – a process carried out by people without sufficient monetary means. 

Here, bartering replaces typical capital investment with a direct form of exchange between two parties. For example: the owner of an abandoned house in need of restoration and tenants without monetary means but willing to exchange their labor as a form of rent.

What this project proposes is not new. Barter usually replaces money as the method of exchange in times of monetary crisis. Although there is not a monetary crisis per se, gentrification of the historical center of Quito reproduced the same phenomenon for the vulnerable side of the population. If the planning of the city puts interest only in technical and infrastructure restorations, maybe the result will be a Disneyland city for tourist routes. The project is not against tourism: it is clear that tourism brings good things, but it is not possible either, that after 8pm, areas that used to be residential neighborhoods lie deserted because no one lives there.

Under Construction focuses interest on the intangible city, more than on its infrastructure. The same intangible relations gave a solution to the lack of the traditional requirements (money) for the urban reactivation. The project proposes to replace capital investments with direct exchange based on agreements between entities. A plan of economic compensation has been designed, and was proposed to the owner of one of the abandoned buildings. He accepted. Then, a constructive process that requires no specialized machinery and which is accessible to unskilled labor (the project authors and team) was designed. Intervention strategies include:

Removing rather than adding: The main resource is abandoned space: dark, uncomfortable and dysfunctional. Excavate, remove, and empty to resurrect. Building system = demolition.

Recycling rather than throwing and buying: Separate all material that is considered useful for new elements; basically timber and furniture. The remainder is 50% soil (material used in almost all houses in the historic center of Quito) and 50% common construction debris. The union of these materials results in a garden (soil) on a drainage system (common debris). Construction systems = the most basic “do-it-yourself” videos downloaded from the Internet.

Preserving rather than restoring: Making it easier to ensure the durability of buildings. Building system = sealed.

At first the project just tries to resolve its own problems. But then as a result of everyday conversations about what people don’t like in the city the question arose: “What if this barter strategy of intervention becomes popular?” The first intervention shows that it is perfectly feasible: and the project team considers the micro-interventions are capable of generating a macro impact.