write:Residentsbetonthepossibilityoflegalizationandregularizationandmostfrequentlyeithersucceedinseeingithappenorlivewiththeconsequencesofongoingirregularity. Thus thereisatemporalityrel

forexample
80%ofperipheralresidentshavelegitimateclaimstopropertyownership(Holston
2008).Legalityisacomplexissue
however.JamesHolston(2008)showsthat
inBrazil
illegalityisacommonconditionoftheurbanizationpatternsofthepoorbecauseitisadominantmeansofruleingeneral
notbecausethepoorhaveatendencytomarginalityandprecariousness.Moreover
whenthereisillegality
itisusuallynotbecausetheresidentshavetakenlandthatisnottheirown
butratherbecausetheyhavebeenswindledbydevelopersorbecauselegislativechangeshavemadeillegalwhatusedtobeacceptable.TunaKuyucu(2014)showsthat
inIstanbul
theuseoflegalambiguityandadministrativearbitrarinessbypublicandprivateactorshasbeenfundamentalfortheconstitutionofaprivatepropertyregimethatanchorsacapitalistmarketoflandandthedisplacementofgecekondusettlements.Whateverthecase
whattheseandotherstudiesdemonstrateisthatthelegalstatusofneighborhoodsbuiltbyperipheralurbanizationisfrequentlysubjecttotransformation.Residentsbetonthepossibilityoflegalizationandregularizationandmostfrequentlyeithersucceedinseeingithappenorlivewiththeconsequencesofongoingirregularity.Thus
thereisatemporalityrelatedtolegalizationaswell.Intheearly1970s
Nezahualco´yotlwastheobjectofthefirstlarge-scalelandregularizationprojectbytheMexicanfederalandstategovernments(Duhau
2014:151).Now
mostLatinAmericancountrieshavelargeprogramsfortheregularizationofurbanlandandthequestionoflandpolicyiscentraltotheresearchagendasofseveralinstitutions(SmolkaandMullahy
2010).However
studieshavealsoshownthatthestateitselfisresponsibleforthecreationandre-creationofirregularityandillegality
asitpasseslawsandmasterplansthatalterthestatusoflandsandbuildings
makingtheirregularintotheregularandviceversa(forDelhi
seeBhan
2016).Asinglezoninglawcanrenderawholeareairregularorlegalizeitovernight.Obviously
theseshiftsengenderintensepoliticalstruggles
astheyinvolveimmediaterepercussionsintermsoftheprofitabilityofrealestateandthedislocationofresidents.Processesofregularizationhelptoilluminateboththeconstantexchangebetweenautoconstructorsandthestateandthelogicofplanningthatitembeds.Sa˜oPaulo’scaseillustratesthispoint.Duringtheperiodoflargestexpansionofthecityin1950–1970
privateentrepreneurslaidoutdevelopmentsindistantareas
leavingvaststretchesofemptylandbetweennewdevelopments(Caldeira
2000;Camargoetal.
1976).Theycreateddirtroadsandbuslinestoconnecttothecitythenewsettlements
usuallyirregular
thattheysoldtoworkerstryingtoavoidexorbitantrent.Theexpectationofbothresidentsanddevelopers
almostalwaysrealized
wasthatthestatewouldfollowupandinstallthenecessaryinfrastructure.Whenthishappened
developersbegantosellthelandtheyhadinitiallybypassed
benefittingfromthevalorizationbroughtaboutbytheimprovedinfrastructuralconditionsandpreviousurbanization.Thesamehappenedasaresultofgovernmentalprogramsoflandregularization/legalization.Thesepracticesinitiatedcyclesoflanddevelopment/regularization/valorizationthatentangledthestate
investors
andcitizens.Intheprocess
stateplannersandagenciesactedroutinelyafterthefactinawaythatbenefittedprivatedevelopers
improvedneighborhoods
andconsolidatedtherightsofresidents.Wecanrecognizethesamelogicinprogramsoflandregularizationandslumupgrading.Finally
thetransversallogicsofperipheralurbanizationappearinthemodesofconsumptionandcredit.Autoconstructioninvolvessubstantialconsumptionrelatedtotheacquisitionofbothbuildingmaterialsandappliances
furniture
anddecorativeitems.Butautoconstructorstypicallylackaccesstocreditfrominstitutions
suchasbanksandthestate
tofinancetheacquisitionoflandorconstructionofhomes.Thereiscredit
butitcomesfrom8EnvironmentandPlanningD:SocietyandSpace35(1)