Nameless Settlements of Sarajevo
Authors: Čakarić Jasenka , Zgonić Aida Idrizbegović 
Published: December 2020

The transitional process from a socialist into a capitalist societal system, started at the end of the twentieth century in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the related transformation of the public into private land ownership, with the neglect and lack of adequate development programs and public opinion, produce today the urban-architectural and, in general, identity crisis. Under the guise of overall well-being, but mostly in the service of short-term economic profit, attractive urban spaces are occupied, the existing physical structure is uncontrollably removed and new construction is carried out, almost as a rule, in disregard for the needs and interests of society/citizens. Transformations of urban space, generated by the vibrations of a transitional society, are most evident in the capital, Sarajevo. The building process is basically a multiplication of residential settlements, the construction of which is carried out on a case-by-case basis, with considerable pressure from investors, and with the decisions made within closed, narrow interest circles and (often) without consulting the profession/urban planners and the public/citizens. In such an environment, the public domain loses its primacy over the private, which is manifested in the alienation of people and the loss of their identification with the place. Such residential settlements are deprived of central functions in the field of social infrastructure and in the manner of “tried and tested” repetitive urban-architectural models, which together negatively affect the quality of individual and social life. In other words, residential settlements without an identity are created. Although they have formal names, these settlements are nameless. They are no places. Architecture and building are always deeply connected with the ideological framework of a particular society, which means that the understanding of the function of space and the place of man in it, we have opened a central question, as the main goal of this paper: Is it really true that the construction of Sarajevo’s new settlements cannot be adapted to anything other than current urban policy? Or else: Is their fate such that they will be permanently determined by the attribute of a settlement without a name? For the purpose of finding the answer, of possible ways of overcoming the crisis or at least mitigating its effects, we conducted a comparative analysis of housing planning in a socialist societal system with current transition planning. The results of this analysis have shown that the new urban policy is intrinsic and creates new articulations of urban space without spatial identity, essentially a name. We have concluded that a crucial moment has arisen in which it is necessary to stop anarchic decision-making on (sporadic) transformations of the city space and to establish a system of compliance with procedures in designing and adopting programs that allocate new necessary functions within the existing physical structures. As urban decisions are currently being made (mostly) outside the realm of the public/citizens, i.e. in closed circles and with the pressures of private investment, the need to change such practices is evident. This is only possible through dialogue, because when all those interested in the decision-making process are involved in the conversation, then change will happen. Only then will we be able to talk about urban politics dedicated to creating an environment in which a person, is placed in the centre of the building process, and where one is given the opportunity to personalize the space one inhabits, to identify with and name it – make it its own, personal and intimate.