In this thesis, I propose a practice of spatial design and documentation which runs counter to the standard working methodologies of international development institutions. I propose this practice in response to the restrictions faced by design practitioners and social movements when it comes to evidencing claims, funding projects and sharing knowledge. I call this ‘counter- practice’. Counter-practice is proposed as a method with which to challenge the universal imaginary of development, which I argue marginalises non-scientific epistemologies, expelling the poor from direct negotiations over the production of their own futures. The thesis explores how political agency is restricted by the knowledge biases which structure development, and how spatialised approaches to the study of urban politics and struggles for a dignified life might inform alternatives to techno-centric, financialised paradigms of urban planning, which fail to recognise their own role in reproducing and reinforcing marginalities. Counter-practice is intended as a guide for design practitioners who wish to embed their work in social struggle, to expand the possibilities for equitable urban futures. It is a practice focused on forging non-extractive relationships between design and research professionals on the one hand, and social movements or people’s organisations on the other. As such, in this work I ask the following questions: What principles of architectural design should be mobilised in collaboration with the urban poor, to expand inclusive and reciprocal processes of urban production? How can the methods and aesthetics of design be mobilised in support of knowledge exchange between social movements, as a way of proliferating the knowledge practices being built around housing struggles in the Global South?

Funder: London Doctoral Design Centre