Design and Microeconomics

Brief description of the context
​Street vendors constitute a complex network of actors across sectors, ranging from civil society to distributors, intermediaries and local governments. Their perceptions about money, saving and credit are hardly individual constructs. They are shaped by the collectives they are part of, and there is a great deal of cooperation and altruism in these groups. By analyzing the physical distribution of vendors in the public space, I began to recognize the patterns that connect space to social dynamics of saving and lending money. This public space allocation is also a factor for the configuration of power centers, which determine access to credit and money.

​Collective ambitions to stay in the informality
Street vendors often operate within informal economic circuits, making their businesses volatile and uncertain. While mainstream economic literature suggests that vendors remain in informality due to flexible hours, convenient locations, and low startup costs, this view oversimplifies their realities. Street vending is not a static or universally beneficial activity; motivations for remaining informal are deeply tied to personal histories. Many vendors enter this sector through family or social networks, imitating or following the advice of relatives and friends. For most, vending is a response to economic hardship—a low-capital, accessible option that offers quick entry and a steady flow of customers. Yet, this choice is rarely about individual advancement. Instead, participation often involves multiple family members, making the business a shared effort. As a result, vendors’ ambitions are shaped more by collective needs and responsibilities than by personal goals, reinforcing their continued presence in the informal economy as a communal strategy.

Collective savings mechanisms

Street vendors constantly draw inspiration from one another in how they arrange and personalize their workspaces. This creative exchange also applies to their financial practices, particularly in the use of Rotating Savings and Credit Associations (ROSCAs), known locally as cadenas. These collective saving systems are deeply rooted in the social and economic fabric of street vending communities.

Among 19 vendors interviewed, 17 had participated in a cadena at some point. These groups are usually formed among fellow vendors and close family members. Once formed, they nominate an accountant and agree on a fixed contribution from each member. The collected money rotates among participants, each taking a turn to use the pooled funds. Once everyone has received their share, a new cycle begins.

Cadenas reveal a strong sense of collective financial responsibility, particularly in relation to debt. Debts—whether owed to banks, fellow vendors, or family—are ever-present concerns. While recognized as burdensome and unsustainable, debt also serves as a social mechanism to share funds. Vendors do not view them as loans but as mutual commitments that help manage urgent financial needs.

However, cadenas are limited in scope. They offer no long-term savings strategies or access to larger credit systems. Vendors operate within tight financial margins, rarely accessing funds beyond daily necessities. This pattern is both a reflection of their constrained economic reality and a collective mindset focused on short-term survival. Their business is less a path to upward mobility than a strategy for shared endurance in the face of economic constraints.

Power and collectivity

Street vendors operate within spatial networks that foster mutual support and savings practices, yet these same networks are shaped by power dynamics and political mediation. Access to vending spots is not equal; local leaders often control space allocation, creating political segregation that limits association among vendors. Family-based vendor groups tend to dominate specific areas, forming localized power centers that can influence who is allowed to work there.

Choosing where to sell is a strategic decision based on foot traffic and consumer patterns, meaning not everyone secures a desirable location. These disparities affect not only visibility and sales but also access to collective savings systems. Vendors’ work setups also play a role—some rely on mobile carts, while others receive fixed kiosks from the government. These official structures may conflict with the informal order upheld by vendor networks, reshaping local dynamics and further complicating inclusion in economic and social support systems.

On cooperation among vendors
Despite the complexity of their networks, street vendors are very collaborative and offer a lot of mutual support. In a small economic experiment that we designed for this project, all vendors were willing to cooperate with two or three others. The results revealed an openness to collaboration, particularly with nearby vendors, as physical proximity allows for easier communication and accountability.

In every case, participants expressed a readiness to contribute a small amount of money toward a shared goal, showing a willingness to take minor financial risks in exchange for the possibility of long-term collective benefits. This highlights their underlying trust and cooperative potential, especially when efforts are rooted in familiar, localized relationships.

Contribution for Design Research
The understanding gained during this project was possible because of the interconnection of knowledge coming from different disciplines, and more importantly, because of the participatory nature of this study. We learned about savings, credit, and money by spending time with vendors, testing multiple speculative design scenarios, and trying out ideas with them to elicit more interesting insights than traditional qualitative methods would. The contact with people was crucial, and so was the courage to transcend the passive role of the designer who creates for people, to one that sits with them and, even without delivering a product, develops the sensibility and courage to understand society in ways that open new spaces for design that are relational, and rooted in care and collectivity.