“Information Is Power Only If Used “-Improving
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
“INFORMATION IS POWER ONLY IF USED “-IMPROVING TENURE SECURITY IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS USING PARTICIPATORY DATA COLLECTION: THE CASE OF INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN GOBABIS, NAMIBIA MENARE ROYAL MABAKENG Land and Property Science, Namibia University of Science and Technology, Namibia [email protected] Paper prepared for presentation at the “2019 WORLD BANK CONFERENCE ON LAND AND POVERTY” The World Bank - Washington DC, March 25-29, 2019 Copyright 2019 by author(s). All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. 1 Abstract The paper investigates land tenure security of informal settlers, and how socio-economic and spatial data generated by communities themselves has been used in aiding the implementation of solutions, that are pro-poor and Fit for Purpose. Additionally, it provides a description on how enumeration has an influence on the perception of tenure security. The major question addressed in the paper is, could participatory enumerations be a catalyst for improving services and registering land rights? Can the data that informal settlers produce be suitable for use in planning and land rights registration? The paper considers data producers and data users, in the investigation. There is a consensus amongst researchers that information is power, the paper concludes with recommendations on how data ownership by community and local authorities could improve inclusive planning for informal settlement communities. Key Words: Continuum of Land Rights, Flexible Land Tenure System, Informal settlements, Participatory data collection, Tenure security 1 1. INTRODUCTION Residents in informal settlements suffer from tenure insecurity, poor housing conditions, and limited urban infrastructure(UN-Habitat, 2016). The social vibrancy of informal settlements makes them worthy for special policy attention (Turok & Borel-Saladin, 2016). Situations in informal settlements are considered a global ethical challenge, such that governments enacted legislation to improve conditions, supported by international NGOs, donor organisations Khalifa,( 2015, p. 1155). According to Arimah(2001) informal settlements are a physical manifestation of social exclusion in African cities, with an estimated 863 million people housed in 2012(ibid). Recently it was estimated one billion of the world population(UN-DESA, 2014, p. 2) live in informal settlements. While there is a decline worldwide in proportions of informal settlement dwellers, the estimated percentage of urban dwellers in Sub-Saharan Africa remains high at 55% (United Nations, 2015). This could potentially fuel the growth of settlements if solutions are not provided, as urban and informal settlement growth are synonyms in Africa (Dobson, 2017). In this study, informal settlements and slums are the same areas, as similarly adopted by Mahabir, Crooks, Croitoru, and Agouris, (2016). Tenure security has been found by academics, policy-makers and development agencies to be a determining factor in poverty reduction, as it promotes household investment and improvement of infrastructure (Payne, 2001; Payne, 2004; van Gelder, 2010b). Residents in informal settlements are mostly affected by evictions and excluded from participating in decision-making platforms regarding their areas of residence (Beukes & Mitlin, 2014). Information on household’s land tenure security in informal settlements is vital for implementing interventions for reducing poverty by governments. Community enumerations carried out by informal settlement households themselves in their communities is reported to have the power to impact decision-making, improve tenure security and promote participatory planning(Patel & Carrie, 2012). Informal settlement communities are rarely looked like a solution provider by international agencies and governments (Patel & Carrie, 2012). However, the data provided by Slum/Shack Dwellers International (SDI) affiliated communities shows communities do have solutions (S. Patel & Carrie, 2012, p. 6; Hasan, Patel, & Satterthwaite, 2005). This is reflected in the slogan of saving groups on data collection, that “information is power”, as in Kenya (Stanfield et al., 2017). 2 According to Davies (1994), information has power if it is used for the intended benefits it was collected. Power can also mean it can be used to disable others. According to Jacobs, Jordhus-Lier, and de Wet,( 2015) using local knowledge in decision making has been shown as a way to improved decision making, legitimate governments and a notion of citizenship. However, in the inclusive governance process, there is no guarantee that community knowledge is meaningfully included(Jacobs et al., 2015). This study reviews the literature to understand how data has been applied by federated informal settlement communities and have clarity on the power of community generated tenure data on the security of tenure in informal settlements. Additionally, primary data is used to understand the level of tenure security of four communities that have implemented participatory enumerations. 1.1. Causes and Characteristics of Informal settlements Tenure security is a vital element to improving the living conditions of informal settlement residents(van Gelder & Luciano, 2015). Informal settlements are areas where residents have constructed houses without permission of a governing authority or owner of the land(van Asperen & Zevenbergen, 2007). These areas are characterized by a lack of tenure security, poor housing conditions, combined with social exclusion and inadequate water and sanitation (UN-Habitat, 2016). Occupants do not adhere to building or planning legislation(van Asperen & Zevenbergen, 2007). As a result, of no formal housing options, low-income populations are accommodated in informal settlements(Mitlin, 2014). According to Barry and Ruther, (2001,p.2), informal settlements are not static but are continually changing, as complex, energetic social systems. The UN-Habitats definition of informal settlements/Slums was recently criticised by Arfvidsson, Simon, Oloko, and Moodley, (2017), noting the definition uses emotive language, as deprivations of informal residents equate a lack of dignity. This according to the authors, promoted an attitude of attaining targets, such as the MDGs rather than improvement of conditions; as in the case of South Africa. In the early 19th century, slum concept had negative connotations (Mitlin, 2014, p. 48). Unfortunately, authorities viewed this area as “urban anomalies” that needed to be eradicated (Friedman, Jimenez, & Mayo, 1988). During the early 2000s, informal settlement upgrading was replaced by integration, focusing on physical integration, social and judicial(Khalifa, 2015, p. 3 155). However, the cities without slum approach aimed to reduce and improve informal settlements might have increased evictions of residents in this area (Croese, Cirolia, & Graham, 2016). Spatially, informal settlements are irregular areas with densely build structures subject to regular change(Gevaert, Persello, Sliuzas, & Vosselman, 2016). However, Kovacic and Giampietro, (2017), caution describing informal settlements based on physical characteristics alone, as this may mislead policy implementation. Because descriptions of physical attributes navigate attention away from social constructs; that explains informality and growth (ibid).While Mahabir et al.,( 2016), propose to consider both physical and social constructs to understand the complexities of the slum. This will provide details on what the main drivers are for people to stay in slums; therefore, providing evidence for appropriate policies(Mahabir et al., 2016). The ending of informal settlements is reliant on an inclusive legal process(van Gelder, 2010a). 1.2. Tenure Security and Informal Settlements When studying informal settlements with the aim of improving conditions, it is vital to study the land tenure security of residents, as it is vital for the development and reduction of poverty. A land tenure system is the social relationship of people to land(FAO, 2002). As an institution, it is the rules developed by society to regulate behaviour and use of land. Land tenure security is the certainty (FAO, 2002, p. 18), and perceptions that rights to land are recognised and protected against evictions and encroachment(Payne, 2004; van Gelder, 2007). One of the main threats to tenure security for households is the action of governments, especially with the eviction of households in informal settlements(Rakodi & Leduka, 2002). Tenure security is understood as being a complex concept (Mahadevia, 2010). Existing literature on tenure security, focuses on measuring security(Simbizi, 2016;De Souza, 1998), understanding what it is(van Gelder, 2007; van Gelder, 2010), having a clear view of what the role of security on investments(Gabriel Luke Kiddle, 2011;Van Gelder & Luciano, 2015a) Furthermore, if residents have tenure security or not (Nefise, Remy, Gora, & Clarissa, 2011). There is a consensus among researchers that tenure security is an important enabler for improvement of living conditions, as summarised by van Gelder, (2007). While the layman may think that security of tenure entails a 4 full legal title, as spearheaded by crusaders of titling, such as De Soto and others(van Gelder, 2010b), that is neither wrong nor right. Tenure security is important for development, residents without titles are assumed not to enjoy a high level of tenure security,(van