Slum Toponymy in Nairobi, Kenya a Case Study Analysis of Kibera
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Urban and Regional Planning Review Vol. 4, 2017 | 21 Slum toponymy in Nairobi, Kenya A case study analysis of Kibera, Mathare and Mukuru Melissa Wangui WANJIRU*, Kosuke MATSUBARA** Abstract Urban informality is a reality in cities of the Global South, including Sub-Saharan Africa, which has over half the urban population living in informal settlements (slums). Taking the case of three informal settlements in Nairobi (Kibera, Mathare and Mukuru) this study aimed to show how names play an important role as urban landscape symbols. The study analyses names of sub-settlements (villages) within the slums, their meanings and the socio-political processes behind them based on critical toponymic analysis. Data was collected from archival sources, focus group discussion and interviews, newspaper articles and online geographical sources. A qualitative analysis was applied on the village names and the results presented through tabulations, excerpts and maps. Categorisation of village names was done based on the themes derived from the data. The results revealed that village names represent the issues that slum residents go through including: social injustices of evictions and demolitions, poverty, poor environmental conditions, ethnic groupings among others. Each of the three cases investigated revealed a unique toponymic theme. Kibera’s names reflected a resilient Nubian heritage as well as a diverse ethnic composition. Mathare settlements reflected political struggles with a dominance of political pioneers in the village toponymy. Mukuru on the other hand, being the newest settlement, reflected a more global toponymy-with five large villages in the settlement having foreign names. Ultimately, the study revealed that ethnic heritage and politics, socio-economic inequalities and land injustices as well as globalization are the main factors that influence the toponymy of slums in Nairobi. Keywords: informal settlements, critical toponymy, ethnic-politics, social injustices, globalization 1. Introduction Nairobi’s urban informal settlements are cosmopolitan settlements whereby, most if not all of the more than 40 linguistic communities of Kenya are resident. There are an estimated 135 informal settlements which occupy about 1% of the city area and house half the population in Nairobi, Kenya. Although much scholarship has focused on the state of living conditions in slums, very little has been done on the socio-political challenges and their impact on the cultural landscape. Therefore, this study seeks to investigate the ideology behind and the manifested pattern of place naming in the informal settlements of Nairobi on the basis of critical toponymic theory. This paper is organized into 1) introduction, 2) the historical and theoretical background 3) research framework, 4) case study analysis and 5) conclusion. * Ph.D Candidate, Department of Policy and Planning Sciences, University of Tsukuba. Email: [email protected] ** Associate Professor, Department of Policy and Planning Sciences, University of Tsukuba (C) 2017 City Planning Institute of Japan http://dx.doi.org/10.14398/urpr.4.21 Urban and Regional Planning Review Vol. 4, 2017 | 22 2. Background 2.1 Historical background Spatial planning in colonial Nairobi was based on racial segregation. The first three spatial plans for the city were: The 1898 Plan for a Railway Town, the 1926 Plan for a settler capital and the 1948 Nairobi Master Plan for a Colonial Capital. 1) The 1898 and 1926 plans were explicitly racially segregated confining whites on raised grounds, whereas the natives were restricted to the environmentally inapt east. The 1948 Nairobi Master Plan described the European zone as ‘areas of economic residential development’ and the Asian and African zones as ‘official housing zones’ or ‘workers housing’. Most of the eastern part of the city where the Africans lived was also characterised by undefined land uses, while the Asian community mainly resided in the area north of the commercial district.2) Informal settlements in Nairobi can be traced back to the colonial period, when the African native was supposed to be a temporary resident of the city. Only those who worked directly for the colonial government could have legitimate city resident status-which was mainly restricted to the African male. They lived in working quarters and were not allowed to bring their families to the city. However, despite these restrictions, some Africans still found their way to the city and with their illegitimate status, could only construct shanties on unused land. These shanty towns (slums) were from time to time destroyed and the occupants forced back to their rural homes. These evictions had been legitimized by the enactment of the 1922 Vagrancy Act which made provisions to segregate, evict, arrest, expel and limit the movement of the natives and indentured workers.3) The attitude of the municipal authority towards African housing was as follows: It seems only right that it should be understood that the town is a non-native area in which there is no place for the redundant native, who neither works nor serves his or her people. The exclusion of these redundant natives is in the interest of natives and non-natives alike…4) When Kenya gained independence in 1963, native Africans were given the right to live anywhere in the country, this included the urban areas which were previously heavily restricted. As a result, many people moved to the city to look for employment opportunities. Nairobi was ill-prepared to handle such an influx of population. Inadequate provision of housing led to the expansion of informal settlements and efforts to curb them through demolitions did not succeed.5) Immediately after independence native Africans were given the right to live anywhere in the country, this included the urban areas which were previously heavily restricted. As a result, many people moved to the city to look for opportunities such as higher education, and employment. Nairobi was ill-prepared to handle such an influx of population. Inadequate provision of housing led to the expansion of informal settlements and efforts to curb them through demolitions did not succeed.6) It took over a decade after independence, to have a new plan for Nairobi prepared after independence. This was the 1973 Nairobi Metropolitan Growth Strategy (MGS), which was formulated under heavy western influence through a foreign firm called British Colin Buchanan and partners.7) This plan did not succeed in dismantling racial, spatial and social segregation but continued to reinforce the status quo.8) The legacies of the colonial and immediate post-colonial plans is still manifested in the city’s socio-spatial structure to date especially with the poor majority being confined to the less favourable parts of the city. Various studies, including the global report on human settlements indicate that currently, more than half of Nairobi’s Urban and Regional Planning Review Vol. 4, 2017 | 23 population live in informal settlements, yet, these settlements occupy less than 1% of the city’s area and less than 5% of the residential area. 9) The major slums in Nairobi include: Kibera, Mathare, and Mukuru.10) 2.2 Theoretical background Traditionally, toponymy mainly focused on the collection and description of place names, without much attention being paid to theoretically guided interpretations of the meanings and processes behind those names.11) In the 1990’s, this study approach was challenged by a new school of thought referred to as critical toponymy, which stresses that, place names have a greater semantic depth than simply referring to a physical location. This new scholarly work, began focusing on the political and social interests behind the construction of culture and cultural identities of cities and other places.12) It also highlights the importance of looking at the processes that led to the specific names being selected to fit into their specific contexts and do a critical exploration of the social struggles that underlie place naming.13) This is because names represent a creative process and a subjective interpretation of a locality by its occupants.14) The place naming process and the names themselves may act as arenas whereby the cultural, political and legal rights of marginalized groups are debated. These debates serve to reshape the identity of urban places and the corporate identity of cities.15) Naming can also be used as a conduit to challenge dominant ideologies and administrative processes. This has been typical of informal settlements in Nairobi, whereby the residents themselves have the responsibility of naming their neighbourhoods instead of the local government or private developers as in other areas of Nairobi. Names also can be used to distinguish certain settlements from others since they represent particular groups of people. To illustrate this, Myers who studied the case of Ng’ambo in Zanzibar, noted that the place names were often used to demarcate neighbourhoods, leading to an association of certain places with certain social groups or classes. In addition, as cultural arenas, names were spheres of performance which could be used as vehicles of empowerment or ridicule. The performance role of names in informal settlements also indicate an ‘us versus them’ consciousness, like in Zanzibar, where Ng’ambo estate emerged as a colonial construction of the city’s ‘other side’. Ng’ambo’s literal meaning in Swahili is the other side.16) Informal settlements in Nairobi fit into this metaphor of the city’s