Prospects for the Asset-Based Community Development Approach in Epworth and Ruwa, Zimbabwe: a Housing and Environmental Perspective
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
African Journal of History and Culture (AJHC) Vol. 1 (2), pp. 028-035, June, 2009 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJHC © 2009 Academic Journals Full Length Research Paper Prospects for the asset-based community development approach in Epworth and Ruwa, Zimbabwe: A housing and environmental perspective Innocent Chirisa Department of Rural and Urban Planning, University of Zimbabwe.E-mail: [email protected]. Accepted 12 May, 2009 This paper explores the dynamics of community building and development within the satellite towns to Harare, namely Epworth and Ruwa, based on a comparative analysis of the role of communities in the housing and habitat sector. That the poor are creative, co-operative and constructive in providing for themselves is undoubted. The 2 satellite towns of Epworth and Ruwa exhibit the multi-dimensions of self-aided housing and shelter provision. This article examines how the burgeoning populations of the 2 satellite towns can be accommodated in an increasingly 'shrinking' urban space where institutions can be formed to collaborate with the urban poor in the delivery of housing, environmental amenity and security within the study areas. This is to ensure that the urban sustainability agenda is achieved. The acknowledgement of the application of the asset-based community development (ABCD) approach shows that there is a considerable potential of self-sustenance in the poor. Key words: Community building, housing delivery, sustainability, habitat, built environment, capital. INTRODUCTION AND FOCUS OF THE PAPER The paper examines 2 important strands of shelter deve- nity managing its own development through people vo- lopment and community building, how they shape and in- lunteering their time rather than through facilitation by an fluence the subsequent habitats and general built envi- agent. This seems more consistent with the role of plan- ronment for the realisation of sustainable human settle- ning since the planner facilitates the setting of the scene ments. The intricacies of the relationships between the rather than the step-by-step facilitated development of social environment and the physical outputs are central to social networks and activities” (Ziller, 2004). From this as- the urban housing agenda. Scott (1981) views community sertion one questions what may be wrong in taking com- building as “… developing authentic relationships bet- munity development as a tool of community building. In ween people…a state of being difficult to describe.” He effect, it is prudent and picturesque to view the two as concurs with Sparks (2008) who observes that “…com- mutually inclusive. munity is a tricky word although it often connotes an in- In the context of this paper, housing refers to the pur- clusive and harmonious collaborative space; too often it poseful commitment to and the engagement of pro- signifies a site of struggle and negotiation, an attempt to cesses, mechanisms and efforts in a community or socie- find a common framework for conflicting and seemingly ty in shelter provision, with its supportive infrastructure contradictory impulses.” According to Scott people in a and services, for the whole or stipulated sections of a po- community feel peaceful, at ease with one another, ac- pulation, in a given spatial or temporal setting. Usually cepting differences, differences are appreciated and even once houses are built, communities are also built. But honoured. Institutions and institutionalisation play a criti- Mohanty (undated) argues that houses are not enough, cal role in community building. Ziller (2004) contrasts that they are neither an end in themselves nor can hous- community development to community building. Ziller ing programmes be treated as separate entities. Commu- perceives planning as having a facilitating role in com- nity building and community development serve as the munity building. He asserts that: “Unlike community deve- apparatus and mechanisms that complement the physical lopment which has traditionally involved a community de- production of houses and the general built environment. velopment worker in a long term capacity working in a Community building embraces the totality of processes place, community building conveys the idea of a commu- involving citizens in a given locale in initiating and deliber- Chirisa 029 Figure: 1. Locality Map for Epworth, Ruwa and Harare Source: Google Earth, accessed on 27 April 2009. ating on projects shaping their common destiny. In order application of the community building aspects in housing to achieve its common destiny, the community must have and habitat agenda in both Ruwa and Epworth, Zimba- the asset of common purpose, a shared vision and a spi- bwe. rit of collectivism. Usually it is the presence of a common problem and antagonistic force that gives the people the Overview of peri-urbanity and the housing situation urge to collectively cope with it. There are usually exter- in Zimbabwe nal protagonists who may lobby and advocate the cause of the marginalised commonly ascribed to improving the Major urban centres in Zimbabwe tend to provide more living standards of the disadvantaged. As a case in point, modern basic services than the small rural service cen- the social components of the millennium development tres. This has been shown in the history of the country’s goals (MDGs), entail a social empowerment thrust speci- urbanisation as is common in most of the rapidly urba- fically, MDG 1, eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, nizing developing countries. This is because of the pro- MDG 3 promote gender equality and empower women cess of rural-urban migration in which urban centres draw MDG 7 ensure environmental sustainability and MDG 8 a excessive populations resulting in urban primacy. In Ha- global partnership for development. rare, the stagnating economic growth of the capital city It should be emphasised that community building is a and its declining capacity to address the housing, infras- cross-cutting paradigm encapsulating the related phenol- tructure and employment needs of its rapidly growing po- mena of gender, age, class, ethnicity and health or men- pulation has witnessed its excess population relocating to tal status. Also, community empowerment is epipheno- Harare’s satellite towns of Chitungwiza (40 km south of menal to community building (World Bank, 2000). But is the city), Ruwa (23 km to the east), Norton (60 km west), community building a spontaneous mission or a social Beatrice (60 km south-west) and Epworth, 15 km south engineering venture? Generally speaking, community east of the capital (Locality map, Figure 1). building embraces in its ambit, the conditioned actions of The major reasons cited by the rural migrants for reset- humanity in the production of outputs and outcomes as tling in Harare’s satellite towns were closely related to they radiate from the latent and natural capacities and their desire to put their children in better schools in the ur- aptitudes of people. Community building is an activity ban areas, the search for better employment opportu- aimed at the modification of the environment by exploiting nities and affordable transport to work, the shortage of af- the ‘unity-in-diversity’ philosophy and channelling of the fordable housing, availability of affordable housing stands unified forces of humanity and sociality in the production in the informal housing sector of the peri-urban areas, of habitats. This paper contextualizes these ideas in the loss of reliable source of income after retrenchment, re- 030 Afr. J. History Culture tirement, death of parents or spouse, divorce, a desire for tral government attempts to control the space for privacy and eviction or relocation by government. The community initiatives for political gains. majority of the migrant respondents felt that they would be much better off starting out in their newly found home How has community building evolved as a housing towns (Mulenga et al., 2004). The study revealed that aspect? most of the rural people households that had migrated to the urban centres desired urban lifestyles albeit most of Amirahmadi (2003) defines community building as "… a them ended up ‘squatting’ on the fringes of the major ci- process whereby various community capitals are brought ties such as Harare. together to build a community of experience and interact- The urban development control policies of both the tion." Important aspects of community capital include: white settler governments of Rhodesia and independent Zimbabwe shunned squatter settlements. In 1980/81 the -Geographical location. government demolished a squatter settlement on the out- -Endowment of resources. skirts of Harare, Chirambahuyo culminating in relocation -Natural and business climate. of its estimated 30,000 people residents to a planned site -Traditions and customs. and service scheme (Patel and Adams, 1981). Another -Quality of life. squatter settlement at Russelldene (between Harare and -Agglomeration economies. Chitungwiza) with a population of 10, 000 people was -The importance of regional investment, as well as also demolished in 1983 (Butcher, 1993). The only squat- -“Untraded interdependencies” including understanding, ter settlement of Epworth was tolerated by the post inde- conventions, informal rules and trust systems, solidarity, pendence government of Zimbabwe on the grounds that mutual assistance. a far larger number of residents in the area had settled -co-opting of ideas (Amirahmadi, 2003). there well before independence