AFD & interventions in precarious settlements

AFD & interventions in precarious settlements:

APRIL 2014

experience sharing and strategic recommendations

Co-authors: Mathilde Chaboche – Nora Preuvot (independent consultants) Amandine Dukhan (Local authorities and urban development, AFD)

Proofreading and technical advice: Gaëlle Henry (Local authorities and urban development, AFD), Emilie Barrau (Gret) and Irène Salenson (Research, AFD).

Further contributors: > For AFD’s Local authorities and urban development section: Sabrina Archambault, Mai Linh Cam, Hatem Chakroun, Thierry Gonzalez, Audrey Guiral-Naepels, Gaëlle Henry, Marie Joly, Marion Joubert, Clément Larrue, Fabien Mainguy, Hassan Mouatadid, Anne Odic, Clémence Vidal de la Blache. > For AFD’s Water and sanitation sections: Karine Frouin.

AFD would like to acknowledge the contribution made by the following experts, whose experience and knowledge of precarious settlements were invaluable in preparing this document: François Laurent (Urbaplan), Guillaume Josse (Groupe Huit), Olivier Toutain (independent consultant), Virginie Rachmuhl (Gret), Jacques-Emmanuel Remy and Emilie

Cover : @ AFD Guillaume Chiron, precarious settlements in São Paulo, Brazil

Coindet (Nodalis).

>2

SUMMARY

Introduction

4

Part 1: Precarious settlements, definitions and operating methods

6

Part 2: Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

12

1. View precarious settlements as integral parts of the urban landscape

12

2. Create tailored interventions on a case-by-case basis

14

3. Root intervention in real political will among local and national actors to act on precarious settlements 4. Promote in situ rehabilitation wherever possible

18

5. Prioritise improvements to services, facilities and public spaces for in situ rehabilitation operations

21

6. Promote secure land tenure for in situ rehabilitation

25

7. Ensure residents’ needs match the sites and solutions for rehousing

28

8. Improve the area’s socio-economic development by supporting local initiatives and job creation 9. Take residents into consideration from the beginning and for the duration of the project

33

10. Integrate precarious settlements into urban planning and management

37

Conclusion

41

Bibliography

42

3<

Introduction

H

umanity passed a historic milestone in 2006, when for the first time more people lived in cities than in rural areas. The UN estimates that over the next 30 years the number of city dwellers will double to reach 6.4 billion people (or 70% of the global population). This massive urbanisation is the combined result of two main phenomena: the growing attractiveness of cities for rural populations searching for job opportunities, income, transport facilities, access to services and facilities (education, health and leisure) or even civic rights, and demographic growth in urban populations.

While this urbanisation has great potential, it is at the same time a source of vulnerability, risk and could exacerbate inequality, particularly through the development of precarious settlements and slums. Their growth is strongly linked to the rural exodus, demographic growth and the arrival of refugees etc, which add to difficulties experienced by the authorities in planning and controlling urbanisation, and notably in being able to offer housing to the most disadvantaged people. In developing cities, it is estimated that a third of urban inhabitants live in precarious settlements.

That represents a billion people globally, with that figure set to double by 2030 if current

>4

urbanisation trends continue (UN-Habitat 2003).

Although the overall situation appears to be stabilising and even improving, it remains a concern in some regions such as North Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean and is actually worsening in others, mainly Sub-Saharan Africa.

Generally characterised by three forms of insecurity – urban, social and land tenure-related – these disadvantaged areas present a major political, social, economic, environmental and health challenge for public authorities. For a donor such as the Agence Française de Développement (French Agency for Development or AFD), intervention in precarious settlements is necessary because they are home to the poorest and most vulnerable groups, who are often living in conditions that are unfit for habitation and particularly vulnerable to environmental risks and catastrophes. The biggest challenge is integrating these areas and their inhabitants into the rest of the city. The goals are numerous: ensuring all inhabitants have access to essential services and decent accommodation, working against segregation and socio-spatial fragmentation, overcoming risks, reducing vulnerability and encouraging economic and social development in these areas.

AFD and interventions in precarious settlements: experience sharing and strategic recommendations

The sheer scale of the challenges facing the authorities must lead to acknowledgement of the urgent need to act in precarious settlements â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to rehabilitate, restructure or clear them â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and the strategic importance of accompaniment by development partners such as AFD. To this effect, AFD aims to capitalise on experience gained over a decade of operating in precarious settlements alongside national

and local actors in its regions of intervention.

Published on the occasion of the seventh World Urban Forum in MedellĂ­n in April 2014, this document aims to gather together the lessons learned during these projects and make operational recommendations that will be of use to AFD representatives and its partners in developed and developing countries.

Percentage of the urban population living in slums 1990-2010

80

1990

2000

2010

70

% of slum population

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Developing regions

North Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa

Latin and the Caribbean

Eastern Asia

Sourthern Asia

South-Eastern Asia

Western Asia

Oceania

Source: World Bank and IMF 2013.

5<

Fabien Mainguy ©AFD

Slum Wahle Daba (Djibouti)

Part 1

Precarious settlements, definitions and operating methods

1. What is a precarious settlement? A working definition Each country has its own words for informal settlements and slum areas: Favelas (Brazil), Gecekondus (Turkey), Invasiones, Barrios populares or Quebradas, (Colombia), Villas miserias (Argentina), Pueblos jóvenes (Peru), Gazras or Kebbé (Mauritania), Ashwaiya (Egypt), etc. These terms generally have negative connotations and emphasise what these areas typically lack rather than being based on their own identities.

In an attempt to give an identity to these areas in light of their characteristics and qualities, the definition proposed here follows on from the analysis work of other researchers and development actors, particularly GRET and UN-Habitat (Mansion and Rachmuhl 2012).

In France, the term “bidonville” (slum) is most frequently used.

It spread after 1953 as a way of describing the shantytowns of Casablanca and took inspiration from the materials (“bidon” means “oil drum” or “metal container” in French) used by

poor workers newly arrived in the city to build their homes.

Little by little, this term gained a wider meaning and was used to describe all settlements built using salvaged material. It merged with the English term “slum”, used in the 19th century for the hovels in England’s working class areas. It was only in 2002 that an official definition was adopted as part of a UN-Habitat initiative.

Today, this definition is an international reference and the basis for tools to evaluate progress towards Millennium

Slums according to UN-Habitat “A slum is a contiguous settlement where the inhabitants are characterised as having inadequate housing and basic services. A slum is often not recognised and addressed by the public authorities as an integral or equal part of the city.” It has four main characteristics: > l ack of access to water; > l ack >6

of access to sanitation and other basic services;

>p oor housing quality; >o vercrowding.

Owing to a lack of reliable measurement criteria, a fifth characteristic, “secure tenure”, was removed from the definition adopted by the experts committee that met in Nairobi in November 2002 under the theme “Defining slums and secure tenure”.

Development Goals (MDGs), in particular Goal 11 targeting improved living conditions for 100 million slum dwellers. This definition is appropriate when considering the most extreme cases of insecurity but does not apply to other areas described as “informal”, “spontaneous”, “popular”, “illegal” or “underequipped”. These designations all emphasise one characteristic of an area, but do not take account of the diversity of situations. Approaching all these areas from an insecurity perspective seems to work best: be it social, economic, environmental or urban in nature, insecurity is what these areas all have in common.

While they are generally characterised by great poverty, isolation or lack of sanitation, precarious settlements cannot be summed up merely as pockets of risk or exclusion.

They also deserve to be considered as sources of urban creativity, ingenuity and adaptability, particularly in terms of built environment and type of occupancy. They are adapted to spatial constraints and to the means and needs of their inhabitants. These areas also occupy an essential socioeconomic place in the development of cities and offer numerous opportunities that can be made use of (support networks, alternative solutions, traditional construction methods,

service economy, etc). Furthermore, the social composition of these areas is far from homogenous. While they house low-income populations, the inhabitants of precarious settlements are not necessarily poor and also include middle classes that find themselves excluded from highly speculative property markets.

2. Types of precarious settlements Precarious settlements are hugely diverse and it is necessary to create a typology to understand them better and tailor interventions to their specificities. Aiming to be of operational use, the typology suggested here builds on those developed by GRET and UN-Habitat (Mansion and Rachmuhl 2012) and defines areas based on different criteria (land occupancy laws, types of construction, relationship with the city centre, socio-economic profile of the inhabitants, etc). a. Slums The first type is closest to the UNHabitat definition. Such areas display the most extreme characteristics of deprived areas and generally exhibit all three forms of social, urban and

Part 1

Precarious settlements, definitions and operating methods

land tenure exclusion: built using salvaged material, lack or absence of infrastructure and services, inhabitants in great poverty, lack of secure tenure, vulnerable location (risk zones, gaps in the urban fabric that are not fit for habitation or are “cut off” from the city by distance and lack of access). In developing countries, all the big cities and more and more medium-sized cities are generating slums with names that vary from one context to another. b. Informal settlements undergoing consolidation More often than not, these were originally informal settlements that have progressively consolidated their position (through a road network, better facilities and more durable construction) on public or private land. These improvements result because the settlements have existed for a long time, or they have relatively secure tenure (no risk of eviction) or thanks to a mix of socio-economic profiles. In older areas, when urban sprawl was no longer possible (notably because of topography), the urban fabric became denser with the construction of small blocks (with three or four floors), mostly occupied by renters. Above all, these areas are

Clément Larrue ©AFD

Informal settlements undergoing consolidation Baillergeau area, Port-au-Prince (Haiti)

7<

François Laurent © URBAPLAN

Area built up using solid materials without any participation by public authorities Suburbs in Dakar (Senegal)

characterised by a mix of situations: sturdily constructed buildings stand alongside makeshift shelters erected by new arrivals. Furthermore, one or several commercial streets are often to be found. c. Areas built up using solid materials without any participation by public authorities Generally situated on the urban periphery, these areas resemble the city proper. They are mostly made up of “solid” buildings but were unplanned and built outside the regulatory framework (without a construction permit and not according to official standards).

Occupation of the site sometimes has a legal basis, often in customary law. The way these areas emerge is

much the same from one country to another. Private dealers divide land into plots without authorisation and houses or small blocks are then self-built. Although these areas are connected to the water and electricity networks, infrastructure there is often rudimentary. Relatively well integrated into the overall urban framework and rarely threatened with eviction, these areas described as “illegal”, “irregular” or “unofficial” compensate for the lack of available housing for the lower middle classes. d. Rundown old quarters in the city proper Dilapidation, lack of maintenance or activities that are incompatible with buildings’ original purpose can transform whole areas of the city proper into precarious settlements.

This for example is the case in impoverished old city centres, where the buildings, threatening to collapse, were not originally self-built. Unsanitary, overcrowded and deprived of renewed access to urban services, these areas, often considered to be part of the city’s heritage, are also pockets of poverty generally inhabited by renters (or even “squatters”). Their inhabitants do however benefit from proximity to the city centre. This is the case in the impoverished medinas of North Africa as well as the former

colonial quarters in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. This type of precarious settlementis often omitted from typologies because it does not correspond to the received idea that all precarious settlements are informal.

3. Possible types of intervention The question of clearing precarious settlements or improving living conditions in those impoverished areas is relevant to almost all cities, even if the realities on the ground are many and varied. It is however unanimously agreed that interventions must be tailored to the context and type of area, and lever actions to catalyse a virtuous circle are to be encouraged. While there is no overall consensus around the best way to intervene in precarious settlements, two broad options can be identified. Either the area is cleared (displacement) or it is retained and efforts are made to improve it (it remains in its location). These two options are further divided into different operational methods. In the first case, eviction may or may not be accompanied by resettlement. In the second, keeping an area where it is may involve simple rehabilitation or deeper restructuring.

>8

Augustin le Gall ©AFD

Rundown old quarters in the city proper Kairouan medina (Tunisia)

Part 1

Precarious settlements, definitions and operating methods

Intervention

Displacement

Type of operation

No resettlement

With resettlement

Description

“Bulldozer politics” consisting of eradicating poor areas without offering new homes to residents, who will at best receive financial compensation.

Removal of an area with resettlement into social housing (as a tenant or with ownership) or with a plot of land and financial compensation to build a new home included.

Advantages

•C lears land, which may be justified

•E nables public authorities to get

in high-risk areas •L ow cost to public authorities

more value from land • I mproves living conditions for

residents

Disadvantages

•V ery high social cost (destruction

of social bonds, trauma, high risk of social tension) •W orsens living conditions for

inhabitants •D isplaces the phenomenon without

providing a solution (creation of new slums or informal settlements further away)

•R esettlement sites often distant, risk

of urban sprawl •D estruction of social bonds •T hreat to economic activity •V ery high costs for the public

authority •V ery long implementation times •D ifficult to carry out on a large scale •R isk of exclusion if inhabitants are

unable to pay charges linked to resettlement

Possibility of AFD support

Viewed as brutal by populations, this approach is not deemed acceptable by donors including AFD.

•A cceptable only if the action is

integrated into an overall vision taking into account all urban and social challenges •R equires a structured institutional,

financial and operational framework

a. Demolishing or redeveloping precarious settlements Projects based on redeveloping precarious settlements aim to remove them for a variety of reasons, such as extending the city proper, freeing up useful spaces for new plans or in some cases fighting poverty. These operations take into account to a

greater or lesser extent what is to become of the residents evicted from their original homes. b. Actions to improve existing settlements

where they are, even if they often include localised evictions from buildings in high-risk zones or on land needed for planned work (roads and rail, public facilities).

Different from projects involving eviction from existing housing, many operations aim to keep populations

Gentrification The English term “gentrification” literally means the process by which a working class area becomes progressively more middle class. It involves a transformation of the environment, local businesses, sometimes the public space and above all the socio-economic profile of the residents, with middle class or wealthy people moving in and replacing the working class people previously living there.

9<

Intervention

Keeping populations where they are

Type of operation

In situ rehabilitation

Complete restructuring

Description

Progressive integration of the area into the city by increasing access to networks, essential services and facilities. This can be accompanied by strategic planning of the area, measures to secure land tenure, measures increasing access to employment and social accompaniment.

Operation comprising reparcelling and therefore also measures to secure land tenure, infrastructure works, urban remodelling through widening roads and installing facilities and subsequently actions to improve living conditions. Aims to catch up with living standards in the city proper.

Advantages

•K eeps inhabitants where they are,

• Keeps some but not all the

maintaining social and economic links

inhabitants where they are, preserves social and economic links

•M inimises risk of gentrification

• Profoundly changes the urban fabric

•C reates development momentum

• Requires a planning operation with a

(one lever being intended to lead to another) •R elatively rapid process (5 years on

average) •F lexible, adaptable and progressive

legal basis • Regulates densities according to

context • Catches up with standards in the city

proper (radical transformation)

•M inimal cost to public authorities

(compared to complete restructuring and resettlement) •M akes use of knowhow and positive

ideas of local inhabitants

Disadvantages

•N o immediate improvement in the

built environment • I mprovements in living standards

sometimes viewed as insufficient •T echnical difficulties linked to

preserving existing structures •R isk of eviction of the poorest

inhabitants (this risk is diminished compared to complete restructuring, if the intervention is well-designed) •D oes not entirely resolve problems

of exposure to natural risks in some areas

Possibility of AFD support

Viewed as the solution to be encouraged by AFD.

• Very high operating costs and very

long implementation periods – an approach that is not appropriate on a large scale or in weak institutional and legal contexts • Risk of gentrification brought about

by the qualitative leap in living conditions (increase in land and property values) • Risk of eviction of the poorest

inhabitants or increase in living costs and displacement of the problem (creation of new informal settlements further away) AFD accompaniment difficult to envisage owing to the limitations of the approach: • limited quantitative impact

ऀ

(restricted scale of intervention); • very long timetable; • high investment cost per inhabitant; • excessive risk that the original

inhabitants targeted by the intervention will be forced out.

>10

4. Possible institutional frameworks One of the major challenges in carrying out these operations is building up a network of actors organised around the contracting authority responsible for public policy and/ or interventions in precarious settlements. This responsibility can be devolved, depending on the case, to local or national authorities. Given the multilateral nature of public intervention in poor areas (which involves several sectors) and the need for good local knowledge of the area and its inhabitants, AFD supports handing projects over to the local level.

The inherent complexity of these operations, necessitating significant coordination and the mobilisation of a range of skills, requires project managers to surround themselves with a network of actors from different spheres. Here are the main actors: >T he

various sector ministries or their technical agencies operating in skill areas in which the contracting authority lacks expertise

>T he

public or private operators intervening in particular urban management sectors: water, sanitation, waste, real estate promotion, transport, etc

>T he

relevant land authorities (national public actors or local authorities, depending on the case)

>C onsulting firms providing technical

and operational support (feasibility, advice). To these can be added certain NGOs running the social and coordination components (within the framework of urban and social project management, for example) >L ocal

users and resident associations locally active in economic, social and community development. They must necessarily be involved in order to find appropriate solutions and get local residents on board.

>D onors,

whether national or international, which would like to cofinance all or some of the operations.

Depending on the local and national context, this is an ad hoc institutional arrangement that must be set up around the contracting authority.

The feasibility of operations relies largely upon the abilities of the public contracting authority and in particular on its capacity to gather together, connect and coordinate the different stakeholders.

For a donor such as AFD, one of the priorities is therefore to help the public contracting authority play an effective role, beginning with an appraisal of its skills and weaknesses.

Two major tools are available: >P rovide internal support to the public contracting authority to help it structure its vision and organise a network of relevant actors by clarifying the role of each one in the project (delegated project management, urban and social project management, service operators, etc.). This will enable it to organise its cooperation under a framework agreement setting out its remits. Depending on the case and the requirements, this support could take the form of contracting support, funded by the donor.

This contracting support would intervene alongside the contracting authority in an advisory and expert role. Depending on the case, this role could be fulfilled through cityto-city cooperation, a consulting firm or an NGO. >S upport the structuring and strengthening of a unique delegated project manager or of a primary contractor working on behalf of the contracting authority. This can be a useful solution because the public project manager rarely has the technical capacity to carry out operations on the ground.

These two tools are however not miracle solutions. They assume

Part 1

Precarious settlements, definitions and operating methods

political will on the part of the contracting authority to act on precarious settlements as well as the ability to inspire a unifying vision for the future of these areas and spread this among its partners.

Finally, interventions in precarious settlements, in particular those carried out in a participatory way, must strengthen public authorities in their role as contracting authorities and their task of urban programming.

Therefore, a project can be seen as an experiment that will in parallel help the contracting authority consolidate its municipal management and strategic urban planning skills for the area concerned and the whole of the area for which it is responsible.

11 <

Š Nora Preuvot

The urban setting of the Favela Santa Teresa, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil)

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

1

View precarious settlements as integral parts of the urban area It is essential to adopt an overall urban approach to precarious settlements and their place in cities. These areas fulfil an essential function in the land use and property dynamics that underpin the creation and transformation of a city. By providing a supply of accessible and flexible housing, which the city proper is unable to provide, or at least not in sufficient quantity, they offer a way into the city, or an â&#x20AC;&#x153;intake valveâ&#x20AC;?, in

the typical housing path taken by the poorest residents.

This housing provision must also be viewed through the wider lens of quality of life, situating housing within its spatial context (level of facilities and services available in the area or nearby, proximity to employment, fluidity of links with the rest of the city). Several scenarios exist.

Slum residents often settle near areas offering employment

opportunities, trade with the nearby formal urban fabric and occupy neighbouring public spaces. On the other hand, they may also be far from their sources of activity, contributing to urban sprawl and to increasing density on the periphery and joining daily public transport commuters, etc. As a result, slum areas contribute to the urban fabric and are an integral part of the city. They contribute to its mosaic identity.

Why fight against urban sprawl?

It brings social, environmental and economic costs 1. Distance from services (education, health, leisure, commerce, etc.), feeling of isolation (particularly true for women, young people and disabled people) and risk of ghettoization 2. Increase in the number of journeys, encroachment into natural and agricultural areas (often eating into wooded land) >12

3. High cost to public authorities of connecting these areas to infrastructure, residents are a long way from employment opportunities.

This reading of precarious settlements enables us to better evaluate and analyse their interaction with the rest of the city and design projects that help them better integrate into the city they are already a de facto part of by helping them gain the same “rights to the city” as their fellow citizens. The aim is to have them benefit from an acceptable level of access to facilities and services, even if

this does not match, in the short and medium term, the level seen in the rest of the modern and proper city. In the long term, it will be necessary to find possible transitions to facilities and services that are harmonised with those in the rest of the urban area to boost improvements and the area’s integration and avoid the risk of entrenching urban fragmentation through a differentiated service offer.

It is only by taking the situation and impact of precarious settlements into account that urban planning will be able to control and direct urban sprawl.

Antananarivo, Madagascar opening up and sanitising slum areas to kick-start local development and improve accessibility Delegated contracting authority: AGETIPA

Dates: 2011-2014

Beneficiaries: 635,000 people

Contracting authority: Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Land Development and Planning

Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €9 million (grant to the State of Madagascar) + €5 million in additional grants (due to be allocated in 2014)

The Lalan’Kely project aims to improve living conditions for disadvantaged populations in the Greater Tana region by opening up and improving sanitation in the conurbation’s poor areas.

sanitary facilities to be managed by the community. The target areas are located outside risk zones and have been selected based on criteria of poverty, density and lack of facilities.

focusing on citywide mobility challenges (Urban Mobility Support Programme), which includes service provision for slum areas and takes account of the journeys made by their residents.

By improving access and allowing living conditions to catch up with those in other areas, the project aims to integrate disadvantaged areas and their inhabitants into the city proper by accepting their existence in the capital.

The project’s vision is for slum residents to have the same rights as other citizens, particularly in terms of living conditions but also more widely in terms of social equity. This is the thinking behind the construction of alleyways, drains and

This logical framework of integration and catching up with urban standards is being applied in an overall vision for the capital’s conurbation, not just in its strictly defined administrative area.

The project involves “Fiftama”, the inter-regional public body bringing together the rural authorities located in Antananarivo’s suburbs. As part of this, a partnership has been launched between the Municipality of Anatananarivo and the Ile-de-France Trades Institute

Despite the vagaries of local politics, the project has never been questioned and the integration of slum areas into urban planning is opening up encouraging new perspectives.

© Benjamin Michelon

Project title: Lalan’Kely opening up and sanitation project for priority areas in the Anatananarivo conurbation (Projet Lalan’Kely de désenclavement et d’assainissement des quartiers prioritaires de l’agglomération d’Antananarivo)

Precarious settlement, Antananarivo (Madagascar)

Type of settlement: 8 slums undergoing consolidation Type of intervention: In situ rehabilitation

13 <

Amandine Dukhan ©AFD

Identifying priority precarious settlements in Abidjan (Ivory Coast)

2

Create tailored interventions on a case-by-case basis

A case-by-case approach It is important to take account of the national local context in order to avoid blanket solutions. Each in situ rehabilitation project is unique in the same way that each precarious settlement is. Each resettlement operation should also take the original area’s specificities into account, such as social and spatial organisation, public spaces, socio-economic profiles, exposure to risks, etc. Precarious settlements are characterised by variable parameters relating to their geographical situation, population and building density, level of facilities, the existence of public spaces, the localisation of natural spaces, etc.

Socio-economic and urban analysis: an essential stage For this reason, intervention in precarious settlements must be based on what is already there and cannot happen without in-depth knowledge of the territory, on the scale of the precarious settlement itself but also on a larger scale (situating the settlement within its relationship to the rest of the city). To create tailored operating

>14

methods for each situation, any intervention must begin with an indepth study not just of the technical and urban specifications (buildings, morphology, access to networks, etc.), which is as far as some studies go, but also of the social, political and economic realities (jobs, ways of living, local civil society, social structure and organisation of local authorities, etc.) unique to the area in question.

Such an in-depth appraisal is a tool for analysing the locality, which allows planners to think of the area in a dynamic and prospective way. More than a simple inventory report, it includes local dynamics, flux, traffic, living areas and job opportunities – in time and space – as well as the relationships between all these elements (systemic approach).

Generally, urban analysis is organised around the evaluation of assets, weaknesses and opportunities for the area under scrutiny, but also the threats it lives under. It also means these areas are not reduced to what they lack but are instead also seen in terms of what they can offer, both now and in the future. This tool is necessary to plan investments and

allows them to be prioritised and translated into concrete actions by using the local development opportunities that have been identified.

Analysis: a first step towards resident participation This multi-level analysis must be carried out as close to the residents as possible so that it is as tailored to the local context as possible.

It is therefore important to use methods that give inhabitants a voice by combining quantitative approaches (censuses and surveys of cross sections of the population) and qualitative approaches (taking the time to have in-depth discussions with individuals or groups of residents). This kind of data collection enables an objective view of the facts as well as a range of subjective perspectives (to become familiar with residents’ wishes, their past experiences and how they live in order better to appraise their ability to adapt to the changes engendered by the project).

Finally, involving – really involving – the inhabitants from appraisal phase is also a way of turning them into stakeholders in the process getting

underway and thus prepare favourable ground for their participation at a later stage in consultation and planning actions. For this to happen, the time allocated to the initial appraisal stage must be sufficient to enable real knowledge of the area and its challenges to be gained. This was the case for the Integral Urban Project

in Medellín (Colombia), where local knowledge was gleaned over an extended urban analysis period and through discussions with residents.

A high-quality appraisal carried out on the ground alongside studies of the area within its urban context will in time make it possible to open an avenue towards projects that

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

residents will find it easier to support and that are better suited to the city’s development.

Port-au-Prince, Haiti accompanying integrated redevelopment of precarious settlements in a post-disaster context

Clément Larrue ©AFD

Project title: Integrated Development Programme of Informal Areas of Port-au-Prince (Aménagement Intégré des Quartiers Informels de Port-au-Prince or AIQIP) Dates: 2011-2016 Contracting authority: Housing and Public Building Construction Unit (Unité de Construction des Logements et des Bâtiments Publics or UCLBP)

Baillergeau, Port-au-Prince (Haiti) AFD’s intervention in precarious settlements emphasises a spatial planning phase – in concert with local authorities – taking into account the specificities of the target areas as well as the region as a whole and organised around sector-based approaches. This was the framework for AFD’s accompaniment of slum area reconstruction in Port-au-Prince, where there is no urban planning and buildings are highly vulnerable. Despite the pressing nature of the situation, the need to combine emergency response and development led to initial stage adoption of planning designs for two informal settlements in the capital, Martissant and Baillergeau.

Type of area: In situ rehabilitation Beneficiaries: About 60,000 inhabitants Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €10.5 million (grant) Cofinancing: €19.58 million (delegated to AFD from the European Union) + €0.9 million (Fondation de France) + €0.2 million (UN-Habitat)

Partners: Knowledge and Liberty Foundation (Fondation Connaissance et Liberté or FOKAL), GRET

Based on local analysis carried out in consultation with residents, these pilot operations made it possible to define conditions for future projects.

Beyond planning priority facilities, infrastructure and roads, the designs also present a potential vision for these areas’ development. These actions, to be carried out in the short, medium and long term and involving a participative process, were set out with the aim of improving residents’ living conditions. This means there can be a coherent approach to planning, zones for urbanisation, zones where construction is impossible (ravines, steep slopes, abandoned quarries, flood-prone zones), public spaces and

traffic routes. It also means AFD funding can be optimised for structuring actions (roads and public spaces) and housing operations (reconstruction assistance and multiple occupancy buildings) to the benefit of residents.

Although it is limited to two sites, this approach is today recognised as innovative and the aim is to reproduce it in other urban contexts. By mobilising Haitian public actors at local and national level and providing expertise to reinforce their skills, this project aims to sustainably accompany the development of permanent urban planning expertise in Haiti.

15 <

Sarah Marniesse ©AFD

Planned public space in Medellín (Colombia)

3

Root intervention in real political will among local and national actors to act on precarious settlements

Intervention in precarious settlements is never a neutral subject from the point of view of public authorities, whether national or local. Fantasies, fears and prejudices may play a significant role in the way these areas are viewed, often as pockets of insecurity or blights on the urban landscape. In brief, they are seen as urban problems to be eradicated to improve the city’s overall image. Others see social problems more than urban problems, poverty-ridden sinkholes in the city to which eradication solutions must be found.

However, there is no miracle solution leading to instant reduction of urban poverty and the disappearance of slum areas. This must take place over the long term, respecting the logic at work in these areas and in their creation, according the same rights to their inhabitants as to the fellow citizens and aiming to integrate them into an overall vision for the city.

AFD supports this broad approach.

For the Agency, intervention in precarious settlements means simultaneously tackling an urban problem and attempting to improve living conditions for their inhabitants. To achieve this twofold aim without elevating one above the other, it is important to succeed in mobilising national and local

>16

public actors that have the will to act on these areas and on behalf of their residents. This assumes the contracting authority has the ability to carry through both the political and operational elements of the project.

Political support for the principle that it is necessary to intervene in precarious settlements is a prerequisite around which it is not always easy to build real consensus.

Given the diversity of elements that need to be taken into account in an integrated project (services, roads, facilities, land rights, etc.), the number of private and public actors involved, often with very different visions for what should happen, can be significant. Getting them on board, coordinating them and linking them up is often the biggest challenge for contracting authorities, generally local bodies, which are responsible for the project. It assumes a capacity for: 1. Steering and coordinating the various actors in a multi-sector project.

Any integrated operation is necessarily complex. Each actor’s actions in its skills area must be set out in time and space while also accepting the contracting authority’s legitimate right to take decisions and not losing sight of technical

and budgetary constraints, which are necessary for proper project management.

2. Mediation and constant defence of an integrated political vision to mediate between the different stages of the project and prevent one actor’s goals in its sector taking precedence over the other dimensions. Thus, the contracting authority must be able to make sure that the technical decisions relating to new network installation do not turn into a brutal experience for residents by requiring for example the (insufficiently justified) demolition of homes or small businesses to the detriment of the project’s social dimension. This involves a continuous search for balance, which is sometimes hard to achieve, between the different dimensions of the project and the constraints imposed upon each actor.

Part 2

Ten Ten key key recommendations recommendations for for intervening intervening in in precarious precarious settlements settlements

Sarah Marniesse ©AFD

Medellín, Colombia: reintegrating precarious settlements into the city through social urbanism Precarious settlement and cable car in Medellín (Colombia)

Project title: Centroriental Integral Urban Project

Type of intervention: in situ rehabilitation

Dates: 2010-2015

Beneficiaries: 300,000 inhabitants (90,000 daily users of public transport funded by AFD)

Contracting authority: Medellín Municipality Delegated contracting authorities: Medellín Urban Development Corporation and Metro of Medellín Type of area: 33 informal settlements undergoing consolidation

Poor areas mainly spread across the steep slopes ringing Medellín. With longstanding problems of violence (drug trafficking, guerrillas) and pronounced social inequality, Colombia’s second city began changing in 2003 when the municipality embarked upon a programme to integrate the barrios populares (poor areas) as part of a policy based on social urbanism. This philosophy rests on the conviction that violence has its roots in deep social inequality. Using this as a starting point, the municipality’s new approach targeted the poorest areas and turned citizens into key actors in the transformation of their city.

Its tool of choice, the Integral Urban Project (IUP), was developed by the Medellín Urban Development Corporation, a municipal entity with significant human, financial and institutional resources. Within an exemplary consultation framework, the IUP gathers together all public actions on precarious settlements. The physical, social and institutional dimensions are taken into account to guarantee disadvantaged populations better access to education, employment, housing, public space etc. Medellín City can do this because it operates all the levers of public action, either directly or via its numerous public enterprises.

By targeting the poorest slums, until then characterised by the State’s absence, this type of intervention, first tried out in the Nororiental area, allows massive investments in all fields

in order to transform whole areas and the living conditions they offer. Under the motto “The best for the poorest”, the Nororiental IUP and the three others that followed were able to create high quality facilities (libraries, schools, hospitals, sports facilities etc) and improve pedestrian access and public spaces (stairs, bridges, sidewalks, squares, etc.).

Overall, the IUPs aim to integrate the slum areas into the city by developing new public transport links connecting to the existing network. Apart from a tramline, the most innovative and emblematic project was creation of the Metrocable lines (with two lines under construction using AFD funding for the IUP Centroriental), which are structuring routes along which all the investments are concentrated. Made up of gondola lifts, this two-line network linking the Nororiental and Centroriental areas to the rest of the city (connections to trams and metro) made it possible to overcome physical (gradients of up to 30%) and land constraints (small land footprint). By integrating it into the public transport network, this infrastructure allows residents quicker access to the city’s dynamic zones and employment opportunities. The success of this model has been hailed across the continent and the use of cable cars as a means of increasing urban inclusion is being copied (in Bogotá, Cali, Rio de Janeiro, etc.).

Demolitions are limited to highrisk zones and the sites of facilities,

Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: USD 250 million (non-sovereign loan at market conditions); €350,000 (grant for technical assistance programme)

with resettlement in the local area in multiple-occupancy blocks. Consultation with residents plays a crucial role at all stages of the urban project, from the first studies through to the works.

This means taking enough time to enable consultation to take place and bearing related staff costs (team of social workers for the entire duration of the project).

The example of Medellín illustrates the effectiveness of public policy which is consistent for the duration (despite changes in the municipal team) and responsibility for which is completely assumed. Surpassing the project approach, this is about focusing public resources on the poorest areas.

Although today poverty and insecurity have not been completely eradicated, the integration process is now underway. There remains the challenge of maintaining this dynamic in other slum areas. The four existing IUPs, which will benefit around a million inhabitants, only cover part of the overall area.

Pursuing the efforts already underway requires significant resources, each IUP costing about USD 350 million. That said, these projects are part of a vision (“Medellín 2030”) that integrates slum areas and their improvement into the city’s future.

The success of social urbanism is today widely acknowledged across the continent and Medellín’s international renown is partly founded on this policy.

17 <

Fabien Mainguy ŠAFD

Ajegunle area, Lagos (Nigeria)

4

Promote in situ rehabilitation wherever possible

Rehabilitation: a solution to be encouraged In situ upgrading of slum areas appears to be the best way to tackle the large-scale problem of urban poverty. The idea of resettling all slum inhabitants appears unrealistic given the lack of available funds and land and the technical limitations of public actors. But it also appears unrealistic in the context of an organic vision of growth and urban transformation. The advantages of rehabilitation lie in its progressive approach, relying as it does on the qualities of the slum areas in question and allowing for successive improvements over time according to need and available funding.

This is the solution to be encouraged in very densely or sparsely populated settlements, with the exception of those in high-risk zones. In the case of very dense areas, which may be home to tens of thousands of inhabitants, such as the slums of Dharavi in India, Kibera in Kenya or the Rocinha favela in Rio de Janeiro, in situ rehabilitation appears by default to be the only solution. In more sparsely populated slums, in situ rehabilitation also seems best because of its significantly lower social and

>18

financial cost compared to clearance or complete restructuring.

For residents, rehabilitation ensures their way of life is stable (because they do not have to move) and guarantees progressive changes to their living conditions. The area will keep its popular identity and not everything will happen at once, but their environment will significantly improve and gain in value over time.

Choose areas to rehabilitate based on transparent criteria Not all poor areas in a country can be completely rehabilitated all at once for several reasons. This relates to their localisation and type of occupancy but is above all due to available means (financial, technical, institutional, etc.). It is therefore appropriate to draw up transparent and objective criteria for choosing priority slum areas in which public in situ rehabilitation interventions can take place effectively. More globally, these criteria could form the basis for emerging public policy in favour of improving disadvantaged areas. This is a prerequisite when intervention comes as part of a national programme (with several regions and poor areas selected),

such as with the PNRQP in Tunisia, or a regional project that includes several poor areas. Four criteria seem essential: 1. Evidently, in situ rehabilitation is generally unsuited to high-risk zones (natural or man made).

Because they are dangerous and unsuitable for construction, settlements on land prone to flooding, polluted land, on very steep slopes, near railway lines, under high-tension power lines or road networks offer very little alternative to resettlement of their inhabitants. That said, in certain exceptional cases public investments could be allocated to secure and preserve settlements in zones where exposure to risks can be reduced, for example by improving rainwater drainage and removing water from flood-prone areas. However, such interventions often entail high investment costs and rarely gain approval.

2. A calm land tenure situation constitutes an argument in favour of in situ rehabilitation.

This type of intervention is risky in a context where property and land occupation are the source of significant conflict. This can disturb balances of power, slow down the project and even cause it to fail.

In the case of rehabilitation, limit the number of evictions When an area is the focus of a rehabilitation programme, a few localised evictions are generally inevitable: in high-risk zones and on the sites of planned infrastructure, networks and public facilities. The denser the precarious settlement, the more likely this is. In the case of evictions necessary to carry out the works, it is important to try to limit them as much as possible through recourse to tailored technical solutions (semi-collective or individual sanitation, choice of water standpipes instead of home connections, modes of transport requiring little space).

These localised evictions must be chosen with care and it must be properly explained to the affected households and their neighbours why certain homes must be removed, making every effort to resettle residents in the local area to maintain social relationships. As a framework for these population movements, AFD usually refers to the World Bank recommendations covering “involuntary resettlement of people”, making sure that regulations in the country of intervention can conform to them.

François Laurent © URBAPLAN

3. Density is no less essential. The denser the population, the harder it will be to free up land for planned works. In such cases, de-densification operations to move part of the population are to be envisaged, particularly for sanitary reasons. On the other hand, intervening in sparsely populated areas seems less viable because of the high cost of connecting them to basic networks and infrastructure relative to the number of households involved.

4. Lastly, scale of intervention is a final criterion to take into account.

The aim of rehabilitation is to benefit as many people as possible without making interventions too shallow.

To achieve this, the critical mass of investments must be significant and their regional distribution must be fair in order to avoid focusing on some areas and overlooking others.

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

South Pikine Informal Area, Dakar (Senegal)

“Involuntary resettlement of people”: World Bank directive OP 4.12 (World Bank 2001) This is a reference point for the major donors (AFD, Inter-American Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, etc.) and respect for it is a condition for allocating funds.

The procedure fixes the following prerequisites: > Involuntary

resettlement should be avoided wherever possible (all alternatives must be considered);

> Once

the need for involuntary resettlement is recognised, resettlement should be conceived and executed as “sustainable development programmes”;

> Compensation

eligibility criteria must be defined (in conformity with World Bank requirements).

Where no alternative to displacement of people or activities is found, a Resettlement Action Plan must be implemented. It defines the phases necessary for resettling residents and paying compensation. Initially, the residents are identified and their possessions listed (by the party implementing the project).

Identification of compensation measures and resettlement methods must be carried out in consultation with the residents concerned. Financial

compensation is to be provided for the loss of possessions or revenues linked to an activity (if trading activity is destroyed, for example) and “resettlement assistance” (allocation for moving and resettlement) is to be provided. Financial compensation is the responsibility of States or local authorities. Resettlement must meet two conditions: it must be located as near as possible to the original site or where work opportunities are located and offer comparable if not better living conditions. Finally, an ex post evaluation is obligatory to determine whether resettlement objectives have been met.

19 <

Augustin Le Gall ©AFD

Tunisia support for national urban redevelopment programmes targeting popular areas as a priority

Ennacim district, Tunis (Tunisia)

Project title: National Urban Renewal Programme (Programme national de rénovation urbaine or PNRU)

Type of intervention: in situ rehabilitation

Dates: 2008-2015 Contracting authority: Municipalities

Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €50 million loan to the Tunisian State + €0.7 million grant

Delegated contracting authority: Urban Rehabilitation and Renewal Agency (Agence de réhabilitation et de rénovation urbaine or ARRU)

Cofinancing: State (€16.3 million) and European Union (€8 million with management delegated to AFD)

Type of area: 229 poor areas characterised by a lack of basic infrastructure, four dilapidated old city centres

Tunisia has a relatively high urbanisation rate (70%) compared to other countries in the region. Urban growth is continuing rapidly and is concentrated on the peripheries of big and mediumsized cities, where what are described as popular areas are spreading. These are self-built on unserviced plots of land.

They generally appear on agricultural land that is legally purchased but allocated without authorisation, the result of a lack of supply of formal housing that is accessible to the poorest people.

AFD has been accompanying the Tunisian State since 1997 in implementation of its policy for rehabilitating disadvantaged areas through its National Programme for Rehabilitating Popular Quarters (Programmes nationaux de requalification des quartiers populaires or PNRQP). It has contributed €130 million to these operations and accompanied the rehabilitation of more than 900 areas, benefiting about 2 million inhabitants.

These successive large-scale programmes aim to improve living conditions for residents and open up areas through improving access to basic infrastructure (mainly roads, drainage, public lighting, water and sanitation).

Area selection is based on essentially technical and economic criteria, which enables investment to be prioritised and distributed while also justifying and

>20

Beneficiaries: 600,000 inhabitants

facilitating the types of intervention.

The criteria are: 1) absence of land tenure conflict, 2) urbanisation rate above 80%, 3) density of more than 25 homes/hectare, 4) programme cost of less than 2,500 dinars per home/ household, 5) under 5% necessary demolitions, 6) off-site infrastructure connection costs of less than 30% of rehabilitation cost.

These large-scale in situ rehabilitation interventions have really made it possible to create momentum for social and economic development, improve security, accessibility and the area’s image and encourage inhabitants to improve their homes. However, because they are designed as sectoral infrastructure programmes based on helping more or less recently urbanised areas catch up with the rest of the city, they promote urban sprawl and have failed to encourage the balanced development of urban regions based on a planning strategy that makes use of efficient planning and controlled land use.

It is to tackle these challenges that the Tunisian State has decided to carry on its efforts through the Social Urban Policy Support Programme (Programme d’appui à la Politique de la Ville or PROVILLE), implemented over the period 20132017 (financed by the Tunisian State, AFD, European Union and the European

Investment Bank). While pursuing intervention in order to improve the living environment in 119 poor areas, this programme aims to structure public urban policy to promote better urban management across the country. By permitting public actors to engage in strategic reflections and reforms in the housing, land rights and urban planning sector and develop tools for analysis and evaluating potential, it is hoped that better management of urban dynamics can be achieved.

Furthermore, the PNRU has made it possible to launch pilot operations of urban upgrading of four historic medinas (Tunis, Kairouan, Sfax and Sousse) and start a study to draw up a public policy for intervention in historic centres. The treatment of medinas is today a major challenge for sustainable urban development in Tunisia and the aim is to breathe new economic and social life into impoverished old centres that are running out of steam.

Amandine Dukhan ©AFD

Part 2

Ten key recommendations Slum area in Abidjan for intervening in precarious settlements (Ivory Coast)

5

Prioritise improvements to services, facilities and public spaces for in situ rehabilitation operations

Why concentrate on spaces, facilities and public services?

cohesion through the creation of new spaces for social interaction.

In order to begin a process enabling inhabitants to reclaim their area by improving its image, the treatment of public space and networks is a priority.

For in situ rehabilitation projects, public resources are concentrated on improving an area’s public services, spaces and facilities through planning or rehabilitation of 1) works (rainwater drainage channels, semi-collective

sanitation networks or connection to public sanitation networks, drinking water supply, public lighting), 2) health, social welfare, educational and cultural facilities and 3) public spaces (roads, squares, sidewalks, etc.) which clean up, open up and catalyse the area by reattaching it to the city. This group of interventions enables the development of economic activities, creates better interaction with the rest of the city and reinforces social

Investissements Investment

Direct Bénéfices benefits directs

Externalités Positive outcomes positives

Roads/drainage

By organising the urban fabric around main routes, facilities and public squares and gardens, public spaces and urban facilities play an essential role in local life (space for trade and traffic, support for social life and a locus for representations by the local authority and for community identity).

Improving them leads to significant improvement in the area’s image.

• Opens up the area

• Develop economic activities

• Mobility of inhabitants

• Access to employment opportunities

• Less vulnerable to floods • Reduction of risks to health through

better rainwater drainage

Water/sanitation

• Reduction in risks to health • Reduction of costs to inhabitants

• Reduction in epidemics and infant

mortality • Social integration • Quality of life improvement

Public lighting

• Better security

• Less delinquency/criminality

• Possibility of extending trading and

• Economic dynamism

social activities into the night

21 <

Investment Waste management

Direct benefits •C leanliness of area

Positive outcomes • Positive impact on the environment

•R eduction of sanitary and pollution

risks

and public health • Job creation • Clean living environment

Communal social facilities

•H ealth

• Better social and professional

integration of inhabitants

•E ducation •L eisure

Trade facilities

Public spaces (parks, gardens, squares)

•D evelop activities

• Reduce unemployment

•L ocal economic dynamism

• Increase revenues for communities

•C reation of space for leisure activities,

• Residents reclaim their areas

particularly for the youngest residents • I mprove area’s appearance •E ncourage trade and interaction

• Reduction in violence, more social

cohesion • Positive image for the area

•C ombat urban heat islands and

improves areas’ ability to deal with climate-related crises (floods, etc.)

Self-building, a solution to be tailored to each intervention context Recourse to guided selfbuilding means the lack of quality homes can be tackled at minimal cost.

This solution can be useful in the context of rehousing slum families but also in planning for serviced plots, rebuilding projects following natural disasters or in situ rehabilitation. To be efficient, self-building must benefit from technical (quality control of materials and works, respect for norms), financial (grants to top up household funding) and legal guidance as well as having social accompaniment.

© Agence de développement urbain (Nouakchott)

Redevelopment in the Kebbe of El Mina, Nouakchott (Mauritania)

Structured in this way, self-building is pragmatic because it enables accompaniment of a process that is already underway in many precarious settlements. However, that does not mean it is the right solution for every situation and the results seen in projects taking this approach vary greatly.

One example is the Support Programme for Slum and

>22

Shantytown Clearance (Programme d’Appui à la Résorption de l’Habitat Insalubre) financed by AFD in Morocco, where it was observed that recourse to this operating method can lead to the most vulnerable families being excluded. There are also financial (its cost is added to land costs and temporary housing during the works) and technical reasons, with some households incapable of doing the work themselves (disabled or sick people, widowed or divorced women, old and isolated people).

Self-building must therefore be handled with care. A range of tailored formulas exist: technical construction guidance, financial arrangements making it possible to benefit from money from another household (“associated third party” as experimented with in Casablanca) or self-promotion (an interesting alternative that does not require residents to take part in construction work itself but instead makes them the “project managers” of the construction process).

Creating or improving roads is generally the starting point for intervention.

It enables water, sanitation and electricity networks to be installed, increases mobility (pedestrian or with motor vehicles) and makes solid waste collection easier. The creation of access roads helps open up the area, facilitates the circulation of goods and increases accessibility for public transport.

On the other hand, surfacing greater areas makes the ground more impermeable and increases the risk of flooding, which by definition makes it necessary to improve rainwater drainage (with drains running the length of the roads). But these improvements to public space can directly encourage the development of trade and services. This momentum can be sustained through the creation of trade facilities (covered markets, locations for activities, etc.).

These various upgrades can create a virtuous circle of development. In addition to the direct benefits that arise, each investment also has positive outcomes over the long term.

Aiming to catalyse home improvements These investments constitute AFDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pillars of intervention in precarious settlements. At the end of this chain, improvement in the overall environment is expected. Direct support to upgrade all the homes in an area is difficult: it represents a very high financial cost and poses numerous legal problems because it involves acting on private properties, which necessitates legal and financial structures that are complex to implement. That said, in some contexts provision of support systems to improve or rebuild homes is justified and can lead to contributions from families and enable technical support to ensure better quality

construction (earthquake-resistant or of better environmental quality).

By mobilising residents to improve their habitat, in situ rehabilitation indirectly makes use of the contributive capacities of residents and the private sector.

It is generally observed that improvements to the living environment start a virtuous circle of private initiatives to improve buildings. Installation of better public services is often seen by residents as a sign the public authorities are acknowledging their occupation of the site and they therefore feel there is less risk of eviction. Residents feel more confident in starting works that could lead to them completely rebuilding their homes. It is therefore important to think about ways to guide and accompany these works with the aim of bringing the area progressively up to standard.

Take care not to exclude the most vulnerable people While improvements to services, facilities and public spaces are synonymous with improvements to living conditions, they can also lead to social exclusion: >W hen

the poorest households do not have the means to access improved services (if they have to pay to be connected to a new drinking water network, for example) or are unable to adapt to increased costs resulting from the work (water and electricity bills, higher rents, higher trading prices, etc.).

Part 2Â

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

who cannot afford higher rents or some property owners who resell their plots to benefit from the higher prices.

In situ rehabilitation therefore creates a paradox. While it improves living conditions in poor areas in order to reduce poverty, it sometimes leads to the most vulnerable populations having to leave, missing the target of the intervention and displacing the problem.

To rehabilitate areas without missing the social aim of the projects, it is vital to consider tailoring standards to the residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ability to contribute in order to avoid disproportionate responses and prevent these working class areas turning into exclusively middle class areas with the poorest people being forced out.

The best scale for intervention can also be considered. This should neither be too small in order to avoid too great a transformation on a single site for a limited number of residents, nor too large in order to avoid a diluted impact.

Furthermore, the facilities must be equitably distributed across the whole area in order to avoid benefiting some residents more than others, which can create imbalances and potentially conflicts within an area or between areas.

Finally, to be sustainable, these public investments must take into account from an early stage issues surrounding their management and maintenance, which will involve making sure inhabitants are aware of the need to respect and maintain infrastructure.

>W hen

a process of gentrification gets underway: if improvements managed by the public authority profoundly transform a poor area, they can lead to a rapid increase in land and property values with the result that the original inhabitants are forced out, for example renters

23 <

Access to drinking water and sanitation i n precarious settlements

Š Mathilde Chaboche

Water standpipe, Antsiranana (Madagascar)

Because water is a basic need, extending access to water has to be a priority. The challenge is twofold: on the one hand the population needs access to water, on the other hand its quality must be guaranteed.

Beyond the basic need, water and sanitation (treatment of waste water and drainage of rainwater) are significant sanitary challenges (waterborne diseases, germ proliferation, soil pollution).

Installing water standpipes is the most frequent response because the needs of the greatest number of people can thereby be met under equal conditions of access and at a minimal cost. Creating individual connections is more complex, the connection and maintenance costs are significantly higher and home access to water tends to increase consumption and therefore the water charges households must pay.

Nevertheless, if the situation is appropriate, this solution is to be encouraged because it offers an undeniable increase in comfort and often responds to a strong desire on the part of residents.

Generally speaking, technical choices must take into account inhabitantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; financial situation. To this effect, householdsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; willingness to pay must be considered. This means looking at what they are able to contribute financially and how willing they are to pay for the proposed service. This can be influenced by various factors: insecure land tenure leading to unwillingness to pay for networks to be installed or

>24

even cultural aspects (for example, in Latin America free water is seen as a right).

Integration of the most vulnerable social categories is vital if the poorest inhabitants are not to be forced out by fee increases. To this end initiatives are being developed, for example autonomous water service management (Cochabamba, Bolivia) or prepaid cards (subsidised by the State for the poorest households).

Beyond technical criteria (topography, tangled narrow streets, high population densities, soil types), extending water services may be held back by a limited production capacity at city level.

Particular attention must be paid to access to an improved sanitation system and waste management as development levers. Improving sanitary and environmental conditions is directly related to this.

Treating wastewater and rainwater can be achieved using solutions that are technically simple (drains, sewers, gutters, treatment stations), but they may turn out to be difficult and expensive to install in precarious settlements as a result of the urban morphology.

Informal settlement, Diyarbakir (Turkey)

©AFD

6

Understanding land tenure insecurity The question of land tenure plays a crucial role in urban politics and it can be used as a tool for reducing inequality. Three main linked factors lead to land tenure insecurity in developing cities and, a fortiori, in their informal areas.

1. Unequal land distribution creates scarcity: take for example the colonial heritage of big agricultural domains in Latin America (hacienda or sesmaria), which are made up of big private tenements that “freeze” access to land tenure in areas that today have undergone urbanisation and are therefore often occupied without permission. Generally speaking, the attractiveness of cities adds to pressure on land given the demand from all social classes. By increasing commercial land value, market forces contribute to the “silent” expulsion of poor people out of the city.

2. Convoluted local laws render land tenure situations incomprehensible: in many developing countries, in particular Sub-Saharan Africa, land rights regimes inherited from the colonial period and local cultural practices named “customary law” coexist. This system often means the legal and customary rights get tangled up in one another, making land

Promote secure land tenure for in situ rehabilitation

tenure situations almost impossible to understand in cities undergoing sustained growth.

3. Most people resort to informal real estate markets: the development of informal property markets is explained by the lack of official supply but also by the demands (in time and costs) and the complexity of the bureaucratic procedures that characterise the official market.

The particular land tenure situation of precarious settlements These factors all apply to informal areas where the inhabitants generally do not have official property documents.

They may well have purchased the right to occupy and/or build, but outside the official system. This situation may arise from the fact that the people distributing plots and developing the land for resale may themselves not have received or built on the basis of official property documents or permission. Some legally registered areas may also be the objects of informal commercial transactions. In all cases, the lack of official permission has an impact on residents’ ability to demand their rights when threatened with eviction and also on their ability to resell, mortgage or pass on property as inheritance.

The rights of residents who rent their house and/or the land they occupy, without legally registered lease contracts, are in an even weaker position in complex land tenure situations. Land tenure insecurity in the broad sense is one of the biggest drags on residents’ willingness to invest in building improvements.

From the point of view of public authorities, entire areas are in this way removed from their management and tax regimes even if, in developing cities, precarious settlements are far from being the only “grey” zones exempt from paying land use or business taxes. This leads to a lack of knowledge that makes it harder both to carry out forward-looking urban planning and collect local taxes that are vital for sustainable improvements to urban management.

What tools exist to tackle land tenure insecurity?

Different steps to meet land tenure security challenges have been tested, with results that vary from one context to another. To fight directly against land tenure insecurity as part of an in situ rehabilitation project, three major tools are available.

25 <

Tool

Definition

Individual land tenure regularisation

Individual permission under the official legal system, based on land use rights exercised until this point without being legally registered (informal purchase, customary property, etc.).

Advantages

Limitations

•A ccess to private property

•H igh cost

on land

•L ong administrative

•A ccess to the formal

economy for poor residents •R esidents’ status is

procedure exceeding the project duration •N ot always compatible with

definitively secured

customary law

•E ncourages home

•R isk of eviction for renters

improvements

•R isk of resale and

resettlement in other makeshift areas

Collective land tenure regularisation

Acquisitive prescription

Permission under the official legal system based on land use rights exercised until this point without being legally registered (informal purchase, customary property etc) via the delivery of collective rights (long leases or land use rights) allocated to cooperatives or community associations, which rent to households.

•R eduction in costs for

This principle recognises that land belongs to the people occupying it and putting it to use in a peaceful way without any dispute arising over a defined period (5 to 30 years depending on the legislation).

This may or may not see official permission granted depending on the context.

•F lexible and rapid procedure

Promoting land tenure security without making regularisation a prerequisite for intervention Unfortunately it is clear that the most ambitious projects for individual land tenure regularisation are also the most complicated. The long and arduous administrative procedures as well as the number of titles to be distributed often mean that in reality they never or only partially deliver results. As a result, more flexible, scalable and creative solutions to secure land tenure must be encouraged (collective rights, acquisitive prescription, etc.).

>26

•L ack of available feedback at

residents

this point

•L imited risk of exclusion for

the poorest

structures

•S uits communities that are

already structured

•R isk of clientelistic

exploitation

•S uited to a wide range of

contexts •M eans bottlenecks and

conflicts with official rights holders who have not paid attention to their property over a long period can easily be overcome

In addition, tools for finding and registering fragmented plots (simplified land registry, street addressing, etc.) are the first steps towards local governments regaining sight of these areas and thus towards the possibility of planning their development. Land registries and street addressing enable better oversight of territory and are urban management and tax management tools that also indirectly contribute to secure land tenure. These are the solutions to encourage for in situ rehabilitation projects in precarious settlements when secure occupancy is a prerequisite

•A ssumes social and civic

•C an only be applied after

a long period has elapsed (during which there is no official recognition of occupation) •R isks giving tacit approval to

informal urban sprawl •M ay lead to problems if

customary use rights are superimposed on the land

for development. This does not however mean that allocation of a land title should become a condition for intervention by the public authorities.

While these tools may prove themselves from case to case, no great claims should be made for their effect on better-regulated urban development unless significant land tenure reforms are considered, which are difficult to implement because they are highly politicised.

In order to better regulate sometimes-competing strategies

and interests relating to urban land use, and to guarantee secure occupancy for all, transparent, sustainable and efficient land tenure governance should aim to include all the relevant actors (State, communities, customary and religious institutions, official and unofficial developers). Some lines of thought

already exist and should target as a priority: > Simplifying

recognition of land rights whatever their source;

> Increasing

the supply of land and housing, particularly by revising

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

urban regulations, simplifying administrative procedures and arbitration or land tenure agreements that encourage land and housing supply for the poorest (UNHabitat and Cities Alliance 2011).

François Laurent ©URBAPLAN

Land registry and street addressing, tools to promote secure land tenure Designed to increase municipalities’ fiscal resources, the simplified registry (or Urban Land Registry in Benin) enables creation of a geographically referenced map of plots in the city, a database and finally tax, land tenure and urban applications (UN-Habitat/GLTN 2012).

The registry was set up based on accelerated registering and inventory Marking a concession, procedures. It is based on registering Dakar (Senegal) plot owners regardless of the source of their right to the land (official, customary, informal, etc.). As a result, this tool indirectly helps secure land tenure by considerably reducing fraudulent practices and the risk of conflicts over land.

This step also helps strengthen the local contracting authority in its capacity of administering its territory.

A tool that complements the land registry, street addressing makes it possible to “localise a plot or a home on the ground.

That means defining its address based on a system of maps and signposts giving the numbering or names of roads and buildings” (Farvacque-VitKovic 2005). Based on computerised cartography, this system also collects information that is useful for urban management (buildings, services, facilities etc including in informal settlements) and financial management (inventory of taxable local goods and assets, such as for example advertising boards).

This tool also facilitates setting up a local tax regime by increasing and deepening knowledge of taxable “material”, particularly regarding local tax. In the same way, paying these taxes constitutes a form of guarantee legitimising residents’ occupancy, be they owners, renters or squatters.

Securing land tenure in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

When the property is publicly owned, the residents receive a title known as “concession of real usage right” giving them the usufruct for the land, which remains public property. When the land is private, the inhabitants can launch legal proceedings as long as they have occupied the land for at least five years without interruption and without any opposition. If these conditions are fulfilled, the Municipality accompanies residents in acquiring the land by acquisitive prescription. This enables them to become

owners without encountering any additional costs. Given the difficulty in recognising individual plots in the favelas, this principle is often applied collectively, with the property being allocated to the community. Finally, if the inhabitants do not fulfil the conditions, the Municipality can, as a last resort, repossess the land from the owners with the goal of transferring it subsequently to the occupants.

© Nora Preuvot

In Rio de Janeiro, the Favela Bairro municipal programme aims to transform favelas into normal districts (bairros). The plans are accompanied by a secure land tenure policy.

In Rio de Janeiro as in the rest of the country, favelas occupy both public and private land.

Parallel to this regularisation process, the authorities also create a system of addresses so residents can benefit from having an official address.

Rocinha favela, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil)

27 <

Hatem Chakroun ©AFD

Area under construction in Agadir (Morocco)

7

Ensure residents’ needs match the sites and solutions for rehousing

Transparent selection criteria In contexts where residents are exposed to risks, whether natural or industrial in origin, it is appropriate to resettle them in more secure sites. In the same way, if significant works are due to take place in the area (roads, drainage), population displacements, sometimes on a large scale, are to feature in planning. In these different cases, it is worth remembering that this is very rarely something that the residents themselves wish for.

Transparent operating methods based on consultation with residents are therefore that much more necessary.

However, experience shows that displacement of precarious settlements residents is sometimes down to other concerns that are economic or political in nature, which may make sense from the point of view of public au-

>28

thorities but relegate social concerns to a secondary position. In this particular case, AFD would find it difficult to accompany such operations.

Any clearance of a precarious settlement and population displacement is inevitably an ordeal and a destabilising experience for those affected, even if the destination site or housing is objectively more welcoming and of better quality. This is particularly true for longstanding city centre slums and dilapidated old quarters.

Any displacement means leaving a central urban location that until now afforded various advantages (access to job opportunities, public facilities, social integration and a city lifestyle).

Resettlement in sites that more often than not are located on the periphery means brusque changes in their way of life, their living conditions and the way they work, which can sometimes be far harder to bear than the

destitution or squalid conditions they previously found themselves in.

It is therefore clear that for this method of intervention to be legitimate and benefit from the accompaniment of a donor such as AFD, it must make improving living conditions for residents its primary goal. It is in the most impoverished environments that resettlement – despite the disruption it causes – can truly improve people’s daily lives. Generally speaking, the principle should be not to begin demolition until better housing solutions have been identified and made ready to receive residents in order to facilitate the displacement and limit the transition phase.

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

Morocco: supporting an ambitious national slum redevelopment programme by accompanying resettlement

Hatem Chakroun ©AFD

Project title: Slum and Shantytown Clearance Support Programme (Programme d’Appui à la Résorption de l’Habitat Insalubre et des Bidonvilles or PARHIB) Dates: 2005-2010

Operation Essalam, Casablanca (Morocco)

Morocco is undergoing rapid urbanisation under the joint pressures of demographic growth and the rural exodus. The national social housing policy, initiated in the 1980s, reached a turning point in the 2000s, when, with World Bank support, the Slum and Shantytown Clearance Action Programme (Programme d’Action pour la Résorption de l’Habitat Insalubre) was initiated with the aim of redeveloping unofficial areas and clearing slums. In 2004, the programme was renamed “Cities without slums” (Villes sans bidonvilles or VSB). After experimenting with redevelopment and in situ rehabilitation, Morocco turned progressively towards slum clearance as its main response, with resettlement and provision of social housing.

The VSB programme demonstrates the transition from project approaches to an overall logical framework, via a series of reforms: • Developing a financial tool enabling access

to the banking system for low or unofficial income households (Mortgage Guarantee Fund, FOGARIM); • Setting up a national fund for social housing

projects and making public land available (Housing Solidarity Fund, fed mainly through a tax on cement); • Mobilising a single delegated contracting

authority, the Al Omrane Holding (HAAO), created by grouping together the government agencies responsible for housing, which is responsible both for meeting quantitative operational targets and for acting as the main urban and social contractor; • Getting the private sector involved in building

social housing with tax incentives; • Putting in place social accompaniment actions

driven primarily by the Social Development Agency (Agence de Développement Social or ADS), even if these actions are often confined

Contracting authority: Municipalities and Ministry of Urban Habitat Development and City Policy Delegated contracting authority: Al Omrane Holding (at national level)

to providing information packs to inhabitants (with the aim of making operational implementation easier).

Initially planned for the period 2005-2008 and finally postponed until 2014, the VSB programme has seen 43 “cities without slums” declared and has affected almost 240,000 households (2011 figures from the Ministry of Urban Habitat Development and City Policy).

Since 1999, AFD has accompanied Morocco in its campaign against shantytowns. Most of the operations funded under PARHIB envisaged allocating beneficiaries with serviced plots (sewage, public lighting and drinking water provision) on public land located more or less far away from the original sites. The plots were designed for self-building according to a set of specifications. Each household was given a property title that was non-transferable for five years. To encourage social diversity and diversity of use, the plots were mixed as far as possible with operations involving non-subsidised plots destined for middle-income households and commercial facilities.

However, although the great majority of households have seen improvements in their living conditions (building quality, increased living space, etc.), they also faced significant difficulties, mainly financial in nature. Between demolition of their “shanty homes” and the allocation of serviced plots or new housing, households had to pay moving costs and transitional accommodation costs and costs linked to taking over the new home or plot of land (and self-building costs if applicable).

The levels of debt involved in addition to the increased charges meant the poorest were excluded. The system thus led to “slippage” among the initial beneficiaries, which saw plots resold without authorisation and impoverishment of the most vulnerable residents.

Type of area: 9 slums and informal settlements undergoing consolidation Type of intervention: displacement and resettlement off-site with assisted self-building or rehousing Beneficiaries: 50,000 people Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €50 million loan

To remedy this, the ingenious “associated third party” concept was tried out in Essalam (Casablanca). Instead of allocating one plot per household, the same plot was sold to two households who could link to their financing plan a third party who would receive part of the building. Nevertheless, the system suffered from a weak legal framework, leading to litigation and impasses without suitable mediation solutions.

Furthermore, urban and social integration remains questionable after rehousing in sites on the periphery, with infrastructure (access to services, community, social and cultural facilities) generally being installed long after the residents arrived and which often lacked public transport. This situation is experienced by residents as a decline in their quality of life (relegation to the periphery) and upsets their daily routine (loss of landmarks, new neighbourhood, budget management, etc.).

The limitations of PARHIB are mostly down to a lack of consultation and social accompaniment.

As a result, the choice of resettlement sites and operating methods did not always take into account the expectations of the affected populations (proximity to the centre, access to employment, socio-economic profile, etc.). With an emphasis on fairness, individual solutions could have been found for the most vulnerable households. Highlighted by a social and economic impact study carried out in 2012, these limitations do not diminish Morocco’s commitment to what is an ambitious programme and merely emphasise the need to strengthen the key operator HAAO’s social and environmental skills.

29 <

Suitable resettlement options In order to tailor the resettlement offer and conditions, the different elements of residents’ lives must be taken into account (employment opportunities, charges, lifestyle, family organisation, etc.).

Audrey Guiral-Naepels © AFD

Secondly, care must be taken to ensure that displacement is not synonymous with increased exclusion, for example in terms of the selected resettlement sites’ access to the city (connection to transport networks, quality of public spaces, service and trade activities, etc.), de facto exclusion (or “slippage”) of the most vulnerable inhabitants due to the resettlement costs they must bear (investment and charges) or the unsuitability of the new housing to residents’ living habits. This means it is essential to provide social

>30

accompaniment before, during and after the resettlement operation to help residents settle into the new housing.

This kind of attention given to pre-existing ways of life will make it possible to tailor the offer precisely in terms of location, the way the housing is designed and its dimensions, the quality of public space in resettlement sites, access to public transport, etc.

Diversifying resettlement solutions makes it easier to respond to different needs. This is the case for operations to clear squalid housing in French Overseas Territories where proposed resettlement solutions may combine social housing that is eligible for an assisted purchase scheme (progressive social housing) with other housing for rent.

In sum, the aim is for displacement ultimately to be synonymous with improved wellbeing for inhabitants and not just about removing or displacing an urban problem.

This also means integration of these areas into the city from an institutional point of view, from having an urban operator exclusively steer resettlement to common law management of the new site by the local authority, involving actors in the relevant sector.

Slum clearance operation, Social housing for very low-income households (Mayotte)

© Mathilde Chaboche

Market in an informal area, Antananarivo (Madagascar)

8

Improve the area’s socio-economic development by supporting local initiatives and job creation

Any public intervention in a slum area will alter the pre-existing socioeconomic balance and bring new costs to bear on households. On the other hand, various improvements to preexisting socio-economic conditions may also arise as a result of the project: new jobs for local residents in so-called “highly labour intensive” phases (these jobs are however not permanent) or access to new opportunities thanks to the area’s opening up (revitalisation of markets that can be opened to customers from outside the area).

To ensure that interventions on precarious settlements do not miss their target of improving living conditions for residents, it is essential that increasing local incomes be

included as an objective to enable residents to deal with the new charges associated with the intervention.

To achieve this, projects should as far as possible be designed to avoid disturbing the fragile pre-existing socio-economic balances, particularly given that the informal sector is the main source of jobs and income for households in these areas.

Secondly, a commitment should be made to assist with the socio-economic integration of the populations benefiting from the projects. This can take various forms that can be adapted on a case-by-case basis: connecting job-seeking residents with potential recruiters, which can help remove the stigma associated with

slums, professional training, creation of market facilities in the area, support to help set up cooperatives, setting up suitable banking facilities or helping with access to microfinance, support to help set up small and informal water and waste service companies, etc.

In sum, it is often important to help precarious area populations gain access to common law systems, which they are often unaware of because of a lack of information, misunderstanding or fear that they will feel out of place.

With this in mind, development projects often put emphasis on the creation of micro-activities. They generate revenues and can have a knock-on effect that creates development momentum in the area. However, it must

Employment-Intensive Investment Programmes (EIIP) EIIP aims to use the installation of new facilities in slum areas as a way of creating new local jobs. It works to reduce poverty through recourse to untrained local labour. By offering work that does not require qualifications, the EIIP method has something to offer those most vulnerable to unemployment. To guarantee access to these jobs, the proposed salaries should take account of local salary levels (to avoid attracting other better-qualified groups of people to the work, thereby missing the original objective).

By generating new income, the EIIP method deepens the project’s impact on local development while also carrying out work at minimal cost, freeing up capacity for other actions in the area.

Recourse to the EIIP method is particularly well suited to lying surfaced roads, building facilities or putting in green spaces. However, this mainly provides work for men.

Thought must be given to how women can be employed.

Beyond the EIIP approach, these projects also offer opportunity to all those in the building and public works trade. This is all the more significant given that these are sectors that have strong need for labour. Skills at small and medium enterprises in the sector could be strengthened by putting in place training and specific guidance to help them respond to tendering by the public authorities that generally run these projects.

31 <

be remembered that without effective accompaniment, these initiatives mostly fail because inhabitants are sometimes poorly informed about the economic environment and/or have few organisational or administrative skills (Navez-Bouchanine 2008).

Whichever approach is taken to support economic development in an area benefiting from an urban project, these actions require dedicated professionals who are in a position to guide the economic reorientation of residents’ activities watchfully and effectively and who

have detailed knowledge of preexisting activities and potential markets.

Balbala, Djibouti bringing together infrastructure and urban social development Project title: Integrated Urban Development Project (Projet de Développement Urbain Intégré or PDUI)

©AFD

Contracting authority: State Secretariats for Housing and National Solidarity

Funded market in the PK12 area, Djibouti-city (Djibouti)

Delegated contracting authority: Djibouti Social Development Agency (Agence Djiboutienne de Développement Social)

Almost 70% of the Djibouti population lives in an urban environment and demographic projections show that this massive urbanisation is set to continue. The city of Djibouti is home to 60% of the national population. Living conditions are precarious for the majority (more than 65% of homes are built with salvaged material) and there is a widespread lack of secure land tenure (just 22% of households hold official property deeds).

Under the Urban Poverty Reduction Programme (Programme de Réduction de la Pauvreté Urbaine) launched by the State of Djibouti in 2007, several integrated urban development projects have been set up in the capital and secondary cities. The same year, the Djibouti city and region were created, leading to a skills transfer from the national to the local level. To accompany this, AFD has since 2009 been financing an in situ rehabilitation operation in the slum area of Wahle Daba in Balbala, a municipality in Djibouti city.

>32

The IUDP builds on the previous rehabilitation of the neighbouring PK12 area and brings together four areas of work: 1. Support for local development through setting up a community development fund to finance microprojects: material purchases for community facilities, funding of intangible actions such as professional training, literacy classes, education or health programmes, etc. Managed by a committee made up of political and association representatives selected according to representativity criteria, this fund enables direct involvement of residents, reinforcing their sense of ownership of the project; 2. Creation of community facilities: a community development centre with sports pitch, a health centre, a police station, a training centre for women, a minibus terminal and a minibus repair workshop; 3. Infrastructure creation: surfacing for the main roads in the area (partly according to the EIIP method), extension of water and electricity

Type of area: 3 informal settlements undergoing consolidation Type of intervention: In situ rehabilitation Beneficiaries: 40,000 inhabitants Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €5.5 million (grant to the State of Djibouti) networks, installation of an electricity substation; 4. Training for community representatives and skills strengthening at the State Secretariat for Housing, which enabled creation of a map of Balbala and draft proposals for elements of a policy to redevelop and regularise slum areas. The State Secretariat for Housing has furthermore accompanied the project by strengthening its land tenure regularisation programme for Wahle Daba residents.

The work was finished in January 2014.

This project’s success demonstrates the value of a truly participative and community-based approach. The consultation approach creates fertile ground for local development, even if the lack of local experience in managing such a fund led to redundant and/or poorly-targeted schemes receiving funding, for example in the area of professional training.

Amandine Dukhan ©AFD

Residents of a precarious settlement in Abidjan (Ivory Coast)

9

Take residents into consideration from the beginning and for the duration of the project

Informing residents, a basic prerequisite The relationship between local authorities or municipalities and informal settlement residents is often complex.

The inhabitants suffer social exclusion that can mean they lack access to information, citizenship and local democracy. Public actors should take advantage of the project as an opportunity to include populations and encourage their social mobility. To do this, they should embark upon a new kind of relationship with informal area residents.

Right from the project’s early stages, it is essential to keep local people informed. This enables trust to develop between the authorities and residents and is a way of trying to win their support for the project.

The information must be complete, clear and comprehensible to all, and

it is therefore important to render technical jargon into simple language that is easy to understand by all. To be more effective, this information campaign must be communicated in ways that suit inhabitants’ social and cultural level and particularly their level of literacy. This could include an information kiosk, brochures, a website, public meetings, TV advertisements, organised visits to resettlement sites, etc.

Furthermore, informing residents should not be considered to be merely an early stage of the project but instead as an ongoing process that culminates in key moments (launch, demolition, resettlement, etc.) so residents can follow the project’s advancement.

Giving residents transparent and supportive information about their fate and that of their area is a mark of respect, which will however only

be credible if public actors’ behaviour corresponds to the messages they are sending (in particular relating to the timetable, demolitions as part of the operation, costs, etc.).

Taking this further by adopting social management of projects at all stages The projects should not be managed just as highly technical urban projects but equally – and just as importantly – as social interventions affecting vulnerable populations. This attention given to the social factor must be present in all project stages and requires implementation of a specific component, which can come under different names depending on context and its specific aims.

Social management of an operation assumes at a minimum adopting a principle of fairness in dealing with the problems that will inevitably arise.

33 <

Faced with such heterogeneous social situations, it makes sense to seek solutions on a case-bycase basis while striving to avoid favouritism among inhabitants and any misappropriation of the project’s upsides to the benefit of one actor or another, public or private.

This social approach must also be apparent during the ex post evaluations that must examine not just the quantitative project impact (number of homes created, number of people resettled, etc.) but also the social impact.

An even more ambitious aim: getting residents involved in project design

expectations and grievances to be heard.

To take this further, the project can call for residents to participate and cooperate in drawing up the project’s direction and content.

Such cooperation aims to optimise the project so it benefits from individual and collective support. It can be based on individual dialogue carried out via surveys and/or community dialogue at public meetings, local area assemblies, etc.

This enables residents’ opinions,

However, in order that the exercise not be limited to a mere consultation, it is useful to allow residents to be proactive and present their own suggestions. Their participation can take place at all project stages (appraisal of needs, planning investments, etc.). The aim is for the residents to take ownership of the project, which among other things ensures there is coherence between stated aims and priority needs.

Social interventions in urban projects

Tackling a project’s social challenges involves putting in place a dedicated team with a clear function. Two types of intervention are possible: François Laurent ©URBAPLAN

1- Urban and social project management (maîtrise d’œuvre urbaine et sociale or MOUS)

Working with residents, South Pikine Informal Area, Dakar (Senegal)

From an upstream stage of the project, a social operator (depending on the case: local development association, NGO or a public body) can be engaged as an intermediary between residents, local civil society and the public and private operators (the companies carrying out the work, for example) in charge of the project.

This intermediary function should make it possible to have the needs and expectations of residents “float up” towards decision-makers in order to tailor the project to residents’ needs. Based on knowledge of the project’s social context, the social operator can make recommendations to the contracting authority that will be decisive for the project (social resources and potential, perspectives of transformation).

In the other direction, the urban and social project management should

>34

also enable the project’s direction and constraints to “filter down” to the people on the ground amid attempts to explain the intervention to inhabitants and win their support for it. It thus performs a social accompaniment function.

2- Social accompaniment of the project Once the project is finalised and being implemented, social accompaniment will facilitate access to and ownership of the project by residents. This accompaniment can take the form of local initiatives, workshops or intermediation. This step is essential for identifying exclusionary risks during the project.

Generally speaking, a great deal of work remains to be done in setting up such actions, notably by raising awareness of their usefulness among operators and contracting authorities. The Moroccan effort in this respect under the PARHIB project led to production of a guidebook aiming to disseminate these practices and serve as training support for agents working on behalf of contracting authorities (Navez-Bouchanine 2008).

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

François Laurent ©URBAPLAN

Community planning: a tool for empowerment?

South Pikine Informal Area, Dakar (Senegal)

Community planning is a tool that can be useful for establishing investment priorities alongside residents and spreading them across the area. This list of expectations and development priorities in areas, drawn up by the community, constitutes a basis for dialogue and a shared point of discussion between residents, the contracting authority, donors and operators. It enables discussion to be widened to take in the entire zone lived in by residents without being limited to the administrative boundaries of an area. It can be achieved through public meetings with the public project manager and its partners during which residents can prioritise needs and plan interventions. Having residents participate in choosing the plans is designed to ensure their subsequent support for and use of them.

Implementing a participative approach cannot be improvised and requires clear guidelines. Dialogue with inhabitants can get underway once the overall project principles have been defined by public actors. This must focus on topics where there is still room for manoeuvre and discussion (it is pointless and even harmful to run a show consultation on topics that have already been fixed and options that have already been decided upon).

It requires mobilisation of all project actors (local communities, consulting

firms, NGOs, etc.). In order to include all affected residents without marginalising minority groups who find it hard to get their voices heard, participative steps must be based on detailed knowledge of the local system and the complex network of private, social and public relationships that exist between the residents themselves.

Cooperation and participation actions are more or less easy to set up depending on the intervention context.

They resonate most in Latin America.

While this approach can be beneficial, there are two limitations: • Firstly, the priority needs may not reflect those of all residents (women and young people are often excluded in this way); • Secondly, residents may not fully appreciate the implications of their selected priorities: to achieve real empowerment, it is important to make an effort to educate residents who may have skills and abilities as citizens but who are not urban management professionals. Particular care must be taken to explain the repercussions of proposed choices in terms of charges, maintenance, management, etc.

Getting civil society involved there is that much easier because participative policies are already the norm and precarious settlements have a strong pre-existing organisational fabric.

Participation is therefore not imposed from above and it is necessary first to understand local power structures rather than importing models that have been established elsewhere.

35 <

French Overseas Territories clearing slum areas and work towards the socio-economic reintegration of residents The French Overseas Territories, where urban growth has taken place at a later stage and more rapidly than in mainland France, are witnessing informal settlement and slum trends that are close to those seen in developing countries (IEDOM/IEOM 2010). The scale of the problem means the situation is relatively urgent: the French Overseas Territories today contain between 70,000 and 100,000 informal homes. In the Antilles and Réunion, despite the persistence of informal areas on the peripheries of certain cities, shantytowns have been significantly reduced since the 1980s. The opposite is true in Guyana and Mayotte, where strong growth in informal settlements can be observed. AFD is intervening in these territories to accompany public policies designed to clear precarious settlements.

AFD is participating, on its own account and for the French State, in the capital of seven Overseas Department real estate companies (Sociétés immobilières d’Outre-mer or SIDOM: SIDR in Réunion, SIM in Mayotte, SIG in Guadeloupe, SIMAR in Martinique, SIGUY and SIMKO in Guyana and SIC in New Caledonia). The main

operators in their territories, the SIDOMs own half of all the rented social housing in French Overseas Departments, amounting to around 75,000 homes. They also intervene as planners, particularly in operations to clear squalid housing (Résorption de l’habitat insalubre or RHI).

RHI is a designation for public operations, under regional or inter-regional authority, which are coordinated at the level of a very poor area, generally also exposed to natural risks (earthquake, cyclones, flooding, etc.).

It involves freeing up land or housing blocks that are not suitable for habitation through public acquisition with financial assistance from the State. This land is then connected to services and developed so it can accommodate new buildings while those that have been retained are renovated.

The rebuilding project corresponds to residents’ rehousing need, with a large proportion of the homes coming under subsidised ownership schemes (LATS) or designated as rented social homes. Projects also include complementary public facilities and shops according to the scale of the operation. This system is based on

taking residents’ individual rehousing needs into account and aims to resettle them in the original area. Social accompaniment schemes of the urban and social project management (maîtrise d’œuvre urbaine et sociale or MOUS) are generally implemented beginning from the upstream stage via social analysis and analysis of residents’ situation and after that through social accompaniment measures.

However, this type of operation is difficult to implement (Letchimy 2009). MOUS schemes require strong social and technical engineering as well as large-scale public funding. They also need to be carried out by actors that are capable of running complex operations that take place over long durations. Finally, they do not address other problems such as impoverishment and the dilapidation of private housing in old city centres or the spontaneous development of isolated makeshift homes here and there. One solution is also to offer a sustainable supply of accessible housing in order to accompany demographic growth and the strong demand seen in certain regions.

Tuband project in Noumea

Audrey Guiral- Naepels ©AFD

Project title: Squalid homes clearance in Tuband, Noumea, New Caledonia Dates: 2002-2007 Contracting authority: New Caledonia Housing Company (Société Immobilière de Nouvelle-Calédonie or SIC)

Type of intervention: Redevelopment of a slum with rehousing Number of beneficiaries: 2,500 Amount and nature of AFD financial assistance: €3.2 million (AFD loan)

Type of area: 1 slum The Tuband eco-area (New Caledonia)

>36

An operation to clear squalid housing was launched for the “Tuband squat” located on private land in the heart of Noumea city to rehouse the 137 extremely vulnerable families there.

After a long consultation process, each household received social housing.

Resettlement took place in waves over two years and residents also benefited, via implementation of urban and social project management, from personalised accompaniment to encourage their access to employment (creation of a professional accompaniment unit).

The 20 hectares of land thus freed up were then able to accommodate an eco-area project, whose design and realisation were carried out by the New Caledonia Housing Company (SIC). More than 600 social homes were constructed according to a design encouraging a social mix. Specific needs were taken into account (5% of homes allocated to disabled people). Public facilities were added to the project (school, college, community centre, sports facilities, etc.) and were built according to ambitious environmental standards (green spaces, waste sorting,

cycle lanes, energy efficiency, etc.).

The SIC, with AFD’s financial assistance, played a major role as both planner and builder. Beyond rehousing more than 1,500 people on site, this operation created 1,000 jobs (construction sector and service provision) and enabled several businesses to locate on the site.

The operation’s quality is partly the result of the originality of the technical and financial arrangement, which brought together around the table the State, the province, Noumea city, financers and the SIC.

Clément Larrue © AFD

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

Aerial view, Port-au-Prince (Haiti)

10

Integrate precarious settlements into urban planning and management

The challenges for public policy towards slum areas relate both to the present (to improve living conditions) and the future (to prevent such areas from forming). In Sub-Saharan Africa for example, where the urban population is predicted to double by 2030 compared to its 2007 level (UN-Habitat 2013), it is particularly important to anticipate residents’ future land needs.

Joining up curative approaches (improving and clearing existing slum areas) and preventive approaches (anticipating demand and providing affordable housing, new population arrivals and demographic growth among the poor, programming the development of new suburbs and improving control of “encampments”) is a difficult exercise that requires motivated and effective public authorities. To face up to urban growth and offer its new and impoverished citizenry opportunities to prevent them having to turn to the informal market as the only way to find housing, efforts must be made to increase the supply of affordable social housing and plan plots of land that are legal and available at low cost. This implies increasing the production of social housing through operational public-

private partnerships and making regulatory frameworks more flexible, because they are too strict and too expensive to meet demand from the poorest.

One of the roles of donors such as AFD can be to make public authorities aware of how useful it can be to integrate the problems posed by precarious settlements into overall plans for the development of their region, in particular with regard to the costs associated with unplanned and uncontrolled urban sprawl. This should notably translate into planning urban mobility on the scale of the whole conurbation, which must include services to slum areas and the journeys that their inhabitants make.

To build planning and urban management capacity within local and national contracting bodies, training and awareness campaigns at several levels could be launched: for ministries and municipalities, but also for dedicated technical, financial and social operators, trained to be aware of the complexity of social and urban situations in precarious settlements. Capacity building could take place at project scale (support for implementing and coordinating a complex project), but

should include preparation for the “post-project” phase by anticipating means and skills provision for infrastructure and facility management in rehabilitated areas and planning for future operations and investments.

These actions must necessarily include coordinating the different elements of public action that have an impact on precarious settlements. In many cases, it is the contradictions between different public policies themselves – at different levels (local/national), based on different visions (access to property ownership for all/development of rented social housing) or focused on different sectors (land tenure/social, etc.) – that lead projects to failure.

The desired approach involves adopting coherent and ambitious public policies in order to go beyond a fragmented project-by-project approach.

AFD is effectively encouraging – with municipalities and under national policy frameworks – a global and integrated approach to urban landscapes, which would promote the emergence of a strategic vision guaranteeing the coherence, effectiveness and sustainability of development actions undertaken.

37 <

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso using access to essential services as a development lever

©ONEA

Project title: Planning and Opening up of Peripheral Areas Project (Projet d’Aménagement et de Désenclavement des Quartiers Périphériques or PADQP) Dates: 2006-2011 Contracting authority: Ouagadougou Municipality Delegated contracting authority: National Office for Water and Sanitation (Office national de l’Eau et de l’Assainissement or ONEA)

Provision of a water standpoint in Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso) The capital of Burkina Faso is marked by rapid urban growth (7% average annual rate), which mainly takes the form of uncontrolled urban sprawl. One of the consequences of this is the development of a peripheral belt of spontaneously built and under-equipped settlements on unallocated land. However, this lack of facilities is not just something seen in self-built areas because it can also be witnessed in regular inner city areas where land has been allocated.

The distinction between planned and unplanned land comes down to land occupancy law (regular in the first case, irregular in the second). Unallocated areas are generally less well serviced than allocated areas because they are not recognised by the State.

Aiming to intervene in both contexts, AFD and Greater Lyon have accompanied Ouagadougou Municipality in implementing the Planning and Opening up of Peripheral Areas Project. The project aims to correct the differences between planned and unplanned areas and has enabled investments in basic networks and infrastructure, taking into account the specific needs of the sites: • For the five unplanned areas, the

priority was to extend water networks.

This helped to secure land tenure for the residents because as soon as they benefit from a public intervention they

>38

are better protected from eventual eviction. Access to water took place according to an innovative service delegation by the National Office for Water and Sanitation to small private operators which buy water from it according to a main water meter and then resell it at a fixed price based on the Office’s tariff grid via standpipes or individual connections. Today, after three years of experimentation, the five contracts are still in force and all have been renewed until the end of 2014.

The World Bank has replicated this model since 2009 in three unplanned areas while AFD has accompanied this system in three new unplanned areas since 2013. Furthermore, similar initiatives have been carried out

by AFD in Mozambique and in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

• For the nine planned areas, given

their very weak existing infrastructure, 31km of structuring roads have been created, helping to open up neighbouring unplanned areas, and nine local social facilities have been built.

By extending service networks, PADQP represents a first step towards inclusion of unplanned areas. The municipality is thus launching a dialogue between all institutional actors on the phenomenon of urban under-equipment. Since the

Partner: Greater Lyon Type of area: 14 under-equipped areas (nine with allocated plots of land, five without allocated plots) Type of intervention: In situ rehabilitation Beneficiaries: 300,000 beneficiaries including 100,000 benefiting from access to drinking water Amount and type of AFD financial assistance: €15 million (grant) Cofinancing: €0.8 million (grant from Greater Lyon)

end of the project in 2011, improvements to the built environment and the opening of new business and services have been observed on the ground.

However, by carrying out in situ rehabilitation of low-density peripheral areas, the project risks supporting the process of urban sprawl. Aware of this limitation, Ouagadougou Municipality, AFD and Greater Lyon have begun a dialogue around this issue, which has led to the creation of a Land Occupancy Plan. These actions to build capacity within municipal actors have led to urban planning that includes unplanned areas in public policy.

Part 2

Ten key recommendations for intervening in precarious settlements

Urban planning

Image 2014© Digital Globe

that are accentuated by States’ economic vulnerability, and finally 5) difficulties in ranking priorities given the urgent nature of the situations they face.

Slum areas Urban planning is an essential tool for enabling alongside the formal governments and local authorities to be in charge of urban fabric, their areas. The documents formalising this (urban Nairobi (Kenya)

planning masterplan, urban regulations, etc.) make it possible both to possess a snapshot of the territory at any given time and to make projections for future development. Urban planning makes it possible, in medium and long-term scenarios, to coordinate the different sectoral policies that apply to a territory. It represents political objectives and as such constitutes an essential tool for building urban governance.

In developing world cities, urban planning runs into numerous blockages mainly linked to: 1) imbalances between municipalities’ growing responsibilities and lack of capacity (human, technical and financial), 2) a lack of clarity in the division of roles between the different institutions, 3) problematic land tenure management, 4) difficulties in formulating a forward-looking vision

The profound changes (urbanisation, regional competition, globalisation, economic crises) that developing world cities have been through since the 1980s have led to an overhaul of traditional planning tools. The classic top-down planning approach – based on a model of organising cities around their major routes – has rapidly been seen to be too technocratic and unsuited for meeting the new challenges. In response, the concept of strategic spatial planning (Josse and Vauquelin 2011) emerged during the 1990s. It refers to the process of collectively drawing up a city project to be carried out by the government.

This approach aims to have a relatively flexible framework directed by strategic choices that are based on economic efficiency, fair land use rights and environmental preservation. It leads to development plans and blueprints of various scales (metropolitan, inter-regional, local area), land occupancy regulations (allocating a broad category of use rather than a strict and narrow one) and the creation of a permanent structure (urban planning agency, joint organisations) to monitor planning activities.

Including slum areas in the city necessarily takes place through adoption of a vision for the whole city region and its development. Integrating precarious settlements and their residents means posing questions about access to employment, education, services, culture and transport, etc. In situ rehabilitation projects alone cannot meet all these challenges. Strategic urban planning must take these parameters into account in order to achieve a coherent project with a vision for the city landscape as a whole.

39 <

ConclusioN

T

he risk of seeing the population living in insecrue areas double by 2030 (UNHabitat 2007) makes it all the more urgent to intervene, given that this is not an inevitable phenomenon. Initially the result of uncontrolled urbanisation, precarious settlements need special attention, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, home to the majority of people living in urban slums.

AFD is convinced that the city is a space full of potential. Faced with the scale of the challenges to be met, particularly with regard to the most disadvantaged populations, AFD is making intervention in precarious settlements one of its urban development priorities in developing countries.

The experiences presented in this document show that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to tackle poverty and reduce urban vulnerability.

But they have led to ten recommendations for guiding interventions by decision-makers, local governments and any involved operators and partners: 1 View precarious settlements as integral parts of

the urban landscape,

2 Create tailored interventions on a case-by-case

basis,

3 Root intervention in real political will among

local and national actors to act on precarious settlements,

4 Promote

in situ rehabilitation wherever

possible,

5 Prioritise improvements to services, facilities

and public spaces for in situ rehabilitation operations,

6 Promote secure land tenure for in situ

rehabilitation,

7 Ensure residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs match the sites and

solutions for rehousing,

8 Improve

the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s socio-economic development by supporting local initiatives and job creation,

9 Take residents into consideration from the

beginning and for the duration of the project,

10 Integrate precarious settlements into urban

planning and management.

>40

M

ore than a strict intervention methodology, which would find it difficult to embrace the diversity of situations seen on the ground, this document raises a series of questions that must lead to projects being properly tailored and taking account of numerous parameters to be analysed on a case-by-case basis.

existence has been denied and which sometimes do not even appear on official administrative maps. Agreeing to bring in services and carry out public action in these areas is a way of giving them â&#x20AC;&#x201C; finally â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the right to citizenship in the city, by integrating this idea into all sectoral policies and urban planning work.

Given the failure of brutal slum clearances (because they displace the phenomenon) and complete surgical reconstruction (too costly and slow), a consensus is progressively forming around the need for public intervention in these areas to rehabilitate and plan them, integrate them better into the city, improve living conditions for their residents and reduce their vulnerability and exposure to natural risks, especially climate-related risks. Nevertheless, it is still rare to see real government policy with national ambition replacing approaches that are piecemeal or limited to a few projects without a global vision.

Finally, one vital lesson to be learned is the need to combine interventions in existing precarious settlements and preventive actions to avoid the spontaneous formation of new makeshift areas. Planning serviced plots of land destined for the poorer classes and greater production of social or middle-income housing are ways of responding to the urban growth challenge and its manifestation as increasing numbers of poor people in the city. Creating a policy for housing that is accessible to the poorest people cannot be achieved without re-examining land tenure (knowledge of, availability, planning and servicing, security, land use governance, etc.), urban planning and finally the development of economic opportunities and fairer distribution of wealth.

Rehabilitation actions must be guided by the aim of achieving integration for precarious settlements and their inhabitants that is not just spatial in nature, but also social, economic and political. Residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; participation and the inclusion of a social dimension in projects are still too often downplayed, which often leads to failure (poorly directed investments, lack of community support, blockages, social slippage and worsening living conditions as a result of intervention, etc.).

Slum area interventions must be part of an overall political will and a practical project to live together in the city. What this really means is increasing the visibility of areas whose

41 <

Bibliography

On precarious settlements > Works AFD, Medellín, Modelo de transformación urbana : proyecto urbano integral – PUI – en la zona nororiental.

Consolidación Habitacional en la Quebrada Juan Bobo 2004-2007, 2011, 188p.

DAVIS Mike, Planet of Slums, Editions Verso, 2006, 249p.

NAVEZ-BOUCHANINE Françoise (coord.), Projets de résorption de l’habitat insalubre. Guide de l’action sociale, AFD, Agence de Développement Social, Ministère de l’Habitat et de l’Urbanisme du Maroc, 2008, 291p. > Articles CavaLlieri Fernando, « Le Programme Favela Bairro à Rio de Janeiro, Régénération intégrale de quartiers informels », in Métropolis, Rapport d’activité Atelier d’Antananarivo, Commission n°3, 2008, 79p.

DEBOULET Agnès, « Restructurer l’habitat précaire. Récits de meilleures pratiques », in Espaces et sociétés, n°131, 2007, p.67-83 DUPONT Véronique, « Mobilité, pauvretés : les villes interrogées. Création de nomades urbains et appauvrissement. Impact des politiques d’éradication des camps de squatters à Delhi », in Revue TiersMonde, n°201, January-March 2010, pp. 25-45.

>42

GIRAUD Pierre-Noël and RESTREPO Paula, « Mumbai, des droits de construire baladeurs au service du renouvellement urbain », in Etudes foncières, n°150, March-April 2011, pp. 14-18.

HOANG Xavier, « Lutter contre les bidonvilles et l’habitat insalubre : deux démarches différentes, le Maroc et la Tunisie », in Michailof Serge (dir.), A quoi sert d’aider le Sud ?, Economica / AFD, 2006, 483p.

JOSSE Guillaume and Pacaud Pierre-Alain, AFD, Améliorer les quartiers précaires : approches suivies au Burkina, Djibouti et Haiti, 2008, 13p.

Mansion Aurore and Michelon Benjamin, 2009, « La restructuration des quartiers précaires dans les villes du Sud », in Études foncières, n°137, Paris, pp. 14-17.

MANSION Aurore and RACHMUHL Virginie, « Nouakchott : le destin lié de la ville et des quartiers précaires », in GRAS Pierre (dir.), Voyage en Afrique urbaine : urbanisation, modernité et société, Carnets de ville, L’Harmattan, 2009, pp. 107-124.

METRA Brigitte, « Pour un autre mode de « Ville ». Vers un Micro-Urbanisme : les enseignements de l’expérience mexicaine de programme d’amélioration de quartier à Mexico », Le Laboratoire Think Tank Different, June 2012, 7p.

RAVALLION Martin, CHEN Shaohua and SANGRAULA Prem, « New evidence on the urbanization of Global poverty », Development Research Group,

World Bank, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4199, April 2007, 46p.

Soares Gonçalvez Rafael, « La politique, le droit et les favelas de Rio de Janeiro », in Journal des anthropologues, n°104-105, 2006, pp. 37-63.

TOUTAIN Olivier, « Au Maroc, la résorption des bidonvilles traverse le Printemps arabe », in Villes en développement, n°91, June 2012, pp. 6-7. > Reports and publications ALLOU Serge, CHOPLIN Armelle, HENNART Christophe and RACHMUHL Virginie, L’habitat, un levier de réduction de la pauvreté. Analyse du programme Twize en Mauritanie, GRET Online Studies and Work collection, n°32, May 2012, 143p.

ALLOU Serge, GRET, Associations et municipalités, acteurs ou figurants du développement local urbain en Afrique ?, Séminaire Développement institutionnel, Coopérer aujourd’hui, 1999, 20p.

WORLD BANK, OP 4.12, « Involuntary Resettlement », December 2001, 12p.

MATHON Dominique, Pauvreté et stratégie de survie dans les quartiers précaires de l’aire métropolitaine de Port-au-Prince, rapport final, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC-UN), August 2005, 60p.

UN-HABITAT, GLOBAL URBAN OBSERVATORY, Guide to Monitoring Target 11: Improving the lives of 100 million slum dwellers, 2003, 18p. > Theses DEBOULET Agnès, Vers un urbanisme d’émanation populaire, compétences et réalisations de citadins, l’exemple du Caire, Institut d’Urbanisme de Paris, 1994, 552p.

GERBEAUD Fanny, L’habitat spontané : une architecture adaptée pour le développement des métropoles ? Le cas de Bangkok (Thaïlande), carried out under supervision from Guy Tapie, Bordeaux Segalen University, 2012.

n precarious setttlements O in French Overseas Territories

WORLD BANK, INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, Rural-Urban dynamics and the Millenium Development goals.

Global Monitoring Report, 2013, 196p.

SCHMIT Philippe, Rénovation urbaine et habitat indigne dans les DOM, Conseil général de l’environnement et du développement durable, January 2012, 150p.

BARTHEL Pierre-Arnaud and JAGLIN Sylvie (coord.), Quartiers informels d’un monde arabe en transition. Réflexions et perspectives pour l’action urbaine, Conferences and Seminars AFD-LATTS, n°7, June 2013, 159p.

INSTITUT D’EMISSION DES DEPARTEMENTS D’OUTRE MER / INSTITUT D’EMISSION D’OUTRE-MER (IEDOM / IEOM), L’habitat dans les outre-mer français. Progrès, enjeux, disparités, February 2010, 77p.

CARREL Marion, GRET, Pauvreté, citoyenneté et participation.

Quatre positions dans le débat sur les modalités d’organisation de la participation des habitants dans les quartiers d’habitat social, Coopérer aujourd’hui, 2007, 54p.

LETCHIMY Serge, Rapport sur les dispositions particulières relatives aux quartiers d’habitat informel et à la lutte contre l’habitat indigne dans les départements et régions d’Outre-mer, recorded at the National Assembly presidency, June 2011, 61p.

CASTELLANET Christian, SOLANET Guillaume and FICATIER Yves, GRET/AFD, Adapter les pratiques opérationnelles des bailleurs dans les Etats fragiles, Expost. Série Evaluation et Capitalisation, 2006, 85p.

LETCHIMY Serge, Synthesis of the report on L’habitat insalubre et indigne dans les départements et régions d’Outre-mer : un défi à relever, September 2009, 9p.

CHOPLIN Armelle, Répondre au défi de l’habitat social dans les villes du Sud : l’exemple du programme Twize en Mauritanie, GRET Online Studies and Work collection, n°23, 2009, 23p.

On land tenure

CLERC Valérie, and RACHMUHL Virginie, GRET, Les marchés fonciers et immobiliers des quartiers informels à Phnom Penh, Cambodge : dynamiques et enjeux pour l’action publique, Coopérer aujourd’hui n°50, 2006, 30p.

> Works

LAVIGNE-DELVILLE Philippe, and DURAND-LASSERVE Alain, Gouvernance foncière et sécurisation des droits dans les pays du Sud : livre blanc des acteurs français de la Coopération, Comité technique Foncier et développement, 2009, 127p.

FARVACQUE-VITKOVIC Catherine (dir.), Street addressing and the Management of Cities, World Bank, 2005, 272p.

MANSION Aurore, and RACHMUHL Virginie, Bâtir des villes pour tous en Afrique : leçons de quatre expériences, GRET Online Studies and Work collection, n°31, April 2012, 143p.

DE SOTO Hernando, Le mystère du capital : pourquoi le capitalisme triomphe en Occident et échoue partout ailleurs, Paris, Flammarion, 2005, 302p.

UN-HABITAT, CITIES ALLIANCE, Housing the poor in African cities, 2011, 46p.

UN-HABITAT, GLTN, Guide du maître d’ouvrage. Les registres fonciers urbains, 2012, 128p.

43 <

Bibliographie > Articles Comby Joseph, ADEF, Sécuriser la propriété foncière sans cadastre, 2007, 20p.

DURAND LASSERVE Alain, « La question foncière en Afrique à l’horizon 2050 » in iD4D, published 9 October 2012.

DURAND LASSERVE Alain, and TRIBILLON JeanFrançois, « Objet d’une recherche sur les politiques foncières de l’Etat dans l’aménagement urbain », in Le Bris Emile, Le Roy Etienne, Leimdorfer François (dir.), Enjeux fonciers en Afrique noire, ORSTOM, Karthala, 1982, pp. 330-334.

MICHEL Aurélia, DENIS Eric and SOARES GONCALVES Rafael, Dynamiques foncières dans les villes du Sud, in Tiers-Monde n°206, 2011, 235p.

>44

On urban planning > Works Josse Guillaume and Vauquelin Zoé, De la planification urbaine à la planification territoriale stratégique.

Comment planifier les villes du Sud ?, AFD, May 2011, 24p. > Articles TRIBILLON Jean-François, « L’expertise européenne balance entre deux modèles de gestion urbaine » in Les Annales de la recherche urbaine, n°86, 2000, pp. 144-145.

Notes

45 <

Notes

>46

> Articles

Sur la planification urbaine

Comby, Joseph, ADEF, Sécuriser la propriété foncière sans ca> Ouvrages dastre, 2007, 20p.

DURAND LASSERVE, Alain, « La question foncière en

Josse, Guillaume, Vauquelin, Zoé, De la planification urbaine à

Afrique à l’horizon 2050 » dans iD4D, publié le 9 octobre la planification territoriale stratégique. Comment planifier les villes 2012.

du Sud ?, AFD, mai 2011, 24p.

DURAND LASSERVE, Alain, TRIBILLON, Jean-François, « Ob-

jet d’une recherche sur les politiques foncières de l’Etat dans > Articles l’aménagement urbain », in Le Bris Emile, Le Roy Etienne, Lei-

mdorferFrançois(dir.),EnjeuxfonciersenAfriquenoire,ORSTOM,

Karthala, 1982, pp. 330-334.

TRIBILLON, Jean-François, « L’expertise européenne ba-

lance entre deux modèles de gestion urbaine », Les Annales

MICHEL, Aurélia, DENIS, Eric et SOARES GONCALVES, Rade la recherche urbaine, n°86, 2000, pp. 144-145. fael, Dynamiques foncières dans les villes du Sud, in Tiers-Monde

n°206, 2011, 235p.

47 <

www.afd.fr

Agence Française de Développement (AFD) 5, rue Roland Barthes - 75598 Paris cedex 12 Tél. : + 33 1 53 44 31 31

>48