A Method-based Planning Framework for Informal Settlement Upgrading

John Abbott

Habitat International 26 (2002) 317–3

Resumed by Pindo Tutuko

•

Informal settlements house a significant percentage of the population of developing cities, yet there is no common planning framework for upgrading these settlements.  This paper argues for a return to a method-based approach for upgrading and sets out a planning framework.  

•

The key issue are vulnerability and  planning for the long-term sustainability of informal settlements.  It uses the experience of a pilot project in Cape Town.

Introduction

Upgrading of the settlements in situ is the most appropriate, it remains far from clear as to what is the most effective way to achieve this. 

The first step is to define what is meant by a method-based approach.

A planning framework that could provide the basis for a more generic, provides a basis for international collaboration, to provide the basis for long-term planning, cohesive and replicable manner.

Approaches

• An incremental approach to physical provision.
• Micro-planning at a community level.
• The creation of an holistic plan.

Defining the objectives of upgrading

• Around an identifiable community.
• It most distinctly from new developments.
• These settlements are characterized by high levels of poverty considered by the World Bank to be the primary objective of upgrading.

The Step

1. The starting point is a recognition that the physical and social conditions.
2. That informal settlements are generally physically marginalized environments.
3. That relates to the absence of opportunities for asset retention and growth.
4. It deals with perceptions of poverty. Of primary importance here is the dominance of economic definitions of poverty.
5. It vulnerability deals with the compromised use of space.

Specific Indicators

• physical risk associated with the site,
• personal risk,
• livelihood,
• ability to withstand shocks,
• ability to withstand negative trends,
• the recognition of intangible assets,
• the social value of tangible assets,
• the social value of communal assets,
• the impact on informal sector activity,
• spatial relationships.

The relationship between the informal settlement and the city

For a settlement to meet both of these goals it has to satisfy two distinct needs. 

1. It has to achieve internal cohesion. 
2. It has to be integrated into the surrounding areas, a process described by the Recife Declaration (UNCHS, 1996) as the integration of the informal city into the formal city.

Starting point for the development of the planning framework

1. To deal with the issues of social exclusion and sustainability (to turn the community outwards, spatially, socially and economically, in order to link it with the surrounding areas)
2. To integrate all the elements of vulnerability into the upgrading process.

Constructing the planning framework

1. A need to confront the physical constraints of the site itself.
2. Remain the needs of residents.
3. Issues arising at the level of the individual family or shack that affected the potential of those residents to participate fully in the decision-making.

Access and movement through the area it was agreed that the existing network of paths and tracks would be used wherever possible.

This network could be formalized. This constitutes the primary movement corridor. All other access routes have been planned as footpaths.

There is no differentiation between the main movement routes, and they are all shown as being the same.

Level 1: integration with the surrounding areas

The internal/external interface itself

Level 2: the spatial integrity of the settlement

This second level operated with a framework of a partnership between the community and the local authority.

The issues of physical risk, communal facilities, social services and movement corridors.

Level 3: addressing localized community needs . The upgrading of New Rest is built upon a policy of minimum relocation. The project is dealing with people in small groups.

In terms of institutional frameworks, the focus at this level shifts to one that is constructed around community decision-making. 

• The role of the local authority changes from being a partner to support the community and allowing the community to take the decisions. 
• And the tools of decision-making at this level are those of participatory planning. 
• This case study has attempted to show the importance of scale, and the way in which it is linked with different types of decision-making. 
• By focusing on level three, where it is most effective, this provides participatory planning with a logical base. It becomes the correct tool at the correct level.
• Sustainability is the central issue. And in this context the central element is the integration of public and private space. Both have to be dealt with together. 
• This contrasts with traditional approaches, which tend to create rigid boundaries.
• The rigid land use designation of urban planners. All of these are inappropriate in informal settlements.

Level 4: the individual family unit. It relates to the individual family or head of household (particularly in the case of single-parent families). The New Rest upgrading has focussed on two major elements, namely decision-making structures and spatial relationships. They rely on an extensive knowledge of the community derived from an in-depth demographic, social and economic survey of each household in the settlement coupled with experiential knowledge contributed by community groups and organizations and by the community development support group. The ability to manage all of this information and track and test the output from this multi-level decision-making process is made possible through the extensive use of a geo-spatial information management system constructed around a GIS interface.

Conclusions

• The upgrading of informal settlements is a process.
• Within this paradigm, the World Bank has identified poverty alleviation as the most pressing issue facing developing cities.
• It is a response to the failure of conventional approaches that emphasized physical development.
• two elements that then emerge as central to the settlement transformation process, namely spatial relationships and institutional/ organizational relationships.
• The first level of scale is that of the internal/external interface itself, which deals with the issue of integration of the settlement into the surrounding areas. 
• The second level of scale deals with the needs of the settlement as a whole, covering those needs that are common to the large majority of residents. 
• The third level of scale deals with small, clearly defined areas within the settlement, where families can be defined in decision-making terms as more homogeneous groups. 
• The fourth level of scale is the individual family unit, and in particular the head of household and partner within that unit. 
• The emphasis is on social and economic integration, but the tools used to provide the framework for achieving this are spatial integration and the formation of cohesive and appropriate institutional/organizational structures.

From an institutional/organizational perspective, this means that four distinct types of structure have to be considered, which can be summarized as follows.

• Stakeholders and consensus decision-making (decision-making across the internal–external interface),
• A partnership between community and government (settlement planning at a macro-level),
• Community-based participatory planning (settlement planning at a local level),
• Community development support (involvement of individuals in the decision-making process).

Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0197397501000509