Slum relocation v.s. amelioration comes up a lot in
development. Is it better to move slum residents to a dense apartment building
in the middle of nowhere, or spend the extra money to improve existing slum
infrastructure and services? The answer may seem obvious… just make the slums
better. Why would you take people out of their homes, their communities, and
put them in a tiny one-room apartment unit far away from the city? The
conditions of relocation communities are worse than the slums those people came
from… you hear about it all the time. I can remember watching a documentary
called “Ordinary Lives”, with shots of
the terrible, crammed, inaccessible apartments that were put up in Mumbai. The
documentary was full of interviews and testimonies from experts and slum residents
about the consequences of relocating.
I don’t deny the downsides of relocating.
But I do think it has some merit, and if done well, could improve the lives of
rural-urban migrants.
Governments and development organizations who build these
apartment buildings need to completely change the way they think about these
projects if they were to ever make a positive impact. The slum dwellers they
are building for need to be involved in the design and execution of relocation
projects from the very start. Too often, development practitioners assume they
know what’s best for the poor. That’s been a theme of my education as a
development practitioner from day one. The
wise know that they know nothing.
The use of local building materials and labour is incredibly
important. It just makes sense. Local materials and labour is good for the
environment and economy… end of story. The buildings you move the poor into
must we well serviced and designed for their lifestyle, which you would know
how to do by talking to them. Where slums are relocated matters a lot too. Slum
relocation projects are often frowned upon because they are far away from the
city, which matters because the poor often make a living either by working in
the city (if they can find any work), or selling whatever they can on its
streets.
Slums “work” because residents can start businesses out of
their homes. They create a community of people who trust and depend on each
other. If you take away the slum, lose those businesses and that community. Is
there any way to prevent that from happening? I don’t have the answer, but I
can think of some solutions. Have the bottom level(s) of the apartment building
be businesses run by apartment residents. Allow people to run a business from
their units, and allow them to advertise outside of the building to attract
customers. Create a service-sharing program amongst residents. Let families
chose where in the building they want to live, so they can be close to old
friends/neighbours/family.
In the end, slum relocation is about making the lives of the
poor better than it used to be. The evidence now seems to show that this isn't happening
now a days. But I think if poor were to have their voices heard, then
relocation projects could make the lives of the poor significantly better.
Do you think slum relocation could ever be positive for the
poor? If it could, then what would make it work?
You give evidence that slum relocation can be positive if done right. So if we, as only 3rd year INDEV students, realize the aspects that make relocation work, what is preventing governments and development organizations (who we would expect to be more knowledgeable and familiar with the issues) from incorporating those positive aspects into their plans?
ReplyDeleteI don't think anybody really knows the answer to that Bailey... it's a tough question indeed. I think it's mostly because it would involve more time and money than they are willing to put into slum relocation. But in my opinion, that extra time and money would be worth the benefits, without a doubt!
ReplyDeleteThis is only somewhat related, but I remember last term I wrote a paper on the privatization of water services in Manila. Something I found interesting was that one of the companies had a program that was specifically geared towards people in slums and low-income housing where they provided a large water pump service to the slums, and then let the people in the slums manage the distribution within their own community. Then, the slums were provided with safe drinking water and some of the cost was offset by the income from wealthier areas so it was more affordable for these areas.
ReplyDeleteThat's really cool Darrelle! That's a great example of how to bring services to slums so they don't need to be relocated. I'm definitely a little torn on which side of the debate I fall on, because examples like the one you give show that relocation isn't needed, but there's also so many examples of slums that would never have opportunities like that.
ReplyDeleteI like your suggested solution for improving slum relocation - not just in terms of the potential benefits for those being relocated, the improvement from slum conditions, and the attempted re-creation of the micro-economies that exist within slums, but also in terms of good urban planning (I'm thinking Jane Jacobs and "eyes on the street" with your idea of having businesses run out of the bottom floors of apartments). I realize it is difficult to change things that are already rooted in place, but as I'm sure you know, good planning from the outset can make a big difference into the future. So maybe slum relocation is what we need for a longer term solution?
ReplyDeleteThough on the other hand, while it sometimes seems easier to tear everything down and start over on the right foot, we obviously still have to consider the needs of those living in the slums and the tradeoffs of slum relocating versus upgrading, and anything that is done, like you say, would have to be done properly.
It's such a balancing act for sure Jordan. With respect to whether relocation is a long-term solution, I think it's going to have to be... considering the situation in most slums around the world. I mean, relocating people is kind of like giving them a new life, so we better do it right the first time and "start over on the right foot" like you said
Delete