Implementation of Eviction, Relocation and Upgrade Intervention in Disaster Risk Reduction
A fatal catastrophe striking a community or a society for any particular length of time may cause a prevalent loss that may exceed the said society’s ability to confront its current resources. In the attempt to mitigate risk caused by disaster, Implementing an intervention is crucial as it helps identify and reduce the risks caused by the disaster. Various interventions that take root are eviction, relocation, and upgrade.
Eviction of people, especially the poor and of low income by the government and high developers from the urban and city areas is widespread; a case study of Bogota in Columbia is a way of intervention in disaster risk reduction. The sprawling informal settlement coupled with the shortage of usable land poses a significant challenge to the government’s effort to support the informal housing, causing eviction (Everret, 2001). The eviction involves poorer groups transferring high-value land to upper-income groups or freeing the land to pave the way for infrastructure projects and the city expansion by the government. (Everret, 2001) posited that the government and high developers have justifiable reasons for eviction to back families from lands where development is bound to happen. Some displacement reasons include the development of new highways, dam projects, and luxury settlements. For the city improvement and beautification, (Everret, 2001) argued that the government and developers have to do away with the slum dwellers as many social problems stem from the slums. Additionally, citing environmental protection and ecologically reserving some areas as reserves justifies eviction of the poor by the government but only opens up the areas for luxury and commercial development.
Individuals and communities highly feel the impact of eviction as little to no notice of eviction is offered, leaving no time to deploy alternative measures. Compensation for relocation is rarely given to poor people. In turn, the psychological stress caused by disrupted social and economic relations, uncertainty, and health effects become rampant to the urban poor (Everret,2001). Hence the intervention by eviction has only created uncertainty in communities as the threat of eviction lingers whether the residents are evicted or not, which prevents housing investments and economic development.
Relocation intervention is another disaster risk implementation method involving clearance of slums and relocation measures. In the case study of Sao Paulo in Brazil, freeing land for construction work, avoidance of risk situations, and environmental protection are the major urban schemes relocation factors (Abiko, de Camargo Cavalheiro, 2015). The development of some municipalities like Sao Paulo in brazil resulted from the arrival of lower-income workers who were to build the highways in the region. The workers had to settle for the only available land, giving rise to Bairros-cota, a squatter settlement in an environmentally sensitive area. Due to the area’s sensitivity government opted to remove the families and relocate them to state housing development.
Although resettlement of people to equal or better-quality housing provides better accommodation and access to different amenities, removal still affects people’s rights. Involuntary displacement constitutes further to the poor people’s poverty. Many of the new settlement areas required people to interact on common area upkeep issues, which many did not play along with. Settlers sited that their previous sense of neighborhood was lost as they missed their friends and relatives following their new settlement, breaking their well-known social network. Nevertheless, the resettlement brought some positive aspects, including employment availability and ease of job access.
Finally, upgrade, especially in slums, is another measure of reducing disaster risk. Slum formation and expansion contribute to a growing population, especially in urban settings. (Olthuis, Bennie, 2015), posed that in the past, the government used demolition of slums and resettle slum dwellers as a way of dealing with the slum problems, but recently slum upgrading has become a rampant solution. Integration of slums into the city through formalization and improvement are some of the measures of slum upgrading, which leads to social, environmental, and economic improvement.
Slum upgrade has, however, not been persuaded keenly as various issues face it. One issue is that the legalization of informal settlements requires political and legal obligations and huge investments. Secondly, slums are perceived as temporary due to the city authorities’ constant threat of eviction; hence, investment for upgrading may not be a priority.in a nutshell, the attempt of slum upgrades doesn’t create resilient communities.
In conclusion, disaster risk reduction entails eviction, which constitutes of transferring of poor peoples land to the government and high-end developers, which on many occasions is involuntary to pave the way for highway development and luxury settlement. Relocation by government entailing resettlement to equal or better housing to preserve a sensitive environment and slum upgrade through improvement and integration into the city aims at the economic and social betterment of slum dwellers.
Role of Community Participation in Eviction, Relocation, and Upgrade Intervention.
Inhabitants of the informal settlement are not majorly considered eligible for rehousing or rebuilding support; hence most take the challenge to reduce disaster risk and work in collaboration with the local government.
In the case of eviction of the riverside settlers by the government of Surabaya, stating river capacity reduction due to waste disposal which led to flooding, the inhabitants formulated a way to fight and be conversant with the relevant laws. The lobbying led to joint hands of the community and government to prepare for an alternative remedy. The community managed to shift the policy from relocating them to redevelopment by proposing flood avoidance and upgrading to promote city development (Satterwaite, 2011). Through acceptance to upgrade their homes and work in collaboration with the government to clean the river, the community earned the right to stay without eviction.
Communities upgrading their home structures do so from fear of eviction and relocation, according to (Satterwaite, 2011). Informal settlers, especially those living near reservoirs and close to lakes, have opted to take matters personally by building small walls and elevating their plots to keep water out in the presence of heavy downpour. An initiative by the community has seen the construction of drains and trenches for house protection. In case of an overly heavy pour, settlers have learned to move to relocation centers which have become more organized due to the preparedness.
Public participation facilitates the incorporation of values, concerns, and needs of the public into the decision-making of the corporate and government at large to make better decisions for the public. According to (Creighton, 2005), community participation is beneficial in many ways as the public can air their interests and provide essential information needed to participate in a meaningful way.
References
Satterwaite, D. (2011). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: What Role for Low-Income Communities in Urban Areas in Disaster Risk Reduction?
Creighton, J. L. (2005). Defining what Public Participation is (and is not), The Rationale for Public Participation. The Public Participation Handbook.
Abiko, A., & de Camargo Cavalheiro, D. (2015). Evaluating Slum (favela) Resettlements: The case of the Serra do Mar Project, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Habitat International, 340-348. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint.
Benni, J., & Eichwede, K., & Olthuis, K., & Zevenbergen C. (2015). Olthuis-K.-Benni-J.-Eichwede-K.-Zevenbergen-C.-2015. Slum Upgrading: Assessing the Importance of Location and a Plea for a Spatial Approach. Habitat International. 270-288. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint.
Creighton, J. L. (2005). Defining what Public Participation is (and is not), The Rationale for Public Participation. The Public Participation Handbook.
Everett, M. (2001). Evictions and Human Rights Land Disputes in Bogota-Colombia. Habitat International. 453-471. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint.
write