HABITAT+5

SEND YOUR VIEW At The time of Istanbul +5 .... achrsec@email.ksc.net	It's 5 years since Istanbul's Habitat 2 25 years since Habitat 1 What's happened since then ? and / or What are the new directions ? What of UNCHS ? What's been your success or failure story ? What's your personal message to Istanbul +5 and for all working on HABITAT issues for the poor? Take just 15 minutes and SEND your VIEWS in 400 words or less and we'll share them here
The Asian Coalition for Housing Rights is a regional network of grassroots community organizations, NGO's and professionals actively involved with urban poor development processes in Asian cities. In this spirit we accept the rich diversity of views and opinions below. Many of the views are written by friends for whom English is a second, third or fourth language and we thank them kindly for their efforts	May 7- 10 2001 On this page responses from Thailand Fr Joe Maier Human Dvlt Center Zimbabwe Beth Tatenda Chitekwa PD Shelter Bangladesh Lalith Lankatiltelee UNCHS Pakistan Mohammed Younus URC Karachi Korea Prof Seong-Kga Ha KOCER Indonesia Prof. Johan Silas SIT Surabaya UK David Satterthwaite IIED UK PAGE 2 GO HERE for responses posted May 19 Japan Fr Jorge Anzorena SELAVIP India Kalpana Shama Journalist India Sheela Patel SPARC Nepal Lajana Manandha Lumanti India Kirtee Shah HIC and ASAG PAGE 3 Go HERE for responses posted May 20 Japan M. Hosaka ACHR Japan UK Diana Mitlin IIED Korea Frank Mun-su Park ACHR - KOCER India Rabial Mallick & Dhurjati Mukherjee Waiting for your view. We will post many more soon
Some Quotes ... out of context .... 5 years AGO from ACHR friends reflecting on HABITAT 1 Published by ACHR just Prior to Habitat 2	JUNE 1996 Prior to HABITAT II "... The most important trend, to me, during the last twenty years, was the people coming to the fore with their own approaches. They communicate, share and support each other, locally and trans-nationally. I certainly witnessed that while working in Sri Lanka. .... " M. Hosaka Japan 1996 "I strongly believe in the people as key actors, key subjects to the process, and the key in how to find the right housing process and forms to fit it. " ..... It's important to look beyond Habitat II, to concentrate more seriously on creating new mechanisms which are flexible enough to deal with the great variety of problems that exist ....." Somsook Boonyabancha Thailand 1996 "We are in danger of creating a permanent underclass of nations, cities, and people. After two decades of work the conditions of the poor have improved marginally. Evictions are still taking place and the poor still do not have decent housing ..." Adnan Aliani Pakistan 1996 "So what of Mom and Pop Slums? The friendly ones where almost everyone knows each other, and it is really a neighborhood. Like Mom and Pop stores, they are being eaten up and are going. It's Hard times and no Parole for Bangkok Slums ." Fr Joe Maier Bangkok Thailand 1996 " At a political level people have little hope, but at a social level there are strong indications of change " Tasneem Siddiqui Karachi Pakistan 1996 " .... The Squatters, despite the insecurity and inadequate facilities have chosen to stay. Why? Because they rightly perceive that the city offers them no better alternative. The city will neither provide for them nor even show much basic understanding or concern for their plight ." Bill Keyes Manila Philippines 1996
MAY 2001 May 7 From Fr Joe Maier Human Development Centre Klong Teoy Bangkok Thailand frjoehdc@bkk.loxinfo.co.th	From Fr Joe Maier HDC Bangkok Thailand Thanks for the invite - recently I did a 1200 word piece (normal size) for the NATION newspaper on Housing in Klong Toey and the Port Authority - it might have some stuff you could use I can not seem to find it right now so will continue I think you know my feelings of Habitat - I certainly would not want them to go to the lumber yard to buy the lumber for me if I were to built a house - or more realistic, even less would I want Habitat to deal with the local junk man - where I could find some housing material (not nailed down too securely) in the early morning .... when everyone else is asleep - and the watch dogs aren't too alert..... I would not want them to talk to Government for me, - to defend me against the land owners and big cats.....cuz all the Habitat folks who are supposed to stick up for housing rights are the children of the Government Officials & cats who want the land where I & other squatters live.... I would not want them to deal with the local police for me -(who are going to whomp me on the head with their whomping stick/and/or tear down my house...telling me I can not live here any more - who tell me "its the law" who are strongly influenced by the Politicos....who allow the Habitat folks to work in their city and go to their cocktail parties and U.N. type seminars ...which are really ...simply pre-preparation for cocktail parties.... So what are they good for - in the eyes of the poor person who is being evicted...I guess I would ask them to make NOISE about Housing Rights - lots of noise.... visit the slums - take pictures - tell the world.....and thus might influence Government to come up with second or third best solutions. The Squatter will still be evicted by force... but maybe a bit more gently and he can tell his friends that his picture was in the newspaper and on T.V. when they were beating him up - tearing down his house....but then again.... every little bit helps... prayers fr joe
May 10 From Beth Tatenda Chitekwa Dialogue for Shelter Zimbabwe Supporting the Zimbabwe Homeless People's Federation	From Beth Tatenda Chitekwa of the Dialogue for Shelter Zimbabwe Supporter of the Zimbabwe Homeless People's Federation There is a problem with most international conventions on various issues be it gender or the habitat...the feel good factor. This overwhelming notion that all governments and international agencies are doing all they can to make this a better world. Caucuses are held to discuss what so and so is doing best practices and so on. The federation process has a central tenant that you learn as much from a bad practice as from a best practice. Governments that are known to violate the very same conventions that they will have ratified are not held accountable, neither is there a mechanism to learn from their mistakes. Bilaterals are not keen to work with people's organisation and in the end the same issues that marginalise the poor are perpetuated. The challenge I guess for organisations of the poor and NGOs that support them such as ACHR is to create space at these foras in the same way they have created and continue to seek space for the poor in their countries. This is a tall order....but as the old Chinese saying goes a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. We will probably make mistakes and wish we had not involved ourselves but I feel strongly that there is need for people to recognise that these organisations exist and even if in a small way for us to hold our governments and bilaterals accountable by demonstrating what the poor are doing with minimal support from them and highlight how much more could be achieved with the right kind of support. I guess the challenge begins with New York and what we do after that..
May 10 From Lalith Lankatilleke UNCHS Bangladesh	From Lalith Lankatilleke UNCHS Bangladesh The Realization of a “ Secure Place to Live” An Asian Perspective We Asians come from traditionally democratic societies. We have traditions and constitutions; constitutions that guarantee the right to “livelihood and shelter”. These solemn embodiments of our constitutions are constantly being violated and yet societies and governments continue to flourish. The sheer lack of adhering to the fundamentals of what we have pledged for, creates the conditions of our poor to be where they are today. It is no fault of a baby to be born to a mother in a shack with very little to eat. Various religious doctrines (we are not short of that in Asia) may have justifications or explanations for the condition of that child but that does not absolve the society from changing the conditions. This leads to the question of how can our societies create the conditions where that baby can have a dignified life? The answer is simple. If one is born on this earth that person should automatically qualify for a “Secure Place to Live”. Simply said than done. This is a fundamental right, which all Governments have accepted and placed in their constitutions. The realization of this pledge in the constitution becomes one of the most paramount democratic values of a society governed by a democratic government. But why have Governments and societies failed to do so? Lack of political will? Lack of societal responsibility? Well it could be both. But what needs to be recognized is that the poor did not resigned themselves to an enclave of apathy. They strived, they struggled, they fought and they survived. For the poor “a place to work” becomes a priority over “a place to live” and the poor have to sacrifice their living conditions to work. This raises the question can the poor are left to the market to find a place to live while searching a place to work in the market? And that’s the contradiction. The constitutions supposedly guarantees the place to live. How do we ensure the realization of this right???? The “Secure Tenure Campaign” is one facet of bringing about this realization. We need to assess the impact of the campaign so far. My own assessment is that it is not easily understood by policy makers and the society at large. Whenever I spoke about it I had to explain details of what it means. This led to the simple interpretation of “A Secure Place to Live”. The biggest challenge in the next ten years is the acceptance of this fundamental right by governments and societies in a way that it becomes a cultural value. The challenge to activists is to demonstrate how this can be achieved to governments and societies.
May 10 Muhammad Younus Urban Resource Centre Karachi Pakistan urc@inet.com.pk	Muhammad Younus from the URC Urban Resource Centre in Karachi Pakistan responding to a series of questions on HABITAT +5 put by ACHR I am taking your request two parts. Q.1 Any ideas or suggestions or inspirations from your experience, about the Habitat process, about it's potential and about how the Habitat process can move forward from here? Or if the official Habitat thing leaves you uninspired, I think the last part of your question defines it very well. In the absence of social securities, breaking away of joint family system and increasing poverty has forced more and more people to end up with drug addiction, suicides and/or forced them to live footpaths and streets. These are strong indicators for insecure houses and unhealthily communities. Slogans like "No more Evictions" remained just slogans. Governments, which has signed Istanbul '96, do not follow it. Evictions has become an increasing threat. More people are being evicted as ever. And concept of resettlements, compensations and alternatives do not exist at all. More people are forced to live in dangerous zones in unhealthy environments like river beds, railway line, open drains, garbage dumps and under high tension electric wires. Providing a decent environment for these has now become a dream. Land and houses has becoming more unaffordable to poor. Governments are nor developing housing policies for poor neither accepting informal sector's initiatives for poor. I wonder if this the situation what purpose the habitat process is serving for ?! NGOs are unable to frame the community initiatives into larger governments policies. Donors are still a driving force and determine development strategies and mostly miss use things like "Communities participation" and "Public Consultations" etc in their own interest. Q.2 What directions do you feel are important in working to ensure that Asia's poor citizens have decent, secure houses and healthy communities to live in? Promoting and supporting the following, may give it a better direction! a. ensuring participation of people in their future decision process of the development b. Development through local resources and local expertise c. Let the people to build their own neighborhoods environments and their own cities. d. Accepting the existing ground realities and socio economic changes that are taking place. e. Accepting working of informal sector, which provides most of jobs and housing to the poor. f. and finally I think we should find an alternative way of development and that may have a donor free environment ............... or debt free .......... I kept to your instructions in mind. - 15 minutes with blank mind) Let see it make any sense to you. Regards Younus
May 8 From Prof Seong-Kyu Ha KOCER KOREA contact: ha1234@wm.cau.ac.kr	From Prof. Seong-Kyu HA KOCER Korea I would like to raise an important question about Habitat Agenda. Have governments been trying continuously to realize the two themes - adequate shelter for all and sustainable human settlements development in Korea? For Koreans, the years 1997 and 1998 were a nightmare they would love to forget. The casualties including fallen businesses, suspended merchant banks, bankrupt stock investors, and suddenly jobless wage earners were everywhere. The immediate impact of the IMF interventions on housing came through several direct and indirect. Rental costs per monthly income in the Seoul Metropolitan Region went up from 20.8% in 1993 to 26.7% in 1998, indicating that burden for the cost of sheltering has worsened for rented homes during the same period. Since 1998, the number of housing units built annually has gone down to 400,000 due to weakening in the supplying capability ensuing overall economic recession. Prior to the economic crisis, approximately 600,000 housing units were built every year. And most of the public rental housings are parceled out after 5 years so that they are not very helpful in building the number of rental homes available for the low-income group. The problem of forced evictions in housing renewal projects areas has merely been seen as an inevitable side-effect of housing supply and city beautification and not considered an important policy task. Unfortunately there is no official government statistics on the number of cases of forced evictions nor number of persons evacuated. The shelter and welfare of the homeless have arisen as new social issue and a task with significant numbers of homeless produced in the process of corporate restructuring that have taken place since the 1997 economic crisis. According to current constitution and housing acts, it is very hard to say that complete and active realization of adequate housing has materialized. The people’s housing rights is not yet recognized as basic rights. There is no sign at all from the government to guarantee ‘the housing rights’ in near future through the amendment of housing acts. Institutional guarantees must given on improving the quality of shelter standards and protecting the housing rights of the poor, and the government’s role in this must become more substantive. There are many tasks still to be dealt with as problems such as lack of support to the homeless and evacuees from demolition sites remain to be solved. The government must have more active role to ensure that the Habitat Agenda is successfully implemented by finding solutions to above problems. What is the most important thing is that the participation of the poor and evacuees should be given in the process of policy making and implementation on housing and urban development programs.
MAY 8 From Pro Johan Silas Surabaya, Indonesia rapete@indosat.net.id Prof Silas has sent us a longer paper entitled Brief Account on Housing in Indonesia Prepared for Istanbul+5 We have posted it HERE	From Prof. Johan Silas in Surabaya, Indonesia Prof. Silas has sent us a paper entitled Brief Account on Housing in Indonesia Prepared for Istanbul+5, ACHR Go HERE for the paper. Since Habitat 2 Update on what’s happening in Surabaya Indonesia In this five year period after Istanbul, central government did almost nothing in the field of housing. Their concern were mainly in using the social safety net fund to create jobs while improving the infrastructure of low income settlements. However, local government of Jakarta and Surabaya continue their housing programme in a slower pace. And only in Surabaya did the government continue to develop and enriched their experience working with people in the improvement of livelihood in the kampungs. Hence The Comprehensive KIP second generation.
May 9 From David Satterthwaite IIED UK David.Satterthwaite@iied.org	From David Satterthwaite IIED UK How International Agencies' Approaches to Urban Poverty Reduction Might Change Between 2002 and 2015 - 2002: The World Bank officially acknowledges that its US $1 per person per day poverty line is inappropriate for measuring urban poverty as it under-estimates its scale and mis-represents its nature. It begins a research programme in which staff in each of its country offices assess the validity of the $1 dollar a day poverty line in their city. 2003: Initial findings from the World Bank's research highlight how the income-level needed to avoid poverty is much higher than US$1 per person per day for most low-income groups in major cities, largely because of the high cost of non-food items (including rent, keeping children at school, payments to water vendors and pay-as-you-use toilets, fuel, transport, health care and medicines). The findings lead to a questioning of the criteria used by governments to set the cost of non-food essentials when setting income-based poverty lines. 2003: A consortium of international NGO funding agencies agree to develop ways to allow representatives from federations of urban poor groups and local NGOs to have more influence on their urban programmes. 2003: The World Bank replaces its US$ 1 per person per day poverty line with nation-specific and city-specific poverty lines based on more realistic estimates of the real income needed to avoid poverty in each location and a more realistic allowance made for the cost of non-food essentials. 2004: The consortium of international NGOs publish a new strategy for urban poverty reduction which recognizes the need to shift from a project focus with an "exit strategy" to a long-term engagement within each city or smaller urban centre, working with community-based groups and setting new standards in terms of accountability to such groups. 2005: The World Bank recognizes that using only income-based criteria for estimating the scale of urban poverty greatly underestimates the extent of deprivation, as a large proportion of the urban population with "above poverty line incomes" still live in poor quality, overcrowded homes with insecure tenure and inadequate provision for infrastructure and services. An expert meeting is convened with staff from national statistical offices from many low- and middle-income nations and representatives of urban poor federations to identify indicators of deprivation that better serve urban poor groups and are useful to local governments. The World Bank begins a programme to increase the capacity of national statistical offices to provide local governments with relevant census data disaggregated to local area units, for the new round of censuses being planned for 2009 to 2011. 2006: A consortium of international NGOs agrees to set new standards of accountability and transparency in their urban development programmes. This includes full disclosure of the funds available and how these are spent in each city and greater scope for priority setting and funding decisions within the cities where the funding is to be spent. 2009: The various official bilateral and multilateral agencies involved in the Cities Alliance agree to a new code of practice, similar to the one developed by the consortium of international NGOs, setting new standards of accountability and transparency in their urban development programmes. 2011: The Cities Alliance, with support from many bilateral agencies, agrees to support a wide- ranging assessment of the scale of urban poverty which is based both on poverty lines that are adjusted to represent the real income needed to avoid deprivation within each city and on non-income aspects of deprivation, including the extent to which legal and political systems and government agencies serve and respond to the needs and priorities of low-income groups. This assessment is to inform the international donors as to whether the international targets they had set in the late 1990s for reducing poverty by 2015 have been fulfilled for urban areas.
15 minutes - 400 words At the time of Istanbul +5	More views are posted on Page 2 of Istanbul +5 Send yours to achrsec@email.ksc.net or achr@asia.com