Slum Upgrading and Community Participation A Policy to

Slum Upgrading and Community Participation: A Policy to Avoid Relocation for Juan Bobo Residents: Case Study in Medellin, Colombia Nicholas Salter 1)How does the ‘Heartfelt Houses’ project in Medellin, contribute to improving social equity through the creation of an environmentally sustainable environment? 2)What is the role of community participation and how is this established by the relationships amongst the stakeholders? 3)Has the project improved economic outcomes for the residents in the neighborhood/city? Environmental Health and Equity: Global Strategies and Innovation April 30, 2011 Mc. Gill University

Planet of Slums �In the year 2007, population shift from rural to urban locations resulted in the majority of people living in urban settings. �It is estimated over a 1 billion people are now living in slums. �Slums often result from an increase of population outside the capacity of cities to provide affordable housing or economic alternatives. �Difficulty in accessing land tenancy leads to illegal invasions and abnormal land purchase of available or open terrain. �Without improvements, the global slum population is estimated to reach 1. 4 billion in 2020 and 2. 67 billion by the year 2030.

Background � Daily Conditions � Slums are often situated on dangerous land have frequent overcrowding, lack security of tenure, access to clean water, and proper waste disposal. � Life Expectancy � Slum dwellers are more likely to die earlier, experience more hunger and disease, attain less education and have fewer chances of employment. Overcrowding plays a major role in the transmission of diseases. � Urbanization � Re-shaping population health problems, towards non-communicable diseases and injuries, alcohol- and substance-abuse, and impact from ecological disaster. � Strategies for Improvement � Assignation of terrains with basic public services’ provision, shelter upgrading, social regeneration programs and large scale infrastructure improvement projects

Project Methodology � Case Study Selection � ‘Heartfelt Houses’ is slum upgrading project in the Juan Bobo community, in Medellin, Colombia � Recipient of 2008 UN Habitat Award for Best Practice. � Notable for employment of a “no relocation” policy and use of community participatory mechanisms. � Case Study Methodology � Snowball sampling method • 45 semi-structured interviews conducted during June and July of 2010 • Frequent site visits and observation • Collection of project reports, presentations, academic articles • Use of translator for Spanish language interviews

Medellin, Colombia Geographic Conditions � Terrain restricts the use of space � Expansion from river at the center of the valley upward into the slopes � Precarious and vulnerable to geological risks (landslides and flooding) Urban Development � Massive relocation programs and other type of housing failures � Upper and upper-middle sectors built according established norms � Rest of city developed via selfhousing, illegal subdivisions and land invasions � Barrios populated by refugees displaced by guerrilla, paramilitary and military action “You can see the poor areas are almost spectators on the sides, so it is something that you can’t ignore. They are always going to be there … they are always in your mind. We can see these communities … trying to thrive and make something of themselves. ” (Carlos Montoya, EDU, Director of Juan Bobo Project )

Empresa Desarrollo Urbano de Medellin (EDU) � EDU as primary actor involved � EDU is a decentralized agency from the local government responsible for municipal development of projects leverage private and public sectors � To increase efficiency, Fajardo’s municipal government decided to position EDU to coordinate development projects for all the different departments of the municipality Institutional Coordination • This project leveraged a variety of institutional partners in Medellin including organizations at the municipal, departmental (provincial or state) and national level. • An institutional alliance model emerged which created a synergy between the institutions • Political will of the mayor’s office was identified as key to maintaining institutional coordination

Juan Bobo � Environmental Situation � Tendency of overcrowding � Poor accessibility system � Polluted water and garbage � High percentage of inadequate utilities : � � illegal aqueduct s and energy service informal sewer systems � Environmental damage in surrounding systems (i. e. Local creek) � Lack of protection of hill slopes � Socio-Economic Conditions � Poor economic situation and informal employment � High presence of disadvantaged community members (migrants and ethnic minorities, single parent families) � Deeds to the ownership of their housing structure but not the land it occupied Photo courtesy of EDU “whenever it would rain … I would be putting pots and pans on the floor to catch the rain, covering holes up on the wall with whatever I could find “ (Juan Bobo Community Member)

``in college … certain teachers. . . would say that, all those parts on the side of Medellin, on the valley, on the mountainside … those zones were …. not for housing … [But] there are houses being built there … You can’t ignore that. ” (Juliana Portillo , Coordinator of the Juan Bobo project) Photo courtesy of EDU

Innovative Intervention • Policy of no relocation which sought to maintain both the social and economic networks of the community. • Traditional housing professionals believed that the land in the area could not be built on safely. • The project sought to demonstrate that some of the unconsolidated and informal zones were NOT too risky too intervene within. • Recognizes principles of social and economic equity over market delivery and expansion • Create an social, environmental and economically sustainable intervention in order to address larger global, nation or city-wide problems at the local level. Photo courtesy of EDU

Planning � In-depth geo-referential mapping and socio-economic surveys � Community participatory mechanisms to gather input � Intervention plan combined 3 intervention strategies: � construction of new buildings � relocation of existing housing within Implementation Process � Remove unsafe housing � Temporarily displace residents � Build apartment buildings for displaced residents � Remainder of homes: Residents given materials and workshops to rebuild their own homes. the community � upgrading of existing housing � Reorganize the settlement to introduce public services: � sewage � water systems � electricity � Create public spaces and increase accessibility Photo courtesy of EDU

Environmental Impact • 115 house improvements • 115 legalization processes of houses to be entitled SERVICES • Water, electricity and sanitation • Connected to the official grid in which residents now billed monthly SPACES • Introduction of green, public and communal spaces • Increased pedestrian accessibility IMPROVED and SAFER HOUSING • Contingency walls and structurally sound buildings to prevent disaster in the case of landslides and flooding. • Reduction of the vectors for disease in the community: • open sewage • unsanitary water, • dumping of garbage • areas for water to collect. • Subsequent clean up of community creek

Community Impact POSITIVE COMMUNITY FACTORS � Workshops: capacity building, conflict resolution and community cooperation � Committees and assemblies: development of an ‘acceptable community behaviour’ manual � Social capital: Increased feelings of competency and self-esteem � Columbus School Project: beautification process including various sectors of Medellin society NEGATIVE COMMUNITY IMPACTS • • • Passive participation of community members Lack of clear empowerment and continuing presence of conflict in community. Existence of higher conflict among those in apartments then those staying in their homes “overall, it kind of created that connection between people, it got us all kind of thinking about, not just about who is right next to me, who else is in this community? Who can I meet? ” (Juan Bobo Community Member) Photos courtesy of EDU

Economic Impact Positive � Community members provided with legal land tenure transforming the home into a financial asset � Maintained informal and formal economic networks � Maintained location close to existing infrastructure and city core, keeping cost of localization low. � Some evidence of short term job creation directly and indirectly from construction process Negative � Some reports of incurred debt from construction process � Evidence of community members unable to pay for their formalized services � Project faced with high costs � Little evidence of long term economic development in the area

Challenges � Questions surrounding social sustainability, economic feasibility and replication � The political will of mayor’s office may be a necessary component of success not currently present � Presence of ongoing social conflict in the community � Lack of economic development � Formalization of services bringing additional costs leaving some residents without � Ongoing processes of massive relocation and institutional development happening on periphery of Medellin • Long-term effects on the social and economic networks/capital due to the policy of no relocation, are difficult to evaluate at this point in time

Lessons Learned • The project could be improved by a stronger, more active community capacity building and participatory intervention. • Further economic development necessary to allow adjustment to formalization process • Policy of no relocation and provision of land tenure is an exceptional policy especially in light of other policies of relocation both in Medellin and other countries • Impacts of maintained social and economic networks may be felt in later generations