On informal housing supply restrictions and livelihood in informal settlements: Implications for sustainable development

Abstract

Land use restrictions can curtail housing supply and lead to increased costs of accommodation, which can have adverse effects on livelihood among low‐income groups and thereby compromise sustainable development. However, limited studies have investigated housing supply restrictions in informal housing markets. To address this knowledge‐gap, this article analyzes a range of indicators of livelihood among residents of informal settlements and informal housing supply restrictions in Maputo, Mozambique and Nairobi, Kenya. The findings underscore that informal urban development is restricted to a far higher extent and livelihood in informal settlements is considerably more compromised in Nairobi compared to Maputo, despite that wages are higher in Nairobi and geographic factors likely curtail urban development to a higher extent in Maputo. The empirical evidence and economic theory reviewed in this article consistently indicate that antagonistic approaches to informal urban development in cities with large segments of the population financially excluded from the formal housing markets have comparable consequences to land use restrictions guiding formal urban development. Namely, that informal land users pay a price premium for basic shelter in such contexts due to the increased pressure on the housing markets and risk of loss of investments through forced evictions. On this basis, the article argues that unless viable legal housing alternatives are available, repressive approaches to informal urban development should be abolished while less restrictive standards for building and planning regulation should be adopted to expand provision of affordable legal accommodation and thereby enhance sustainable development.

On the impact of urban planning in contexts with limited enforcement of building and planning regulations: A study of the urban form of planned and unplanned informal settlements in Maputo, Mozambique

“…A number of studies have emphasized suitable policy measures to support the development of sustainable urban form of informal settlements in sub-Saharan Africa. These strategies include early establishment of planned urban structures, in situ upgrading of established informal settlements, and state recognition of the land occupation [ 7 , 10 , 15 , 19 – 20 ]. Establishment of planned urban structures during the early formation of settlements have been promoted to provide adequate space for infrastructure and vehicular access as well as to avoid subsequent costly structural readjustment of the settlements [ 15 ].…”

“…In situ incremental interventions, comprising street expansions and infrastructure improvements, along with wider recognition and land title provision initiatives have been promoted to improve living conditions in established informal settlements through higher level of tenure security and enhanced access to basic infrastructure [ 7 , 19 ]. Simplification of the requirements of planning guidelines, land title acquisition procedures, and issuance of construction permits have been promoted to enable and advance legal urban development [ 10 ]. Provision of increased mandate for decision-making to the local level authorities have been promoted to address issues with limited institutional capacity to administer the urban development [ 10 , 15 ].…”

“…Simplification of the requirements of planning guidelines, land title acquisition procedures, and issuance of construction permits have been promoted to enable and advance legal urban development [ 10 ]. Provision of increased mandate for decision-making to the local level authorities have been promoted to address issues with limited institutional capacity to administer the urban development [ 10 , 15 ]. Although many of these approaches have been examined in the scholarly literature, the long-term impact of implementation of planned urban structures during the formation of the settlements remains a under investigated.…”

“…As a result, informal settlements are associated with compromised living conditions leading to aggravate public health outcomes [7][8][9]. Ultimately, authorities can evict the residents of informal settlements without compensation because of the extra-legal construction and land occupation [10]. Consequently, the insecure tenure conditions can lead to risk of lost investments in housing and businesses, which can discourage long-term investment and undermine economic development [11].…”