19 minute read
HOW INFORMAL DWELLERS CAN CLAIM THEIR RIGHTS TO THE CITY: The Case of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, Ghana
EUNICE AMISSAH-MENSAH
As an Urban Planner, Eunice’s commitment to social justice influences her planning work, emphasizing a human-centered approach to advancing sustainable and equitable community development. She advocates for universal access to dependable, cost-effective, and environmentally sustainable innovative solutions that can enhance overall quality of life. Eunice strives to empower communities and facilitate stakeholder dialogues to create thriving environments for all.
ABSTRACT
Urban growth in the 21st century will be happening in the Global South. It is evident the only way to deal with urban informality will be to embrace it and accept it as a way of life. This article draws on the right to the city by Henri Lefebvre as a guide in the claiming of urban spaces by informal dwellers and illustrates this idea in the informal settlements of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, in Accra, Ghana. It delves into the struggles informal dwellers face and how negotiation would provide a platform for dealing with their situation and the government as well as finding their voices through a discovery process. Planners and authorities must collaborate with informal communities to address the underlying issues leading to forced evictions. The right to the city provides a framework that has the potential to guide the decisions of inhabitants and authorities alike.
Keywords: Informalities, deliberative planning, local knowledge, right to the city.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I extend my sincerest gratitude to Professor Jane Rongerude for her invaluable mentorship and guidance throughout my research journey. I am also thankful to Isabelle Thoma-Bain Norman for her diligent editing expertise, as well as to the Carolina Planning Journal for their support and platform for sharing this work.
INTRODUCTION
Over the years, most countries in the Global South have been finding solutions to make their cities “slum-free” through mitigating economic, social, and environmental impacts as well as promoting overall quality of life through inclusive and sustainable growth. Planning scholarship and practice struggle with inculcating the ideas of informality in the process of planning. However, informal settlements have been a topic of discussion in the Global South for years. The policies, laws, and regulations governing countries in the Global South create an avenue and a platform for the emergence of these informal settlements.
Informal settlements are a combination of squatter settlements and slum formations. The term “informality” is usually used to show the disparity between slums and elitist communities. Hart, writing in the context of Accra, created the idea of informality, which has been commonly interpreted as “the relationship of economic activity to intervention or regulation by the state” (Roy, 2012). This serves to differentiate between what is deemed “formal” and “informal.” Urban informality is no longer only a target for critics, but a chance to redefine the planning process to address diversity and minority inclusion. Unfortunately, there has not been a substantial change in the urban planning field. City planners and policymakers continue to criticize informality as a barrier to healthy urban growth and a source of economic and structural disadvantage.
The word ‘slum’ is defined by UN-Habitat is defined as “one in which the inhabitants suffer one or more of the following ‘household deprivations: lack of access to an improved water source, lack of access to improved sanitation facilities, lack of sufficient living area, lack of housing durability and lack of security of tenure” (UN-Habitat, 2016). Out of these five components, the lack of security tenure is the only condition that does not deal with the physical aspect of housing conditions. Slum dwellings, due to the definition of the concept, are usually read in tandem with the term “informality.” The emergence of slums in Ghana has been attributed to rapidly growing cities and the inability of successive urban governments to invest sufficiently in the provision of sustainable housing, services, and infrastructure that meets the population’s demands (Adarkwa & Post, 2001). Over 30% of Ghana’s urban population lives in slums, and more than half of the world’s urban population, 61.7%, live in slums in Africa (UN-Habitat, 2013).
This paper aims to advocate for the integration of Henri Lefebvre’s right to the city agenda through collaborative and deliberative planning in politics and policy decision-making in the Global South. This paper will look at the importance of stakeholder involvement in the mitigation of the continuous cycle of slum clearance and evictions, and advocate a concrete policy framework that guides development and achieves the objective of providing quality of life to all. This case study will be situated in Accra, Ghana, and will look at Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, an informal settlement that has borne the brunt of constant evictions and clearance that have yielded no results, and how their resistance to evictions and ideal of placemaking account for this. This paper stands to make an argument for the inculcation of the right to the city notion through collaborative means, deliberative planning, and the use of local knowledge by urban planners, which in turn will produce results that address the problems of urban informality and the issues of urban informal dwellers.
RIGHT TO THE CITY
Henri Lefebvre, a French sociologist, introduced the concept of the “right to the city” in his 1968 book, Le Droit à la Ville. He defines the concept as “the right of urban society to participate in the qualities and benefits of city life.” He talks about the social and economic segregation of urban dwellers, and how some of them have been forced to live in estrangement and ghettos. David Harvey makes a claim on what the right to the city should entail. He states, “The right to the city is far more than the individual liberty to access urban resources: it is a right to change ourselves by changing the city. The freedom to make and remake our cities and ourselves is, I want to argue, one of the most precious yet most neglected of our human rights” (Harvey, 2021).
The Lefebvrian right to the city argument has become a rallying cry for those opposed to neoliberal urban governance and the growing social and spatial divide. Lefebvre lays the groundwork for a new urban thought that is essentially political by articulating the notion of a right to liberation through the urban lens. His ideas have contributed to the views on how cities should be built and how they should be inhabited attesting that the production of space should include the input of residents, for this would be an indicator of the embodiment of the right to the city. However, he points out the fact that there lies a problem in defining what inclusivity is and what it must entail. He proposes there should be transformative political action taken in the creation of spaces. This can arise in the form of a digital space or social networks that serve as a platform for participation. A city should not just be based on its form and structure but should imbue the social dynamics and relationships within it as a means of enhancing its possibilities and opportunities to achieve change. If done properly, this could slow down the process of the destruction of informal communities (Lecoq, 2020).
In the right to the city context, Lefebvre considers the relevance of resident intervention by articulating how residents of informal settlements produce meaning in the use of the space that they occupy through their daily economic and social activities. For example, urban dwellers influence their neighborhoods and the use of space through trade and in the context of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, the burning of electronic waste to retrieve copper for sale. Through tactical urbanism and a desire to change the outlook of their communities, informal inhabitants organize their initiatives to improve their situation and require going beyond the physical to look at what practices define these urban spaces. Finally, informal dwellers can engage in participatory procedures by joining institutional efforts where they are lobbied for their comments on projects or self-organize which would serve as a counter to governmental projects. If done properly, it could slow down the destruction of informal communities (Lecoq, 2020).
Mark Purcell, a political theorist inspired by Lefebvrian principles, believed the right to the city creates an avenue to shift power from the state into the hands of the citizens themselves. He understands the need to place human life as the central focus and dissect the intersectionality that exists within the human and social aspects of life (Beebeejaun, 2017). Purcell provides an emphasis on what the right to the city invokes, which is more focused on the inhabitants of urban places and the activities they partake in. While building off of Lefebvre’s right to the city concept, he quickly reminds his audience that Lefebvre did not just want the inclusion of the people by the state, he also wanted people to pursue and draw their power from beyond the workings of and with the state (Purcell, 2014).
The participation process takes time, for it requires room for relaying information, ensuring that information is understood and that the people involved are deliberately listened to and allowed to speak. Participation needs space to ensure accessibility to the entire community. This brings on the lens of “invited” and “invented” spaces as an exercise for inhabitants’ right to the city (Miraftab, 2016). According to Lefebvre, creating a participatory and deliberative process takes a significant amount of institutional investment and often faces extensive pushback, thus institutions cannot guarantee people’s right to the city. Economic and political liberalization, as well as increased knowledge of key environmental challenges, have moved responsibility for urban policy to city residents in recent years. In an urban framework under environmental and social limitations requiring us to collectively rethink our position, the right to the city must be modified at all levels, from the household to the neighborhood to the city, or be left unable to respond to the difficulties we face.
URBAN INFORMALITY FRAMEWORK
Literature, articles, newspapers, and media coverage usually push the negative narrative of desolate places in the Global South. Slums and informal areas are often blamed for the rot, discord, and disinvestment that cities face. Depending on the country, slums, favelas, ghettos, or banlieues are referred to as “informal” spaces and places. Informalities as a term has come to be associated with unplanned, non-conforming concentrations of poverty, disorder, and crime that have been put together by a patch of strong-willed and close-knit people or communities. Regardless of the description that is given, urban informal settlements have come to be understood as a contradiction to the planned and formal city (Roy, 2012).
Urban informality is a term coined by Keith Hart in 1973 to embody the activities of the “informal sector.” He identified the relationship of these activities as they relate tothe regulation and interventions of the state. Ananya Roy (2012) points out how Hart in his later interpretation of the informal economy did not attribute it to “a place or a class or even whole persons.” He instead argues that many informal residents seek to forge diverse livelihoods and income opportunities and that has become the norm in urban places.
Urban informality in the Global South has become an essential component of urban development. It has been attached to the negative aspects of the urban environment due to its informal economy, social nonconformities, and physical form. Today, approximately 5.5 million people are living in slums worldwide and non-governmental organizations are working with communities to address issues of service provision and evictions from the government (Awal & Paller, 2016). Ghana has seen its fair share of increased urban informality since its independence in 1957, primarily due to increased migration from rural communities to urban communities. Urbanization in the 21st century has taken a different form and has brought to light a renewed interest in informal cities. Mike Davis’ Planet of Slums provides an account of how “informal urbanization is a stark manifestation of “overurbanization” or “urbanization without growth” which has been influenced by the world debt crises and the IMF-led restructuring of Third World economies in the 1980s” (Davis, 2006). For the Global South, much of this manifestation is the result of nations adopting state-led initiatives that explicitly cite doing away with slums and their particularly associated status as poverty indicators. This, as Davis alludes to, does not only happen in the Global South but also occurs in the Global North with Europe and America utilizing similar rhetoric. In doing so, slum clearance and evictions are sold to the public as the only means of paving the way for better service provision, affordable housing, and a better life altogether.
Nezar AlSayyad and Ananya Roy (2004) argue that “urban informality is not a distinct and bounded sector of labor or housing but, rather, a “mode” of the production of space and is a practice of planning.” Urban renewal and upgrading projects take over informalized spaces, and formalized spaces are given recognition and attached value through legitimation. There is also the issue of urban form as it has been shaped by planning approaches that emerged in Europe and the United States. The urban form focuses on aesthetics, efficiency, and modernization as they relate to slum clearance, skyscrapers, connectivity, and open green spaces. These ideologies stem from the influence of early modernists who used master planning and zoning as tools to promote what they deemed as the “good city” (Watson, 2016).
Informal settlements for the urban poor provide them with affordable shelter and provide an avenue for political manipulation by the state in exchange for much-needed services (Miraftab, 2016). Organized inhabitants performing their universal citizenship mobilize in informal settlements, which are the manifestation of poor citizens’ resistance, to assert their entitlement to the city and urban livelihood (Holston, 2008) and in doing so, urban informal dwellers’ existence is an expression of Lefebreve’s right to the city. Urban planners would have to reevaluate the spatial, social, and political value of informal spaces to help eliminate segregation and exclusion.
RIGHT TO THE CITY AS SITUATED IN AGBOGBLOSHIE AND OLD FADAMA, GHANA
The government of Ghana has dealt with informal settlements over the last two decades through evictions and slum upgrading which usually brings up the issue of land-tenure rights among inhabitants (Oppong, 2016). Upgrading seeks to improve the living conditions, while evictions usually mean informal residents or settlers are forcibly removed and their settlement is replaced (OHCHR, 2014). The Slum Almanac by UN-Habitat states that forced evictions take priority over upgrading projects in informal communities. These governmental actions are usually justified by the importance and desire of economic growth, and dealing with environmental and health issues that come with such growth. Puttkamer suggests affected citizens can claim their right to the city through protest, litigation or negotiation, and contestation (Puttkamer, 2019).
The strategies adopted by Slum Dweller International provide a good example of tackling the negotiation aspect of the eviction prevention process. This process is usually based on enumeration data, which is often met with skepticism and criticism. This form of cooperation often becomes a trade-off of sorts. In as much as these local grassroots organizations can provide housing and meet other objectives, one must be politically connected to receive the benefits that come through such exchange. Contentious politics through protests have become the predominant way informal dwellers demand their right to stay or to everyday life. They have to find their means to shape the city, and in so doing become political actors themselves. Residents of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama have managed to create a new space by repossessing the conservation of their settlement and reclaiming their name. This is one of the many steps that have been taken by the community toward resistance.
Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama is one of the largest known informal settlements in Accra. Since 2001, the area has commonly been referred to by the nickname “Sodom and Gomorrah,” which is a reference to the Biblical story of the city destroyed by God due to their sinful actions. (Grant 2006). The nickname has since been used by the press, citizens, and politicians alike. Accra’s Mayor, Oko Vanderpuije, has not failed in expressing his concern with Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama and has made evicting the settlers one of his top priorities. He continuously uses the term “Sodom and Gomorrah” and expresses his disdain for the community. He calls the community a national security threat and a high-risk area for criminal activities to thrive.
The “twin disasters” of flooding and fire served as the basis for the June 20, 2015 evictions carried out against residents of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama. It was at that moment residents of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama pushed against using the term “Sodom and Gomorrah,” hence the use of quotation marks to point out Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama as the appropriate name in addressing the community. This change in public perception can be attributed to civic engagement on the part of community members, with an emphasis on cooperation between residents, local organizations, and media outlets. This initiative highlights the achievement of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama through the communicative exchange as a means to garner inclusion and respond to exclusion. The change in public perception of Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama is one of the steps residents have taken in (re)claiming their right to the city. Despite this achievement, it does not mean that the fear of eviction has been eradicated, instead, this has created an awareness that there is a possibility of finding alternative solutions to the problems faced by the community. Slumdwellers need to be properly recognized as citizens. The government needs to be reminded of what being a “citizen” means and extend its meaning to imbue a set of rights and ways to achieve them. Citizens are all entitled to housing, security, utilities, services, sustainable development, and participation in decision-making processes that affect them.
CONCLUSION
Friedmann (2016) makes a powerful statement in advocating for places like Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, for he states:
“In relation to place-making, centering, and acknowledging that certain sites are endowed with a sense of the sacred are much the same thing…By whatever name, whether it’s slum clearance or gentrification, the results are the same: the erasure of places is a violent act, as established patterns of human relationships are destroyed.”
Urban growth in the 21st century will continue to occur in the Global South, even if we fail to acknowledge it. The optimal approach to addressing urban informality lies in embracing and acknowledging it as an inherent aspect of urban life. This will require taking a critical and positive outlook on what informality has to offer. Policies should attempt to recognize the agency of slum laborers and include them creatively in the upgrading process. Instead of awarding upgrading contracts to contractors, local officials may assemble a group of informal artisans, train them, and hire them to oversee the process. Such techniques may help to regularize informal employment and, with oversight, relieve the cityscape’s informality concerns.
Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama are good examples of how to mitigate forced evictions through negotiation, adding the political and economic dimensions to the mitigation process and aligning them with the interests of the residents. Their insistence on the end of the use of the derogatory term for their communities is one of the ways that communities have shown how it is possible to change the perception of the public towards the settlement and its inhabitants. This was achievable through the media connection they garnered as a community.
Empowering citizens with the right to the city is not just a mere notion; it is a fundamental entitlement deeply ingrained in their rights and aspirations. Now is the time for citizens to not only assert their rightful claim to the city but also to fervently strive toward its realization. While the journey ahead may pose challenges, it is an honorable pursuit worth fighting for—a continuous endeavor to uphold their beliefs and ensure that government entities acknowledge their duty to provide a dignified quality of life. Embracing collaborative dialogues, especially in locales like Agbogbloshie and Old Fadama, could illuminate pathways forward. However, it necessitates a shift in governmental approach—moving beyond mere demolition tactics towards crafting sustainable solutions that honor the homes and livelihoods of community members. Drawing inspiration from global examples such as Brazil’s statute on safeguarding the rights of informal settlers, offers a beacon of hope. Though imperfect, it signifies the potential for transformative outcomes and an equitable urban landscape.
WORKS CITED
Adarkwa, K., & Post, J. (2001) . The Fate of the Tree: Planning and Managing the Development of Kumasi. Accra: Woeli Publishing Services.
Awal, M., & Paller, J. (2023). Who really governs urban Ghana? - Africa Research Institute. Retrieved from https://www.africaresearchinstitute.org/newsite/publications/ who-really-governs-urban-ghana/
Beebeejaun, Y. (2017). Gender, urban space, and the right to everyday life. Journal of Urban Affairs, 39:3 , 323-334. DOI: 10.1080/07352166.2016.1255526
Chasant, Muntaka (2021). An aerial photo taken on 11 June 2021 shows the Agbogbloshie scrapyard before it was demolished 20 days later. African Arguments. https://africanarguments.org/2022/07/agbogbloshie-a-year-after-the-violent-demolition/
Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. New York: Verso.
Elrayies, G. M. (2016). Rethinking Slums: An Approach for Slums Development Towards Sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Development, 225-244.
Friedmann, J. (2016). Places and Place-making in Cities: A Global Perspective. In S. S. Defilippis, Readings in Planning Theory. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Harvey, D. (2021). The Right to the City. New Left Review.
Holston, J. (2008). Insurgent Citizenship: Disjunctions of Democracy and Modernity in Brazil. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Lecoq, M. (2020, July 3). The Right to the City: An Emancipating Concept? Retrieved May 6, 2022, from Metropolitics: https://metropolitics.org/The-Right-to-the-City-AnEmancipating-Concept.html
Miraftab, F. (2016). Insurgent Planning: Situating Radical Planning in the Global South. In Susan S. Fainstein and James DeFilippis., Readings in Planning (pp. 480-498). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2014). Forced Evictions. New York and Geneva: United Nations Habitat.
Oppong, B. E. (2016). Slum or Sustainable Development? A Case Study of Sodom and Gomorrah in Accra, Ghana. Mankato, Minnesota State University: ProQuest LLC.
Purcell, M. (2014). Possible World: Henri Lefebvre and the Right to the City. Journal of Urban Affairs, DOI: 10.1111/ juaf.12034, Volume 36, Number 1, pages 141–154.
Puttkamer, L. v. (2019). Changing the Perception of Informal Settlements- A Case of Old Fadama, Accra. Trialog 134 - A Journal for Planning and Building in a Global Context, 34-38.
Roy A. & AlSayyad N. (2004). Urban Informality: Transnational Perspectives from the Middle East, Latin America, and South Asia. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Roy, A. (2012). Urban Informality: The Production of Space and Practice of Planning. In Readings in Planning Theory (pp. 524-539). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
UN-Habitat. (2016). Slums almanac 2015-16. Tracking Improvement in the Lives of Slum Dwellers. Nairobi, Kenya: UNON, Publishing Service Section.
UN-Habitat. (2013). Global Urban Indicators Database. http://www.unhabitat.org/stats/Default .aspx
Watson, V. (2016). “Seeing from the South: Refocusing Urban Planning on the Globe’s Central Urban Issues. In Readings in Planning Theory (pp. 540-560). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
