Essay_Moyiba_Sihuenta

Environmental renovation in Moyiba, Freetown: the first step to new opportunities in a healthy community

Environmental renovation in Moyiba, Freetown: the first step to new opportunities in a healthy community ____________________________________________________________ Course: Development and Planning in African Cities UCL (University College of London) Author: Jean Paul Sihuenta Key words: Settlement / Connectivity / Sanitation / Infraestructure / Environment Introduction: The low degree of connectivity presented by the informal settlement of Moyiba has caused innumerable risks that have devastated the community in terms of economic, social and environmental viability in the sector, specifically in seasons of natural phenomena such as rains, winds, landslides and other phenomena of anthropic characteristics, reducing the lack of opportunities for the dwellers. Subsequently, the questions posed by the course will be answered:

Source: photo takes by the 2018 ESD students.

What is the issue?

In relation to the sources published by the course and others investigated (1), the problem is reduced to key aspects: Lack of connectivity, physical and legal sanitation, infraestructure and, where will focus the essay, the environmental restoration which together cause the lack of diversification of livelihoods.

Who is most affected by the issue and why?

On a progressive scale, the different ecosystems come first, followed by the inhabitants of the settlement and neighboring neighborhoods. Because deforestation, inaccessibility, illegal land tenure and the continuous exploitation of quarries do not allow a balanced development of the neighborhood, bringing with it the accumulation of risks due to natural phenomena such as landslides, lack of cushioning for the winds and floods (2).

Are there any social diversity issues that underpin it, for example are some groups more affected tan others?

Due to the unauthorized construction that takes place within formal and informal areas (MLCPE & FCC, 2014), it is in this sense and due to negligence and greater purchasing power that have an impact on socio-spatial conflicts and natural risks against the settlements of the sector and neighbors; However, in turn they bring with them minimal contributions in infrastructure that are also affected by the lack of integration of the neighborhood; On the other hand, the ineffectiveness of the different entities related to roads and traffic weakens the inclusive gaps for residents who decide to circulate through the neighborhood either by walking, by bicycle or others, which are affected in their economy, health, education and others (3).

2

Does the issue relate to spatial injustice?

Several of the problems are related to this concept and can be corroborated by looking at the attached map (4), where we can see that access to public services is the most evident despite being less than a kilometer from the Kortright neighborhood, Maeba and Allen Town where, despite having other socio-spatial problems, they have a variety of facilities; Likewise, another related issue is the lack of connectivity and accessibility between the plots, blocks and neighborhoods either due to vehicular traffic, bicycle lanes, lack of stairs, among others. Finally, mention the lack of access to blue infrastructure (water and sewerage), green (wooded areas and ecosystems in the southern sector) and gray (roads, sidewalks and others), demarcating the spatial injustice.

What factors and processes have contributed to this issue and how?

Through complementary readings (5), one of the key problems is deforestation, causing the forest limit to have shifted 5km to the south with a loss of 60% of the forest (FCC, 2014), produced in an anthropic way within the formal and informal environment, giving rise to a greater area available for informal occupations, since the land is very limited and difficult to access, especially for low-income groups (Forkuor & Cofie 2011, FCC 2014), being one of the factors that determine the occupation of the land and the extraction of materials such as rock and wood that are decisive for construction. Consequently, this leads to rethinking the way in which the different urban actors are planned and organized at the different municipal and governance scales, since this problem triggers a series of processes such as accessibility to basic services, connectivity and among others. that destabilize urban health of the community.

Which actors could contribute to its solution?

Among the interviews carried out with the neighbors, civil society stands out as the main actor for collaboration in the different initiatives; However, it is urgent the inclusion of the public and private sectors, as well as different NGOs that can accompany in the different stages; On the other hand, the structure of the government scales and decentralization are fundamental aspects for the diversification of functions in coordination with the local government that will support key decisions in planning and management. It is worth mentioning some examples that have been carried out on their own initiative to strengthen the city. The first case (6) is that of Kadiatu Mangura, who on her own initiative and other owners begun to plant trees to reduce the effects of the wind and, as a second case, to highlight the work of creating compost to encourage the population to urban agriculture by improving the livelihoods of the community.

3

Comparison of forest area in 1974 and 2017 (World Bank 2017).

Conclusion: Moyiba is a clear case of the negative consequences on the affectation of ecosystems through different human activities; However, this does not mean that the different ecosystem services that could be worked with are left aside, but for this it is essential to recognize the management capacity of local governments and the participatory work of the community, which together with the sector private could improve the settlement from a micro scale and with a strategic perspective; Finally, the management and social production of habitat could be an indispensable tool to empower and reactivate trust in local authorities, bringing with it the capacity for resilience to different natural phenomena and the improvement of the sector.

References: (1)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwHAEPYNAuY&feature=youtu.be (2)https://uclondon.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=6fa93fe520bb4d14a627 b2546e8c8764 (3)https://sierraexpressmedia.com/?p=87959 (4)https://issuu.com/jeanpaulsihuenta?issuu_product=header&issuu_subproduct=document_pag e&issuu_context=link&issuu_cta=profile (5)https://www.sl.undp.org/content/sierraleone/en/home/library/crisis_prevention_and_recovery /analysis-of-the-causal-and-trigger-factors-of-the-august-2017-la.html (6)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DvaIaJS7f8&feature=youtu.be Ministry of Lands, Country Planning and the Environment (MLCPE) and Freetown City Council (FCC). (2014). The Environmental Assessment and Evaluation of Natural Disaster Risk and Mitigation in Freetown. Urban Planning Project 2011–14.

Forkuor, G. and O. Cofie (2011). "Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in Freetown, Sierra Leone and its effects on urban and peri-urban agriculture–a remote sensing approach."

International Journal of Remote Sensing Vol. 32, (No. 4, 20 February 2011): 1017–1037.

4