NEW ISSUES IN REFUGEE RESEARCH Research Paper No.1
Proposal on a constructive alternative towards the slum and housing crisis – Refugee-led Settlements Project –
Architect for Aid Yuri Akiyama-Carrel
March 2015
Copyright rests with the author(s). Materials may be reproduced and circulated provided that the title, author and source is acknowledged. The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Vision First, unless otherwise stated.
1
INDEX 1. Context 1.1 Refugees in illegal slums 1.2 Refugees in guesthouse 1.3 Homeless refugees 1.4 Perfect scenario to lead refugees into jail 1.5 Avoidable waste of public funds 1.6 Voice of refugees
3.6 Utilization of private housing market and housing loan with selfhelp construction (1980's) 3.7 Gaps of housing policy between government and NGOs: re-spread of slums (1990's) 3.8 Back to 'community-based' housing policy (Late 1990's) 3.8.1 Mutual-help theory 3.8.2 Enabling strategy
2. Living Environment 2.1 Global standards on emergency settlements 2.2 Circumstances of refugees' living environment in HK 2.2.1 Cases in slums 2.2.2 Cases in dormitories 3. Movements of housing policy towards slum resolution in Asia 3.1 Slum clearance following forced eviction (1970's) 3.2 Slum clearance with provision of public apartment (1970's) 3.3 Slum clearance with provision of relocation site (1970's) 3.4 Conversion to new housing policy: provision of individual housing (1970's-1980's) 3.4.1 Self-help theory 3.4.2 Enabling strategy 3.5 New housing methodologies based on 'self-help theory' & 'enabling strategy'(1970's-1980's) 3.5.1 Community participation 3.5.2 Community contract 3.5.3 On-site slum upgrading (1) Land sharing (2) Public apartment 3.5.4 Off-site relocation (1) Site and service (2) Core housing 3.5.5 Land regularisation
4. Proposal of a constructive alternative towards slum & housing crisis 4.1 Ordinance background to unauthorised building works on 'agricultural land' 4.2 Programme detail 4.2.1 PHASE1 Emergency assistance - slum clearance + guesthouse, dormitory and emergency shelter (1) Programme target (2) Programme methodology (3) Emergency shelter 4.2.2 PHASE 2 Transitional period selection of relocation site and planning of permanent village (1) Programme target (2) Programme methodology 4.2.3 PHASE 3 Permanent assistance - shift from emergency shelter to permanent refugee village (1) Programme target (2) Programme methodology (3) Low-cost housing (4) Working permit within mutualhelp housing construction programme 5. Conclusion
2
This article explores an overview of current attitudes towards the slum and housing crisis where refugees are confronted without specific options and proposes a constructive alternative through housing programme while the permanent resolution is identified. Yuri Akiyama-Carrel
Department contractor, the International Social Service (ISS-HK). Considering the current housing market in Hong Kong, the 1,500HK$ is evidently insufficient to find an affordable room. Refugees must make a hard decision and mostly end up to be settled in a hut of illegal slums which the ISS-HK officially recommends as an rent option is only available for rent within HK$1,500 assistance.
1. CONTEXT In the ‘Asia’s World City’ Hong Kong, the humanitarian crisis generated refugees slums that have sprung up since 2006 and exponentially grown in numbers on agricultural lots in the rural areas of New Territories West. These slums are defined as 'unauthorised building works (UBWs)' and several departments of the Hong Kong government are responsible for the handling of UBWs; they are the Lands Department, the Buildings Department and the Planning Department. However for the last 10 years the government has reached yet to a fundamental resolution towards the crisis that refugees have been compelled to endure humiliating by all means of such unsafe unhygienic unlawful living conditions while the destitute and suffering refugees residing have been kept hidden from public view. First of all, refugees are not economic migrants but persons who fled from their country for refuge or safety from war, political oppression, and religious persecution. Almost 9,000 refugees in Hong Kong are prohibited from working and must rely on a 1,500HK$ monthly rent assistance and some food provided by the Social Welfare
Otherwise, refugees would be asked apparently to share a rented accommodation such as guesthouse or dormitory, despite many finding this resolution uncomfortable or impossible. However some are suffering from traumas, mental disorders, PTSD often cased by persecution, are aggravated by ongoing stress and anxiety. Such forced cohabitation under lack of privacy is quite hard to accept as an alternative. In these circumstances, the government proactively pushes refugees to slums through ISS-HK. On the other hand, dozens of refugees are evicted from illegal refugee slums while the clampdown on guesthouses comes at a time. Therefore refugees have been compelled to suffer from the circulation of unstable humiliating living conditions within the slum and housing crisis. Further it is just impossible for some refugees who are currently under medication to move anywhere without specific place arranged for the medical and physical conditions. Refugees are not a temporary ‘problem’ to be fixed with residual humanitarian assistance, the government has been certainly demanded the enforcement of permanent resolution towards the crisis. 3
1.1 REFUGEES IN ILLEGAL SLUMS
1.2 REFUGEES IN GUESTHOUSE
The huts in slum are ordinarily structured by illegal unauthorised materials such as metal and wood sheets taken from landfills, and the degraded unlawful structure is never enough to resist typhoon, rain, strong wind and fire.
While many refugees are settled in slums, some kicked out from slums for several reasons or refuse to settle in slum are occasionally given alternative temporary accommodation. It is estimated that about 300 refugees have been housed in guesthouses over the past 18 months as housing prices spiraled beyond reach.
Slum fires have been alarmingly frequent for the one month. The one that broke out on 29th January 2015 left a dead of a Sri Lankan refugee. Some huts and all belongings to the households burst into flames while the acid smoke raced up to sky turning it black. The Sri Lankan refugee settled at a hut recommended by ISS-HK and it’s said the slum fire caused by a short from degraded electricity wiring according to interviews to residents in the slum. The slum fire exposed that these unlawful unhygienic living conditions within slums endangers the life of refugees as human beings. Affected refugees are gravely concerned about the prospect of being suddenly evicted, though they generally appreciate that short-term discomfort such as moving to guesthouses or dormitories is preferable to years of living dangerously in structures that could as easily collapse as erupt in a ball of fire. His death further revealed the dangerous unauthorised structures erected by a landlord hell-bent on profiting from rent paid by ISS-HK, the sloppy management by caseworkers of ISS-HK with lack of inspection and outreach, and the evil slum business between ISS-HK and the landlord.
However it has been currently reported that numbers of refugees settled in guesthouses have to leave their rooms and make a hard decision immediately with unstable unavailable alternatives; namely whether they miraculously find and rent accommodation for 1500HK$ or become homeless. Specific issues in guesthouse are 1) uncomfortable forced cohabitation by several individuals in a tiny room under lack of privacy 2) guesthouse usually has no cooking facilities and food supplied by ISS-HK cannot be cooked. 1.3 HOMELESS REFUGEES It is worth noting that the refugees settled in the same slum where the deadly fire broke out had their rent stopped and faced mass eviction. The clampdown on guesthouses comes at a time when dozens of refugees are evicted from illegal refugee slums without adequate assistance. About a hundred refugees have found themselves in the streets. At least guesthouse rooms are no longer offered as an alternative to homeless refugees.
4
1.4 PERFECT SCENARIO TO LEAD REFUGEES INTO JAIL Since ISS-HK cut the rent assistance or paid less than the monthly rent, refugees are compelled to work illegally to pay the surplus and utilities while the rent increased sometimes, and refugees end up to be jailed. Considering the prohibition from working and 15 to 22 months jail for working illegally cased by the rent cut controlled by ISS-HK, it seems to be a perfect scenario heading towards ‘refugee solution’ reflected by a hidden agenda.
2. LIVING ENVIRONMENT For refugees hoping to return to their hometown one day, the life in simplified shelter or other countries would be a temporary accommodation. However refugees live everyday with feelings of instability waiting for solutions. Therefore living environment within refugee communities should be considered as an essential factor to bring them hope, energy and empowerment. 2.1 GLOBAL STANDARDS ON EMERGENCY SETTLEMETS
1.5 AVOIDABLE PUBLIC FUNDS WASTE Prior to February 2015, a considerable number of homeless refugees were assigned single-occupancy rooms in guesthouses by ISS-HK when they failed to find rooms for 1500HK$. Starting second week in February 2015, refugees were unceremoniously locked out of guesthouses after ISS-HK payments were stopped. The decision is not unreasonable as the guesthouse solution wasted millions of dollars that should have been more prudently allocated. 1.6 VOICE OF REFUGEES “No refugee wants to live in slums. Were affordable alternatives available we would gladly move out of these insanely dangerous structures.” - RU publically started early 2nd week in February 2015. The Government must not deny the entire group participation in solving the problems relating to their livelihood through the prohibition from working that effectively reduces refugees to ‘children of the state’.
The UNHCR Handbook for Emergencies1 establishes technical minimum standards concerning planning and operation of a Refugee Camp. The Chapter 12 focuses particularly on minimum standards of living environment including shelter, settlements, sanitation and services. These are based on the Sphere Project Handbook2 that is one of the most widely known and internationally recognized sets of common principles and universal minimum standards for the delivery of quality humanitarian response. The minimum standards of emergency settlements are following; [SHELTER PLANNING] • Covered living space= 3.5m2 / person
Source) Sphere Handbook, Sphere Project • •
Suitableness for seasonal variance Privacy and emotional security
5
[SITE SELECTION] • Size and density = 30-45 m2 / person • Security and protection • Land use and land rights • Accessibility • Expansion possibility • Topography • Drainage • Soil condition [SITE PLANNING - MASTER PLAN]
Source) P227 Handbook for Emergencies Third Edition, February 2007, UNHCR • • • • •
Sanitation services Infrastructure Fire prevention Administrative services Communal services
[SITE PLANNING - MODULAR PLAN]
Source) P228 Handbook for Emergencies Third Edition, February 2007, UNHCR • •
Land allocation = 45 m2 / plot Detail plan of services and infrastructure
2.2 CIRCUMSTANCES OF REFUGEES’ LIVING ENVIRONMENT IN HK The use of these minimum standards should be limited in an emergency situation only to be protected from the risk of being homeless or insanity precarious environment ‘temporally’. However, it would be useful to understand the circumstances of living environment where refugees have settled for years in Hong Kong by compared with the minimum standards; namely it is taken for granted that a living environment towards semi-term or long-term settlements should be better than at least the minimum standards towards temporary emergency settlements. The result of outreach and field survey conducted by the Vision First and the Refugee Union illustrates the unsafe unhygienic living environment in slums and dormitories where dozens of refugees appeared to have been living. These living conditions also tarnish the reputation of Hong Kong and the appropriateness of such arrangements should be carefully analysed. 2.2.1 CASES IN SLUMS The dangerous unauthorised structures of high-density huts are mostly erected by illegal materials such as metal and wood sheets taken from landfills with services and infrastructure degraded. These are never enough to resist typhoon, rain, strong wind, electric leak and fire, and to secure documents and personal belongings from the disasters.
6
uncomfortable forced cohabitation also helps disease spread in the closed room.
4 refugees share 1 bunk bed in a tiny room
4 refugees live and cook in the windowless bedkitchen-common room
th
th
Source) VF Blog, February 5 and13 2015
These living conditions will not even satisfy the minimum standards towards temporary emergency settlements at the following points; X Covered living space = 3.5m2 /person X Suitableness for seasonal variance X Privacy and emotional security X Site size and density= 30- 45m2 /person X Services and infrastructure X Fire prevention 2.2.2 CASES IN DORMITORIES Refugees are encouraged by caseworker to share rooms and 4 to 6 individuals are packed into rooms no larger than PingPong tables, nearly 4m2, where they sleep back to back. Sometimes sleeping areas are turned into kitchens and toilets used for storage. There is no space to store their documents and personal belongings. The
3 refugees share 1 bunk bed sleeping in turns th Source) VF Blog, February 16 2015
Further issue is illegal buildings against the Hong Kong Building Regulations such as a windowless room; According to CAP123F Building (Planning) Regulation3, every room used for habitation or as a kitchen shall be provided with natural lighting and ventilation by window(s) and its area to be 10% of floor area of the room with 6% to open for ventilation. X
Covered living space= 3.5m2 /person X Privacy and emotional security X Fire prevention X Window and ventilation (HK regulation)
7
3. HISTORY OF FAILURE & FINDINGS: MOVEMENTS OF HOUSING POLICY TOWARDS SLUM RESOLUTION IN ASIA 4
NHA (National Housing Authority, 1975, Philippines), NHDA (National Housing Development Authority, 1979, Sri Lanka).
It's no exaggeration to say that Asia is the most experienced region on housing challenge towards slum resolution. The policy and practices are highlighted below; 3.1 SLUM CLEARANCE FOLLOWING FORCED EVICTION (1960’S-)
Public apartments provided by NHA - Manila, Philippines Source) NHA home page
In the 1960’s in the growth cities of Asia, the main concern of the Government was on infrastructure development such as road and water service and the Construction Authorities were established by the international agencies. Therefore, the slums in the city were just concerned as an obstacle for development. The slum clearance following forced evictions became a main stream as a typical urban development policy.
Within their main policy of providing the public apartments widely, the solution towards slum issues was attempted in shape ‘slum clearance with provision of public apartment’.
The biggest slum clearance with forced eviction in Asia was the one towards ‘Beautification of City for Seoul Olympics’ in 1983-1988. Almost of the 720,000 people were evicted without receiving any alternatives and re-formed slums and squatter areas around the city. 3.2 SLUM CLEARANCE WITH PROVISION OF PUBLIC APARTMENT (1970’S) In the 1970’s, the National Housing Authorities finally established in Asian several countries were responsible for providing the public apartments to lowincome households who are below the middle class; HUDCO (Housing and Urban Development Corporation Ltd, 1970, India), NHA (National Housing Authority, 1972, Thailand), PERUMNAS (1974, Indonesia),
However these public apartments faced soon to difficulties due to the large economic burden caused by rising of construction cost following an unnecessary high standard of buildings to these specific nations where just became independent from colonial rules after the war, and couldn’t catch up with the number of urban poor rapidly increased. Further, these public apartments following slum clearance ended up to be transfigured to accommodations for rather the middle class than urban poor. Again the slums were diffused and reformed around the city. 3.3 SLUM CLEARANCE WITH PROVISION OF RELOCATION SITE (1970’S) In the cases the Governments provided relocation sites following slum clearance, the relocation sites were often affected by further forced eviction towards ‘Effective Use of Lands’.
8
3.4 CONVERSION TO NEW HOUSING POLICY: PROVISION OF INDIVIDUAL HOUSING THROUGH COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION & SELF-HELP CONSTRUCTION BY COMMUNITY-BASED CONTRACT (LATE 1970’S-1980’S) In the late 1970’s, the housing policy towards slum issues was significantly converted from the direct housing-supply by the Government to new housing approaches based on ‘Self-Help Theory’ & ‘Enabling Strategy’; namely the Government ended providing public apartment to urban poor, focused on the potential of slum communities and attempted providing individual housing through community participation and self-help construction by community based contract. New housing approaches were based on two conceptions following; 3.4.1 SELF-HELP THEORY A theory that urban poor in slums have willingness and ability to shake them free from the slums and improve their living environment, given a guarantee of land right and minimum accommodation. 3.4.2 ENABLING STRATEGY A strategy 1) to reduce the role of the government as a direct housing supplier 2) to spread the role of individuals, community-based organization (CBO), NGOs and private sector as promoters towards improvement and construction of housing 3) to spread the role of the government as a supporter through necessary administrative actions to be taken for the system.
3.5 NEW HOUSING METHODOLOGIES BASED ON ‘SELP-HELP THEORY’ & ‘ENABLING STRATEGY’ (LATE 1970’S-1980’S) The technical methodologies are typified as following; ‘Community Participation’ ‘Community Contract’ ‘On-site Slum Upgrading’ usually implemented with ‘Land Sharing, and ‘Off-Site Relocation Project’ usually implemented with ‘Sites & Services’ and ‘Core Housing’ (Figure1). These new housing approaches politically played a large effect and became widespread globally, while the trends of housing movement towards urban poor was further internationally recognized at the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements held in Vancouver in 1976. 3.5.1 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION A housing methodology, based on ‘SelfHelp Theory’, urban poor communities participate in activities to improve their living environment from slums. It will be expected 1) sense of belonging to community is heightened 2) issues and prioritization of needs the community faces are shared. 3.5.2 COMMUNITY CONTRACT A housing methodology, based on ‘Enabling Strategy’, CBOs become the contractors on housing programmes during receiving a technical education from external agencies rather than leaving all housing activities to external agencies.
9
3.5 3.5.3
3.5.4
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2) Figure1. Housing methodologies to improve living environment Source) produced by the author based on field survey in Cambodia in 2007-2010
3.5.3 ON-SITE SLUM UPGRADING A housing methodology to upgrade the potential of existing urban slums within onsite without forced eviction. (1) LAND SHEARING In the case a slum is formed on the land owned by government or individuals, a part of land is given to the slum community free of charge. ‘Land Sharing’ enables landowner regains land and slum community ensures a good environment and land rights through collecting and rebuilding the disordered slums.
Rama IV project in Thailand - Land Sharing faced difficulty since the late 1980s as land prices boomed for investment in Bangkok.
(2) PUBLIC APARTMENT
3.5.4 OFF-SITE RELOCATION A housing methodology to relocate people in slums into a new planned site. Relocation site is often set at a remote corner of the country due to difficulty to obtain a series of lands near downtown. Considered the area urban poor can make a living is limited around city, location and access to city have to be considered in selection of relocation site. The Asia Development Bank and the World Bank recommend following points; 1) to minimize the impact of relocation as loss of housing, community relations, resources, living environment and services 2) to support recovering their livelihood including affected social cultural measures. 3) to adapt ‘Community Participation’ in all phase of making decision. (1) SITE AND SERVICE A symbolic housing methodology of ‘Enabling Strategy’, 1) minimum infrastructure such as roads, water supply, sewage, electricity, gas is constructed 2) housing and exteriors are left to the residents. By supplying the minimum facilities and keeping the land-rent including development fees lowest, it enables to keep supplying housing to lowincome households after relocation.
Public apartment built next existing slum Source) taken by the author, Phnom Penh 2008
10
In the urban development loan program by the World Bank which began in 1972, about half of the total amount of loan up to 1986 was ‘Site and Service’. The effective element that ‘Site and Service’ enables to provide housing at much less price than traditional public housing had found by international society.
3.5.5 LAND REGULARISATION A methodology to certify the rights of land where is unstable and illegally occupied, and to give the land ownership and longteam leasehold newly defined after reallocation. 3.6 UTILISATION OF PRIVATE HOUSING MARKET & HOUSING LOAN WITH SELP-HELP CONSTRUCTION (1980’S)
Construction of water service by ‘Community Contract’ based on ‘Enabling Strategy’ Source) Kork Kleang 1 community, Phnom Penh
(2) CORE HOUSING A housing methodology, based on ‘SelfHelp Theory’, to surpply the CORE such as toilet, shower and kitchen and the fundamental structure of housing such as columns, walls and roof only. Construction of the rest such as partition depends on economic situation and life stage of the family though ‘Self-Help’ in future. ‘Core Housing’ enables to form living environment based on resident’ needs, and to encourage ‘Self-Help’ construction by reducing the initial investment towards a housing.
Source) taken by the author, Phnom Penh 2009
In early 1980’s, it was the period of world recession and accumulated debt. The interest of international financial agencies directed to strengthening a potential of urban management and activating private housing market and headed to housing supply for the middle class. In these political administrative stream, the ‘100,000 housing units project’ in Sri Lanka started as a five-year framework since 1979 promoted 1) a reduction of public sector 2) utilisation of private housing market and 3) housing loan system with self-help construction. The project mainly implemented the supply of housing loan with self-help construction in rural area and supply of public housing in urban area. The ‘100,000 housing units project’ had been supported by the booming economy successfully achieved the goal of number of housing. However the government revealed by their own investigation that actually poor communities had built much larger numbers of housing by their self-help construction at the much lower price in outside the framework of public project, and the system of housing construction controlled by communities enables to produce a housing meets their own
11
needs rather than a housing provided by the government. Based on this context, ‘100 million housing units project (1984-1989) ’ was formulated.
3.8 BACK TO ‘COMMUNITY-BASED’ HOUSING POLICY BASED ON ‘MUTUAL-HELP THEORY’ & ‘ENABLING STRATEGY’ (LATE 1990’S)
In late 1980s’, wide rage of administrative supports towards self-help construction was additionally implemented.
In the late 1990’s, as next solution following the development booming from the 1980’s to the early 1990’s, it was the new housing system widely raised that 1) to respect the process of housing provision based on decision-making of each family 2) to clarify CBOs or NGOs as the body of development and main shaft to the government and private sector. 3) all members of CBOs to participate in development as a part of the body.
3.7 GAPS OF HOUSING POLICY BETWEEN GOVERNMENT & NGOs: RE-SPREAD OF SLUMS (1990’S)
In the late 1980’s, there are the standpoint insisted on activating the housing market and the other standpoint insisted on distributing resources towards self-help construction. Both were corresponded by only a point of disillusionment on housing supply by the direct intervention of central government. Although the gap between both was gradually expanded in the 1990’s, the stream of utilizing private housing sector progressed overwhelmingly. After all, illegal slums were spread again as housing opportunities for urban poor were reduced on market by formalization of land and housing.
The technical methodologies are typified as following; • Mutual-help housing construction • Enhancement of job opportunities superimposed on housing construction • Production and distribution of lowcost materials by community-based • Group housing loan through housing union and mutual guarantees, and • Cooperative land tenure 3.8.1 MUTUAL-HELP THEORY A theory that individuals and families of CBO help each other to improve living environment, based on 3.4.1‘self-help theory’. 3.8.2 ENABLING STRATEGY A strategy 1) to reduce the role of the government as a direct housing supplier 2) to spread the role of individuals, communitybased organization (CBO), NGOs and private sector as promoters towards improvement and construction of housing 3) to spread the role of the government as a supporter through necessary administrative actions to be taken for the system.
12
4. PROPOSAL OF A CONSTRUCTIVE ALTERNATIVE TOWARDS SLUM & HOUSING CRISIS First of all, giving a guarantee of land right and minimum accommodation, refugees have willingness and ability to shake them free from the slums and to improve their living environment. Second, given the approval for working, refugees have the willingness and ability to engage in further social contribution. By the prohibition from working that effectively reduces refugees to ‘children of the state’, the Government must not deny the entire group participation in solving the problems relating to their livelihood. 4.1 ORDINANCE BACKGROUND TO UNAUTHORISED BUILDING WORKS ON ‘AGRICULTURAL LAND’ Unauthorised building works (UBWs) are mostly located on agricultural land in New Territories. The Lands Department, the Buildings Department and the Planning Department are response for the handling of UBWs. According to policy and practices of the lands department5, the privately held “Old Schedule” lots in New Territories contained within the Block Government Leases and described as agricultural land may be suitable for the purpose of some temporary uses. If the TEMPORARY USE does not involve ANY BUILDING WORK, then, subject to compliance with the Town Planning Ordinance (TPO) (Cap.131)6, the lessee may use the land for purposes such as the open storage of goods etc.
However, the Block Government Lease does require that the lessee must obtain the approval of Government before any buildings or structures of any description are to be erected or constructed on the land. To accommodate some acceptable TEMPORARY USES that would involve the ERECTION OF STRUCTURES, it is the current land policy that a Short Term Waiver (STW) may be issued, subject to terms and conditions to be imposed by Government including the payment of a fee, to waive the Government’s right of re-entry for a limited period during which the lessee may use the TEMPORARY STRUCTURES on the land for purposes in accordance with the conditions imposed in the STW. However the issue of a STW should not prejudice in any way permanent development or long-term use. Nor would it prevent enforcement action from being taken by the Buildings Department against any structures that have been erected without their prior approval, should such action be considered necessary. The Lands department has the power to demolish UBWs so that it may be used for agricultural purposes under the Lands Provisions Ordinance (Cap28)7, and reenter the land and cancel the lease under the Government Rights 8 Ordinance (Cap 126) . When there is a breach of lease conditions by the lot owner, the lands department will play the role of lease enforcement. The Lands Department had taken lease enforcement action against the unauthorised structures erected on the slum that fire broke out on 29th January 2015. 13
4.2 PROGRAMME DETAIL In the above context, this proposal presents the emergency settlements assistance and the permanent housing assistance as a constructive alternative towards slum and housing crisis. The government has been demanded the enforcement of sustainable permanent housing assistance and required to recognise the potential of refugee community, in other words, promote the GUARANTEE OF HOUSING SUPPLY ON NEW RELOCATION SITES and ITS LAND RIGHTS through PARTICIPATION OF REFUGEES IN ALL DECISION-MAKING PHASES. It is a noteworthy fact that the government owns huge land. The escalation of the crisis is a threat to social stability and public security. It is no exaggeration to say that taking no thought of using huge lands is just as negligence of the duty and refusal of social responsibility.
(2) PROGRAMME METHODOLOGY PHASE 1 focuses on a successful housing policy and practices to close all 69 slums; slum clearance with provision of alternatives. While permanent solutions are identified, the government should be coordinating and implementing the clearance of illegal unhygienic slums, and at the same time refugees should be moved to alternatives a) guesthouses or b) dormitories or c) emergency shelters; a) Guesthouse
b) Dormitory
c) Emergency shelter (On-site/Off-site)
PHASE 1 - EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE
4.2.1 SLUM CLEARANCE + GUESTHOUSE, DORMITORY, EMERGENCY SHELTER (1) PROGRAMME TARGET PHASE 1 is proposed as emergency settlements assistance and sets the target to A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF HOMELESS REFUGEES AND REFUGEES IN ILLEGAL SLUMS ONLY to avoid the risk of reducing refugees to worse ghettos than the present rather homeless or flimsy slums.
PHASE 1 PROGRAMME CONCEPT Source) created by the author
1 Recognition of preferences by a hearing survey on 'which family prefers to move where'; to respect the process of emergency settlements provision based on voice of individuals and families, 2 Implementation of emergency settlements assistance and move to a place, and 3 Enforcement of slum clearance
14
(3) EMERGENCY SHELTER As the final aim of UNHCR working in massive refugee camps in Middle East or Africa is not promoting camps but closing camps, the emergency settlements will not be promoted with the refugee life in a simplified shelter within this program. All emergency settlements assistance is to protect refugees from the risk ending up to live outside or insanity pre-carious environment.
C - 2 EMERGENCY SHELTER OFF-SITE As a pilot programme of emergency settlements assistance to provide 20 emergency shelters on off-site, the government proposes and provides some affordable sites with terms and conditions. Examples of emergency shelter are shown following; 1 US$1,000 IKEA Refugee Shelter 9
C - 1 EMERGENCY SHELTER ON-SITE (LANDS LEASE ENFORCEMENT HAS TAKEN)
According to the Hong Kong Building Regulations - CAP123F Building (Planning) Regulation 50, temporary buildings shall mean any building for which a permit is issued on a temporary basis and is required only for a short time and constructed of short lived materials. In existing ordinances, a Short Term Waiver (STW) may be issued to accommodate some acceptable TEMPORARY USES that would involve the ERECTION OF STRUCTURES on agricultural land. The provision of emergency shelter on agricultural land could be an temporary alternative while it fosters the idea on refugee circumstances in slum and housing crisis to the local social and seeks sponsors towards imposed payment. Further changes in use of land, are mainly regulated by the Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131), land leases, Buildings Ordinance (Cap 123) and the deeds of mutual covenant, might not be impossible after the Lands Department has taken lease enforcement action.
Size: Weight Houses Cost Assembly Note
188 square feet (17.5 m2) 100 kg 5 person US$1,000 per unit 4 hours, no tools required Flexible, adaptable, modular, solar panel
Source) IKEA Foundation
Comparison of annual expense between the current rent system and IKEA Shelter
Rent Electricity Monthly 6 months (1HK$=0.13US$)
Existing Rent
IKEA Shelter
(per unit)
(per unit)
1500
HK$
200
HK$
300
HK$
30
HK$
1800
HK$
230
HK$
10800
HK$
1380
HK$
1393
US$
178
US$
Even if it takes US$1,000 as the initial cost of IKEA Shelter, it is not more than the 5 months expense of present system. The solar panel enables to be minimized the electricity bills. At any rate, it is not sustainable leaving both refugees and the 15
Hong Kong government a permanent uncertainty with regards to time and huge expense. The IKEA shelter repacked into cardboard boxes of components could be assembled easily by Refugee Community on off-site.
Source) IKEA Foundation
2 Container type shelter
PHASE 2 - TRANSITIONAL PERIOD
4.2.2 SELECTION OF RELOCATION SITE AND PLANNING OF PERMANENT REFUGEE VILLAGE PHASE 2 focuses on the sucessful housing policis and practices; 1) to respect the potential impact of community-based organisation - Refugee Union, its individuals and families, and NGOs, 2) shelter programme thorough refugees’ participation based on ‘mutual-help theory’, and 3) closure of all refugees slums with housing assistance. The government is required to recognise the potential of refugee community, and to enforce permanent housing resolutions learning in the history on housing policies and practices, in other words, the government is demanded to give THE GUARANTEE OF HOUSING SUPPLY ON NEW RELOCATION SITES AND ITS LAND RIGHTS, through participation of refugee community in all decisionmaking phases. (1) PROGRAMME TARGET PHASE 2 sets the programme target to REFUGEES WHO RECEIVED THE EMERGENCY SHELTER ASSISTANCE IN PHASE 1 ONLY.
Size House Unit Cost Note
100 square feet 4 person per unit 72 units (Total 288 person) US$3,000,000 including all 110 Seat Dining, Kitchen, Freezer, Dry storage, 30 shower units, 24 tank toilets, 12 toilets for men, 27 sinks, Fuel tanks, Generators, Sewage treatment plant, Portable water tank etc.
(2) PROGRAMME METHODOLOGY 1 SITE SELECTION: The relocation site should be selected on appropriate location considering accessibility to social services, and avoided to be an isolated remote site from urban area. Size and density = 30-45 m2 / person, security and protection, land use and land rights, expansion possibility, topography, drainage and soil condition should be considered.
16
2 SITE PLANNING: Assuming the Government selected an appropriate site in their own land, site planning towards permanent refugee village will be commenced. Sanitation services, infrastructure, fire prevention, administrative and communal services should be planned. The area of open land should be left as expansion possibility. 3 RELOCATION: Refugees in PHASE1 c)- emergency shelter will 1) move to the new relocation site and reassemble the emergency shelters in the area left as expansion possibility space. 2) then the land of emergency settlements will be returned as agricultural land.
Figure. Relocation arrangement keeping relations before and after, Phnom Penh Source) produced by the author, survey in 2007
PHASE 3 - PERMANENT ASSISTANCE
4.2.3 SHIFT FROM EMERGENCY SHELTER TO PERMANENT REFUGEE VILLAGE BY COMMUNITY-BASED CONTRACT PHASE 3 focuses on the sucessful housing policis and practices; 1) to foster the potential impact of community-based organisation - Refugee Union, its individuals and families, and NGOs, 2) housing supply programme by refugee-community-led contract based on ‘mutual-help theory’ and ‘enabling strategy’. (1) PROGRAMME TARGET PHASE 3 sets the programme target to REFUGEES WHO RELOCATED TO THE NEW SITE IN PHASE 2 ONLY.
PHASE 2 RELOCATION CONCEPT Source) created by the author
The history of relocation projects tells that the impact of relocation should be minimized, in other words, collapse of existing community relationships organised before relocation should be avoided as much as possible to foster the mutual-help on relocation site.
(2) PROGRAMME METHODOLOGY 1 While emergency shelters protect refugees on relocation site, planning and construction of low-cost housing will be commenced by refugeecommunity–led contract. 2 Refugees will move in to their new house after construction works are completed. Emergency shelters will be repacked into cardboard boxes of components by
17
refugees, rebuilt and reused at another emergency settlements. 3 Then the loop of function PHASE 1 – 3 will iterate and spread.
remarkable system to provide low-cost housing though community-based contract, the model of construction process of low-cost housing is highlighted below;
PHASE 3 MODEL ON CONSTRUCTION PROCESS OF LOW-COST HOUSING Source) created by the author, fired survey 2007
PHASE 3 PROGRAMME CONCEPT Source) created by the author
(3) LOW-COST HOUSING Low-cost housing is ‘non-market social rented intermediate housing’ provided to specified eligible households whose needs are not met by the market. Most of the literature on low-cost housing refers to a number of forms that exist along a continuum - from emergency shelters, to transitional housing, to non-market rental. The notion of housing affordability became widespread in the 1980s in Europe and North America. The low-cost is reasonably adequate in standard and location not only by using low-cost materials but also by constructing through community-based contract. The Habitat for Humanity (HFH)10, an international NGO founded in 1979, has been devoted to building ‘simple, decent, and affordable’ housing. Focusing on its
1 CBO (the Refugee Union) will make a contract with the government and non-profit engineering organisation on the low-cost housing construction programme in refugee village. CBO selects community members as construction labour. 2 Community members will be given an engineering education and the construction materials by the government contractor, a non-profit engineering organization such as HFH. 3 Construction will be completed by refugee labour in refugee village. 4 Refugees will make a lease contract with the government, and move in to new low-cost house.
1000US$ Low-Cost Housing 2007 Model provided by Habitat for Humanity Cambodia Source) created by the author, fired survey 2007
18
(4) WORKING PERMIT WITHIN THE MUTUAL-HELP HOUSING CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMME By the prohibition from working, the Government must not deny the entire group participation in solving the problems relating to their livelihood and living environment. Refugee community will lead and involve in this refugee village programme as a decision maker, and will contribute as planners and construction labour. In other words, this refugee village programme could open job opportunities to refugees through the mutual-help housing construction and provide refugees a pilot working permit within this programme. 5. CONCLUSION Giving a guarantee of land right and minimum accommodation, refugees have willingness and ability to shake them free from the slums and to improve their living environment. Given the approval for working, refugees have the willingness and ability to engage in further social contribution. Soon refugees will demonstrate their ability to manage their livelihood and improve living environment, while community participation helps the problems relating to their livelihood solve and living environment through this programme. I would greatly appreciate urgent assistance by the Government and considering this proposal as one of alternatives towards the slum and housing crisis in Hong Kong.
1 The UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Handbook for Emergencies Third Edition, February 2007 http://www.unhcr.org/472af2972.html 2 The Sphere Project, Sphere http://www.spherehandbook.org
Handbook,
3 The Building Department (2001), Building (Planning) Regulation CAP123F reg30 ‘Lighting and Ventilation of Rooms used for Habitation or as an Office or Kitchen’ 4 Yuri AKIYAMA-CARREL (2010), Study on a Relocation Project following Forced Migration in Phnom Penh Cambodia, Chapter 2 P15 – P29 5 The Legislative Council (2005), LC Paper No. CB(1)1875/04-05(07) Meeting of the Panel on Planning, Lands and Works on 28 June 2005 http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr0809/english/panels/ dev/papers/dev1125cb1-232-7-e.pdf 6 The Town Planning Board, Town Planning Ordinance CAP131 http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/6799165 D2FEE3FA94825755E0033E532/AEA02550B541 AC16482575EE003FB1D8?OpenDocument&bt=0 7 The Land Department, Lands (Miscellaneous Provisions) Ordinance CAP 28 reg12-13 http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/6799165 D2FEE3FA94825755E0033E532/0DC8528C353 E7043482575EE00304946?OpenDocument&bt= 0 8 The Government Rights Ordinance CAP 126 reg4 http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/67991 65D2FEE3FA94825755E0033E532/E87620820 77CEC6C482575EE003F71CF?OpenDocumen t&bt=0 9 Dezeen, Ikea develops flat-pack refugee shelters (2013) http://www.dezeen.com/2013/07/03/ikeadevelops-flat-pack-refugee-shelters/ 10 Habitat for Humanity International http://www.habitat.org/eurasia
Yuri Akiyama-Carrel yuri.carrel@gmail.com
19