F-Project 03 2001/2002

Informal Settlements Development on Zanzibar

A Study on the Community Based Provision of Storm Water Management

Participants:

Ameyibor, Steve

Basteck, Timo

Bierbaum, Claudia

Frommeld, Nadine

Giaourakis, Nike

Hackenbroch, Kirsten

Kirchberg, Axel

Kutsch, Alexander

Mendel, Maximilian

Schlichting, Silke

Schmelz, Sebastian

Schoppengerd, Johanna

Schulitz, Antonias

Schützendorf, Judith

Sufryd, Christian

Vorberg, Thorsten

SPRING WORKING PAPERS No. 21 Dortmund 2003

SPRINGStudies in Regional Development Planning and Management in Developing Countries

Revision of layout and content Bierbaum, Claudia; Frommeld, Nadine; Giaourakis, Nike; Hackenbroch, Kirsten; Kirchberg, Axel; Schlichting, Silke; Schoppengerd, Johanna; Schulitz, Antonia; Vorberg, Thorsten

Project Supervisor Univ.-Prof. Dr. Volker Kreibich MA, University of Dortmund, Germany Dipl.-Ing. Wolfgang Scholz, University of Dortmund, Germany

Project Advisor Dr. Ute Middelmann, University of Dortmund, Germany

External Examiner Yao Yeboah, University of Dortmund, Germany

Distributor SPRING Centre University of Dortmund Baroper Str. 291 44227 Dortmund Tel.: +49-231-755-2543 Fax: +49-231-7554398 E-Mail: spring@pop.uni-dortmund.de

I

Acknowledgements

This report represents the outcomes of a student-project at the University of Dortmund, Faculty of Spatial Planning.

For one year 16 students worked together on the topic of informal settlements and tried to answer the question how to provide basic infrastructure in those settlements.

Besides this, one aim of the project was to reflect the German understanding of plan-ning and to get an impression of the completely different conditions in which planning has to take place in developing countries. During the work the project dealt with prob-lems of urbanisation in developing countries and the inability of the government to re-spond to it. As possible solution, strategies for “planning without planners” were ana-lysed and provided a new view on the possible actors of a planning process and their tasks.

The four weeks of research in Zanzibar Town, which were carried out in February and March 2002, allowed to take a very close and lively look into these topics. Each member of the project developed his/her own very personal experiences and opinions on the situation.

One major problem of the case study approach was that all necessary data had to be collected during this one limited period of time and it was very difficult to get additional information afterwards. Despite the continuous feedback process between the different methods, the research question and the first findings, it was impossible to foresee all the following working steps including the necessary information. For example the decision to create a technical concept was taken during the last days on Zanzibar. Therefore the questions in the interviews were not very detailed concerning this topic and the project faced difficulties in gathering the necessary information afterwards.

But nevertheless the outcomes of the research were very satisfying, the amount of the conducted interviews, the mapping and the teamwork within the group lead to a good result.

At the end of a very instructive and interesting year, we like to thank all the people, who enabled us to carry out this study.

Firstly Mr Mohammed Habib Mohammed and Mr Mohammed Zahran Mohammed took a great effort by not only translating but also explaining our intention to the inter-viewees and important differences of the cultural understandings to us. Secondly we have to thank all the residents for spending their time to answer to questions of crazy “wazungu”, which might not always have made sense to them. In addition, the Sheha of Magomeni, Mr Hassan Ali Hassan, guided our work in the settlement and he as well as the Sheha of Mwanakwerekwe, Mr Ali Said Mpoto, explained all circumstances of their settlements. Mr Abdul Ali Suleiman and Mr Haji Miraji Abdullah explained the struc-ture and the attempts of the self-help organisations in the two case study settlements and Mr Ali Haji and Mr Rajab Mzee provided the necessary information on the two football clubs.

Magomeni Football club gave us the opportunity of an exciting football match we played against them and let us for a few hours be part of their settlement life.

Mr Mwalim Ali Mwalim, the director of the Stone Town Conservation Development Authority and coach of a second division team, contributed by explaining the context of life in developing countries and especially on Zanzibar to us. Many discussions on the different understandings of problems of planners and residents in informal settlement enabled us to understand a little bit how people in Zanzibar think and how they live.

II

Special thanks to the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Mrs Sigrid Pessel and Mr Sheha Juma Mjaja were not only interviewees but also welcomed us very warmly on Zanzibar and provided us with support and rooms. Additional important information was given to us by the acting director of ANGOZA Mrs Mariah Mahubaka, the Vice Town Clerk of the Ministry for Water, Construction, Energy and Lands, Mr Khamis Juma Mzee, Mr Mohammed Omar, a storm water management expert of the Zanzibar Municipal Council, and the head of the Solid Waste Department Mr J. Muhsin Rahmad-hani.

A discussion on the first findings with lecturers from UCLAS gave important inputs and critics for our further working steps. Special thanks to Mr Sheuya who provided us with a “planning-bar-tour” through the suburbs of Dar es Salaam.

Last but not least we would like to thank our advisors Prof. Dr. Volker Kreibich MA, Dipl.-Ing. Wolfgang Scholz and Dr. Ute Middelmann without whom this work would not have been possible. Based on the studies done by Mr Scholz and Mr Kreibich in the last two years, easier access to general knowledge on the issue of informal settlements and to information on Zanzibar Town was possible. In addition we profited from their existing contacts to the people on Zanzibar and were therefore able to find a great num-ber of interesting interview partners.

And many thanks to Judith Schützendorf who participated with us during the whole year. We appreciate your work.

III

Table of Contents

List of Figures.....................................................................................................VI

List of Maps ........................................................................................................VI

Acronyms .......................................................................................................... VII

CHAPTER 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 Informal urban growth in Sub-Saharan Africa...............................................................................2 Portrait of Zanzibar ........................................................................................................................4

History · Economy · Main population characteristics

CHAPTER 2Research Question and Methodology................................................................. 9 The research question.....................................................................................................................9

Selection of the infrastructure example · Hypotheses · Approaching the analysis · Aim of the project

Methodological approach.............................................................................................................12 Interviews · Spatial analysis · Evaluation

CHAPTER 3Informal Urban Growth in Zanzibar Town.................................................... 15 Urban development in Zanzibar Town.........................................................................................15 Informally emerged urban settlements .........................................................................................18

Causes for informal settlements · Process of informal land managementInfrastructure problems.................................................................................................................23

The problem of storm water management · Other infrastructure problems and their relation to storm water management

Important aspects of informal urban growth................................................................................28

CHAPTER 4Technical Solutions for Storm Water Management ....................................... 29 Discharging ..............................................................................................................................29 Seepage ..............................................................................................................................31 Rainwater harvesting....................................................................................................................33 Comparison of the different technical solutions ..........................................................................33 Examples ..............................................................................................................................34

Hanna Nassif · Jang’ombe-Urusi

IV

CHAPTER 5Implementation and Management ....................................................................37 Definitions .............................................................................................................................. 37 Responses and strategic approaches to informal settlements....................................................... 38

Influencing informal development by lowering planning standards · Decentralisation as a key towards active participation · Preventing gentrification while creating motivation · The local community as a legal mediator

The environment for institutions of the civil society on Zanzibar .............................................. 41 Tradition of self-organisation in the Zanzibarian history · Establishment of a civil society · ANGOZA as an supportive NGO · The Zanzibar Sustainable Programme as a mediator · People’s awareness and responsibilities to take action

Football as a best practise for self organised local development ................................................ 45 Importance of football · Process of development of football grounds · Structure of football clubs · The maintenance of football grounds · Conclusion

Strategies and recommendations for establishing grass root initiatives ...................................... 48 Motivation · Members · Structure · Finance · Excursus: Recommendations for financing community upgrading projects

CHAPTER 6Case-Study Areas: Analysis ...............................................................................55 Selection of case-study areas....................................................................................................... 55 Magomeni .............................................................................................................................. 56

Development of the settlement · Analysis of storm water related aspects · Analysis of self-help related aspects

Meli Nne .............................................................................................................................. 67 Development of the settlement · Analysis of storm water related aspects · Analysis of self-help related aspects

CHAPTER 7Case-Study Areas: Concept ...............................................................................79 Technical concept Magomeni ..................................................................................................... 79

Measures · Costs and building phases · Conclusion Implementation and management concept for Magomeni .......................................................... 85

Emergence of the CBO · Tasks and responsibilities of the CBO · Conclusion Technical concept Meli Nne........................................................................................................ 93

Measures · Costs and building phases · Conclusion Implementation and management concept for Meli Nne ............................................................ 99

Emergence of the CBO · Tasks and responsibilities of the CBO · Conclusion

V

CHAPTER 8Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................... 105 Preventive strategies to provide infrastructure in informal settlements......................................105 Excurse: Scenario .......................................................................................................................107 Recommendations for further studies.........................................................................................108

References ......................................................................................................... 111

Appendices ........................................................................................................ 117 Appendix 1: Interview topics for residents (flooded areas).....................................................119 Appendix 2: Interview topics for Sheha of Magomeni............................................................122 Appendix 3: Expert interview: Topics for Mr Mzee ...............................................................125 Appendix 4: Interview topics for football-key person.............................................................126 Appendix 5: Layout plan designed for a TAP-Owner in Kisauni............................................128 Appendix 6: Data for calculation.............................................................................................129Appendix 7: Calculation for drainage size...............................................................................130 Appendix 8: Formula to calculate the bank width (B).............................................................131 Appendix 9: Calculation of concrete needed ...........................................................................132 Appendix 10: Calculation of costs.............................................................................................133Appendix 11: Financing of drains Magomeni ...........................................................................134 Appendix 12: Financing of drains Meli Nne .............................................................................134

VI

List of Figures Figure 1: Geographical location of Zanzibar ........................................................................................ 4 Figure 2: Climate diagram .................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Chronological structure of fieldwork................................................................................... 14 Figure 4: Population projection for Zanzibar Town............................................................................ 15Figure 5: Structure old unplanned settlement ..................................................................................... 16 Figure 6: Structure old planned settlement ......................................................................................... 16 Figure 7: Structure semi-planned settlement....................................................................................... 16 Figure 8: Structure new planned settlement........................................................................................ 17 Figure 9: Structure informal settlement .............................................................................................. 17 Figure 10: District boundaries............................................................................................................... 19 Figure 11: Distribution of expenditures of the Zanzibar Municipality 1998/1999 ............................... 20 Figure 12: Flooded areas in Zanzibar Town ......................................................................................... 24 Figure 13: Flooded area on Zanzibar .................................................................................................... 25 Figure 14: Problem of access ................................................................................................................ 26 Figure 15: Liquid waste ........................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 16: Solid waste .......................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 17: Football ground in Magomeni ............................................................................................. 46 Figure 18: Organisational set-up of Hanna Nassif ................................................................................ 51 Figure 19: Location of the case study areas .......................................................................................... 56 Figure 20: Planning scheme of Magomeni ........................................................................................... 57 Figure 21: Flooding problem in Magomeni .......................................................................................... 61 Figure 22: Erosion on path.................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 23: Rainwater catchment areas for Magomeni .......................................................................... 62 Figure 24: A maskani in Meli Nne........................................................................................................ 71 Figure 25: Meli Nne flood protection foundation ................................................................................. 72 Figure 26: Rainwater catchment areas for Meli Nne ............................................................................ 75Figure 27: Possible cross-section of drain............................................................................................. 80 Figure 28: Detail B – Covered drain ..................................................................................................... 83 Figure 29: Cross-section of two versions of intakes ............................................................................. 83 Figure 30: Detail A – Collection basin ................................................................................................. 84 Figure 31: Detail D – Retention Meli Nne............................................................................................ 94 Figure 32: Detail C – Cascades............................................................................................................. 97

List of Maps Map 1: General map Magomeni ................................................................................................. 59/60 Map 2: Detailed map Magomeni ................................................................................................ 63/64 Map 3: General map Meli Nne ................................................................................................... 69/70 Map 4: Detailed map Meli Nne................................................................................................... 73/74 Map 5: Technical concept Magomeni......................................................................................... 81/82Map 6: Technical concept Meli Nne........................................................................................... 95/96

VII

Acronyms AD Ante Domino ANGOZA Association of Non Governmental Organisations on Zanzibar CBO Community Based Organisation CCM Chama Cha Mapinduzi – Party of the Revolution CDC Community Development Committee CUF Civic United Front DCC Dar es Salaam City Commission DED Deutscher Entwicklungsdienst (German Development Service) DOLE Department of Land and Environment DOSUP Department of Survey and Urban Planning Dr. Doctor e.g. example given EMP Participatory Environmental Planning and Management Model et al. et alii etc. et cetera f following FC Football Club GDP Gross Domestic Product GRI Grass Root Level Initiative HIV Human immunodeficiency virus i.e. it est ibid. ibidem ILO International Labour Organisation km kilometre LDC Least Developed Countries m metre mm milimetre MYSA Mathare Youth Sports Association NGO Non-Governmental Organisation No. Number pp pages PR Public Relations SCP Sustainable Cities Programme SDP Sustainable Dar es Salaam Programme sq.km square kilometre sq.m square metre STCDA Stone Town Conservation and Development Authority SWM Storm Water Management TAP Three Acre Plot TASAF Tanzanian Social Action Fund TSh Tanzanian Shillings UCLAS University College of Lands and Architectural Studies UNCHS United Nations Centre of Human Settlement UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation UN-Habitat United Nations Centre of Human Settlement UNV United Nations Volunteers US$ United States Dollar w.p. without page w.y. without year x times ZMC Zanzibar Municipal Council ZSP Zanzibar Sustainable Programme

VIII

1

CHAPTER 1Introduction

The current the urban development in Zanzibar Town is determined by growth of informal settlements. The government is not able to cope with the vast stream of migrants and the fast growth of the informal settlements, which leads to a shortage of basic infrastructure, such as water supply, sewerage systems, solid waste management or storm water management. This situation creates problems for the rural-urban migrants concerning housing conditions, health conditions and the quality of life in general. The problems aggravate and the situation in the settlements gets more severe every day. The need to act immediately is blatant.

The research of the student project focuses on the question how appropriate infrastructure, i.e. storm water management systems, and the necessary public space in informal settlements can be provided and maintained. In a case study approach a technical concept and an implementation and management concept are designed. In the ideal case, the outcome of the research will be put into action in the case study areas. The first chapter introduces the issue of informal urban growth in Sub-Saharan Africa and illustrates arising problems. In the second sub-chapter the research area of Zanzibar is introduced.

Based on the presented issues of informal settlements, in chapter 2 the research question including the hypotheses is developed and the methodology, which has been used during the field work for data collection is presented.

Chapter 3 specifies the special conditions of urban growth in Zanzibar Town. After an overview of the last 60 years of settlement development, the preconditions of the emergence of informal settlements, i.e. governmental failure, are described in detail. Then the process of the informal land market and its consequences as well as the specific infrastructure problems of Zanzibar Town, especially storm water management, are laid out.

To prepare the technical concept, a variety of different storm water management techniques are presented in chapter 4 including two examples to demonstrate the implementation.

As a basis for the designing of an implementation concept, chapter 5 evaluates all findings about existing local approaches and participatory efforts to come up with a framework for the successful work of CBOs and self-help organisations. Important parts of this analysis are the conditions for self-help on Zanzibar and football as an interesting example of self organised local development, due to the fact that every settlement on Zanzibar has one football ground.

Chapter 6 portrays the two case study areas chosen in terms of general development and problems. Furthermore, storm water related and self-help related aspects in reference to the research question are emphasised on.

Resulting from the preparation in chapter 4 and 5 and from the findings of the case study area analyses, chapter 7 presents a technical solution for storm water management in each of the settlements, which can be implemented by the inhabitants of the settlements. A possible form of organisation and implementation is depicted.

Chapter 8 sums the contents and findings of this report, gives recommendations for settlements to be planned in the future and inspires further research topics.

2

Informal urban growth in Sub-Saharan Africa Urbanisation, urbanising world, a world of cities – these are some of the most important terms dealing with global future and especially with the future of developing countries. The State of the World’s Cities Report 2001, published by the United Nations Settlement Development Programme (since 2002 UN-Habitat), presents a lot of findings referring to these keywords: Up to now nearly 50 percent (3 billion) of the world’s population are living in cities. The urban share of the total population is expanding; world-wide the urbanisation rate is about 0.8 percent. It is estimated that in 2030 60 percent (4.9 billion) will live in cities. (UNCHS 2001: 6)

African countries are facing the most serious situation. Today 34 percent of Africa’s population are living in cities. The average urbanisation rate of 1.6 percent will lead to 46 percent up to 2020. Since rapid growth of cities in Africa started only 40 years ago (after most African countries obtained their independence) these figures are alarming.

Cities are growing in three distinct ways: in number, in area and in population (Sub-Saharan Africa: 4-7 percent per year (Kombe et al. 2000: 2). While cities in post-industrial countries are expanding in area because of growing affluence, in Africa the increasing demand for urban space is determined by population growth and rural-urban migration (Kreibich 2000: 270). One reason for this migration are the prospects that a city offers. Especially young people from rural areas see no future in their home villages and move to the agglomerations. Cities offer better possibilities for employment, education and access to social infrastructure (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung 1999: 20).

Under this pressure of urbanisation the cities are confronted with several problems. The population has to be provided with land, housing, jobs and services. But the city administrations are not able to cope with the demand, because they lack resources in manpower and finances. This situation will be discussed in detail in chapter 3. The general result is a marginalisation and a growing spatial imbalance of economic and social development (ibid.).

The high demand for housing, jobs, land for building purposes and services combined with the inability of the administration to provide the settlers with the same, induce the people to be driven to the growing informal sector. There they provide themselves with the necessities from resources organised by grass roots initiatives1 and informal management. Especially the sector of informal settlements is rapidly growing, because existing formal planning standards and regulations are inappropriate to meet the people’s demand (Fekade 2000: 1). For example in Tanzania by now about 70 percent of the population of Dar es Salaam lives in informal settlements (in the 1960s: 30–39 percent and 1992: 60 percent). (Kombe et al. 2000: 16)

The structure of those settlements is characterised by a rather non-functional pattern. As it will be described in chapter 3 (p 18 ff.), the distribution of plots follows no planned structure or conventional planning principles. There is either no or almost no guided planning and especially streets and technical infrastructure are not regarded for. The dysfunctional settlement pattern and a high density of houses lead to a lack in the provision of space, e.g. the access to houses is blocked. This is also stressed by the fact that settling processes in an early stage of development are done individually, which contributes to create a random settlement pattern.

1 The term includes self-help initiatives and community based organisations and will be defined in

chapter 5.

3

Another occurring problem of these settlements is the absence of infrastructure services. For example only 50 percent of the urban population in Africa has access to water supply (UNCHS 2001: 40). Areas with high density rates and haphazard housing are subjects to health risks and heavy rainfalls or fires can wipe out houses or any existing infrastructure. Besides health problems, many environmental problems occur due to the lack of proper sewerage or waste collection. Finally, absence of tenure security and recognition by governments often lead to violent evictions. This description of informal settlements is similar to the definition of the United Nations, which is the most acknowledged:

“Informal settlements are: – areas where groups of housing units have been constructed on land that the

occupants have no legal claim to, or occupy illegally; – unplanned settlements and areas where housing is not in compliance with current

planning and building regulations (unauthorised housing)” (Website United Nations).

A potential released by the problem of urban growth and lack of governmental provision is the process of self-organisation deriving from this. Due to the persistent neglect of the people’s needs and demands and the failure to provide land for housing, the new population finds its own way to provide their basic necessities by itself. Self-help activities seem to be “demand-driven processes”, as Kombe et al. call it, to organise, provide and allocate infrastructure and the plots for housing by themselves (Kombe et al. 2000: 32).

There are some global programmes referring to the fact that 1.3 billion people live in inadequate shelter as described above: The Habitat Agenda from UNCHS, the Agenda 21 (as an outcome of the United Nations Conference on environment and development in Rio de Janeiro 1992) and the Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP) (a joint programme of United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and UN-Habitat). The two main issues of the Habitat Agenda are “adequate shelter for all” and “sustainable human settlements development in an urbanising world” (UNCHS 1996: 1). Therefore a global plan of action has been initiated. The objective of the Agenda 21 is to establish a global partnership for a sustainable development. The most important principle is the idea of participatory development. To fight poverty, all different stakeholders on local and global level (civil society, government and private sector) have to take part in decision-making.

The SCP was established to implement the environmental components of the Habitat Agenda and the Agenda 21 on city level. The objective is “to strengthen the capacities and abilities of municipal authorities and their partners in the public, private and community sector in the field of environmental management” (Website SCP). These programmes are global but their implementation concentrates on national or city level. The SCP is undertaking demonstration projects in more than 30 cities all over the world. 10 Tanzanian cities participate in the SCP, among these Zanzibar Town.

4

Portrait of Zanzibar Zanzibar is located in the Indian Ocean 37 km off the east coast of Africa. Politically it belongs to the United Republic of Tanzania. The archipelago of Zanzibar consists of

two major islands, which are called Unguja and Pemba. Unguja, which is often referred to as Zanzibar, is the larger island with 1658 sq. km (Website Zanzinet Forum) and is subject to this study. In the further context of this report “Zanzibar” is used as synonymous for “Unguja” as it is also done in the relevant literature and the local usage.

Zanzibar Town is the capital city of the archipelago. It is the economic, political and cultural centre of the islands as well as the administrative headquarters of the Zanzibar Government and the second biggest town in Tanzania. (Awadh et al. 1998: 1).

The island is predominated by a hot, tropical climate with two rainy seasons and an average temperature of 32°C. It receives an annual rainfall of about 1350 mm, which heavily depends on the season and is connected to the change of monsoon (ibid.: 1998: 1).

The relief of Unguja rises gently from the west to the east coast. The ground of the western side is a fertile clay ground mixed with sandy soils and is highly important for

agricultural activities. In difference to that, the eastern side has an unfertile coral and sandy ground. Zanzibar Town lies in the fertile West and is growing more and more into former agriculture land, which result in a conflict in usage between settlement and agriculture.

Originally, Zanzibar was covered with dense rain forest, but it was cleared for plantations since the 19th century.

Nowadays there is only a small part of the original

vegetation left, which is protected by a nature reserve. Zanzibar, also called the “Spice Island”, has become famous for its clove plantations, which are cultivated in the western part of the island together with other agro-trees like mango and papaya. In the north of

Figure 1: Geographical location of Zanzibar

Source: website UT Library Online

Climate Diagram ZanzibarAverage per year: 26.25 °C and 112.5 mm

0

20

4060

80

100

120

140

160

0

40

80120

160

200

240

280

320

°Cmm

°C 28 28 28 27 25 25 24 25 25 26 27 27

mm 50 60 140 320 280 50 20 30 40 60 170 130

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Source: Website Zanzibar

Figure 2: Climate diagram

5

the island there are large plantations of sugar cane and rice. The unfertile east of the island is covered with dry bush lands. (Törhönen 1989: 38 pp.)

History

First permanent settlements on Unguja island were established by Shirazis in the 7th

century AD, a Persian people that transferred the Islamic religion to the island. Together with Arab merchants they developed a stable trading base for the Indian Ocean.

In the 16th and 17th century Portuguese colonists ruled Zanzibar, but their influence on the development was marginal. The power of the Portuguese declined in the 18th

century and the Omani Arabs, who originally came as merchants, took over (Awadh et al. 1998: 6). Zanzibar became an important trading centre not only for slaves but also for ivory, coconuts and palm oil. Since the beginning of the 19th century cloves, which became one of the most important economic factors, and other spices were planted on the islands. In the middle of the 19th century the British East India Company began to rule the Indian-Ocean-trade and Zanzibar was a British protectorate between 1890 and the independence of 1963. During that time a capitalistic economical system was dominant. (Awadh et al. 1998: 9) After the independence a sultan was empowered but the legitimacy of the sultanate was questioned until the revolution in 1964. Since then Zanzibar belongs politically to the United Republic of Tanzania, which is a union of Tanganyika (Tanzania mainland) and Zanzibar. But Zanzibar’s position in the union remains quite independent. It has its own parliament and an autonomous government with the exception of union activities, i.e. defence, foreign affairs and home affairs (Awadh et al. 1998: 9).

After President Nyerere declared the “Arusha-Declaration” in 1967, Tanzania was ruled socialistic. It was a break with the capitalistic ideas that failed the country in the previous years and lead to the implementation of a socialistic system. This system worked partially well for the situation of the country in the first years and became a model for other developing countries (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung 1999: 37).

Almost two decades later, in 1985, the Zanzibarian President Ali Hasan Mwinyi, who also became President for the United Republic of Tanzania, adopted the way of market economy to rebuild the system that developed under the premises of the “Arusha Declaration”. The reason for this reorientation towards capitalism was Zanzibar’s economic breakdown on account of the socialistic mismanagement, rapid shrinking world prices for cloves and the economic impacts caused by the worldwide decline of communism during the early eighties (Award et al. 1998: 10). The principles of free-market economy supported the revitalisation of the private sector. Public companies were privatised and the result of this liberalisation was foreign investment. (ibid.)

Since 1995 a multi-party system was allowed on the island. The former socialistic CCM (Chama Cha Mapinduzi – Party of the Revolution) won the first election. It was criticised by the opposition parties, mainly the Arab Islamic CUF (Civic United Front), for manipulating the election. The same happened in the year 2000 at the second multi-party elections, when CCM was accused again and the opposite parties encouraged bloody and violent protest (Website All about Zanzibar). This conflict got solved and the political situation nowadays seems to be quite stable.

6

Economy

Currently Tanzania, including the archipelago of Zanzibar, is listed by the United Nations as one of 49 Least Developed Countries (LDC). These are the poorest countries in the world, of which most are located in Sub-Saharan Africa (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 2001: 4)

The comparison of the GDP to other selected countries corroborates this fact. According to the Bank of Tanzania, Zanzibar (Unguja and Pemba) had a GDP per capita of US$ 222 in the year 2000. For comparison, Tanzania itself has a GDP of US$ 220 per capita and Ethiopia, the poorest country in the world, has a GDP of US$ 100 per capita (ibid.).Germany, as an example of an Western European country, has a GDP of US$ 22,868 per capita (all data is based on the year 1998).

The public sector in Zanzibar is the main formal employer on labour-fields like construction, retailing, public service activities and the local administration. But the formal sector employs only 56 percent of the labour force. The remaining 44 percent find their employment in the informal sector, which is important for providing additional income and basic needs. Typical informal work in Zanzibar is found for instance in manufacturing, restaurants and hotels or in the construction industry. (Awadh et al. 1998: 10)

The most important economic activity lies in the agriculture sector, which is relying on one major export crop, the production and sell of cloves and clove products. In addition to the clove production the agricultural sector focuses mainly on food crops, tropical fruits, spices and fisheries. 65 percent of the whole labour force works in this sector (Website United Republic of Tanzania).

Next to agriculture, tourism, which today is the most important foreign exchange earner, and trade are major contributors to economic growth. Today the importance of tourism is higher than the one of trade. Its part in GDP is 26 percent with an expected growth rate of 5 to 10 percent per year which is higher than the average 4.3 percent growth rate of the economy. The increasing number of tourists provides new ways of income generation, for example in hotels or restaurants or as “guides”. Besides the big opportunity tourism is offering to Zanzibar, its drawback of the increasing demand on space, construction materials and on other resources will lead to environmental problems on the densely populated island. (Awadh et al. 1998: 13)

Main population characteristics

In 1998 the population was estimated to be 820,000 people for the whole archipelago (Awadh et al. 1998: 10).The 1988 population census (no further census is carried out up to date) revealed that the population of the islands of Zanzibar stood at 640,578 of which 375,539 (58.6 percent) were on Unguja. Nearly 32 percent of the population lived in urban areas

The archipelago of Zanzibar generally has a young population. About 50 percent of the population is below the age of 15 years. Only 6 percent are older than 60 years (Commission for Land and Environment 1995: 9).

The archipelago of Zanzibar has a very high population density as it is typical for a small island. Based on a land area of 2460 sq. km and a population of 640,578, the density in the year 1988 was 260 persons/sq. km. In comparison on mainland Tanzania 26 people were living on one square kilometre.

The 1988 census revealed that the population of Zanzibar - Unguja and Pemba - increased very fast. It increased by 34.2 percent between 1967 and 1978 and 34.5

7

percent between 1978 and 1988. An estimated population of 820,000 in the year 1998 would mean a population growth of 28 percent between 1988 and 1998. The main factor for this growth is a high natural population growth, e.g. in 1988 Unguja had a fertility rate of 7.2 (Population Statistics for Land Use Planner 1993, cited from Awadh et al. 1998).

The growth is mainly concentrated on Zanzibar Town. Especially the unplanned parts in Zanzibar Town are growing due to rural-urban migration. Today Zanzibar Town has a population of 230,000 (1978: 110,000). Its annual growth rate is roughly 4 percent (Population Statistics for Land Use Planner 1993, cited from Awadh et al. 1998: 10). The “National Land Use Plan” from 1995 also shows that areas in the Town/West region around Zanzibar Town have rising growth rates. Those areas are attractive for migrants, because the land is suitable for agricultural uses and they are very close to Zanzibar Town which offers access to services, job opportunities and markets for agricultural, livestock and forest products (ibid.).

8

9

CHAPTER 2Research Question and Methodology

The firste subchapter the research question including hypotheses and the approach to-wards the analysis will be introduced. The used methodology especially during the fieldwork on Zanzibar is dealt with in the second subchapter.

The research question The introduction has shown that Sub-Saharan African cities are undergoing a rapid ur-banisation process combined with the inability of the government to provide the urban dwellers with enough surveyed plots and infrastructure services. This leads to the de-velopment of informal settlements.

This rapid urbanisation process is strongly determined by rural-urban migration. The student project is aware that it would be favourable to avoid urbanisation by approaches on the rural level but in all probability it is hardly avoidable in the following years ac-cording to the urbanisation rates and the existing circumstances.

In informal settlements the lack of infrastructure is one of the major problems. Ap-propriate infrastructure serves the basic need of the residents to secure an environment in which a sustainable living is possible (Nohlen 1991: 280). But the government is and will probably be unable to meet the demand for the needed facilities of growing infor-mal settlements (see Chapter 3). In some settlements self-help organisations of the set-tlers themselves have shown the potential of local institutions to fill this gap.

Therefore this report will analyse the following question: How can basic infrastructure in informal settlements be provided?

In this context provision on the one hand means an appropriate technical solution, which serves the needs of the residents, and on the other hand an implementation and maintenance concept, that takes the inability of governmental institutions into account. Therefore the priority for the implementation and maintenance will be on locally based approaches.

The term basic infrastructure defines a standard that is adjusted to the local condi-tions, i.e. can be built in self-help efforts with small expenditure and needs less mainte-nance. The provision of basic infrastructure consists of:

– the provision of enough and suitable land – the planning and surveying as far as necessary – the building of systems – the manpower capacities, – the financing and the future maintenance Subject to the analysis of the research question will be Zanzibar Town, the rapidly

growing capital of the archipelago of Zanzibar.

Selection of the infrastructure example

In order to examine this main research question, one very important but still absent in-frastructure service was selected as an example. As a tropical region, Zanzibar Town is

10

on the one hand subject to high precipitations (see p. 4), on the other hand storm water management (SWM) is still missing in many of the settlements of the municipality. With steadily growing building density, caused by infill housing, the problem of flood-ing is increasing due to blockage of natural waterways. At last SWM is strongly related to the settlement pattern, as suitable routes are needed. Therefore, this research will be deal with the provision of SWM, and although other problems (e.g. solid waste man-agement or water supply) are of similar importance and related to storm water manage-ment, they will only be mentioned and are not analysed in detail due to the restricted time schedule of the student project.

Hypotheses

The following main research hypotheses derived from first problem-orientated analyses of the topic and built the basis for conducting the field work.

1. For the provision of infrastructure a certain settlement structure is necessary.

The assumption is that a functional settlement structure in terms of access and building lines is needed, because otherwise infrastructure, that is dependent on adequate land, cannot be provided. A sub hypothesis in this context is:

To establish a functional settlement structure, a minimum of development guide-lines is needed in the early phase of settlement development.

This is due to the assumption that a settlement can only be structured in a sustainable way, if actors in the informal land market are aware of planning issues to some degree.

Also hypotheses concerning the organisation were developed. The main one is: 2. The work of Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and self-help organisa-

tions is able to compensate governmental deficits up to a certain degree

The government on Zanzibar has proven incapable of meeting the growing demand for plots and infrastructure. So there have to be institutions, which compensate these fail-ures. In informal settlements these are CBOs and self-help organisations (detailed defi-nitions are given in Chapter 5), which are restricted to the settlement level.

A sub-hypothesis concerning CBOs is:With a link to the institutional framework, CBOs and self-help organisations be-come more efficient, thus co-operation between the governmental and informal ac-tors would improve the efficiency of work on both sides.

According to this hypothesis, a link to the institutional framework can be a solution for both sides to gain advantages: It will enlarge the government’s capacities and abilities. It will also support self-help organisations and CBOs to work more effective, e.g. in terms of planning and surveying, and will enlarge their area of influence.

To improve grass root initiatives and assure locally based provision of basic infra-structure, a participatory environment has to be created.

Grass root initiatives (GRIs) are able to work more efficient when they get external support in terms of capacity building and social networks.

Approaching the analysis

There are two main approaches leading to an implementation concept, which were dis-cussed during the student project: – Transfer of the analysis of the provision of football grounds

11

– Transfer of the analysis of functioning organisations

1. Transfer of the analysis of football

Football grounds exist in almost every settlement in Zanzibar Town. Football takes a strong and important position in public life. The provision of space for football grounds is never in jeopardy. There is enough potential of self-help activities to organise the provision of space and the maintenance of the ground.

This fact leads to the question why the provision of a football ground as a kind of so-cial infrastructure and its maintenance are successful while for other infrastructures, e.g. SWM it is not.

Both examples are not completely on the same level because the demand for space and the tasks of maintenance are different. Nevertheless the aim of analysing the proc-esses and organisational forms of providing football grounds and trying to transfer them to the provision of a storm water management system, is possible to carry out.

The main hypotheses concerning this approach are: The importance of providing land for a certain infrastructure service depends on its meaning for daily life.

Football is very important for the people and because of its importance for daily life it has a more apparent priority then flooding, which is a severe problem, but only occurs twice a year.

There is no problem keeping a plot for a football ground open and maintaining it, whereas only people affected by flooding care about SWM. To establish a football ground, just a few people who are interested and motivated are needed, while to provide land for SWM there is a need for co-operation of dif-ferent stakeholders.

2. Transfer of the analysis of functioning organisations

Another approach is the analysis of functioning CBOs and self-help organisations. This will be done in defined categories like motivation, actors, financing, relation to govern-ment etc. The results will give some suggestions for a functioning grass root initiative. This is supposed to serve as a scheme to compare later on which potentials and deficits exist in the specific case study areas and what has to be changed or added in order to implement, operate and maintain the technical SWM-concept in these areas.

Aim of the project

The student’s project aim is to develop implementation concepts for SWM in the two case study areas. After presenting technical solutions, the main focus will be on the organisation. The concept has to integrate the local people’s potentials and find a strat-egy how the dwellers can operate and maintain their new infrastructure services suffi-ciently.

The second aim is to give general recommendations and statements on the environ-ment, which support the self-help efforts of settlers, and on how problems in future set-tlements, where construction did not start yet, can be solved before becoming serious.

12

Methodological approach The main research question has been analysed on a theoretical level and also examined in the field work. For a better understanding of complex interactions it is necessary to have a local connection. Therefore a case study approach was chosen.

Two settlements in Zanzibar Town are subjects to the study: Magomeni and Meli Nne2. They reflect the process of increasing densification in fairly young settlements of different ages. Magomeni was established in 1980 and Meli Nne in 1994. While in Meli Nne the construction phase has already started and indicates the future problems con-cerning flooding, Magomeni shows Meli Nne’s future: it struggles already with crucial flooding problems. In both settlements there is still the chance to realise a SWM solu-tion, but especially Magomeni is undergoing further densification and needs a solution urgently. In both settlements potentials for self-help approaches (football club and oth-ers initiatives) are existing.

Besides literature analysis and first results from Wolfgang Scholz’s research project “Sustainability of informal settlements – the case of Zanzibar”, which has been con-ducted in the same case study areas, the student project focuses on empirically gathered information during 30 days of fieldwork on Zanzibar which took place in Febru-ary/March 2002. The fieldwork included two main methods: spatial analysis of the two settlements and interviews. Being as efficient as possible in the gathering of data, the used methods were cross-checked regularly and adapted to current knowledge. This kind of “on-site-analysis” has the advantage that there is a continuous feedback process between the different methods, the research question and the first findings (Schönhut 1993). After finishing the fieldwork, first findings were being presented to local plan-ners on Zanzibar, at the University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS) at the University of Dar es Salaam and at the Faculty of Spatial Planning in Dortmund to get some first comments and further hints for the following evaluation and concept development from local and planning experts.

Interviews

The interviews were conducted as semi-structured and structured interviews. Following the different methods and the occurring problems will be described in detail. Examples of the interview forms are provided in the appendix.

Semi-structured interviews

Semi-structured interviews with experts ascertained information about the institutional and political framework (one conducted interview), the main infrastructure issues (one interview on SWM), grass root initiatives (three interviews) and football (one inter-view). A semi-structured interview with open questions is able to produce new informa-tion and gives the interviewer the possibility to go into detail, if a new interesting issue occurs (Veijalainen 2000: 16p). Interview guides are deduced from the research hy-potheses securing that each important issue is dealt with and that the results are compa-rable. The semi-structured interviews were conducted in English, which allows to alter the questions due to the interview situation and to react on unexpected interesting in-formation. Right after the interview, minutes were written to make sure that no informa-tion gets lost.

2 In Zanzibarian vernacular “Meli” refers to the English word “mile” while on Tanzania mainland the term “Maili” would be used.

13

Structured interviews

To get a detailed analysis of the case study areas, interviews with local leaders (three interviews), key-persons for football (two interviews), key persons for GRIs (two inter-views) and residents (inhabitants of the settlement that are affected by storm water and those who are not, 15 interviews) took place (see Appendix 1-4). These interviews were conducted as structured interviews with a Swahili-English translation. For this purpose local planners were introduced into the research. The structured interview guide makes it easier for the translator to conduct the interview by following a prepared line of ques-tions. The questions are arranged under topics so that the interviewer can react accord-ing to the course of the interview. The students should have had the chance to influence the interview, if interesting or unclear aspects during the interview appear. Therefore the answers were directly noted down in English. Later on the minutes were written out of these notes.

Problems related to the interviews

Some problems came up because of the different cultural background and the different languages. Non-spoken values or vivid descriptions have not always been understand-able. This problem was minimised by discussing different interpretations with the help of the translators and other local planners who have the same professional background, but it has been impossible to be avoided completely. The translation itself produced some additional problems: some of the words like “sustainability” or “infrastructure” are difficult to translate into the Swahili language. Although the possibility of interfer-ing and reacting to the answers during the interview was given, some information might have gotten lost. This is unavoidable, because of a certain dependence on the translator, who noted down condensed and reduced versions of the “original” answers.

Spatial analysis

The analysis of the spatial setting inside the settlements has been an important part of the research, especially because there were no updated maps available. The spatial analysis consisted of three different parts: site visits, general and detailed mapping. The site visits, conducted in an explorative way, were supposed to give a first impression of the settlement. Physical and social aspects were observed by each student and gathered together later for each of the two settlements. Out of these first impressions and the topic of the research, criteria for the general mapping were developed. To get precise information, the general mapping (scale 1:5000 in Meli Nne and scale 1:2500 in Ma-gomeni) was obtained with the help of GPS technology. Important issues like flood-prone areas, river beds, meeting points, shops, open spaces etc. were located on the map to get an overview of the settlement.

One area of each settlement was chosen for detailed mapping (scale 1:1000). In Ma-gomeni an existing map (Government of the United Kingdom) was used while in Meli Nne the detailed map was made without any basis. Buildings, open spaces, paths, the vegetation, the natural water flow etc. were grasped with simple but exact instruments like compass and measure tapes. The results are not professionally surveyed maps of the areas, but for the purpose of the further research they provide the relevant information sufficiently e.g. the settlement structure, the building density and the natural water flow.

14

Figure 3: Chronological structure of the fieldwork

Major findings and first concepts

Dai

ly r

evis

ion

of in

terv

iew

s an

d cr

oss-

chec

king

Preliminary questionnaires; research hypotheses

First experts interviews (3)

Interview with the Shehas

Preliminary findings and cross-checking

Interviews with residents

(13)Detailed maps of selected

areas 1:1000

General maps 1:2500

Presentation to planning qualified interview assistants (translators)

Analyses and linkages between football, SWM, implementation and management and back-stocking

Site visits in case study areas

Revision of interviews Surveying and analysing case study areas

Interviews with experts and

keypersons (9)

Major findings and first concepts

Dai

ly r

evis

ion

of in

terv

iew

s an

d cr

oss-

chec

king

Preliminary questionnaires; research hypothesesPreliminary questionnaires; research hypotheses

First experts interviews (3)

Interview with the Shehas

Preliminary findings and cross-checking

Interviews with residents

(13)Detailed maps of selected

areas 1:1000

General maps 1:2500

Presentation to planning qualified interview assistants (translators)

Analyses and linkages between football, SWM, implementation and management and back-stocking

Site visits in case study areas

Revision of interviews Surveying and analysing case study areas

Interviews with experts and

keypersons (9)

Source: own construct

The figure shows the steps of the research on Zanzibar in chronological order. The two parts of the fieldwork, interviews and spatial analyses, are followed by the analysis of the first findings which results in the major findings. The whole process was flanked by the daily revision of the interviews, especially the structured ones and the cross check-ing with other immediate results from the spatial analysis.

Evaluation

As it can be seen in the figure above a first evaluation of the findings took place during the fieldwork. The results of the different methods were cross-checked in daily meetings and especially during two evaluation processes. Out of the first evaluation some major findings of the research were developed and presented as mentioned above. Subsequent to the fieldwork a detailed evaluation of the interview material took place. According to the research question and hypotheses some “subheadings” for the main topics football, SWM, grass root initiatives and for the two settlements were defined. All relevant in-formation was extracted from the interview material. The result was a source of specific information, which is used for the analysis of the situation and the development of a concept. Additionally all maps were drawn and provide a proper basis for the analysis and the conception phase.

During the conception phase the lack of some data had to be compensated by estima-tions because specific information about the special condition on Zanzibar was not available. This concerns the financial calculation of the implementation concepts and the calculation of the amount of rain, which determines the capability of the technical concept.

15

CHAPTER 3Informal Urban Growth in Zanzibar Town

Cities in Sub-Saharan African have to deal with a rapidly growing population and with the attractive power of cities for rural-urban migrants. These circumstances lead to tre-mendous urbanisation rates, which is one characteristic of Zanzibar Town as well. While in the beginning of the 1990s the population of Zanzibar Town was below 200,000, in 1998 it was 230,000 and projections show that Zanzibar Town will double its population by the year 2018 (The Aga Khan Trust for Culture 1996: 77 and Awadh et al. 1998: 10).

The enormous urbanisation rate, together with the inability of the government to meet the high demand for building land in the formal way of land application, results in the developing of informal settlements.

The intention of this chapter gives an overview on the urban growth in Zanzibar with a priority on informal urban growth. The first subchapter describes the urban develop-

ment in Zanzibar Town in general and the existing

settlement patterns. Afterwards the reasons for informal settlements are identified and the process of the informal land management ana-lysed. Finally, the third subchapter describes different infrastructure problems with a focus on storm water management (SWM), which’s absence leads to several problems in a tropical region like Zanzibar.

Urban development in Zanzibar Town Zanzibar Town consists of two main parts: Stone Town and Ng’ambo3. Stone Town, adjacent to the ocean in the western part of the island, used to be sepa-rated from Ng’ambo by a creek, which is now drained.

Zanzibar Town, as it appears today, was strongly influenced by the Omani rule in the 19th century. This is visible in Stone Town, the oldest part of the city, which was de-clared a World Heritage by the UNESCO in 2001. The town centre features a lot of imposing and unique Arab architecture.

While Stone Town was predominantly inhabited by Omanis, Arabs and Indians, Ng’ambo used to be the quarter of the African people. Ng’ambo has been the part of the town that expanded into the interior of Zanzibar due to the urbanisation process de-

3 Ng’ambo is the Swahili word for “the other side” and describes the local context the area east of Stone

Town.

Figure 4: Population projection for Zanzibar Town

050.000

100.000150.000200.000250.000300.000350.000400.000450.000

1992 1998 2018

Population ofZanzibar Town

Source: Own construct, based on: The Aga Khan Trust for Culture 1996: 77 and Awadh et al. 1998: 10

16

scribed above. Ng’ambo is approximately seventeen times as big as Stone Town (16 hectares) and inhabits the majority of the population of Zanzibar Town (The Aga Khan Trust for Culture 1996: 65).

Today Ng’ambo is characterised by different types and patterns of settlements which reflect different periods of development under the influence of distinct planning ideas. In Ng’ambo mainly five different settlement types are found: Old unplanned settle-ments, old planned settlements, semi planned settlements, new planned settlements and informal settlements. These will be defined based on information from the ZSP4 (ZSP 2000a), map interpretation (Government of the United Kingdom - Directorate of Over-seas Surveys - for the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania 1982) and own observations during the field work.

Old unplanned settlements

This area directly adjoins the eastern border of Stone Town, the former creek separating Stone Town from Ng’ambo. It is the oldest part of Ng’ambo and was developed between 1840 and 1923. The housing structure of its bazaar streets is similar to the one which can be found in Stone Town. The settlements of the area are highly con-densed and contain haphazard housing. Access is very limited espe-cially in the interior parts of the settlements because of the high den-sity.

Old planned settlements

The old planned areas were built under colonial rule in the 1940s and 1960s. Old planned settlements were developed with conven-tional planning principles, e.g. surveying, organised plot allocation and layout plans. Houses were arranged in straight rows, which al-low access through roads and installation of infrastructure like water supply, sewerage, electricity supply and storm water management (SWM).

The problem of these settlements, in spite of their planned origin, is informal and haphazard infill housing. Reasons are changes in the household size leading to extension of houses and the need of space for economic activities recognis-able in small shops adjacent to houses.

Semi planned settlements

This type of settlement was not developed by using the legal framework or a complex planning scheme. Simple guidelines ad-vised by planners controlled the development with the aim create a well organised settlement. After the implementation of this concept in the late 1970s and early 1980s it first worked out because of a rather strong political influence on the settlement development. But nowadays informal infill housing is taking place which contradicts the initial planning guidelines.

4 The Zanzibar Sustainable Programme is a demonstration project of the Sustainable Cities Programme,

a joint programme of UNEP and UN-Habitat (for further information see chapter 5, p. 41ff.)

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

17

New planned settlements

Informal settlements

These settlements started to develop immediately after the political change and economic liberalisation in the mid 1980s. In the early 1990s due to the rapid urbanisation the demand for plots arose and the formal way of applying for plots became difficult. The govern-ment became unable to meet the high demand for building land. Plots were and are sold informally by private individuals. Because the sale and purchase is not according to the law, it takes place very quickly and plots are built on more or less randomly (for detailed

information on the informal land market see p. 21 ff.). Little attention is paid to any kind of planning principles. The density of these settlements is increasing according to the building activity. Outcome of this development often is a dysfunctional settlement structure, which makes it extremely difficult to install any kind of infrastructure facili-ties.

Figure 9

These types of settlements were planned and built during the 80s. The Chinese Master Plan from 1982 was set up as a layout plan to build these settlements. This plan regulated the expected settlement development of Ng’ambo in detail. Precondition for the implemen-tation of this plan was a very strong political influence. (Quian 1982: w.p.)

Figure 8

18

Informally emerged urban settlements Most of the informal settlements are characterised by a dysfunctional settlement struc-ture as explained before. By law it is the task of the governmental institutions to provide the city with layout plans to supply the stream of rural migrants with surveyed land. The reasons why the authorities are not able to meet the demand for plots are explained in subchapter “Causes for informal settlement”. Because of this inability, today most of the settlers buy building land on the informal market instead of relying on the formal way of plot allocation. The circumstances and the impacts of this process are described in the subchapter “Process of informal land manage-ment”.

Causes for informal settlements

The main reasons for the incapability of the authorities to deal with the situation of fast ur-ban growth are given in the figure on the left. The conditions are explained in more detail in this subchapter.

One reason for the unclear and overlapping responsibilities is the fact that the Zanzi-bar Municipal Council (ZMC) still uses regulations from 1960 (ZSP 2000c: 19). Mr Lerise stated: “Actually, Zanzibar is run by decrees and since the 90’s by acts […] that means, the president is able to decide without the parliament and the law does not have to be changed. The question of how to run a country with old laws, decrees and new acts is a problem for the planners and leads to many conflicts.” (Lerise 13.11.2001)

Unclear boundaries of the municipality

One of the most apparent reasons for many administrative problems, which lead to the poor performance of the government in providing building plots and infrastructure, is the confusing boundary organisation. The existing boundary between the Municipality of Zanzibar and the adjacent West District is not clearly defined and can thus be ques-tioned. On the one hand there is the municipal boundary and on the other hand there is the boundary which was defined in the Chinese Master Plan in 1982, both are de facto legal. In the Municipal Act of 19955 the minister of local government and regional ad-ministration was required to declare the boundaries but up to now he has not done that (Awadh et al. 1998: 3).

In the context of informal settlements this is of high importance because many of the informal settlements are located outside the municipal boundaries but inside the area of the Chinese Master Plan. This leads to a situation where both the Zanzibar Municipal Council and the West District Council claim certain areas to belong to their jurisdiction in order to collect taxes. This happened for example at the market places of Mwanak-werekwe and Mombasa (Sheha 18.02.2002). On the other hand it is questionable which council is responsible for which area concerning the provision of building plots and infrastructure facilities.

5 The Municipal Act No. 3 from 1995 declares the establishment of the Municipality and the Zanzibar

Municipal Council (ZMC).

Causes for informal settlements:

– Unclear municipal boundaries – Overlapping administrative re-

sponsibilities– Deficits in manpower – Lack of finance and technical

equipment – Inefficient formal land distribu-

tion

19

Since the establishment of the Urban West Region with the two different parts, the Urban District and the West District, the confusion increased because the town planning department of the ZMC is now not only responsible for the Urban District but also partly responsible for the West District. And although the town planning boundaries extend into the West District, no councillor of the West District is represented in the ZMC (Awadh et al. 1998: 3).

Overlapping responsibilities on the administrative level

The Municipality Act from 1995 actually regulates the responsibilities of the different governmental planning institutions but it is not properly executed. Especially the

institutions ZMC, Department of Land and Environment (DOLE), Department of Sur-vey and Urban Planning (DOSUP) and Stone Town Conservation and Develop-ment Authority (STCDA) are overlapping in their jurisdictions and the co-ordination is inadequate. This is partly due to the fact of being organised under different minis-tries which leads to a lack of supervision and organisation. For example the STCDA is responsible for Stone Town but the solid waste management in Stone Town is organ-ised by the ZMC.

Since there are no policies or feasibility studies for the legislations of ZMC, DOLE and STCDA each of them interprets their regulations in their own way. According to this interpretation the institutions carry out their duties without taking the others into account. So most of the time they work without co-ordination or even contradictory and blame failures on each others. (Awahd

Source: own construct based on ZSP 1998 et al. 1998: 76 pp.)

Deficits in manpower

Like many other developing countries, Zanzibar has a very limited amount of well edu-cated professionals in the field of planning and development (Awadh et al. 1998: 54). The national ministries often have only few employees who hold a degree and/or a di-ploma. They are “heavily understaffed at the higher technical level” (ibid.). Also the ZMC has a lack of well educated workers in the management and on the technical level whereas the Solid Waste Department is overstaffed with field workers (ZSP 2000g: 4).

Especially the lack in the management sector leads to further problems. The horizon-tal flow of information between different departments of the city council is interrupted. Furthermore “there is no systematic manner of identifying urban development issues” (Awadh et al. 1998: 53). This often results in inefficient ad-hoc decisions and built-up task forces dealing with problems that became urgent nuisances. On the other hand long-term problems are neglected.

There are not only problems in the horizontal management but also in the vertical co-ordination between actors of different levels. Many powerful religious leaders, business

Figure 10: District boundaries

20

people and grass-root initiatives are complaining about the unwillingness of the gov-ernment to co-operate (Awadh et al. 1998: 32, 49, 50). Therefore participation, which could be an anchor for the bad situated ZMC to solve problems in an informal way, can hardly develop.

Lack of finances

A substantial factor for the provision of plots and infrastructure by the government is the financing. As the ZMC is in a very severe financial situation, the council is hardly able to buy technical equipment and to employ professional planners and surveyors for drawing layout plans and to build and maintain infrastructure. In the fiscal year 1998/1999 the ZMC had a financial deficit of US$ 210,000. The total sum of revenues amounted US$ 400,000 while the expenditures in the same year came to US$ 610,0000. (ZSP 2000c: 11)

There is much more potential capacity in the revenue. The problem is the poor col-lection, which has several reasons, e.g. lack of keeping records of revenue sources, low skills of staff, no observation of laws and corruption (ibid.: 3). Furthermore the ZMC is depending on “grants from the government to finance its operation” (ibid.: 4).

The figure shows that almost 70 percent of the

municipal expenditures are spent on salaries and wages. Only 18 percent are left for other expenditures which contain for example infrastructure investments and technical equipment (ibid.: 11). In comparison in 1998 German communi-ties on average spent only about 28 percent of their expenditures on salaries (Karrenberg et al. 1998: Source: own construct, based on

ZSP 2000c:11 151).

Inefficient formal land distribution

The planning system, especially the provision of building land at the urban fringe of Zanzibar Town, is inefficient and too slow to meet the demand of the settlers. To get a land title, the settlers have to apply for it at the government, because according to the law building plots can only be provided by governmental institutions. The process of provision of land starts with the survey of suitable agriculturally used plots. After the surveying it is divided into building plots and legalised as a layout plan before the single plots are sold to the applicants. Because there are too many people on the one hand, who want to settle in the urban area of Zanzibar Town, and on the other hand the gov-ernment is lacking finances, manpower and technical equipment, this formal way of land application cannot deal with the stream of settlers from rural areas.

For example there are only two working surveying instruments available on Zanzibar today, also skilled and experienced staff for the surveying of land is missing. Therefore in Zanzibar only about 15 percent of the applicants were supplied with a plot in the

40%

13%

18%29%

Salaries

Salaries oftemporary laboursPetrol Cost

others

Figure 11: Distribution of expenditures of the Zanzibar Municipality in 1998/1999

21

1980s and the early 1990s. In the following years the percentage of legal plot alloca-tions in comparison to the applications increased. But this only seems to be due to the development that the majority of the settlers is trying to buy a plot on the informal mar-ket and is no longer applying on the formal way. (Awadh et al. 1998: 40)

Besides not being able to meet the demand for plots, the government also plans with-out regarding the demand and appropriate standards. In Kisauni, an area located next to the airport, the owner of the land asked the municipality to design a layout plan for him. But the layout plan the Municipality designed (see figure 33 Appendix) does by far not meet planning principles: Nearly every house is accessible by car and the open spaces for communal activities are too large, therefore the area can be regarded over-serviced and not suitable for households.

Process of informal land management

The failure of the formal application process forces many settlers to get plots on the informal land market. The informal land management does not follow any accepted planning principles, instead the settlement layout is a product of action and negotiation between different actors. During the plot allocation process, problems that can result from the settlements’ inner layout in the future are not taken into account. In the follow-ing passages the process from plot allocation to the final layout is described chronologi-cally all participating actors, their offers and motives and including the impacts of their actions on the layouts’ appearance.

The illegal context of informal land management

The origin of the illegality of the informal land management process is lying in Zanzi-bar’s history. Soon after the revolution in 1964 Tanzania was transformed into a social-istic country. Land ownership became a governmental monopoly. The government con-fiscated all former plantations and subdivided them into Three Acre Plots (TAPs) of 12.000 sq m size. They were allocated to peasant families with a Right of Occupancy strongly restricted for agricultural use around Zanzibar Town. This means that there is no ownership, i.e. the grantee is not allowed to subdivide the land granted and he can only sell the Right of Occupancy for agricultural uses. Even today the state is still the landlord of all land, but he grants the Right of Occupancy for lifetime to the grantee (Törhönen 1993: 84). This includes the payment of compensation from the state for any governmental interference, including withdrawing the Right of Occupancy as punish-ment for illegal actions (ibid.: 86).

In reality no TAP-grantee is interested in compensation for agricultural land, because on the informal market their land is worth more and therefore higher prised than the state would pay as compensation. Especially close to Zanzibar Town land for plots is highly requested and demanded for residential purposes.

Actors of the land allocation process

During the process there are different actors involved. First the vendors, who are the TAP-grantees, sell their land, that they have the Right of Occupancy for farming use for, directly to purchasers as land for housing. During the process of selling the land, the grantee becomes the allocator. In some cases an allocator turns to a middleman, who brings vendors and purchasers together. The purchasers can be split into two groups. Most of the people buy land to construct a house for own usage while some are specula-

22

tors. The last institution involved into the process is the Sheha6 or the Councillor7. Al-though the subdivision of land for housing is illegal, he confirms the transaction as a witness and ensures the land tenure. (Veijalainen 2000: 114-119)

Each actor’s involvement in the process described above initiates future problems, which altogether lead to random layouts and dysfunctional settlements.

Allocators are usually not trained in planning issues. They are interested in selling the highest possible amount of land as fast as possible. The faster they sell, the less is the danger of being compensated by the government and thereby losing their land for a low compensation. Therefore they sell plots according to the wishes of the customers concerning size, shape and location. It is obvious that this procedure creates a highly random settlement pattern that causes inefficient land use, blocking of access and pre-vents the implementation of technical infrastructure. According to the economic princi-ple they also do not reserve enough land for social and technical infrastructure without payment. Dur-ing the phase of plot allocation, problems may be created that are not harmful in the current situation but can become a danger in the future. Examples for this are some of the now existing flood prone areas, where the plots where sold when the rainfall did not do any harm up to that time. Due to increasing housing densification and other factors (see p. 23 ff.), the flood prone areas have become haphazard land to live on today.

Some allocators subdivide their plots by following some kind of planning scheme. An interviewed TAP-owner stated: “This is an area for residence and hence needs some good thinking. The idea developed out of copying surveyed residential areas.” (TAP-Owner 1 2002). In order not to waste any valuable land, the allocator ensures for exam-ple building lines allowing to sell more land.

There are about 20 middlemen operating around Zanzibar Town. They overlook dif-ferent allocation processes and have gained a lot of experience. Within a short period of time they contact many customers. They can ensure a fast and efficient allocation proc-ess, but not every allocator turns to a middleman. They are not officially recognised by the government, which prevents a co-operation between the formal and informal sector (Scholz 2002b: w.p.). Further on the middlemen are interested in achieving high prices since their share is about 5 - 10 percent of the price (Scholz et al. 2001: 11).

The buyers do not feel pressure when undertaking the illegal process, because the government would have to compensate them for residential land and is not able to do that in terms of financial means. Settlers seldomly buy more land than they need for their building purposes and do not preserve land for infrastructure. Indeed they often only realise that they have not left enough space for access or other important needs when the house is finished and they start to live there. And even if the allocator fixes a quite structured layout, the purchasers can turn it into a highly unstructured and dys-functional settlement. This causes enormous problems for the implementation of infra-structure as it will be described in the following chapter.

6 The Sheha is the official authority of the lowest administrative level, the Shehia. 7 The Councillor is the official authority of a Ward, the administrative level above the Shehia. One

Ward usually consists of two or three Shehias.

Actors of the land allocation process:

– TAP-grantees = allocators

– vendor

– Middlemen

– Purchasers

– Sheha or Councillor

23

The speculators start to resell their land when the construction phase has already started or is finished, because then they can achieve higher prices. Either they resell the land for increased prices or they invest in social or technical infrastructure and resell it to the community later on. Speculation can only influence the settlement layout when the speculator bought many plots. Then there is either the possibility to leave open spaces or to sell the land hazardous.

The Sheha or Councillor are official local authorities but the role is restricted by those “who do not wish to use their services during the allocation process” (Veijalainen 2000: 117), i.e. allocators and middlemen. Often local authorities act as witnesses for sellers and buyers.

Infrastructure problems The lack of basic infrastructure in informal settlements depends on the land allocation process and the settlement structure and on governmental failures. During the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme (ZSP) City Consultation8 in December 1998, various stake-holders were consulted to identify the major problems of different environmental developments (ZSP 2000g: 3). The issue of water supply, wastewater and flooding belong to the prioritised environmental problems, which need to be addressed urgently. For these tasks several working groups were established to analyse the current situation and develop specific strategies, recommendations and action plans on how to tackle these issues and to name responsible actors. (ZSP 2000a: i)

This chapter describes SWM as a specific infrastructure problem in Zanzibar Town. First of all the reasons why flooding occurs and on which circumstances it depends are described. Areas which suffer from flooding are mentioned with their different and spe-cific problems and in the end this subchapter focuses on the impacts of the flooding problem. Furthermore other infrastructure problems in informal settlements and their relation to SWM are described. The gathering of information is necessary to get a gen-eral overview on the situation in Zanzibar Town. With all the background information it is easier to compare and evaluate the situation, which will be observed in the two case study areas of Magomeni and Meli Nne.

The problem of storm water management

Zanzibar receives an annual precipitation of 1,350 mm. It heavily depends on the two rainy seasons Masika and Vuli and is connected to the change of the monsoon. Masika is the season of heavy and intense precipitation, when approximately 40 percent of the annual rainfall occur, and lasts from March to May. During Vuli from October to De-cember 20 percent of the total annual rain amount occur. The time of highest rain amount usually takes place in April: Up to 400 millimetres are falling in one month which can lead to peaks of more than 100 millimetres per hour (Awadh et al. 1998: 1). Because of clay and sandy soil (cambic aerosol) in the west of the island with their low permeability (coefficient of permeability9: 10-5) the ground is unable to seep water away

8 The City Consultation is the second proposed working step of the SCP. The aim is to bring key actors

from the public, private and popular sector together to agree on the priority issues confronting their city (see chapter p. 43).

9 The influence of the liquid qualities and ground qualities on the filtration rate are expressed in the coefficient of permeability.

24

or naturally drain the masses of water. The relief of the island (elevations and depres-sions) and a high ground water table aggravate this problem. Flood prone zones are depression areas and areas with high ground water tables.

Reasons for flooding

A high housing density, which most of the informal settlements are characterised by, makes natural seepage of storm water more difficult due to the high share of sealed land. The flowing off of storm water is accelerated by roofs out of metal or compressed soil. The trend of infill housing in most settlements decreases open spaces for seepage and blocks the natural water ways. Settlements located in depression additionally have to cope with more storm water coming from other settlements.

The needed drainage systems in those settlements are missing or insufficient. The in-sufficiency of the existing drainage system is based on a shortage of drains, bad moni-toring and maintenance. The unstructured settlement layout and the high density com-plicate the construction of an effective drainage system. An additional problem is the blocking of drains, which is caused by waste disposal. (ZSP 2000a: 15)

Flooded areas

Several Shehias in the Zanzibar Municipal-ity are affected by intensive flooding: Jang’ombe, Chumbuni, Sebleni, Magomeni, Mwanakwerekwe, Mwembetanga and Bonde la Meya (ZSP 2000g: 20). In the following some flood affected areas are described exemplarily.

In Chumbuni more than 100 houses, which is about 6% of all households in the settlement, are affected by flooding, 29 houses are flooded. This is a result of the lack of storm water drains along the roads and haphazard construction of houses. The

inhabitants have tried to reduce the flooding problem by excavating ditches. These ef-forts have only been partly successful because of poor excavation. Re-excavation is necessary before every rainy season. When completed the ditch is supposed to dispose water to the Mtopepo stream (ZSP 2000g: 20).

In Magomeni 91 houses are flooded, which is also about 6 percent of all households, even more are effected indirectly. During the rainy season people in some areas have to leave their flooded houses for two to three weeks. More detailed information about flooding in Magomeni will be given in chapter 6, especially page 61 ff. In the Shehia of Mwanakwerekwe even 7 percent of the households are flooded. The situation in this Shehia will be described in chapter 6 page 71 ff.

Jang’ombe–Urusi area is identified as one of the critical flooding areas in Zanzibar Town. A storm water drainage trunk has been build in order to solve about 50 percent of the rain amount in the Jang’ombe area by cutting the natural up-down/south-north flow of storm water from relatively high level of Urusi area to low level in Jang’ombe area

Figure 12: Flooded areas in Zanzibar Town

MTONI

AMANISOGEA

WELE

KINUZIWANI

MBWENI

MOMBASA

MAISARA

KWAHANI

KISAUNI

CHUMBUNI

KILIMANI

MIEMBENI

MLANDEGEMAKADARA

MAZIZINI

MASIN

MIGOMBANI

JANG'OMBE

KWALIMSHA

MTONDOONI

KWAMTIPURA

MICHENZANI

KIEMBESAMAKI

MUEMBEMAKUMBI

MWANAKWEREKW

ZANZIBAR CHANNEL

ZANZIBAR CHANNEL

ZANZIBAR AIRPOR

Stone Town

Ng'ambo

Source: own construct based on ZSP data

25

(ZSP 2000b: 5). Inadequate drainage channels and especially blockage of the older drain at Jang’ombe school are leading to an accumulation of water from Magomeni, Urusi and Mpendae. Jang’ombe has been proposed to be a priority area for a pilot up-grading project, because of extensive drainage and sanitation problems. The main objec-tive is to improve the health situation of Ng’ambo through a strategy of improving in-frastructure (ZSP 2000a: 32). The technical concept of the SWM system in Jang’ombe–Urusi will be explained in chapter 4 page 35 ff., where two settlements will be described which could be role models for SWM in Tanzania.

Impacts of flooding

Flooding heavily affects the health situation of the residents of Zanzibar Town. During rainy season pit latrines and septic tanks tend to overflow (ZSP 2000h: 27), water and

sewage lines are deteriorated and disposed toxic waste is washed away (ZSP 2000g: 12). This leads to contamination of both drinking water and ground water.

Flooding amplifies the emer-gence of water borne diseases (e.g. cholera, dysentery, diarrhoea), which are spread very easily and quickly throughout the population. Besides drinking water induced diseases the flooding can also in-crease the number of malaria infec-tions. Lakes and bigger

puddles, which are breeding places for mosquitoes, emerge because of

blocked or non-existing drainage systems (Awadh et al. 1998: 64). Informal housing practises, especially the treatment of sewage in water catchment areas, exacerbate these problems (ZSP 2000h: 27). In 1997 the Cholera outbreak in the municipality of Zanzi-bar resulted in 1,084 affected and 101 dead people. The most affected area was Jang’ombe with 57 people infected and five people that died. Estimations of unknown cases are supposed to be much higher than the mentioned numbers. (ZSP 2000a: 51)

With reference to housing conditions flooding causes high casualties on properties and buildings that affect the productivity and the economy of the town indirectly. There have also been cases where houses were completely destroyed, e.g. during extensive flooding in 1997 and 1998. Land slides result in sinking of houses which puts them in danger of collapsing. The problem of erosion is strongly related to flooding and attacks fundaments of houses as well as footpaths and unpaved roads. Another result of flood-ing is erosion of the road surface by overflowing water. (ZSP 2000h: 26-27) A disad-vantage for people living in flooded areas is that they have to leave their houses and secure their properties when flooding occurs (ZSP 2000b: 3).

Concerning urban agriculture, flooding hinders efficient development of agricultural activity and lowers the quality of soil (leaking of nutrients). The urban agriculture takes place on marginal land such as flooded and swamp areas (ZSP 2000a: 25).

Figure 13: Flooded area on Zanzibar

Source: own photograph

26

Other infrastructure problems and their relation to storm water management

Besides the problem of SWM, other infrastructure facilities are not properly provided in most semi planned and informal settlements on Zanzibar. In the following paragraphs the most important infrastructure problems, which occur due to these failures, are ex-plained and their connection to SWM is pointed out.

Access

Accessibility is a serious problem in most of the informal settlements. On the one hand road network in Zanzibar Town and especially in the informal part is poor and only

trunk roads are paved (ZSP 2000a: 17). Because of poor maintenance, the situation worsens. This is due to management problems and the lack of funds (Awadh et al. 1998: 27). On the other hand there is the problem of provision of space for roads that hinders access inside the settlements. The houses are built without a layout plan and the need to leave space open for footpaths and roads is often not con-sidered. As the density in the settlements increases, accessibility becomes worse and relies mostly on earth tracks and footpath systems (ibid.). This leads to several problems, for example difficulties for the households to have their septic tank emptied be-cause the trucks cannot get close enough to their house.

During rainy season these impacts are intensi-fied. Many roads and paths are impassable due to flooding or erosion. An unsystematic settlement structure complicates the establishment of reticu-lated infrastructure services, e.g. because drainages following straight roads can not be build. Also semi

planned settlements face such problems today.

Water supply

Although the supply with safe water is essential for the health of the people, it is not sufficient since the supply is considerably smaller than the demand (ZSP 2000a: 11). One major reason is that the distribution system does not cover the whole settlement area of Zanzibar Town. The amount of households, which are often connected to water pipes illegally, surpasses the capacity of the system. Many of the pipes are leaking or blocked by deposits caused by the high concentration of calcium in the water. In addi-tion, the water tanks are often corroded, deformed and permeable. The pumping capac-ity of the used pumps is limited due to the outdated technical standard and cannot cap-ture all the demanded water (ibid.). This frequently leads to water shortages.

The water is polluted by sewage or contaminated ground water resulting from water seeps through the pipes or water tanks. Settlements near water catchment areas threaten the quality of the extracted water (Awadh et al. 1998: 58). Because informal settlements tend to expand into these areas, this conflict will intensify in the future. Since the water is inadequately disinfected and tested for chemical and bacteriological quality because of financial problems, the contamination of water is often not detected early enough. On

Figure 14: Problem of access

Source: own photograph

27

account of the poor water supply, people in informal settlements dig their own wells which are shallow and unprotected (ibid: 8). The poor quality of drinking water is the main reason for widespread water born diseases in Zanzibar Town, especially cholera and diarrhoea.

Stagnant water pools and the high groundwater level as effects of an inadequate SWM facilitate the contamination of drinking water. Like drainage systems, water sup-ply systems are related to the settlement structure but less depending on open spaces.

Liquid waste

Liquid waste can be differentiated into three categories. These are foul or black water, grey water and surface water or storm water. Water polluted by excreta is called black water. Grey water consists of water from washing, laundry, kitchen, bath etc., while surface water is mainly accumulated rainwater.

There is no centralised sewage system in Zanzibar Town and only 19 percent of all households are served by a system. About two million litres of wastewater per day are disposed to the sea without being effectively treated, simply because Zanzibar Town has

no treatment plant. This mixture of all three water types pollutes the marine environment and makes the construction of a treatment plant absolutely necessary. The only problem is an adequate loca-tion, which has not been found yet. (Awadh et al. 1998: 33-34)

The majority of all households of the Zanzibar Municipality (78 percent) are using pit latrines or septic tanks with soak pits only, three percent have no access to toilets at all (ibid.: 33). In areas with a high density, pit latrines can cause pollution of the ground water, because in flooded areas with high groundwater level they overflow during rainy sea-son. (ZSP 2000a: 14). Another problem is the non-existence or abuse of existing soak pits. This type of on-site sanitation system normally needs to be dis-lodged every three years. But the frequency of emp-tying is not sufficient, because Zanzibar Municipal-ity has only one truck available for this purpose. This disposal practice that is often done

locally without any treatment pollutes the surface and groundwater, especially in sensitive environmental areas and affects a high poten-tial risk of water borne diseases to water users (ZSP 2000g: 7-8).

In nearly every informal urban area the handling of grey water can be observed, as it is lead out on the streets.

Heavy and intense precipitation during rainy season intensifies the problems con-nected with liquid waste by accelerating the overflowing of pit latrines or septic tanks. As a result wastewater affects many more households and accumulates in depressions, which shift another problem into flooding areas. An efficient SWM would reduce the risk of overflowing pit latrines or septic tanks.

Figure 15: Liquid waste

Source: own photograph

28

Solid waste

Solid waste in Zanzibar Town is not treated properly. Only 45 percent of the produced garbage is collected and brought to a dumping site by the Solid Waste Department (Awadh et al. 1998: 38), which owns only three garbage trucks within the ZMC (ZSP

2000f: 3). Most of the inhabitants of informal set-tlements in Zanzibar Town are not willing to bring their waste to one of the collection points or even pay a fee for a collection service, but bury or burn it close to their residence. This is one of the major reasons for the emergence of many small informal dump sites close to or even within the settlement area, which can become a source for diseases. (Awadh et al. 1998: 38-39)

Considerable problems arise through this way of waste management. First of all the smoke of the burned garbage affects the health of the people, causes air pollution and even road accidents. Secondly toxic materials can easily infiltrate into groundwater or water catchment areas causing contamination of drinking water. (ibid.: 39)

Furthermore the garbage blocks drainage systems, which causes flooding. The insufficient SWM accelerates the dispersion of garbage over the settlements in contrast to centralised disposal sites.

Important aspects of informal urban growth The questionable municipal boundaries and the unclear responsibilities are contributing to informal settlement development. Furthermore there is not enough money for neither the provision of building land nor the provision and maintenance of infrastructure. In the foreseeable future, the demand of the applicants can not be satisfied, which will lead to extension of informal settlements.

As the Zanzibar Municipality Council fails to meet the demand for formally planned housing land, the informal settlements’ layout development is a product of uncoordi-nated and uncontrolled market forces. The ones, who create the problems to come, earn a lot of money by allocating and selling the plots. Purchasers only realise their environ-ments’ deficits, when it is too late and no one else takes responsibility.

Flooding, as a result of the dysfunctional settlement pattern and the natural condi-tions, has severe impacts on informal settlements and their inhabitants and is character-ised by a strong interdependence with other infrastructure problems. Especially impacts of health and housing related problems could serve as a motivation for local people to tackle the problem. In contrast to the natural conditions concerning flooding, the lack of adequate drainage systems or the problem of maintenance of existing drainages can be influenced by the inhabitants of Zanzibar Town. Concerning the problem of SWM, there are also possible technical solutions and local potentials, e.g. grass root initiatives, which will be explained in the following chapters.

Figure 16: Solid waste

Source: own photograph

29

CHAPTER 4Technical Solutions for Storm Water Management

To solve the problems that heavy rainy seasons result in and that were described in the previous chapter, a suitable storm water management (SWM) system has to be installed. This can consist of different measures that will be described in the following.

There are three technical solutions, which are important in this context: Discharging, seepage and harvesting. Each one has a certain spatial, financial and technical demand and needs particular preconditions. Also each of them offers its own contribution to storm water management (SWM) with a different result on the amount of rainwater that can be dealt with and the way the water is treated. These demanded preconditions and resulting contributions are being related to the conditions and needs on Zanzibar.

This general background will be explained in two examples. One is based on Zanzibar, the other one in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

DischargingThe main aim of a concept that focuses on discharging is to dispose the water as safely as possible with a controlled runoff to avoid erosion and damage of paths, streets and houses. For this purpose, two types of drains can be used. Closed drains are usually pipe systems under ground, while open drains are fosses and ditches with an embankment to strengthen the construction. Different technical expenditures, materials and ways of construction result in different runoff velocities, requirements for maintenance, durability, construction and conservation costs.

The desired runoff velocity depends on the topography of the area. If the differences in heights are considerable, the velocity has to be slowed down. It is important to construct the drain with easy access and low cost maintenance as well as a long durability. The total costs depend on the chosen materials, the costs of the removing of soil and the labour forces (Vischer, Huber 1993: 172).

In general, a net of main drains should follow the contour lines of the concerned area to discharge the water to the lowest point, where it can be further dealt with. In order to have a controlled flow of water, the runoff velocity has to be kept very low therefore rough materials for the drains and retention areas have to be constructed. The later are basins built in regular intervals to slow down the flow of the water. In case of steep slopes or even drops in the topography, cascades can be effective but also the construction has to be secured in a special way to prevent erosion. Measures would be the stabilisation of the slope and a sufficient impermeable construction. (Vischer, Huber 1993: 161)

When dealing with a declining terrain, a drainage system of intercepting side-drains in the form of ditches is advisable. Their function is to catch and discharge rainwater in a controlled way and lead it into the main drain. These intakes are situated mostly parallel to contour lines. Vertical to the contour lines are the fall drains that lead towards the main drain at the bottom of the downgrade. (Schlichting 25.05.2002)

Closed drains are more expensive and need more technical skills and know-how than open drains. Additionally there are some relating problems e.g. that a blockage by waste or a damage by roots of trees can occur and prevention or solutions are costly and difficult. (Vischer, Huber 1993: 343) So closed drains are more difficult to maintain

30

(Omar 27.02.2002). The advantage of closed drains is that they are underground and therefore do not need a lot of space. Especially in dense settlements the construction of open drains with embankment can lead to spatial problems.

Open drains can have different shapes with different capacities. In comparison to the best shape type of a semicircle, which has the highest capacity, there are also the types of trapezium, rectangle and triangle shape (Vischer, Huber 1993: 149f).

Drains can be made of wood, clay, soil, brickwork, natural stone, gabions, asphalt and or concrete. The type of material used depends on the amount of rainwater, the time span it has to sustain and on the geologic and topographic characteristic of the area.

One possibility is to construct drains with a porous sole. Then the rainwater can seep through the permeable layer, which would reduce the run off. (Geiger, Dreiseitl 2001: 273)

The easiest and least expensive way to construct a drain is possible by using wood, clay or soil. The drawback is that all three materials are not very stable and damage can happen easily, even if the embankment is secured. Especially drains made of clay and soil erode quickly in the case of heavy rainfalls or steep slopes. In comparison to other materials, drains made of soil or clay can be easily and cheaply repaired without a broad know-how. The maintenance is therefore not costly but very time consuming, which leads to a high demand in labour forces. The runoff velocity is small, which means the water runs rather slowly through the drains (ibid.: 51).

For a more stable and durable construction the drains can be constructed by brickwork or natural stones which are still rather inexpensive. They also have a low runoff velocity, because – among other reasons - they are not as smooth as for example concrete drains. A disadvantage of this is that sediments which settle on the sole inevitably block the drains. The maintenance can be more complicated than for solid drains.

Gabions are containers made out of wire mesh, which are filled with stones, bricks, brick fragments, coral stones or similar materials. These containers are used as walls of drains. Stone fragments are easy to find and the containers are fairly cheap and easy to construct. The drains are comparably stable but difficult to maintain in the case of damage. Also the drains get blocked easily, because of the rough material.

An expensive but very effective way to build drains is by using concrete. These drains have a high runoff velocity and are therefore practical in areas where a lot of water has to be discharged in a short time. They are very solid and do not get damaged by erosion easily. This fact makes them very durable. Also they are easy to maintain, because garbage and sediments are washed away and can be caught and cleaned out at specific points of the drainage system.

In general the gradient of the drain that influences the velocity of the water runoff should have not more than 8 percent and not lower than 0.3 percent. The most effective gradient is about 1–2 percent (ibid.: 335). Usually an embankment to stabilise the sides of the drain is installed. This can be made of gravel or plants, which prevent the erosion of the soil around the rim. These two measures additionally have the advantage of increasing evaporation and seepage of rainwater. That reduces the amount of rainwater, which flows into the drainage system and has a purification effect. These plants or gravel must be maintained well to preserve their function. Other measures to secure the soil of the rim would be by concrete or by boxes made out of wire mesh. (Geiger, Dreiseitl 2001: 220, 245)

The problem of blockage with waste can be solved by installing catch lattices in regular intervals. Here the flowing waste is collected and can be removed easily. Also

31

the rough surfaces along and in the drain have to be cleaned regularly. (Geiger, Dreiseitl 2001: 239)

The main tasks of maintenance for drains are to cut the plants at the embankment and rim, the repairing of damages occurred by erosion and the removing of waste. (Vischer, Huber 1993: 337; Geiger, Dreiseitl 2001: 247).

A problem of open drains is the reduced safety. Mainly for children these drains can be dangerous. To prevent this, open drains can be covered with slabs or permeable lids with slits to let the rainwater flow into the drain. The lids are removable to ensure an easy cleaning of the drains. In the case of covered drains within the streets or paths they can be crossed and used by cars and pedestrians so that accessibility would be secured.

SeepageGenerally seepage means the infiltration of water into the ground. It is advisory to increase natural seepage through different measures.

In German settlements storm water runoff from streets, roofs and other sealed areas has usually been discharged by public canalisation. But nowadays seepage is regarded as an alternative solution. The main reason for this is the preservation of the ground water level. Seepage fosters the cleaning of the water, because it infiltrates through vegetation and layers of soil.

A basic precondition is the quality of the storm water, which must be unpolluted. Additionally a lot of space is needed, depending on the different seepage methods. But most important is the capability of the soil to let storm water seepage. Clay soils or a hardened surface will hardly infiltrate water, while seepage in sandy soils is much easier.

For the special case of Zanzibar, seepage is generally possible but the preconditions are not always fulfilled. The storm water is contaminated by waste from the settlements and must be pre-cleaned. Also the amount of available space inside the settlements is very small, because Zanzibar Town is very dense. Also the soil in Zanzibar Town mostly consists of a sandy layer on the top with a layer of clay beneath (Kh. Mzee 18.02.2002). This means that the capacity of the ground to absorb the water is not sufficient enough. And if the ground is already saturated with water, the runoff increases to nearly the same amount as on sealed spaces.

The possible methods of seepage can be divided into centralised and decentralised ones. In the following, surface spreading, depression infiltration, trenching, pipe infiltration and shaft infiltration as examples for decentralised methods and seepage in a basin as a centralised method will be described.

Surface spreading

The concept of surface spreading bases on seepage of precipitation through non-sealed and permeable soil. The storm water just infiltrates on-site. The amount of water that seeps into the soil is even bigger when the ground is covered by vegetation. This also purifies the water as well as the different soil levels do. Advantages of these methods are a minimum of work while installing and an easy maintenance afterwards. The main disadvantage is the need of large spaces as the storage capacity of the ground is low. The requirement of space depends on the adjacent sealed area and the runoff velocity. Hence this method can only be used if large open spaces are available.

32

Depression infiltration

If the infiltration rate of the soil is too low for the amount of rain water, it can be stored temporarily in small depressions. This method is less space-demanding. Again, covering vegetation expands the seepage possibility. As a comparison, in Germany 5 – 10 sq. m of depression are needed for 100 sq. m of sealed area; the depth should not be deeper than 0.3 metres. Therefore it is not easy to implement it in dense areas as Ng’ambo, which also have to deal with the runoff from surrounding areas. Similar to the surface spreading, the advantages of this method are that the storm water is filtered through different soil levels and the implementation as well as the maintenance are simple. Another advantage is that less space is needed compared to surface spreading and some other uses are possible during the dry season.

Trenching and pipe infiltration

These methods are used to avoid non-permeable soil levels which cause a higher runoff and no seepage. Corresponding to the infiltration capacity of the soil the water seepages subterranean. For pipe infiltration a perforated tube is embedded into gravel or coral stone pieces which have a high infiltration capacity (Kh. Mzee 18.02.2002). The storm water is discharged subterranean into this pipe. Trenching means that gravel or coral stone pieces are used to fill a ditch. There the storm water is discharged either subterranean or on the surface.

With these methods seepage is also possible, when the surface is non-permeable or when there is not enough space for other methods. The disadvantage is that by avoiding the first layer, the purification process of the soils is only working partly. So contaminated storm water can infect the ground water. Another problem is that soil, which has been removed through erosion and waste, can block the construction. When the construction is once blocked it is hard to reuse it again.

Shaft infiltration

For this method a shaft is dug into the ground. The storm water is stored there and seepages through the permeable walls and floor of the shaft in the ground. The advantage is the low demand of space. One disadvantage is that there is no soil level clearing the water in the case of contamination. Another disadvantage, which is more existent in Zanzibar Town, is that the shaft can be blocked with waste if no measures are taken to prevent that. A blockage is almost impossible to reverse and hence destroys a shaft infiltration system. In order to avoid a blockage, the shaft has to be cleaned regularly.

Seepage in a basin

The only centralised method is the collection of discharged storm water in a big basin. This method is used if there is no space available in the settlement or if the catchment area is very big. There it can seepage while being filtrated through the ground and vegetation. In tropical circumstances it has to be secured that the process of seepage is fast to minimise the risk of malaria by breeding of mosquitoes. One opportunity is to dig up the basin and fill it with coral stones in order to increase the infiltration capacity (Kh. Mzee 18.02.2002).

33

Rainwater harvesting Rainwater harvesting means the catchment of rainwater for certain uses like agriculture or domestic water supply. Rainwater can generally be harvested from all sealed spaces. In this case rainwater harvesting from roofs is important. Reasons are the easy and inexpensive implementation of such a catchment system based on a decentralised structure and the possibility to implement it in a single household without depending on others. It can easily be done by installing a gutter along the roof which catches the storm water. The water then runs into some kind of catchment system like water tanks, basins or whatever is available. The catchment system should be closed at least with a lid to prevent malaria or other water born diseases (Omar 27.02.2002). A precondition of harvesting rainwater from roofs is a hard roof like corrugated iron sheets, which excludes houses with maskuti-rooftops10 – which are favoured mostly by a low-income group. Apart from that, the quality of the harvested water also depends on the state of the roof which therefore has to be kept clean.

Rainwater harvesting used to be a common technique in whole Tanzania and still is common in rural areas. Nowadays rainwater harvesting is nearly forgotten in urban areas. Either for the reason that other systems of water supply have replaced it or because it is just not wanted anymore since it is regarded as “backwardness” (Kh. Mzee 18.02.2002).

Reactivating harvesting again mainly makes sense as an additional alternative water supply. The contribution of rain water harvesting to SWM is simply limited. After the catchment system is filled up, the remaining storm water flows into other measures of a SWM-system. Still, this method seems to be useful for a SWM-system, as it contributes a bit and is easy to reactivate as people see an immediate benefit for themselves without high investments and large spatial demands.

Comparison of the different technical solutions Each system differs in its applicability and contribution to cope with the amount of storm water.

Harvesting is applicable in nearly every household and the expenditures are not too high. Different varieties of catching and storing the water exist. But its contribution to diminish the amount of storm water is very small. A main advantage of harvesting is that it can better the water supply of a household and thus convince the people to implement it.

The applicability of seepage measurements is limited in space or expenditures or both. The most important fact - as a main precondition for seepage - is that the soils are permeable enough for rainwater to infiltrate. There is no use for seepage measures, if the soils are already satiated after a short time of precipitation. A reason for this can also be a high ground water level in the area, which is characteristic for Zanzibar Town. Methods that are advisory for dense settlements like shaft or pipe infiltration are expensive to build and difficult to maintain. Seepage basins or areas are ideal breading places for mosquitoes and increase the danger of malaria. Because of this and the amount of space that is needed for these measurements they can only be installed outside of the settlements.

A drainage system is necessary if the amount of water is too large for on-site seepage. By discharging the water away from the endangered areas, flooding can be

10 Maskuti roofs are roofs made out of palm leaves.

34

prevented even in the case of strong precipitation. It also diminishes the risk of water born diseases. The various types of systems and shapes are a good opportunity for Zanzibar to use local materials and manpower.

Generally a combination of all three methods of SWM is the best solution.

ExamplesIn this chapter two settlements will be described which are role models for SWM in Tanzania. The first one, Hanna Nassif, is a settlement in Dar es Salaam and the second one is Jang’ombe-Urusi, a settlement in Zanzibar Town.

Hanna Nassif

Hanna Nassif is a settlement with about 20,000 inhabitants located in Dar es Salaam, the biggest town in Tanzania. It did not have clearly defined roads or storm water drainage. During rainy season many areas were flooded. Those flooded areas were mixed with overflow from pit latrines and solid waste spread in the whole settlement. Contaminated water remained for a long time and several diseases were one negative outcome.

In May 1991 the International Labour Organisation (ILO) visited Hanna Nassif after heavy rain falls which had caused high damage to the settlement. They decided to start a pilot project on “labour-intensive and community upgrading of an urban area in order to generate employment and improve living conditions” (Website United Nations). The project lasted from March 1994 till August 1996.

Solving the problems caused by flooding has been one of the immediate project objectives. Therefore a storm water drainage was implemented. Results of the project were about 600 m of storm water drains, 1.400 m of side drain, 1 km of road and 600 m of footpaths. The crossing of the one metre deep and one metre wide storm water drain is possible through covered parts or improvised bridges. The total amount of investments in the first phase from 1992 till 1994 was about US$ 600,000. The costs of labour wages were about US$ 60,000 which was less than a fourth of the total investment costs. Costs for materials took the highest part of the investments. A special outcome of the work was that nobody had to be relocated during the upgrading of roads and drains. (Website United Nations) (Baums et al. 2000)

Two other settlements of Dar es Salaam even replicated the strategy of this pilot project because the outcome was more than satisfying. Still, some problems occurred during its implementation. The Community Development Committee and the technical support team underestimated the organisation of the work which caused implementation problems. This resulted in demolishing already finished sections of new drains and their reconstruction. Therefore two of the recommendations were more flexibility and adequate supervision. The former intended a piece by piece design with possible changes during construction while the latter lead to a documentation of the designs. Also important aspects like laboratory soil tests, thickness and capacity of the road base and road design were not or less considered but should be given more significance in further projects.

The cleaning of the drains from garbage is still a problem. Costs for maintenance in the first three and a half year were about US$ 10,000. Also the depth of the drains bears the risk of children hurting themselves by falling into it. But today the biggest problem is the gentrification process. Richer people are buying up plots and houses in Hanna

35

Nassif. They are attracted by the working storm water drainage system where no problems of further flooding occur to their property. Hence people who originally lived there are forced to search for shelter in areas where again during rainy season flooding will be a problem for living.

Jang’ombe-Urusi

Jang’ombe is a Shehia in Zanzibar Town with 5,687 inhabitants and a size of about 0.33 sq. km. This results in a density of app. 17,000 inhabitants per sq. km in comparison to260 inhabitants per sq. km for the whole archipelago of Zanzibar (see Chapter 1 p. 4 ff.) (ZSP 2000h: 30). It is located about 2.75 km south-east of the city centre of Zanzibar Town. During colonial times the settlement used to be a model neighbourhood for Africa. It had been planned with infrastructure utilities such as access to roads and storm water drains. Meanwhile the drains deteriorated due to a lack of maintenance. Some of them completely collapsed.

Urusi is another Shehia adjacent to Jang’ombe with 12,714 inhabitants and measures about 0.54 sq. km. This results in an even higher density (app. 25,000 inhabitants/sq. km) than in Jang’ombe. Urusi was built without any planning principles and offers nearly no infrastructure services.

During the Zanzibar City Consultation (see chapter 3, p. 23) Jang’ombe and Urusi were – among other settlements – chosen as a prioritised pilot area for infrastructure upgrading in Ng’ambo. A working group was established. Important issues were inadequate (Jang’ombe) or rather not existing (Urusi) drainage systems. The existing drains in Jang’ombe were old and there was a problem of proper cleaning and maintenance. One new drain, built through community initiatives, existed. It also lacked proper management. (ibid: 5)

During rainy seasons an area with about 150 houses is flooded regularly. In addition to the precipitation of its own area the settlement receives water from higher positioned areas, too. The most serious floods happen during the high rainy season between March and the end of May. They lead to the maceration of the ground and the foundations of the houses sink. About 30 houses were deconstructed or are in the eminent danger of collapsing in one year. Despite of the new drain, the drainage system did not work well, because of blockage with garbage. Additionally water from overflowing pit latrines mixed with the grey water. In this environment, diseases accrued very quickly.

As a successful model of infrastructure upgrading, community labour force was used as well as participation on an experimental basis. Finally the conclusion was to upgrade and extend the storm water drainage trunk along Jang’ombe Road to a length of 1.45 km. The drain leads to the ocean where the rain water is finally discharged. With one metre depth and about one metre width the drain has the capacity to be connected to other drainage systems. The drain is made of concrete. In some parts it is covered to cross it. Today the drain lacks proper maintenance in particular by means of garbage disposal. There are only some minor ditches from the settlement to the main drain. Therefore rain water runs naturally out of the settlement in direction of the drain and carries garbage on its way which blocks the iron bars protection. Highest priority must be to find a group out of the settlement who is going to take the responsibility of maintaining the drain. Furthermore the sustainability of discharging into the ocean is questionable especially if the rain water is mixed with garbage.

A document showing the working procedures and recording its experimental pilot project status is still in progress. An evaluation report, a monitoring plan and learnt lessons and recommendations will also be included (ibid: 5).

36

37

CHAPTER 5Implementation and Management

Theoretical background information on co-operation and self-help responses to the development of informal settlements is needed to develop the implementation and management concept for the two case study areas. The main focus of this chapter is the implementation process, considering grass root initiatives (GRIs) and non governmental organisations (NGOs) as important actors within this process. Each sub-chapter represents a relatively independent module.

The first subchapter defines the terms used in the following, i.e. grass root initiatives, self-help-organisations, CBOs and NGOs. “Responses and strategic approaches to informal settlements” emphasises on theoretical concepts and strategies of finding ways out of the “dilemma” of informal settlements.

To be able to create a concept for the two case study areas, it is essential to be familiar with the special preconditions and circumstances for self-help organisations on Zanzibar. These are provided in the third subchapter (p. 41 ff.) and include the tradition of self-help and other aspects based on the experts’ interviews as well as a description of existing organisations supporting self-help .

Referring to the research approach, football as a best practise for a GRI movement in the specified area is analysed in the next subchapter. According to the hypotheses, transferable findings concerning the provision of space for SWM are presented here.

Based on the findings of the previous subchapters ways of implementation (i.e. establishing a GRI) are illustrated and underlined by examples of existing initiatives in the final subchapter.

DefinitionsThe main actors in the process of self-help and implementing community upgrading projects are non governmental organisations (NGO) and grass root initiatives (GRI). GRIs can be subdivided in two types of organisations, which are self-help organisations and community based organisations (CBOs). GRIs and NGOs are organisations of the civil society, which do not depend on the state and are non-profit organisations. Their main differences are based on the criteria of problem-dimension and territory of action (Nohlen 1991: 325).

Grass root initiatives: self-help organisations

Contrary to NGOs, GRIs are acting on settlement level only and usually try to solve occurring problems within their neighbourhood (Nohlen 2001: 325). GRIs are often self-help organisations and start as a kind of neighbourhood help. When it becomes necessary to improve an existing situation for the affected residents and this is possible to realise without help from outside, neighbours come together and solve the problem without asking the government for help. These activities are often of short duration and as soon as the problem is solved, the group organisation stops working together.

Grass root initiatives: Community based organisations (CBOs)

“CBOs can be organised in specific localities, have a defined boundary of working area, are solving problems within the community itself and are founded by affected

38

members”, Mr Sheha, programme co-ordinator of the ZSP explains. Their members often have experiences from participating in former self-help organisations. Their action is focused on general problems within their local territory or on one fixed purpose. They strive for satisfaction of their needs or for the creation of political awareness. As their work is long term orientated, their activities are organised formally and their solutions have a lasting self-administrative quality. They develop solid organisational structures within their group.

It is desirable that CBOs use their gained competencies to enlarge their responsibilities. As governmental measures or failures influence the CBOs‘ daily business, the CBOs itself should progress and enlarge their work on higher administrational levels.

Non governmental organisations (NGOs)

NGOs are filling the gap between the state and the GRIs. They often follow one specific objective that they try to implement on a large scale. Mrs Mahubaka from ANGOZA states: “NGOs are started by people from different corners all over Zanzibar, who want to solve a specific problem, e.g. help youth against drugs”. Therefore a NGOs’ territory of activities is widely spread on different areas and often on the international level. The wide range of supporting activities of NGOs can be differentiated into the following aims (Grohmann 1996: 55): – NGOs give financial aid to strengthen and improve the GRIs economic situation. – NGOs are consulted by GRIs in different matters, they give educational help in

order to develop the organisational form and structure or to sensitise awareness among the population.

– NGOs train GRIs to express their matters of interest towards the government and/or privates to claim their rights.

– NGOs work as lobbyists either for a local target group or as an umbrella organisation for other NGOs and/or CBOs.

The main organisational forms that the following chapters focuses on, are CBOs and self-help organisations, because the aim is to find local ways of solving problems inside one settlement.

Responses and strategic approaches to informal settlements The following chapter deals with different strategies supporting upgrading processes in informal settlements. Possible actors in these strategies include the residents of the settlement, GRIs and NGOs as well as the government. This information can be regarded as theoretical background for the effort of giving recommendations for a successful GRI. It illustrates the necessity of a parallel development of reforms of state institutions and the creation of cooperative environments to reach sustainable solutions.

Influencing informal development by lowering planning standards

The first possible approach of Abgola (Abgola 2001) focuses on building and planning standards, just like the student project focuses on the distance between houses, a functional settlement pattern and plot coverage (housing density). Therefore the further text will stress the subject of planning standards.

39

The problem is in fact that the planning standards on Zanzibar are very high, so the government is not able to provide enough official building plots and poor urban dwellers buy their land on the informal land market (see p. 23 ff.), so they are driven into illegality. The TAP-owners, who sell the plots, usually do not care about any settlement pattern. If they do care and consult a professional planner, the TAP-owners will loose almost 30 percent of their land (see p. 23). This is the result of a model process initiated by the government, in which the share of land for infrastructure services and public need is immoderately set to be about 30 percent (Scholz 2000: 18). The question which unavoidably arises is: What are planning standards for? They are supposed to secure safe and healthy living conditions in a settlement. But there is no point in sticking to regulations which leave the TAP-owners with so many disadvantages that they do not accept them.

Surveys in the context of Abgola’s and Kasozi’s study have revealed that the planning standards can be lowered without impairing human functions. These surveys have also dealt with plot coverage, and housing density. It is possible for TAP-owners to sell their plots at least with the same profit and allow them to provide enough public land for basic infrastructure services, e. g. access paths, SWM systems, etc (Scholz 2000: 18 and Scholz 2002a: 77–81). So the planning response emphasises on a compromise between the proposed 30 percent and the present inappropriate situation of no pattern at all. Since there are advantages in tenure security, the incentive for buying and selling land illegally can decrease, leading to more people who are willing to respect the planning standards. This is one way of influencing the settlement pattern, housing density and to support a functional settlement structure. (Abgola 2001 and Kasozi 2001)

On Zanzibar a possible compromise between a very low density and plot coverage, as it is proposed in the existing standards, and a fairly high density and plot coverage, as it is practised by the residents at present time, is a reasonable long term goal.

Decentralisation as a key towards active participation

The way of co-operating between institutions and the local residents as well as the way of co-operating among the residents themselves is of major concern. This strategic approach is based on the principle of cooperation, which, besides others, Robert Axelrod (1984) identified as the way to achieve the best results, e.g. a win-win-situation, but which needs special conditions “to emerge in a world of egoists without central authority” (ibid.: 3). In this regard, the planning response uses decentralisation as a key element to foster civil society, democratic participation and initiatives. The future participation model should shift from putting the needs into the centre towards promoting skills and competence in order to be sustainable in itself. The residents are no longer beneficiaries, but become actively participating actors.

The project is not only evaluated by its positive outcome, but also by the procedure towards this goal, in which the residents have gained new skills and strengthened their ties between each other. Although this kind of outcome cannot be measured, it is very important when the long term goal is help towards self-help.

For this strategy it is important to choose the right way of implementation, which is often a mixture of top-down and bottom-up approaches. A typical example for a top-down and rather passive participatory approach is the training and guiding of residents by external professionals. Whereas an example for a bottom-up and rather active participatory approach is the development of new concepts and ideas by the residents

40

themselves. Existing relations between residents should not be destroyed, but used as positive potential. (Apuzzo 2001)

It is one proposal to change the pay-off for the long term development by creating new possibilities of income-generating. Besides upgrading the settlement through the realised project, an active participatory approach can also improve the quality of the residents’ life. It can be combined with a job training programme.

Preventing gentrification while creating motivation

The following approach points out the impacts of legalisation and security of tenure in informal settlements. By securing the land tenure the risk of gentrification after the upgrading projects will be minimised. Therefore it increases the willingness of the residents to invest in their own neighbourhood. The motivation to participate in GRIs is higher.

The theoretical strategy requires a governmental programme, which provides social housing rights without giving up the public land, together with a local land use planning scheme. Furthermore a specific institutional apparatus to manage the tenure regularisation programme is needed. With these measures the sociospatial integration improves. The socioeconomic profile of the settlement can be maintained. This results in the prevention of gentrification after the upgrading process and in the preservation of social relations. By reserving areas for social housing the identification with the settlements increases and so does the motivation to invest in the own settlement. (Fernandes 2001: w.p.)

This background information is useful in two stages of the implementation. First of all it is one way to mobilise local actors. It creates motivation, because the settlers do not have to fear that they will not be able to enjoy the pay-offs of their work. Secondly it deals with one of the most important issues after a project has been realised; namely maintaining the benefits for the residents that have improved their own living conditions. To prevent a process of gentrification on Zanzibar, it is important that with the change of the right of occupancy (see p. 21 ff.) the land use will be restricted to social housing.

The local community as a legal mediator

The last example of different responses, which is deduced from studies by Oestereich (Oestereich 2001), tries to transform the local community into a legal mediator between the individual resident and the government. It is based on the principle of federation with three different levels within the community. The former top-down strategy is replaced by a system that is rather multi-tiers, bottom-up and self-reflexive. It assures an active participatory approach in development processes. The theoretical strategy divides the community into three further levels within a strict but democratic hierarchy; the section, the branch and the ward.

The section is made up of 25 households that elect one leader as their speaker. All members state on paper that they live in the mentioned section. This has three effects: each beneficiary is identified; each of them becomes obliged to the “common good” (compulsory contribution); possible “free riders” are excluded.

The branch consists of six to ten sections and has to confirm the correctness of the section lists. It also serves as an organ of appeal, if there are any conflicts on the section level.

41

The ward is the highest level that functions at the interface of external finance, technical advice, internal material contributions and social affairs.

The self-help organisations form territorial lines and erect their own systems of hierarchy. This should drive them out of illegality into legitimacy and finally towards claiming their land title to become legalised. (Oestereich 2001)

Especially on Zanzibar, where the residents are used to structured hierarchies because of the former system of balozi, this response reveals some interesting aspects regarding the residents’ contribution to CBOs. It is possible to bundle the power of the residents more effectively, but at the same time bears the risk of a misuse of the power by some individuals. It can be a possible solution to make residents contribute money to every project of the CBO, although they are not equally affected.

The environment for institutions of the civil society on Zanzibar During socialistic times, an independent civil society did not exist on Zanzibar. Since 1995 especially NGOs and CBOs are allowed and are “mushrooming” all over. This chapter will reveal this process and will show the possibilities arising from participation. Examples of the work of the Zanzibar Susatinable Programme (ZSP) and ANGOZA (Association of NGOs on Zanzibar) will be given.

Tradition of self-organisation in the Zanzibarian history

Looking back to the history of the Union of Tanzania, the terms community based development and participation became very important in the 60s with the development of socialism. In many places people joined forces with the government in public works, e.g. the building of schools, the digging of drains etc. (Andreasen 2001: 263). Today local leaders like Shehas are thinking of the period of Sheikh Karume, who was president from 1964 to 1972 (Website Zanzinet), as the “good old days when there was spirit and participation among the people” (Andreasen 2001: 267). But many also claim “people have lost the participation and the voluntarily self-help spirit” and “leaders do not emphasize the self-help spirit in development activities” (ibid. 2001: 267). The participation, which was called from above and is therefore not comparable to participation-models today, was also criticised for being non-democratic and a result of pressure (ibid. 2001: 267). Also the issues for collective actions were different from the ones needed today: In the 1960s housing and agriculture were most important, today the environment and health of people is. Nevertheless the history of working for community purposes joined by the former balozi-leader system (ten-cell-leaders), which were responsible for neighbourhoods, could be a potential to motivate people to contribute again. In the late 1970s and 80s a decline in participation took place and only since 1995 it is emerging again in a different way.

Establishment of a civil society

NGOs and CBOs have recently been established following enactment of the Societies Act No. 6 of 1995. Before 1995 there was no independent civil society on Zanzibar. Liberalisation startet in 1985 with the economic liberalisation11 and was followed by a

11 The economic liberalisation was started by the break down of clove-prices on the world market. Before that, all economic development was steered by the government.

42

democratic liberalisation, finally leading to multi-party elections in 1995. After the elections in 1995 and the establishment of a multi-party-system, the government introduced the Societies Act No. 6 under international pressure. International organisations and states threatened to stop the foreign aid. The act now allowed the existence of NGOs, CBOs, trade unions and others. As the Agenda 21 and the Sustainable Cities Programme are calling for a participatory development, this has been a major step. Now it will turn out whether the co-operation works. Former associations have never been independent from government and most are not fully independent up to now (Awadh et al. 1998: 72). This is clearly visible in the example of the CBO “Mkele Ward Development Committee”. They claim themselve to be a CBO, but the leaders are mostly local authorities with relation to the government like Sheha, Ward and Councillor. On the one hand, they are the people with authority and knowledge in the settlements, on the other hand, they could use the structure of the CBO to establish governmental interests and to control people not to call for reforms. This might be a restriction for the development of a strong and independent civil society.

Nevertheless the number of CBOs and NGOs on Zanzibar has reached over one hundred in 1998 (Andreasen 2001: 264), which is indicating a positive development. Parallel, organisations which follow a participatory approach have settled on Zanzibar, for example the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme (ZSP).

ANGOZA as an supportive NGO

The main objective of ANGOZA is to support NGOs and CBOs in a quantitative and qualitative way, to establish international links to other NGOs and international donors and to act as an intersection-point between CBOs/ NGOs and the government.

ANGOZA establishes and maintains an information network and managing system between the NGOs/CBOs which is also available for public use. There is training for the member organisations three times a year for free. According to the needs of the respective organisation it contains exercises which improve skills in managing and financing. The seminars offered by ANGOZA are one of the most important and successful components of their work.

ANGOZA represents an important potential for CBOs, because with the help of ANGOZA it can be easier to contact donors in the case study areas. Furthermore skills

Mkele Ward Development Committee

In Mkele Ward, a highly condensed settlement in N’gambo area, a community based organisation was established to tackle the environmental and sanitation problems. The Committee was initiated by the settlers themselves, but built with the help of local politicians. One objective is to educate people with the help of the Sheha and the Councillor.

ANGOZA

ANGOZA (Association of Non Governmental Organisations on Zanzibar), founded in 1993 (a time when NGOs were not allowed on Zanzibar) and registered 1995, is an umbrella-organisation for NGOs and every registered NGO or CBO is free to join it (40 members today). The entrance fee for CBOs/NGOs to become a member of ANGOZA is US$ 10, the annual fee is US$ 5. ANGOZA claims itself to be independent from the government and is acting in the whole area of Zanzibar and Pemba. (Mahubaka 25.02.2002)

43

in managing and financing are a precondition for a successful work of a CBO which has to organise and manage with less professional staff.

The Zanzibar Sustainable Programme as a mediator

The work of the ZSP proceeds in five major working steps. In 1998 the first working step of the ZSP was preparing an environmental profile, which gives an overview of the most important issues, like naturally available resources, city development, the condition of infrastructure and institutional set-ups. Under the principle of participation, all stakeholders were involved in a consultative process. Issues for the further work were identified.

In the same year, the next working step was to organise and conduct a City Consultation, in order to bring key actors from the public and private sector together to agree on the priority issues confronting their city. After the City Consultation the ZSP did establish and support a Working Group Process in 1999 (third working step), which is going into detail with special issues (e.g. solid waste management or institutional framework etc.). The aim of the whole process is to formulate issue-specific strategies (fourth working step) and action plans (e.g. an alternative master plan) and to institutionalise the EPM process in Zanzibar Town (fifth working step).

The results of the Working Groups are finally implemented by the government, thus the ZSP is no organisation of the civil society. But by following a participatory approach and bringing different stakeholders together in the Working Group Process , it is acting as a mediator between government, civil society and private institutions.

Problems with participation

One problem is the dominance of the public sector, i.e. employees of ministries and municipal council, in the working groups, in contrast to the EPM approach, which favours a well-balanced participation of all stakeholders. Only 10 NGOs and CBOs took part in the City Consulation in 1998.

The participation process is often stagnating due to the behaviour of the Zanzibarians. By different statements (Pessel 11.02.2002; Sheha 18.02.2002) it was pointed out that people only attend the meetings if they get compensated. During the first years, while UN-Habitat/UNEP was supporting the ZSP with money, local leaders

The Sustainable Cities Programme on Zanzibar

The Zanzibar Sustainable Programme (ZSP) is one of the demonstration projects of the Sustainable Cities Programme (SCP). It started to work in February 1998 and has defined the following objectives according to the aim of the SCP:

– “to develop a participatory environmental planning and management model (EPM) and to integrate it into the governmental management functions;

– to improve the urban environment, health and service provision in specific areas in Zanzibar Municipality; and

– to improve the capacity of ZMC, and regularly apply environmental planning and management in the council” (Muhajir et al. 2000: 1).

All SCP programmes are implemented by various institutions. The ZSP is implemented by the Zanzibar Municipal Council (ZMC), the Stone Town Conservation Development Authority (STCDA), the Department of Environment, the Department Of Urban Planning and the Department of Lands. A steering committee is heading the ZSP, whose chairman is the minister of finances.

44

and CBOs attended the meetings. Today, while the German Development Service (DED) is supporting the ZSP, it is hard to motivate people and government staff to participate, because no allowance is paid anymore.

Potentials for grass roots Apart from several problems, the ZSP is a potential to support grass root projects. The examples of Ng'ambo Areas reveals that the ZSP is able to support upgrading processes. Furthermore the ZSP is able to mediate between grass roots and the ZMC, due to the fact that it is incorporated in government and has relations towards grass root projects in the settlements. The ZSP can also advise organisations in financial issues, e.g. how to apply for external donors, as it already does in Mkele Ward.

One problem still unsolved, concerning also the support for CBOs, is the integration of the ZSP into the Zanzibar Municipal Council to ensure the continuation of the work after the official SCP-process is fulfilled. But there are strong interests that the ZSP should become an institution of cooperation and participation for all planning processes on Zanzibar.

People’s awareness and responsibilities to take action

There are a lot of reasons why people work together in CBOs or participate in governmental activities. The main working field concentrates on the environment of the settlement, e.g. infrastructure provision. In the following, important factors, which have come out in discussions with the Zanzibarian experts, will be explained. All these statements and conclusions are reflecting the estimations of the experts, which potentials to organise people are available and which special conditions can also be constraints.

Responsibilities are different in the rural and urban context

Like other interviewed experts on Zanzibar, Mr Sheha, the acting programme co-ordinator of the ZSP, states: “Often the people who came from the villages into town feel not responsible for their settlement, but more for their origin village. Therefore participation in rural areas works very well.” (Sheha 18.02.2002). Mr Mwalim, director of the STCDA, underlines this statement: ”People contribute more to their old village than to the part of the town they live in, in terms of effort or attention.” (Mwalim 18.02.2002). One goal is to enhance the identification of people with their urban settlement. One potential can be the fact that people in one urban settlement are often coming from the same rural area and identification can be developed through the communal feeling.

Awareness to tackle a problem is only present in some cases

Another aspect is the identification of a problem. Mr Mwalim states: “What’s a problem for us is a problem to them but the problem is they do not see it as a problem” (Mwalim 5.03.2002). Mr Rahmadani, Head of the Solid Waste Department, adds that being aware of the problem depends on the magnitude of a problem (Rahmadani 5.03.2002). In this context Mr Mwalim mentions that it is more important for the people on Zanzibar to satisfy their basic needs than to care about the provision of technical infrastructure. He explains: “People are not aware of long term problems and their impacts” (Mwalim 11.02.2002).

45

Concerning awareness building Mr Mwalim points out that “people on Zanzibar have to be developed” (ibid.) but the development has to care about the following facts: “The interdependence between a certain behaviour and the impacts have to be explained to the people (e.g. to settle near to water-catchment areas bears risks for the drinking water), development has to come gradually/step by step, the projects have to address the immediate problems and alternatives have to be shown. Although people know there are problems of flooding they are used to the fact that nature takes care of everything” (ibid.). This refers to the fact that people do not see the signs, e.g. if they do not see the flooding problem in erosion or flooded houses, they are not aware of a flooding problem in their settlement which will exist in several years.

Potentials and constraints of the work of CBOs on Zanzibar

Experts on Zanzibar also see the potentials of CBOs, namely the mobilisation of the community and their closeness to the community, which leads to a better understanding of their problems (Omar 27.02.2002). It means, there is the chance that the municipality itself begins to work together with these organisations to become more efficient and to try carrying out its tasks again. Constraints of CBOs are seen in the lack of technical knowledge and finances, because the money collected from the community is usually not enough. As Mr Omar, a town clerk, explains, the technical support is often given by the ZMC, but financial support is not possible.

Football as a best practise for self organised local developmentFootball does play a major role in many people’s life all over the world and certainly on Zanzibar as well. Taken as an example for the successful provision of infrastructure facilities (see p. 9), the provision and maintenance of football grounds in the settlements play a major role to answer how the provision of basic infrastructure in informal settlements can be organised.

Importance of football

Football is a reason for many people to act in a seemingly irrational way. One example is the story of the Zanzibar Leopards which is told in the TV-documentary “Die Leoparden von Sansibar” (Booch w.y.). An amateur football team from a fisher village on the east coast of Zanzibar puts great effort into financing a trip to Dar es Salaam. They qualified to play a football match against a professional team in the national stadium. Each of them paid an amount worth eight months of salary for the trip only to play a football match. It is obvious that those fishermen could have spent this money on other things like building materials for their houses or modern equipment for their work. But from the statements in the interviews it is also obvious that none of them regrets their behaviour. This behaviour even gives them a social status of great importance in their community.

How the tremendous motivation in football can also mobilise people to do things, which they normally would not do or are not able to do, shows another example, which takes place in Kenya and is described in the article “Miracle in the Mathare Slums”, written by Jim Hutchison (Hutchison 1995). It is the story of the Canadian Bob Munro, who came to Kenya as an environmental adviser for the United Nations in 1985. Startled by the misery and poverty of people in the depressing slums of Mathare Valley, he developed an idea for community upgrading, which involved the youth and their

46

astonishing great ambition to play football. He started a soccer league for the kids. To start the programme and buy equipment, he agreed with his wife to take money from the family savings. One week after friends spread his idea, 27 teams (nearly 500 kids) registered. That was much more than expected, so he dug in the family savings again and collected money from friends to start the league. Friends also helped him to coach

and referee the first games in the new Mathare Youth Sports Association (MYSA). He gave the kids an alternative to their every day life in the settlements. Instead of hanging around on the streets and end up in gangs, kids practised three times a week and played a game every weekend. For the next registration one year later 2500 boys and girls applied to play in MYSA, which was supported by the players from the first season. Besides these changes, MYSA was able to integrate a new teamwork into the teams. “Slum kids know you don’t

get something for nothing. They must put something back to the community”, a friend told Bob. So they decided to get the kids to clean up the rotting garbage and the overflowing drains of Mathare. To make it attractive for the kids, each team earns four points for each fulfilment of a cleanup project. Ashamed by the eagerness of the kids to clean up, older boys and even adults participated. Their hard work and the discipline they discovered, showed that they could do things they never thought would be possible. The new team spirit lead kids to become better students at school or even to go on to higher education. Twenty MYSA youth players are working as leaders on awareness and prevention campaigns concerning HIV in the slums, others became professional football players, coaches or referees. For their great efforts and achievements, MYSA received the United Nations Environment Programme’s Global 500 Award in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 during the UN Earth Summit Conference. In 1995 more than 4500 kids were playing in 250 teams. MYSA has become the largest youth-sports and community-service organisation in Africa, and the kids still earn points for cleaning up their environment.

Both examples show that football has an impact on the daily life of many people. This meaning for their daily life is also pointed out by Mr Mwalim, director of the STCDA and coach of a second division team: “In informally emerging urban settlements with limited facilities and amenities, football and the ground where it is played offers the feeling of equality with other established settlements” (Mwalim 2002: 4). Football gives the people “satisfaction of having something to represent them, something whose name and location advertises not their business but their identity and aspirations, something located within their very neighbourhoods, something blending together all the members of the community” (ibid.).

Politicians also discover football as a platform for election campaigns. “If they are investing in football, they are investing in their career. It is easier to achieve goals if you attain popularity” (Mwalim 18.02.2002). Just a little money to sponsor e.g. a football competition has big impacts on politicians’ popularity.

Figure 17: Football ground in Magomeni

Source: photography

47

Process of development of football grounds

The process of how to acquire a piece of land for a football ground and to protect it from being built on in the long run, which will be explained in “the maintenance” of football grounds, proves that football has a strong impact on the initial land management in informal settlement.

In these settlements the provision of land for football grounds is organised in an early stage of the settlement development. As the process of developing a football ground is similar in most of the settlements on Zanzibar, the case of Magomeni has been chosen as a transferable example.

“It is normally the younger generation that creates an informal team, grabbing on whatever open space available around the neighbourhood for their team’s pitch” (Mwalim 2002: 6). The land, where the football ground in Magomeni is located today, had been leased to TAP owners for agricultural purposes. In 1970 the team members of the football club asked the TAP owner, who was not cultivating the whole land, to use it for a football ground. He agreed and gave them the land for free. They just “had to compensate the farmer, who leased a piece of land from him to cultivate cassava”, Mr R. Mzee, secretary of the football club in Magomeni, reports how the football ground initially developed (Mzee, R. 29.02.2002). This process of transforming farm land into a football ground is common practise on Zanzibar. Once the land has been transformed to a football ground it is almost impossible to restore it to agricultural land or develop it for building purposes. It goes as far as that there have been cases of politicians using their influence to represent the football players’ interest against land owners. Mr Mwalim states: “In most cases the teams received the ground and the leaseholder of the plantation did not get any compensation” (Mwalim 18.02.2002).

Structure of football clubs

Parallel to the development of football grounds, the football clubs were gradually established. In the early stage of club history there was hardly any organisation, later a structured hierarchy lead by a executive committee has been introduced. But the hierarchy of Mzalendo FC in Magomeni only lasted until 1980. “The treasurer squandered the club funds and the club became weak and was quarrelling nearing breaking point. The youngsters thought that they have to continue with the team players instead of the club officials” (Mzee, R. 15.02.2002). So today the club has a rather informal hierarchy. Magirisi football team in Meli Nne has a club structure that is comparable to the old hierarchy in Magomeni.

Also the number of members has increased in time. Mzalendo FC started playing in the 1970s with a few young people. Today it has about 50 members, while the club in Meli Nne (founded in 1998) has 100 members.

Both clubs get their revenue through a monthly contribution by their club members of about US$ 0.2. In Magomeni some fans also contribute money. Both teams have expenditure like purchasing balls, jerseys and annual fees for the football association.

The maintenance of football grounds

Both clubs are responsible for the maintenance of the pitch. Maintenance can be divided into keeping the ground free from building purposes or other land uses and preserving the condition of the ground. Even though football is the most important activity, in Magomeni a lot of other activities like rope pulling, local dances, drum playing or

48

celebrations take place on the football ground. There is a collective interest to keep the ground free from any building purposes which can be seen as a basis for a social control mechanism. This mechanism works out very effectively as a resident underlines: “the settlers faced problems with people, who started building on the fringe of the football ground during nighttimes or selected sand from the ground for building purposes. Members of the football team and residents had to arrange night watches to stop these building processes.” (Resident Magomeni 1 2002).

Other problems were solved in the same way. One problem has been the disposal of solid waste. “It was stopped by settlers watching out for those who disposed the waste on the ground. The disposed waste was taken back to the front doors of the people to whom it belonged.” Mr R. Mzee mentions (Mzee, R. 15.02.2002).

In Magomeni during rainy season there is a lot of debris and when the season is over, members hire a bulldozer and grate the ground. The club has to finance it by itself.

Conclusion

The example of football grounds illustrates that people are motivated to spend time, money and energy to provide land for infrastructure. Football is a very important issue for many people. The benefits of the football ground are visible every day through football practice, other social gatherings and leisure activities. The importance for daily life is a major precondition for the willingness of settlers regarding their contribution and the provision of land for infrastructure.

The community provides a football ground on their own. It seems that they become active because nobody expected the government to do so and the residents feel self responsible. The football clubs portray that it is possible to preserve the land for a football ground in the long run through an organised and institutionalised structure. It is possible to transfer structures from football clubs to a structure of a CBO. But it is necessary to have a core of charismatic people who initiate and consolidate the football club.

The analysis of football grounds has illustrated that an effective land management process is possible at an early stage of settlement development, i.e. before the construction of houses is started when people do not expect the government to act and institutionalise their efforts,.

Football in Zanzibar is very important for the everyday life of people and represents a best practise for self organised local development.

Strategies and recommendations for establishing grass root initiatives The following observational statements on the structure, financing, the members and their motivation are mainly taken from the study “Improvement of squatter settlements: Between successful organisation and a lack of co-operation” done by Johannes Lückenkötter, Andrea Fieger and Frank Roger in 1994. This study describes existing community upgrading projects in three informal settlements in Dar es Salaam. These results are related to some findings from the fieldwork of the students’ project on Zanzibar concerning existing grass root initiative’s work.

49

Motivation

According to the definition of GRIs, one main motivation is to develop their community. Lückenkötter et al. (Lückenkötter et al. 1994: 53) indicate that most of the people perceive the problems of their settlement and know simple and effective means. The fact that there are community improvement projects proves that people feel responsible and do not wait for the government or other institutions. In general residents feel more responsible for solving problems that affect all the people in the settlement equally (e.g. education, traffic, religion) than problems which are more related to a specific area (environmental and health).

The authors identify that residents of the settlement Tabata in Dar Es Salaam are, compared to the residents in the other two case study settlements, very active. Possible reasons for this fact are that the settlement is in the process of development, inhabitants have a high socio-economic status and many people are well educated. The development of their settlement can be regarded of higher priority than basic needs fulfilment like for example food, shelter or a job.

Lückenkötter et al. refer to the common theory that low income households, whose basic needs are hardly fulfilled, are not able to participate in self-help improvement activities and that their priority will be the improvement of their own housing conditions. But they indicate that on the settlement level low income does not prevent residents from starting even very costly projects as they are able to use a variety of strategies to raise the necessary funds jointly. On the neighbourhood level low income may be one reason for not co-operating but most of the times this came together with other factors like personal dislike, etc.

Social and ethnic differences among residents are often the reasons for a lack of co-operation. Shared common values promote co-operation.

Further on the study points out that a major reason for the often poor environmental conditions in the settlements seems to be the “responsibility trap”. For example waste water running out off one house runs through the plot of the neighbour. The first family does not feel responsible, because they are not affected and the second family thinks the first family has to solve the problem. So in the end nobody does anything.

Experts on Zanzibar stated that in order to motivate the residents, the first thing is to explain existing problems because they have a different awareness on what is a problem and what is not; afterwards it is important to organise and mobilise them (Mwalim 18.02.2002). In contradiction to Lückenkötter et al., interviews with residents in the two case study areas on Zanzibar (see chapter 6. pp. 65-67 and pp. 75-77) reveal that three out of four residents expect the government to solve the problem.

Members

Most of the organisations have more than 50 members (Lückenkötter et al. 1994: 22). The reason might be that improvement actions are either undertaken with broad popular support or not at all. There are very few active members whereas a much larger group has been involved only for a short time into one activity or just contributed some money.

Most of the projects Lückenkötter et al. evaluated have been initiated by existing local organisations (churches, schools, etc.). Outside of these existing organisations there are hardly any persons who are able to start and co-ordinate community projects. Only two projects have started jointly as a result of discussion among the participants. Some other projects have been initiated by very strong individualist. Their neighbours

50

have followed them because of their determination, their ability to organise people and their prior experience and education (one was retired army captain and another was a graduate of the University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS) in Dar es Salaam).

The authors report that low formal education does not reduce people’s ability to understand causes of problems and know simple and effective means. The most important thing is that the initiator is aware of the problem and willing and charismatic enough to motivate and organise other people.

The findings from Zanzibar show that many GRIs are initiated by existing organisations. But, unlike in Dar es Salaam, these are often members of the local authorities. There is no clear answer to the question what kind of people inside the communities initiate projects: on the one hand some experts stated that “intellectual people, who see the problem, look for people to work with them” (Mahubaka 25.02.2002). On the other hand a member of a grass root initiative argues that everybody, who is aware of the problem, is able to initiate a CBO regardless their school education (Abdullah 20.02. 2002)

Additional the interviews on Zanzibar show that GRIs have a core of people and that not everybody can be an equal member. “You have to make sure that you get people who are very active and voluntary. You also need to get people of whom you are sure that they can help to solve a problem” (Mahubaka 25.02.2002).

In Mkele Ward, were the CBO “Mkele Ward Development Committee” is especially engaged with solid waste collection, the CBO was initiated by the settlers themselves but with the help of local politicians. The core of members consists of the Sheha and the councillor and others from higher educational or occupational status like teachers and doctors (Khamis 20.02.2002).

Structure

Lückenkötter et al. differentiate between formal and informal organisation structures of grass root initiatives. There are only few grass root initiatives with an official status, but most of the evaluated initiatives have some kind of common law and clearly established roles e.g. concerning decision making. They are therefore called formal. The most common form is a committee which is elected by all members during general assemblies.

In formal organisations goal setting and strategic planning take place in two different stages, according to the decision making structure. First there are meetings of all interested participants in which general goals and strategies are discussed and committee members are elected. They are held about once every three years. Specific planning and implementation are delegated to the respective committee(s).

The ‘informal’ organisations as they are defined by the study have informal leadership which evolved during the planning and implementation phase.

The structure of the grass root initiatives depends on their tasks. Most service orientated organisations have a formal structure and long experience in continuous service delivery which makes them quite successful when it comes to planning, implementing and maintaining construction projects. With exception of two large organisations, all organisations, which only deal with the construction, have a small membership and informal leaders. In some cases this results in poor maintenance performance. It indicates that formal organisations are more likely to secure long term management of the newly created facilities.

51

The effectiveness of the different forms of organisations is hard to measure as it depends on the number of mobilised people, the amount of raised money, size and quality of the performed tasks etc. Most informal projects involve only a small number of people who know each other well and meet frequently. Large informal projects have difficulties in regarding the management of funds and maintenance. It seems as if more participants, more money and a longer time span make distinct competencies necessary, which indicates that formal decision making structures are in most cases the most effective form of organising community improvement activities.

To strengthen grass root initiatives, Lückenkötter el al. recommend to create community Development Committees in order to deal with the overall development of the settlement. A structure with two interlinked bodies is suggested, the advisory board (members are representatives which are appointed by existing institutions like churches) and the executive committee (members are local candidates which are elected by the residents of the settlement). Both bodies meet regularly in joint sessions. During the meetings all the members have equal right to speak, make a petition, etc. But only the members of the executive committee have voting power.

The examined organisations in Dar es Salaam have almost no linkages to higher level organisations or government agencies nor interactions (e.g. exchange of information) among organisations on the same hierarchical level. In the few cases where these linkages existed they were the basis for very effective co-operation because resources like finance and knowledge were bundled to reach a common goal.

The Community Development Committee of Hanna Nassif, Dar es Salaam has a very detailed organisational setup. The figure shows how the institutions and organisations that are involved in the process of settlement upgrading are related to each other.

Figure 18: Organisational set-up of Hanna Nassif

Source: ILO 1997: ch. 2.2., cited from SDP (1994), Community Infrastructure Programme for Dar es Salaam

Also all interviewed grass root initiatives on Zanzibar bear a strong hierarchy. There were some which also have a committee (e.g. Meli Nne described in chapter 6 pp. 76-77).

52

In contradiction to the findings from Lückenkötter et al. the GRIs on Zanzibar are often working in close relation to the local government. Sometimes the government provides technical knowledge or in some cases GRIs are initiated by or with the help of some members from local government such as the Sheha or the Ward.

Finance

Usually money is the most important resource, only some, mostly small scale informal organisations, rely on volunteer labour. Most of the times paid workers carry out the tasks, because it is too difficult to mobilise many people over a long period of time to work voluntarily and working only in the evenings takes too long. This results from the difficult economical situation of the residents, who need more time for income generating. Another reason can be the abandonment of the old political system which included certain norms regarding collective action (this is described specifically earlier in this chapter pp. 41-42).

Organisations which mobilise their resources only from inside the settlement are mostly small informal projects. External resources are typically mobilised by large projects with formal decision-making structures. This indicates that size and structure of an organisation seem to be related to its ability to mobilise external resources. Money was in many cases given by wealthy private individuals who live in other parts of the city (mostly to school or church projects). More common are donations of building materials, to ensure that the money is used for the intended purpose.

There are many different strategies to collect money. It is possible to have a collection system with fixed amounts of money which have to be paid by each participant. Another way is to collect user fees. These two strategies are chosen in cases of a clearly defined membership or in projects where people can be excluded from the benefits. Usually voluntary contribution is the main strategy in the majority of projects.

When trying to attract external donations it is important to identify possible donors first and then approach them individually. Some organisations use or create high publicity through special events (e.g. ceremonies, charity walks) to attract local and outside donors.

One factor is that donors want to be sure that their donation is used for the intended purpose only, which is why they often look for formal and transparent organisational structures and prior experience (Lückenkötter et al. 1994: 166). But there are also other successful strategies for this: Two projects just started the construction work and collected money from people on the street / visitors.

The analysed GRIs on Zanzibar raised money from the community in the beginning. In Mkele Ward the CBO is financing itself through contribution fee of US$ 1 monthly for every household (Kassim 20.02.2002). As the money is normally not enough, they either contact the government, which can support them with ideas but not financing (Omar 27.02.2002), or try to get external donations. The amount of external donations is very different and not every CBO manages to get some donations. The Hanna Nassif project, for example, depended very much on international finances, the first two years the volume was US$ 600,000, of which only 5% were provided by the City Commission and the Community. The rest was donated by international organisations. This exemplifies the problems related to the collection of great amounts of money from within the local community.

In the last years more CBOs have been founded on Zanzibar, because through a CBO the community can get money faster than from the government, related to the growing importance of international support of CBOs/NGOs. (Mahubaka 25.02.2002)

53

Excursus: Recommendations for financing community upgrading projects

This paragraph is based on information from the website “Waterpage”. It deals with all kinds of infrastructure projects concerning water. There is a section, called the African water page, which stresses the issue of financing water related infrastructure projects thoroughly.

In general there are four different sources to finance community upgrading projects: – Stretching and targeting government funds – Mobilising community resources – Applying at social investment funds (often international) – Co-operation with the private sector.

The local government in Tanzania has financial struggles, but still governmental organisations provide GRIs with money (TASAF scheme), connections to international donors (ZSP) or with technical assistance (ZMC).

It is important to use the raised funds effectively and ensure an efficient implementation of community projects. For this purpose staff overloads must be avoided. There have to be improvements in management systems and budget controls, including regular audits to enhance their efficiency and accountability.

Secondly the community is supposed to pay a contribution, participate at all stages of the project and make choices of affordable options in order to create identification and responsibility towards the project.

Communities should be fully responsible for operation and maintenance of their systems. That means they have to raise some money within the community or organise themselves in order to assure all the maintenance and operating.

Some financial principles, which are applicable to all actors, are absolutely necessary for implementation strategies, especially to define access criteria and rules for channelling of funds.

To receive support from social investment funds it is essential to build up a good co-operation with the sector agencies. They are especially interested in well established and transparent structures. In order to ensure a sustainable project it is important that the GRI builds up capacities for operation and maintenance.

Another important factor is the mobilisation of additional resources from the private sector. This can be done by selling the desired solutions at an affordable price to businesses. This will depend on or be facilitated by well established and transparent management systems, clear accountability of management and operators, secure tenure of assets and of access to resources, strong links to community resources and the creation of wealth and access to technical assistance.

It is also possible to create a small enterprise which organises, implements and maintains the upgrading project. The salaries of the employed people are paid from the raised money. (Karcher 1996: 235p)

Some more recommendations for financing strategies include: – partnerships between CBOs, community finance institutions, NGOs and municipal

agencies– incentives for savings by low-income groups – institutional and financing strategies to leverage public funds with community

resources and to facilitate co-ordination / linkages with trunks systems – widely-spread and systematic information and communication.

54

55

CHAPTER 6Case-Study Areas: Analysis

During the field work, the case study areas were analysed by conducting site visits, spatial analyses and interviews with Shehas, key-persons and residents. In this chapter the outcomes of the fieldwork in reference to the research question are described. Based on the requirements of the research, in the first subchapter the case study areas are chosen by following specific criteria. The second subchapter deals with the case study Magomeni which has been developed following a simple planning scheme. First the development of Magomeni and storm water related aspects, i.e. the causes of flooding inside the settlement and the impacts as well as the amount of rain that converges in certain areas, are analysed. Self-help related aspects, including the awareness of the residents towards the flooding problem and the important persons and organisations in the settlement, are described in the following chapter. In the last subchapter Meli Nne, an informal settlement outside the municipal boundary will be analysed following the same steps as in the analysis of Magomeni.

Selection of case-study areas As explained in Chapter 2 a case study approach is followed. To have a wide range of comparable findings and to be able to answer the research hypotheses, two different settlements are chosen. The selection is based on the following criteria the settlements have to fulfil: – The settlements have to be in different stages of development in order to draw

conclusions regarding the density of a settlement and prove the necessity of acting in an early stage of settlement development according to the hypotheses. One settlement has to be developed whereas the second one is supposed to be still in building process.

– To understand the chronological development of Zanzibar Town, the settlements have to be located along a development axis, i.e. one of the main roads leading out of Zanzibar Town into the hinterland.

– The settlements have to be characterised by informal structures or by informal infill housing development. Governmental planning instruments like layout plans should not have been implemented, because the aim is to find out how settlers are able to organise themselves to substitute governmental responsibilities.

– Lack of infrastructure, especially storm water management (SWM) with flooding as a result, has to be one of the main problems in the settlements.

– A self provided football ground has to be in the settlements. According to these criteria Magomeni and Meli Nne were chosen. Both settlements are located along Makunduchi Road which leads to the south of the island. The road is a development axis representing the urban development of Zanzibar Town. They are both characterised by informal structures and the problem of organising infrastructure is a major one.

56

MagomeniMagomeni is located about 4.8 km (3 miles) away from Stone Town, south of Makunduchi Road. The development of the settlement started in 1980. Magomeni has semi-planned and informal sections. Makunduchi Road forms the northern boundary of the Shehia. Magomeni is surrounded by the Shehias of Kidongo Chekundu, Urusi and Nyere in the north, Amani in the east, Mikunguni in the south-west and Mpendae in the west. It is an own Shehia, consisting of the neighbourhoods of Meya and Magomeni.

Figure 19: Location of the case study areas

Source: Government of the United Kingdom

Today approximately 10,200 people live in an area of about 0.6 sq. km. Over 50 percent of the inhabitants of the neighbourhood Magomeni are younger than seventeen years. The neighbourhood consists of roughly 1,500 houses with an average household size between six and eight people. Most of the inhabitants are originally from the rural south of Zanzibar, mainly Makunduchi. Different income groups live in the settlement, but according to the Sheha, most of the residents are low income earners and are engaged in small businesses with incomes between US$ 1 or 2 a day (Hassan 18.02.2002). Only in the southern part an area with higher income households can be found. This is due to the fact that in the Chinese Masterplan this area was designated for large houses with big plots.

As Zanzibar Town is still expanding into the hinterland, plot prices in Magomeni, which is located relatively close to the centre in comparison to the new settlements, are increasing. According to the evaluation of the resident interviews, the actual value for building plots differs between US$ 2,000 and US$ 10,000. Plots adjacent to Makunduchi Road are the most valuable ones. In comparison to today, settlers state that

Magomeni

Meli Nne

57

they bought the same plots for about US$ 3 to 6 twenty years ago. Without taking the inflation rate into account this underlines a price explosion. (Residents 1-7 Magomeni 2002)

As visible on the general map (p. 59), the research area is situated in the north-eastern part of the neighbourhood Magomeni, including the football ground and the flooded area next to it, and has a size of 0,015 sq. km. It is a curiosity that the football ground, which is located in the centre of the settlement, is a dry place and therefore a perfect building plot, while next to it people settle in an area that is flooded regularly.

Development of the settlement

In 1980 the settlement of Magomeni started to develop in an area that used to be a plantation with mango and coconut trees. The settlement was developed under the guidance of the ruling party, influential persons and with the advice of planners. They did not consider the legal framework and its contradictions but followed an idea on how to develop a well-working settlement with simple planning schemes. Only the former plantation’s boundary was surveyed while the inner plots were marked by tapes to measure their size (Scholz 2002: 5). Houses had to be built in a row structure with clear building lines parallel to Makunduchi Road. The people were supposed to leave 10 feet of space between the backyard houses, which were built first, and neighbouring houses and 25 feet between the front sides of the houses for roads.

This strategy worked only partly, because of increasing demand for plots after the first houses had been built. The area became denser when people built houses between the existing rows. This might be due to the fact that a road of about 8 m is too large and not meeting the demand of traffic inside a settlement.

Up to now 50 percent of the surface is built on. Currently, only few building activities are taking place. Within the research area the houses are build in rows parallel to Makunduchi Road and around the football ground, which is located in the centre of the research area. Towards the eastern part, the settlement structure gets irregular, because of the topography. There is a gentle slope towards a basin-shaped depression, at its lowest point there are only two houses up to now. The area of the depression, which is situated east of the football ground, was not considered to be built on in the old planning scheme but left free because of the flooding that occurs twice a year.

Housing situation

Most of the houses are built in Swahili type and are private property. They consist of a front house, a back house and a court yard in between. But only about 75 percent of the houses in the settlement are completed. In Magomeni there are three different types of houses: 18-20m x 9-10m, 14-15m x 9-10m and 8-10m x 9-10m. Depending on financial possibilities of the dwellers the houses are built with different materials like stone, clay, maskuti roofs and corrugated iron sheets. The foundations regulate the different levels

Figure 20: Planning scheme of Magomeni

Source: Own construct

58

of topography and are usually made out of coral stones. Especially in flood prone areas, the houses are built with high foundations made of coral stones and strengthened with concrete. (Site visit Magomeni 12.02.2002)

Social infrastructure, use of land and open spaces

Most of the settlement is residential area, except the zone along Makunduchi Road which is commercial. On both sides of the road, dense rows of shops form a concentration of small scale enterprises for daily needs, which also has importance for the surrounding settlements. A few small grocery shops and tailor shops are also spread within the residential area. Furthermore there are four nursery schools, one private primary school, 25 Madras and two mosques in the Shehia of Magomeni. According to the Sheha, every child attends the primary school, but only a few students attend secondary school. Medical treatment is supplied by small dispensary units and a mental hospital. (Site visit Magomeni 12.02.2002 and Hassan 18.02.2002)

Urban agriculture activities take place in a few gardens near the houses and on larger open spaces within the settlement. The inhabitants cultivate fruits and vegetables for their everyday needs (sugar cane, cassava, yams, etc.) and also have livestock like chicken and cows.

Meeting points like maskanis can be found everywhere in the research area. The biggest coherent open space is the football ground (56m x 94m) in the centre of the research area. This ground is used for football and a lot of other activities like celebrations, dances or weddings (see Chapter 5, p. 48). A lot of open spaces or plots, where nothing has been build on yet, are misused as dump sites. Another big vacant area is the swamp area in the south-west with a size of 0.1 sq. km (Site visit Magomeni 12.02.2002).

Streets and access

There are no paved streets except Makunduchi Road which is a busy through fare north of the settlement. Only very few roads in Magomeni can be accessed by car. Most of the paths are blocked by infill houses, vegetation and erosion protection, except those areas where the former row structure of houses exists as shown on the general map of Magomeni. Thus, access for trucks, which are needed to dispose solid and liquid waste, is impossible in almost all parts of the settlement. In the northern part of the research area, where the row structure is still visible, streets are passable by small cars. The access diminishes in the flooding areas, where irregular housing structures and flooding protection measures block the streets.

Solid and liquid waste

The whole settlement is polluted by waste. Mainly substances which can not be decomposed, like plastic, glass or metal, are lying on the paths between the houses. Organic waste rots or serves to feed livestock. There is no public disposal collection in Magomeni. The people’s way to deal with disposal is burning the waste at fire places between the houses or collecting the waste on little dump sites. In the flooded area there is much more waste lying around, which has been washed away from the upper areas. It accumulates in the flooded areas, especially in the basin shaped area. No sewage system exists in the settlement. Grey water is often directly lead onto the streets by little pipes . Black water is collected in pit latrines or septic tanks. During the rainy season, when the storm water is mixed up with sewage and other liquid waste out of overflowing pit-

Legend

Magomeni neighbourhood (Research area)

Settled area

Flood prone area

Streets and paths

Big trees (e.g. Mangotrees)

Palm trees

Footballground

Disposal site

Maskanis

Frame for Detailed Map

N

General MapMagomeni (Map 1)

Informal SettlementsDevelopment on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of DortmundFaculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 2500 (original)

100m75m50m25m0m 125m

60

61

latrines, serious problems can occur, leading to water born diseases especially in areas with stagnant water.

Water supply and electricity

Large parts of the settlement are provided with electricity. The supply with water is handled through public water taps, but is not sufficient. Some parts of the settlement have no access to water at all and the inhabitants have to walk long distances. One resident states: “We have to walk a long way to get water and then we miss work. There was a governmental initiative, which built water pipes nearby, but no water came out. A big local water tank should be established.” (Resident Magomeni 7 2002)

Analysis of storm water related aspects

The detailed map shows the research area of the neighbourhood Magomeni, which is also marked on the general map of Magomeni.

Large parts of the settlement are in a depression and are subject to flooding in the rainy seasons. According to the Sheha, about 30-40 households in the depression east of the football ground are directly affected. In other parts of the Shehia, another 70 households are affected (Hassan 18.02.2002). To get an impression of the extent of the flooding problem see figure 21 above.

Extension and impacts of the flooding problem

Magomeni is in an advanced stadium of development and building density (sealed area, i.e. houses) has already reached 50 percent due to infill housing. This has lead to blockage of natural waterways and resulted in an increase of the flooding problem during the past years. The increase will probably go on in the future, if no measures are taken. A man reported that there was almost no flooding when he moved to Magomeni in 1982, but due to the building activities in the neighbourhood it became a problem (Resident Magomeni 1 2002).

The impacts of flooding, which occur in about 6 percent of the settlement (ZSP 2000g: 8) are severe: “Things get wet and rotten every time, so I loose most things. The water level is up to 1.20 m and we have to move out every rainy season.”, a 42 year old woman complains (Resident Magomeni 4 2002). Sometimes residents have to leave their houses for over three weeks. Additionally the houses are

Figure 21: Flooding problem in Magomeni

Figure 22: Erosion on path

Source: Own photography

Source: Own photography

62

sinking into the ground and the walls are cracking (Resident Magomeni 4 2002). Affected households try to protect themselves from flooding and erosion by different

measures. Erosion is a problem not only in the flooded area, but nearly in the whole settlement, where the water runs through with high velocity and especially in the areas with big slopes. It intensifies because the sandy soil is mostly not covered with vegetation. To protect themselves, residents build up walls with a height of 0.4-1.0 metres around the doors and strengthen foundations, which are built up higher in the flooding areas with coral stones and concrete. Some residents use sandbags to prevent erosion. They also dig ditches to control the water flow and divert the water from the house. Additionally they cultivate Pemba grass and little bushes.

Another problem mentioned by several residents is that people dump their garbage into the storm water stream. Besides blocked ditches this also affects residents, who are not affected by stagnant flooding: “The storm water passes next to my house and the garbage is accumulating on my plot”, a woman stated (Residents Magomeni 5 2002). In the end the garbage converges in the depression area and together with the stagnant water and overflowing pit latrines it causes severe health problems.

Rain water catchment areas

The rain water converging in the basin-shaped area (located in area IV of Figure 23) and leading to the high water level comes from different areas depending on the topography. This area is affected by water coming from north of Makunduchi Road (settlement of Sogea, area II), which is lead through a pipe under the road and directly into the flooding area. The big slope leading down to the depression creates a storm water flow with high speed, which results in

erosion problems because there is no controlled diversion and the water just runs along the paths. Additionally the basin-shaped depression is affected by storm water coming from area I in the western part and area III in the east. The maximum amount of rain water, which needs to be treated, sum up to 367.28 litres per second.

Area II 56,250 m²

93.44 l/sec.

Area I 55,200 m²

91.70 l/sec.

Area III 61,450 m²

102.08 l/sec.

Area IV 48,200 m²

80.07 l/sec.

Figure 23: Rain water catchment areas for Magomeni

Source: Own construct

House built after 1982

House built before 1982

House under cnstruction

House built of mud and pole

Ruin

Shops

Garden

Agricultural areas on open space

Vegetation for protection against erosion

UC

M + P

RUIN

S S S

Flooded area during rainy season

Big tree (e.g. Mangotree)

Palm tree

Paved street

Drain

Flow direction

CCM Building

Maskani

Waste-/Disposal site

Legend

N

Detailed MapMagomeni (Map 2)

Informal SettlementsDevelopment on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of DortmundFaculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 1000 (original)

0m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

64

65

Potentials for and constraints on a storm water management system

In Magomeni there are some potentials concerning storm water related aspects. One potential is the semi-planned development of the settlement. The straight rows of houses (at least at the north west of the research area) allow an easy water run off and simplify the construction of drains in that part of the settlement. Another potential is the big open space in the south-west of the settlement which can be used as a seepage area. But today it is used for agriculture and as a football ground. The neighbouring Shehias Jang’ombe and Urusi can also be potentials because of their existing drainage systems and the possibility of a connection.

One constraint is the growing density of the settlement. If infill housing goes on, soon there will be no straight access rows any longer and implementation of drainage becomes more difficult. Especially the area of the depression has not been built according to a planning scheme. The plots in the depression have already been sold, and problems with the owners can emerge when trying to keep it free as a seepage area.

Analysis of self-help related aspects

As revealed in the previous chapter, flooding is a main issue to be solved in the neighbourhood of Magomeni, but up to now there have been no efforts. In the following the pre-conditions in Magomeni to implement a SWM system in a locally based approach are examined.

Awareness and sense of responsibility

The interviewed inhabitants of Magomeni name the problems they have and that were observed during the site visits, the reasons for these problems and some even mention solutions. One example is the problem of flooding that even the people that are not affected are aware of. The identified reason is blockage of the natural waterways because of the high building activity (Residents Magomeni 1/3/6 2002). The solutions range from small scale activities like digging a ditch or building a wall around the main entrance to the idea of a drainage system for storm water (Resident Magomeni 2/3/4/7 2002). As revealed in chapter 5, the identification of a problem is the first step towards its solution.

One constraint may be that some of the people living in the upper areas do not feel responsible for their flooded neighbours; they sometimes even aggravate the problem by throwing waste into the flooded areas (Resident Magomeni 2 2002).

The second important aspect is the sense of responsibility that an individual develops for the community and for solving problems. The affected residents expect the government to act, “but we can not wait for the government forever” (Resident Magomeni 1 2002). Another resident states: “The government should support us, but due to the fact that the government is inactive, residents take responsibility without help from outside.” (Resident Magomeni 3 2002). This proves that on the one hand residents are not willing to contribute but they also see that nothing will happen if they wait for the government. So it might be possible to raise their willingness.

Social relations in the settlement

The degree of identification with the settlement and strong, good working neighbourhood relations may promote co-operation. There are very good conditions in the settlement, which contribute to these factors. Firstly most of the inhabitants are originally from the rural south of Zanzibar and secondly most of the inhabitants of

66

Magomeni have been living there for about 20 years. Most of the interviewed people are pleased to live in Magomeni except one woman living near the depression area who answered the question whether she is happy to live in Magomeni following: “I do not like it due to flooding, I only stay because there is no other place affordable for me.” (Resident Magomeni 4 2002). People did not name any social problems, but only infrastructure ones. Some of them talked about the good neighbourhood relations (Residents Magomeni 3/5/6 2002). The people obviously help each other, even when they are not directly affected by the occurring problem. The people that are not affected by the floods help by moving property or providing shelter (Residents Magomeni 5/6 2002). Also they organise social events together like weddings and funerals. This sense of responsibility can also be observed among the members of the football club that help each other when one has a problem (Resident Magomeni 4 2002).

The Sheha seems to have a good overview of the occurrences in the settlement, but he does not feel responsible for the initiation of self-help organisations to solve infrastructure problems in the settlement. He sees himself as the link between the government and the people. His job is to bring down the government’s instructions from the District Commissioner on the community level. Besides that, he is the head of a “Sheha Committee”, which meets twice a month to discuss important matters and then announces decisions once a month in public to a residents’ assembly. But mainly he settles social conflicts. The residents come to him and ask for help when they have family problems. (Hassan 18.02.2002) He seems to be an important figure in the social life of the settlement.

Portrait of the self-help organisation in Magomeni-Meya

In 2001 residents in the neighbourhood of Meya have formed a self-help organisation to solve common problems starting with the flooding problem. The following description is based on one resident interview (Resident Magomeni 1 2002) and the interview with the initiator Mr Haji Miraji Abdullah (Abdullah 20.02.2002), who is affected by flooding himself and had already tried to initiate an activity three years prior.

The aim of this self-help organisation is to build a drainage system, which is supposed to join the main server line at Jangombe/ Urusi. It will be constructed on open spaces and road sites. Demolition of some houses will be necessary, if the plan is put into action.

There are 219 households and about 1600 people involved. Mr Abdullah explains the motivation of people: “The motivation of the people is the willingness to solve the problem together and they hope to get help from the government or other sources. They do not get any support from the inhabitants of non-affected parts of Magomeni.” (Abdullah 20.02.2002). Another important issue is the necessity of an initiator. According to Mr Abdullah, everyone with primary school education could be one, only he has to be aware of the problems. There are also residents that are not aware of the problems and do expect the government to act.

Within the self-help organisation there is a strong hierarchy, which consists of one chairman, one secretary and one treasurer. At the moment two Members of Parliament support them morally and help to raise money. An expert for drainage system from the ZMC has helped to make estimations. The council has also promised to bring an excavator when the project is carried out.

To finance their activities and aims they are targeting the TASAF scheme and collect contribution from members. They collect US$ 18 from each household to reach the total amount of about US$ 4,000. This amount of money equals 20 percent of the total cost of US$ 20,000 for the basic project and an option for a wider area. The US$ 18 can be

67

paid in three instalments over the period of one year. According to the resident, “people are willing to contribute because the damage caused by flooding would be more expensive” (Resident Magomeni 1 2002).

The example of the self-help initiative in Meya proves the willingness of the settlers to contribute. It can be regarded as one potential for implementing and organising a SWM system in other parts of the Shehia. The initiative can for example be expanded or at least the structure can be copied.

Potentials and constraints

Magomeni has a good basis for self-help initiatives, because the people are aware of the reasons for the problems, have a communal sense and the Sheha is involved within the people’s matters. This has lead to some activities in the past like the restoring of streets or bigger ones like the self-help organisation in Magomeni–Meya, which shows that some people try to find their own solutions. On the other hand nearly all of the interviewees state that the government is responsible for solving their flooding problem and non-flooded residents are not willing to contribute.

Meli Nne The second research area Meli Nne is located, as its Swahili name already reveals, four miles (6.4 km) away from Stone Town outside the municipal boundaries but inside the area of the Chinese Master Plan. The development of the informal settlement Meli Nne started in 1994 as an outcome of the ongoing rapid urban growth when the first TAP-Owners subdivided their plots. The building process is still in progress as Meli Nne is located at the current urban fringe. It is part of the Shehia Mwanakwerekwe, which is a very large one. Meli Nne itself is surrounded by a swamp area in the south-west, a plantation in the south and a power line in the east. Makunduchi Road is the northern border of the neighbourhood. The Shehia of Fuoni sets the border in the east.

Nowadays 14,000 inhabitants live in the Shehia Mwanakwerekwe with a household size between 5 and 7 people. The number of residents living in the Meli Nne area is hard to estimate. The income groups are varying in the settlement: the majority of the people has a small to middle income with a monthly amount between US$ 40 and 200. About 60 percent of the people are from Zanzibar (mainly south region), 30 percent from Pemba and about 10 percent from the mainland Tanzania. (Mpoto 20.02.2002)

The price for a plot with a house is up to US$ 10,000. Most expensive are plots close to the street and other infrastructure facilities. About 20 percent of the rooms are rented for an average rent of US$ 3-6 a month. (key-person Meli Nne 2001)

As shown on the general map (Map 3) the research area is situated in the south of Makunduchi Road and has a size of 0,665 sq. km.

Development of the settlement

The development of Meli Nne started in 1990 by sub-dividing the Three Acre Plots into smaller ones and selling them to developers. Before the area has been a coconut and mango plantation. Meli Nne was developed without the help of planners and therefore is an informal settlement. Since the TAP-Owners subdivided the Three Acre Plots on their own, no general settlement structure is visible. The site visits (Site visit Meli Nne 13.02.2002 and spatial analysis) revealed, that most of the TAPs were subdivided structuring the plots, which are almost the same size, in regular rows. Because there was

68

no negotiation between the TAP-Owners, former plot boundaries are still visible, where the orientation of the rows changes (see also Map 4: Detailed map of Meli Nne). One resident explained the process of “planning without planners”: “The owner of the TAPs sold the plots to people and made some kind of layout plan that the individuals had to follow. This includes leaving space for streets and people follow it because they know the importance of accessibility, e.g. for ambulances.” (Residents Meli Nne 1 2002). Interviews with two TAP-Owners in Meli Nne prove this statement: “I had some ideas on planning a structured settlement especially to secure access, open spaces and spaces for mosques and madras. I even feel responsible today and try to ensure that no one extends beyond the plots.” (TAP-Owner 1 2002). The other TAP-Owner explained that he acquired the idea from past experiences in the old Ng’ambo area and transferred this knowledge to the settlers through parts of the contract (TAP-Owner 2 2002). This informal approach is very positive, although in some parts problems with infill housing are beginning to develop, e.g. the main old path is getting narrower in some parts and two cars can not pass each other anymore.

The whole settlement has a low housing density of 34 percent, which diminishes in the south with growing distance from Makunduchi Road. Since the settlement is in an early state of development, building activities are still in progress and a higher density can be expected in the future.

Within the research area a homogeneous settlement structure does not exist. The existing rows of houses are orientated along an irregular old path, but the houses themselves are parallel to each other according to the subdivision of TAPs mentioned above. Especially in the northern part of the settlement a clear structure is visible, because building activities are almost finished in contrast to the southern part, where building is still in progress and on many plots only foundations have been built up to now.

Housing situation

The majority of houses are Swahili style houses. Depending on financial possibilities, the houses are built with mixed materials like stone, clay, maskuti roofs and corrugated iron sheets. Sometimes people build huts made of mud and pole with maskuti roofs first and later, when they have the financial potential, stone houses with corrugated iron sheets are being built around the old hut. The houses are built with a distance of 10-15 feet. Some houses are built with fences, walls with spikes, hedges, especially south of the second bridge and at the east of the old river. This indicates that some inhabitants are wealthier than others.

Social infrastructure, use of land and open spaces

Most of the settlement is residential area. Along Makunduchi Road there are small shops and dispensaries and one brick factory. Few shops for daily needs are situated along the old path which serves as main access road for the southern parts of the settlement (see Map 3:General Map). In Meli Nne there are one primary school, one secondary school, eight mosques and eight dispensaries.

Enough land for agricultural uses is available at the fringe of the settlement, but inside the build up area it is restricted to a few open spaces and little gardens in front of the houses. The two swamp areas are mainly used for rice cultivation. Main agricultural products are sugar cane, cassava, yams and livestock for daily needs. Also some coconut and mango trees are left.

A big open space is situated under the power line, which forms the eastern border of Meli Nne. Due to security measures the space underneath the power line has to be kept

Legend

Meli Nne neighbourhood (Research area)

Settled area (Structure known)

Settled area (Structure unknown)

Swamp area partly used for agriculture

Streets and paths

Big trees (e.g. Mangotrees)

Palm trees

Footballground

Maskanis

Powerline

Tendency of building activityinto swamp area

Cemetary

Frame for Detailed Map

N

General MapMeli Nne (Map 3)

Informal SettlementsDevelopment on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of DortmundFaculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 5000 (original)

200m150m100m50m0m 250m

70

71

free from building activities. Therefore it is used for agriculture except one part which is used as football ground.

Meeting points are widely spread over the area in maskanis or under big mango trees. The Sheha told that people are meeting for football games, meetings with the Sheha, political parties, games and local dances (Mpoto 20.02.2002).

Meli Nne is also facing the problem of solid waste disposal on open spaces, which pollutes the ground and fills up houses still under construction.

Streets and Access

There are only few streets passable by car within the settlement. The main access is the old path, an axis which leads from north to south (see general and detailed map). Unfortunately this road is subject to erosion especially during rainy season since it is falling gently away. To cross the riverbed, which connects the two swamp areas, a bridge has been built by the Development Committee, which will be described later in this chapter. The passable streets have a width of up to four metres. Houses in the second rows can not be reached by car, because paths are too narrow due to vegetation, barazas and water tanks. This leads to several problems like the emptying of pit latrines.

Solid and liquid waste disposal Meli Nne is facing serious problems concerning solid and liquid waste. According to

the Sheha there is no waste collection system in the whole settlement (Mpoto 7.10.2001). Especially TAPs, which are not sold yet, and foundations of houses are subjects to disposal. Black water is treated in pit latrines and grey water is lead onto the streets. People in Meli Nne face a problem with access roads for the lorry to empty the pit latrines.

Water supply and electricity

The existing power lines make connections to electricity possible for everyone. But low voltage electricity is a problem and the Development Committee is collecting money for a new transformer right now (Residents Meli Nne 1 2002).

Water is provided by public water tabs and some houses are connected to a water pipe. One resident says that the existing pipe was too small and so they needed a bigger one. Neighbours contributed US$ 5 to pay for the bigger pipe. The project has been organised by the Development Committee. (Resident Meli Nne 4 2002)

Analysis of storm water related aspects

The detailed map shows the research area of Meli Nne, which is located in the east of Meli Nne along the old path.

Figure 24: A maskani in Meli Nne

Source: Own photography

72

Extension and impacts of the flooding problem

As the settlement is fairly young, flooding of whole areas is not an urgent problem in Meli Nne up to now. But it has to be assumed that the ongoing building activity and increasing density (by now it is 34 percent housing density) and thus blocked natural water ways will lead to the same extension of flooding as in older settlements like Magomeni.

Today erosion is the only consequence that is visible. There are erosion paths on roads and damages on houses because of the undermining of foundations.

The settlement of Meli Nne is surrounded by swamp areas in the south-west and in the south-east on which agricultural activities take place. One surprising fact is that currently there are building activities in the swamp areas in the south west, although it is heavily affected by rainwater. In the east there is a big open space between the settlement and the next settlement of Meli Tano, because of a power line under which no building activity is allowed.

Another element of a natural storm water discharge is an old river bed which functions as a natural drain connecting the eastern swamp area with the one in the

south-west. One of the residents living next to the riverbed underlines: “It is of major importance to provide a proper drainage instead of the already encroached river. It should be done by government efforts and the involvement of residents.” (Resident Meli Nne 12 2002). Up to now only a few houses along the river are subjects to flooding. One man describes the impacts: “The flooded area is located around my house, close to the river. Water level is up to one foot above the floor and is stagnant for less than

one month. It is blocking access and there are no possibilities for children to play. People are used to move out during rainy season.” (Resident Meli Nne 1 2002).

North-east of the lake there is a drop which has a height of 2-4 metres. During the rainy season water runs down like waterfalls and floods the houses beneath the drop. The occurring erosion at this drop endangers also the houses above.

West of the drop, in the middle of the settlement a lake can be found, where the water converges. On the one hand this lake could overflow during high precipitations and affect houses but on the other hand the stagnant water could lead to waterborne diseases.

Within the research area the old path is the main natural water way leading rain water into the old river bed, which is situated in the centre of the examined area. At some parts there is a slope along the path.

The only visible flooding impact up to now is erosion. Especially on the main path erosion is visible and is a major problem for accessibility by car. The second area where problems occur is north-west of the research area where the drop begins. Two houses are build right beneath the drop and have been built with high foundations to avoid

Figure 25: Meli Nne flood protection foundation

Source: Own photography

N

Detailed MapMeli Nne (Map 4)

Informal Settlements Development on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of Dortmund - Faculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 1000 (print reduced by 71 %) (original)

gjk

Legend

Big tree (e.g. Mangotree)

Palm tree

Paved street

Passable path

Flow direction

Maskani

Waste-/Disposal site

House built after 1982

House under construction

House built of mud and pole

Ruin

Shops

Garden

Agricultural areas on open space

UC

M + P

RUIN

S S S

Natural stream

Bridge

Lake

Wetland/Swamp

0m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

74

75

erosion. This was the only place in the settlement where residents have tried to protect themselves or their houses. Most of the residents also stated that they do not have a flooding problem.

Rain water catchment areas

As well as in Magomeni, the research area in Meli Nne has been examined in order to identify the different rain water catchment areas (see figure 26). In each area the precipitation (in litre per second) is calculated in order to know how much rain water the technical concept will have to deal with. The riverbed is located at the lowest point, collecting the rain water from the south and in large parts from the north. A water divert is located at the northern end of the drop where the water either goes down the main path or down the drop and into the lake. The maximum amount of water which needs to be treated in the concept during rainy season comes to 303.55 litre per second.

Potentials and constraints for a storm water management system

One potential is the awareness of the TAP-Owner, who started subdividing their plots following a row pattern. Implementation of a drainage concept then becomes easier, because the drains are able to follow straight paths.

The natural preconditions like the two swamp areas, the riverbed and the lake mentioned above are also a big potential for SWM systems. The water discharged from the built up areas can be diverted to these areas and seep away without affecting any residents. This requires a building stop in these areas.

One constraint for a SWM system is that up to now no flooding problem is clearly visible, apart from erosion, and settlers do not see the need of implementing it now (see next subchapter). If the building process continues into the swamp areas and around the lake, it will be too late to implement a SWM system as successfully as it is still possible today.

Analysis of self-help related aspects

As revealed in the previous chapter, the flooding problem in Meli Nne is partly visible but not tackled up to now. The reasons for this and the potentials of the settlement will be revealed in the following.

Area VII55,000 m²

91.67 l/sec.

Area I 50,625 m²

84.38 l/sec.

Area VI 22,500 m²

37.50 l/sec.

Area V 25,000 m²

41.67 l/sec.

Area III 12,500 m²

20.83 l/sec.Area II 12,500 m²

20.83 l/sec.Area IV 4,000 m²

6.67 l/sec.

Figure 26: Rain water catchment areas for Meli Nne

Source: Own photography

76

Awareness and sense of responsibility

The awareness of the residents of Meli Nne concerning problems differs. Some identify problems within the settlement and participate in a self–help organisation to do something against it (Residents Meli Nne 1/2/6). In the case of flooding some of the interviewed people claim to have no problems with storm water even when according to observations during the interviews damages of erosion and security measures are visible on the house (Residents Meli Nne 3-6). One woman lives right next to the river which overflows every season but states that she has no problems with flooding (Residents Meli Nne 6 2002). The Sheha explained (Mpoto 20.02.2002): “They must be aware of twice a year flooding, because before they started to construct houses, I told them of flooding and advised not to settle there, but in vain. The people insisted to stay, because this place is close to town.” According to him, mainly the poor residents settle in flooded areas. The residents that have been aware of the flooding problem are partly feeling responsible and partly expecting the government to act.

Social relations in the settlement

Meli Nne is a fairly young settlement and people have not been living together for a long time. But the interviewed residents are pleased to live in the settlement and name the good relationship with the neighbours as a good aspect of the settlement (Residents Meli Nne 2/5/6 2002). Even the relationships between members of the two opposing political parties CCM and CUF were described as “very good” (Residents Meli Nne 2/3/4/6 2002). A lot of settlers originate from Makunduchi, a region in the south of Unguja. One interviewed person says that these people from the south form their own groups which he does not belong to (e.g. football club) (Resident Meli Nne 1 2002).

Unlike in Magomeni there are some residents which clearly state that the residents are responsible for solving the flooding problem (Residents Meli Nne 1/6 2002).

The Sheha is responsible for a much larger area than only Meli Nne and he does not even live in Meli Nne. His knowledge of Meli Nne is therefore limited and he does not seem to be in close touch with the residents. (Mpoto 20.02.2002)

There is one man who lives in Meli Nne and claims to be the assistant Sheha, but he is even less informed than the official Sheha. In the interviews he was not able to give the information that usually belongs to the duties of a Sheha, e.g. the number of inhabitants and households. Also he knows about the existing self-help organisation described below, he is no member (Jaha 27.02.2002).

Portrait of the self-help organisation Meli Nne Development Committee

About 10 years ago residents formed a self-help organisation in the neighborhood Meli Nne-Uzi. The following description is based on the interview with Dr. Abdul Ali Suleiman, who has been the current chairman of the initiative for two years (Suleiman 27.02.2002).

In the past the Development Committee organised the construction of a bridge at the old riverbed and water supply. Currently the aim is to provide electricity for the residents. The next project will be a nursery school.

Today the Committee has 20 members from which five are active and additionally for each project a number of resident households participate. The members are from both parties, CCM and CUF, and are working together very well. The identifying of issues to tackle goes along as Dr. Abdul Ali Suleiman explains: “The committee usually meets twice a month to discuss projects. The problems are also brought to a big meeting with all neighbours from the area. The committee initiates these meetings and tries to

77

raise awareness and then works according to the people’s decision.” (Suleiman 27.02.2002).

The structure of the self-help organisation consists of a chairman, a secretary and a treasurer. The chairman organises the committee that meets twice a month and more often if necessary. The tasks are to apply for support by the local and regional government to get financial and professional support. They have a good relation to the Sheha, to whom they present their ideas. The Sheha’s Committee initiated the establishment of the self-help organisation (Mpoto 20.02.2002).

The organisation collects money from the residents, which is used for one specific project, like the building of the bridge. Leftover money is used for the next project. There is no monthly fee, the people have to pay. Every active member has a certain number of households he is responsible to collect money from. In the case of the water supply project, the number of participating households was 229. The contributions of the participants to the different projects have ranged from US$ 0.5 for the bridge to US$ 10 for electricity supply. There are also people from outside the settlement who donate money, sometimes because they benefit (bridge) and sometimes without apparent reasons.

The example of the Development Committee shows that a small organisation with a charismatic core is able to do a lot for the settlement. Also residents seem to be willing to contribute to projects when they are affected. To implement a SWM system the popularity of the Committee has to be used to raise the awareness among residents.

Potentials and constraints

In Meli Nne the pre-conditions for locally based approaches are only partly existing. Smaller projects like the restoration of a street (Resident Meli Nne 3 2002) or the successful self-help organisation of the “Development Committee” and good neighbourhood relationships represent potentials. On the other hand the settlers lack awareness because the flooding problems are hardly visible up to now. This awareness has to be created in order to tackle problems before they get worse.

78

79

CHAPTER 7Case-Study Areas: Concept

The concepts for a storm water management (SWM) and their implementation in Magomeni and Meli Nne are explained in this chapter. The main aims of the technical concepts as well as the conditions for building materials are described in the first subchapter for Magomeni and in the third (p. 93 ff.) for Meli Nne. In these subchapters the technical concepts for both settlements will be presented and described in detail with the help of maps and sketches. The conclusion evaluates each concept and first estimations concerning financing are given. The implementation strategies for the technical concepts are explained in the second subchapter (p. 85 ff.) for Magomeni and in the fourth subchapter (p. 99 ff.) for Meli Nne. These subchapters describe how CBOs emerge in each settlement and how the CBOs can finance, construct and maintain the technical concept. A conclusion evaluates each implementation concept and shows crucial points.

Technical concept Magomeni The interaction of natural and man-made factors causes problems of flooding and erosion in the settlement (see chapter 6, p. 61 ff.). The installation of a drainage system will solve the occurring problems or at least minimise them.

There are three methods to deal with storm water, namely discharging, seepage and harvesting (see chapter 4). These three possible methods have been checked concerning five aspects which are high effectiveness, low costs, uncomplicated maintenance, avoidance of stagnant water and availability of materials. The consideration of these criteria has led to the following proposal.

The technical concept for Magomeni mainly focuses on discharging, because the use of drains will be the most effective method to manage storm water in the tropics, where high precipitation occurs selectively. A big amount of water can be discharged with comparatively small efforts. The building materials for these drains have to be long lasting and easy to procure. Therefore concrete as main building material was chosen.

Discharging the water with the method of seepage faces one main problem in the tropics. The high amount of rain water accumulating each day during the rainy season leads to fast saturation of the soil and therefore to stagnant water for weeks, which can cause waterborne diseases like malaria and cholera. Even advanced seepage systems (trenching and pipe infiltration) are not taken into consideration, because the disadvantages are predominant. Especially the high costs and maintenance are decisive.

Harvesting is supposed to be introduced as a method in every household. Due to the high amount of water during the rainy season harvesting in the tropics is not that relevant concerning SWM, but increases the water supply opportunities of the settlers.

More successful is certainly the collection of rainwater in big water tanks which are able to slow down the flooding process, but for most of the settlers costs are a great burden.

80

Measures

Basis for the calculation of the technical design for the concept is the book “Neue Wege für das Regenwasser” (Geiger et al. 2001). Because of lacking data concerning the conditions in Zanzibar Town, some figures are based on estimations. A sealing degree of 49.5 percent has been assumed for the calculation. The detailed calculation tables can be found in the appendix (Appendix 6). The main aim of the concept (see Map 5) for Magomeni is to keep away most of the water that is coming from the outside of the basin shaped flood area. In order to reach this aim especially the water from the area north of Makunduchi Road is led around the basin. The concept consists of three main drains which are built along the contour lines and discharge water from three storm water catchment areas I-III (see chapter 6, p. 62) The water is diverted with the use of drains directly into the Jang’ombe Urusi system (see chapter 4 p. 35 ff.). Intakes, which are little drains within the settlement, should lead the water controlled into the main drains and into the basin-shaped depression. Another detail of the system are retention basins along the main drains which will be described in the following text. The measures for the basin-shaped depression are described as well. Seepage as a method is used in that specific area, because other possible solutions like pumps are too expensive and too difficult to maintain. Furthermore people will try to harvest water on their own if possible with closed water tanks in order to slow down the flooding process.

Drain along Makunduchi Road (1)12

Currently the rain water north of Makunduchi Road is discharged through a pipe underneath Makunduchi Road. This water goes directly into the basin-shaped

depression which aggravates the flooding and erosion problems.

The construction of a new open drain along Makunduchi Road aims to catch most of the water coming from the north. The drain also has to block off the existing rain water way, which currently leads water directly into the sloping depression in the south. It will have a length of app. 525 metres and will be located south of Makunduchi Road, where there is still enough space for a construction. The drain starts from the western border of the settlement and ends at the eastern

border, where it is connected to drain 2. It will be made of concrete with a width of 0.4 metres and a depth of 0.4 metres, which makes it possible to discharge up to 93.44 litres per second. The figure on the right shows a cross-section of a possible drain.

12 The numbers behind the headings are referring to the measures shown in the maps.

Figure 27: Possible cross-section of drain

Source: Own construct

Detail A

Detail A

5

5

5

5

5

5

1

1

2

2

3

3

2

2

4

Drain to connect with theJan’gome/Urusi system

BasinShapedArea

Detail B

PipeunderStreet

Legend

Main drainsDrain along Mackunduchi Road (1)Drain along eastern border (2)

Main drain partly coveredthrough settlement alongfootball ground (3)

Basin shaped area (4)

Intakes (5)

Collection basin (Detail A)

Contour lines

Flow direction

Pipe under the street dischargingwater into the basin shaped area

N

Technical ConceptMagomeni (Map 5)

Informal SettlementsDevelopment on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of DortmundFaculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 2500 (original)

100m75m50m25m0m 125m

82

83

Drain along eastern border (2)

Today the water from the upper eastern areas flows directly into the flooded area, which is also a cause for the problems mentioned above.

The water of the first drain (1) is discharged into the second drain (2). That means with the aid of the second drain 195.5 litres per second can be discharged. The drain has a total length of app. 880 metres, a width of 0.6 metres and a depth of 0.5 metres. Behind the point where the third drain (3) connects with the second drain (2), this drain is built wider (width 0.7 metres) and deeper (depth 0.6 metres) in order to take all the water from the area. The discharged water will be diverted into the Jang’ombe Urusi system to avoid waterborne diseases.

Drain through settlement along football ground (3)

To keep away the main part of the water, which comes from the western area of the settlement, the third drain (3) should be built from “milestone 3” on Makunduchi Road in the north up to the connection with the second drain (2) in the south of the settlement. The drain has a length of app. 210 metres, a width of 0.35 metres and a depth of 0.4 metres. The drain has to be built within the settlement and might block access to some roads, therefore a partly covered drain is suggested (Detail B). It is covered with a permeable lid. Besides protecting the existing access this will also make it easier to maintain the drain because it can be opened.

Seepage in the basin shaped area (4)

The basin shaped area lies in the north-eastern part of the settlement and covers about 2,850 square metres. Even if all the water from the outside was kept away, there would still remain a high amount (maximum 80 litres per second), which would accumulate in this area. The solution for this is seepage. The disadvantage of this method in the tropics concerns the high amount of water per day during the rainy season. This leads to a fast repletion of the soil and therefore to stagnant water for several days, which

Figure 28: Detail B – Covered drain

Source: Own construct

Figure 29: Cross-section of two versions of intakes

Source: Own construct

84

can cause waterborne diseases. To accelerate the process of infiltration the soil will be mixed up with coral stones. Furthermore a building stop and the demolition of houses linked to a resettlement is supposed to improve the situation of the affected households.

Intakes (5)

Intakes are small ditches between the rows of houses that lead the water to the main drain and the basin shaped depression. Through the controlled diversion inside the settlement, the problem of erosion of paths and houses can be avoided. The intakes are either paved with stones or semi-circle concrete tubes with an average width of 0.4 metre and a depth of 0.1 metre. The concrete tubes have to be installed especially in areas with a gradient of more than three percent that suffer severely from erosion, i.e. north of the basin-shaped area. More-over, paved intakes have to be built where they can serve their purpose efficiently. It is important to stabilise the rims of the intakes and build some kind of embankment with stones. The figure above shows possible cross sections of an intake.

Retention basins (Detail A)

Retention basins are concrete basins connected to the main drains to divert some water for a short period of time and thus slow down the waterflow. They will be built where space is available and they will not block access. The size depends on the available space but they are supposed to cover at least an area of two sq. metres. The whole

amount of water, which can be stored in the basins, has to seepage in the period of one day to avoid stagnant water. Therefore the ground of the basin will be made of permeable materials, i.e. coral stones. The exact location and measures of all collection basins can not be given in detail because of missing necessary information. The figure on the right shows a collection basin (Detail A).

The amount of soil material dug out for the main drain is about 345 cubic metres. This soil is mainly sand. After cleaning it from disposal, debris and other polluting materials it can be used for the production of the concrete for the drains and also be given to the local circular flow of material in the settlement and its surroundings.

Costs and building phases

In order to enable a frictionless building process the financing of the concept has to be assured before the building process starts. The different features of the technical concept have to be built step by step. Therefore there are three building phases, which enable the residents or donors to spend money for each single phase. That way the whole costs and work of the technical concept can be split up. The first phase, also being the most cost intensive, focuses on the construction of the drains, which are the main measures to

Figure 30: Detail A – Collection basin

Source: Own construct

85

avoid flooding. At first the second drain (2) has to be built, which will take all water from the first (1) and third (3) drain.

During phase two intakes will be added, which control the diversion into the drains and thus refine the drainage system. The intakes are just dug into the ground and if possible could be paved with stones or bricks. Therefore the erecting of the intakes does not caused much expenditures in work and material. In the third and last phase of the concept the retention basins will be installed. The costs for a retention basin depends on its size, but since only the walls are made of concrete and the soil is excavated and filled with coral stones, the costs for a basin are not too high.

Basis for the calculation of the costs and materials for the drains are general construction data based on the “Tabellenbuch Bautechnik” (German Civil Engineering Handbook). Additionally estimations based on information by the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme and by the Hanna Nassif Community Based Urban Upgrading Project about the proportions of additional costs and labour cost are taken into account. Out of this data, the necessary amount of materials is calculated. (See Appendix 6-9)

The total costs for the planned drainage system in Magomeni are calculated at about US$ 65,000 and is based on the cost compilation explained in Appendix 10. This figure is put together by material costs (about US$ 50,000) and labour costs (about US$ 15,000). The remaining costs for the needed machines and equipment as well as the costs for erecting the intakes (phase two) and basins (phase three) is included in the price for the material. Their share in the costs is approximately 50 percent of the cost for the concrete only (US$ 33,338). It was estimated that about US$ 5,000 can be saved through work contribution by the settlers.

The drains have different measurements and therefore different shares in the total costs. The first drain (1) costs about US$ 17,997 the second (2) US$ 40,154 and the third (3) US $6,887. (ibid.)

Conclusion

Altogether up to 78 percent of the occurring precipitation can be discharged by this concept.

The crucial points, which have to be taken care of in the implementation concept of the technical solution, are the financing of the project and the building stop in the basin shaped area.

Implementation and management concept for Magomeni Based on the requirements of the described technical concept and the theoretical background that has been given in chapter 5, an implementation and maintenance concept for a SWM system in Magomeni has been developed. Main actor will be a CBO whose step by step emergence is described first. After its institutionalisation the CBO will be able to start to implement the technical concept. The responsibilities and the tasks of the CBO are explained on p. 89 ff. The outcomes of the implementation concept for Magomeni will be evaluated and crucial points pointed out in a conclusion (p. 93).

The following ideas for the implementation concept are to be taken as suggestions which have to be specified by the actors in Magomeni.

86

Emergence of the CBO

The first and most important step towards a successful working CBO is the awareness building process inside the settlement since the whole concept bases on the willingness of the residents to contribute. Important initiators and possible members of this process have to find together in a second step. To ensure a democratic bottom-up development with the involvement of all residents, an advisable structure and additional measures have to be defined. By getting in touch with the ZSP and ANGOZA, the CBO is gaining direct help and establishes contacts to other grass root initiatives (GRIs) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the government. The fully institutionalised CBO is then able to implement the technical concept.

Awareness building

The ideal development process of a CBO starts with the awareness of the settlers as described in chapter 5 (p. 48 ff.). As seen in chapter 6 the conducted interviews in Magomeni reveal that most of the residents identify flooding as a problem even if they are not affected themselves. But only the flooded residents were active up to now. These residents have to be motivated to take action in a group and the existing attempts have to be co-ordinated. Both groups, but especially the indirectly affected, have to understand the interdependence between flooding and waterborne diseases and the pay-off, which they gain, when this problem is tackled. Solving the flooding problems has to become a higher priority in relation to other problems. Another incentive to help the GRI is that it should later on tackle other problems, which is desirable for a long-term improvement of the living conditions in the settlement and might improve the living conditions of some more people.

Also the actions a lot of the non-affected people take right now, like giving shelter to affected residents, show that they “care about each other”. This behaviour has to be encouraged and enhanced, so that they feel responsible and motivated to contribute to the CBO. Thereby a broader basis is created.

It is assumed that the identification with the settlement is quite high in Magomeni, as most of the residents come from the same rural area. Some have been living in Magomeni for nearly 20 years and are happy to live there. This close relation is important to create responsibility for the urban settlement, which is the basis for every self-help project.

There are people in the settlement who can foster the awareness building and motivation process because they already have a complex awareness of the problem. These people are important key persons and potential initiators for the CBO. They can form a first informal group to organise the mobilisation of further members. The part “Potential initiators and members” in this subchapter will describe this issue in detail.

There are different strategies which can be used to inform the residents. Word of mouth recommendation plays a major role as it is already the common way to spread information. This can for example be done according to the financing strategy of the Development Committee in Meli Nne: one person is responsible for a certain amount of households, visits them, talks to the people and is later on their person to turn to. This method is very direct and obliging and therefore it is likely to reach a good result in motivating people. Another method, which needs less work from the initiating people, is to address each maskani and use them to spread the news over the whole settlement.

In order to create a better understanding in the younger generation it is important to involve the nursery schools, the primary school and the madras into the awareness work.

87

Other possible instruments are picture-posters and role-plays, which show the problem. T-Shirts or Kangas can be handed out to the people in the settlement. They can impart the messages trough language and illustrations. To provide the needed resources, help from other institutions is probably needed. Possible strategies to get support will be described in the part “relation to the government and other institutions”.

This campaign can be supported by famous individuals such as football players, Members of Parliament, successful business men or officials from the religious community who can attract more attention. At the moment there are already two Members of Parliament, who help the self-help organisation in Meya to raise money and support them morally. The motivation of the residents to solve the problem can be fostered by showing successful examples of self-help. Active members can get background information for their work by visiting other settlements like Jang’ombe Urusi, which have already built a drainage. The successful example of the provision of space for the football ground can also be brought to the attention of the residents. The fact that they managed to keep this space free and maintained should show them what they are capable of.

Potential initiators and members

In the following paragraph potential initiators for the CBO in Magomeni are identified. A big potential is the existing self-help organisation in Meya. It was founded by very active people and a few of the members, who were interviewed, were also very concerned with the development of their neighbourhood. These residents are possible initiators and members of the CBO since they are already experienced and attentive to problems.

The awareness-campaign can also be done by or with the help of the Sheha as he is an important figure in the social life of the settlement. He is also the head of the “Sheha Committee”, which meets twice a month to discuss important matters of the settlement. The problem of flooding can be brought to their agenda and discussed. They are possible key persons in the initiation process since meetings with all residents are held regularly with the chance to raise awareness.

In general Magomeni has a good basis for grass root initiatives because, as already mentioned in chapter 6, the people have a communal sense and help each other. Findings from Dar es Salaam revealed that a homogeneous social and ethnic structure promotes co-operation. As most of the inhabitants are originally from the rural south of Zanzibar, they are likely to have shared common values. Additionally there is a high degree of identification with the settlement and a strong, good working neighbourhood, which has developed during the last 20 years.

Structure

After the first interested people have come together, their initial aim is to mobilise as many residents as possible and to motivate them to take part in a general assembly. From the assembly nobody should be excluded.

During this first general assembly a CBO should be founded, which co-ordinates and combines the existing attempts of the different people and develops a solution for the whole settlement. To implement a SWM system a CBO will be more successful than a self-help organisation because CBOs usually have more members, the interest of the residents are better represented and it has more power to mobilise the needed resources and secure a long-term solution (see chapter 5, p. 51). It is convenient to hold the assembly on the football ground because of its importance as meeting point.

88

Important topics of the general assembly are a presentation of the specific situation of flooding (causes and impacts), pay-offs which occur when the problem is solved, institutionalisation of the statutes and the structure, election of volunteers for the different committees, decision on the general strategies and further working steps.

In order to integrate all residents into the CBO and ensure the bottom-up approach, the structure is supposed to grow step by step. After the first general assembly, one elected group will decide on the necessary amount of committees. At the following general assembly all members of the CBO are able to elect the representatives for these committees.

To ensure a continuous participation of all interested residents, the members have to feel the importance of their work. This includes the resident’s personal role inside the CBO and the aim of the whole CBO. Therefore the structure and the decision making process of the CBO have to be transparent to everybody. The general assemblies, where the process of the work is presented and important matters and strategies are discussed, are held regularly. Additionally information on the progress and new occurrences are presented in a showcase or on posters. To attract more people to participate in the general assembly, it could be combined with other important meetings as for example the resident’s assembly, where the Sheha Committee announces its decisions to the public. This would underline the importance of the general assembly but requires a good relation to the Sheha. The general assembly could also be directly before or after a social event like a football game.

In general the CBO should have a structure as described in chapter 5 (p. 50 ff.). The existing structure of the self-help organisation in Meya is used as a basis and it is desirable that the involved people are motivated to continue their work in the new CBO.

It is important to provide the new CBO with a broader basis of members, first of all to ensure that people from the whole settlement are involved and secondly there is more financial as well as social and political power when more people are engaged.

The existing committee of the self-help organisation gets the task, as described above, to evaluate the structure and eventually create a new one according to the guidelines in chapter 5 and the future tasks. As the tasks which the new CBO has to fulfil are complex, it may be advisable to have more than just one person for each task. Additionally this would minimise the risk of abuse of one’s position, as it has happened with the treasurer of the Magomeni football club.

Relation to government and other institutions

As explained in chapter 5 CBOs are able to compensate governmental deficits up to a certain extend. But the results will be more efficient if an environment is created in which they work together. Therefore it is important that the CBO establishes and fosters contacts to governmental institutions like the ZMC and non-governmental organisations like the ZSP and ANGOZA, which offer direct help to GRIs.

The ZMC is the responsible institution which should provide the inhabitants of Zanzibar town with infrastructure facilities, but due to the reasons described in chapter 3 (p. 18 ff.) it fails in fulfilling its duty. But when the residents show initiative the ZMC is willing to help within the range of its possibilities (Omar 24.02.2002). It offered for example technical knowledge and machines to the self-help organisation in Meya. Therefore it is worth contacting them. This could be a first step to a co-operation in which the ZMC is relieved of some tasks but still offers help. The burden on the ZMC in this case will not be too severe, because there are several building phases.

According to the goals of the ZSP (chapter 5, p. 43 ff.), it can support the attempts of the residents of Magomeni to improve the urban environment by a participatory

89

approach. But as the ZSP has worked on a more general and political level until now, it is not clear how this help could look like. First ideas are the moderation of the first general assembly, as the the members of the ZSP have the skills to organise meetings with different stakeholders. In general it is desirable that the ZSP takes a more active role and gets in closer contact to the potentials in the settlements.

ANGOZA arranges trainings to improve managing and financing skills and how to contact international donors. Through the network of CBOs and NGOs build up by ANGOZA contacts to other CBOs and NGOs can be established. Contacts to other NGOs, mainly those who tackle environmental problems or want to support participatory approaches, offer a wider support system in terms of contents, finance and political claims. Ideally ANGOZA will be used to establish a network, in which for example experiences and information can be exchanged, informative literature to be used by all participants can be produced and contacts with actors to play awareness role-plays can be fixed.

The CBO in Magomeni can establish the contacts to these organisations either by a subcommittee responsible for public relation or some members of the Executive Committee. The training of ANGOZA should be attended by the members of the Executive Committee. To represent the CBO, some members are supposed to take part in the general assembly of ANGOZA. (chapter 5, p. 42 ff.)

There are even more possibilities to present the interests of the CBO to the public and to parliament. First of all the Sheha of Magomeni sees himself as the link between the government and the people. If he is involved in the CBO process he can present the needs to the higher governmental institutions. Secondly the two Members of Parliament who are helping already, should also be used for political claims.

Tasks and responsibilities of the CBO

After its institutionalisation the CBO is able to tackle the tasks and responsibilities that are necessary to implement the technical concept.

First of all the established CBO needs money and manpower to construct and maintain the designated SWM system. Strategies to raise money will be explained in the first paragraph called finance. In the following the implementation and maintenance of the measures for the technical concept, e.g. the building stop and the construction of the drains will be described.

Finance

The costs for the construction of the suggested SWM system in Magomeni will be US$ 50,006 for the materials, equipment and machines and US$ 15,002 for manpower, which sums up to a total amount of US$ 65,008 (see first subchapter of chapter 7). Additional money is needed to ensure the maintenance of the drains. It is essential that the residents contribute to the project in order to ensure a construction and maintenance process, which is not depending on donors, and to create a feeling of responsibility for the constructed drains.

There are 1,500 households in the Magomeni neighbourhood. To finance the drainage system by the occupants of the settlement every household would need to contribute approximately US$ 14.5 per year over a period of three years. To collect the money in instalments enables more households to contribute the required amount. There are three building phases so that the splitting of the funds also fits the building progress. Since it is not probable that every household in the neighbourhood of Magomeni will participate because many of them are not directly affected or are not aware of the

90

problems and dangers that are caused by flooding, the amount to be paid per contributing household might increase. But the people of the self-help organisation in Meya were able to contribute US$ 18 per household in one year which leads to the conclusion that this is an affordable amount for the people in Magomeni. Also the fact that the costs to repair the houses and maintain other eroded infrastructure in the settlement are much higher is clear to the people in Meya.

The suggested financing scheme leaves the households to decide, whether they want to donate money or contribute labour force. This possibility to decide is regarding the fact that according to the studies in Dar es Salaam (e.g. Hanna Nassif) people are often not willing or able to contribute much of their time and rather give money. On the other hand poor people are not forced to contribute money, which they might strongly need for other purposes. Those, who have time, are able to gain some skills during the work.

Instead of employing external workers it is more advisable to educate some people from the settlement to do the work, because these people can later on take the responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the system. Some professionals from outside are needed to guide the work and to train the residents. As the calculation of the costs relies on external labour force, it is possible to pay wages to the people who work on top of what the others pay in money. The chance for income generation for the residents also supports the acceptance of the project.

Additional money has to be raised from local donors, which could be wealthier people from inside the settlement or somebody, who is living somewhere else and wants to support the aim of the CBO. The example of the football team of Magomeni reveals that it is supported by some wealthier people living somewhere in Zanzibar. To get money from donors the first thing is to call on the social conscience of the wealthier people. Another possible incentive is to publish the names of the donors either in a showcase or at an assembly of the CBO. Furthermore it is important to give a feedback of what happened with the money by informing everybody involved about the progress of the work or inviting them to an opening ceremony.

People who might donate a bigger amount of money or local enterprises which can be asked to provide building materials have to be identified and approached individually. Another method is to collect money while already building the drainage. This is already done by several projects in Tanzania. It provides the donor with a greater security that the money is used for the intended purpose. Secondly the outcome is clear to see. Third of all, special events can be used or created to attract local and outside donors. One chance could be in using the importance of football by organising a football league or match. Additionally an opening ceremony with a high publicity is a possibility to collect some money for the maintenance. As a last source the CBO has to try to get as much support as possible from the ZMC.

Measures

The construction of the measures from the technical concept for Magomeni is organised by the committee for construction and maintenance of the CBO. To avoid organisational problems, planning assistance to implement the concept is needed. Since the ZMC contributes assistance if residents come and ask for it (Omar 27.02.2002), they could be asked to help in the organisation process. Otherwise other institutions like the International Labour Organisation could be contacted.

After the planning phase the provision of land for the SWM system must be secured. In general this is possible as long as demolishing of houses is not necessary (Omar 27.02.2002). The next steps are the excavation works, the installation of the drains, intakes and collection basins and the mixing of the ground with coral stone to enhance

91

seepage. The excavation works can usually be carried out by hoe or shovel. Additionally other tools are needed when the material hardens (ILO/ASIST w.y.: 12). But most important is that only manpower is needed but no expensive technical equipment. The tools can be provided by the residents themselves or money can be collected by the CBO. The excavated soil can be partly reused for the construction of the drains or intakes or other purposes in the settlement.

The next working step is the construction of the drains, collection basins and intakes. Materials which are needed for the drains and the collection basins are mainly sand, cement and water. To avoid costs, water can come from the settlement itself as well as sand which could be taken from the excavated soil. Still cement has to be bought and transported to compose concrete. All concrete can be mixed by hand. For transports a lorry has to be organised. One possibility would be to ask at the ZMC. Otherwise the costs have to be financed by the CBO. The drains and collection basins can be made on site. Therefore the concrete is poured into forms inside the excavated ground. The intakes are easier to implement since only bricks or stones are used to pave their sole.

Finally for the seepage area and the collection basins coral stones are needed. These are filled in the excavated ground to enhance the seepage capacity. For this again transport is needed which can be organised as described above.

All this work has to be done by manpower which can be split into skilled and unskilled labourers and technical assistance. Excavation works, mixing concrete and filling the soil with coral stones, can also be done by unskilled workers. The forming of the drains and the installation of the collection basins requires skilled labour forces. For those working steps a technical assistance is needed to guide them. Where and how labour forces are created is already described under the heading “Finance”.

For the recommendation of harvesting rainwater no costs and implementation measures can be calculated. Depending on the financial resources of each household, storage tanks can be either inexpensively constructed of clay or bricks by the residents themselves or plastic tanks could be bought by wealthier households.

The settlement density in Magomeni should remain at the current stage. This means that the percentage of sealed area should be held at the status quo of about 50 percent. Therefore a building stop is proposed that has to be decided on and executed by the general assembly. To make this building stop successful the whole community needs to feel the necessity to sustain their settlement density at the current stage. An advantage in Magomeni is the existing strong communal sense.

The acceptance of handing over privately owned or rather privately used ground to the community is strongly connected with the advantages everyone gains. So if there is a strong communal sense and a mutual gain which nearly the whole settlement will take an advantage from, there should not be a problem to convince people to regard the building stop. The mutual gain in this case is the prevention of flooding and erosion. But the gain must become obvious to everyone. So there must be an enlightenment campaign which can use the same measures as already explained under the headline “Awareness” in this chapter.

Further on the “creation” of a second mutual gain, for example using the open spaces together will make the building stop more successful. Especially the space in between the backyard houses must bring a second mutual gain if it belongs suddenly to the whole community and no longer to single households. An obvious gain is the preserved access. As seen in older settlements, where the construction process is far more progressed, the preservation of access is a severe problem. Bigger spaces can be used for maskanis or other types of meeting places which then also result in communal gains.

92

If a strong neighbourhood exists, social control also strengthens this process. As seen in the football example it is easy to keep space free if it holds a communal gain. When new settlers tried to occupy the football ground, the football club members intervened. This process could also work with other open spaces.

Another measure has to be implemented in the basin shaped area, since it will still be flooded and used as a seepage area. One solution would be to demolish the four houses located in the basin shaped area, but this would mean a compensation payment would have to be made. The community cannot afford to buy the houses from the owners. Still the area should be kept free from additional houses. The compensation for free plots can be financed by the community. To create a public gain that would ensure the building stop, the area can become community property for agricultural uses. As the football example shows, securing the use of an area with a developed customary right is possible.

Maintenance

Maintenance includes cleaning as well as repairing works. Cleaning of the drains has to be done regularly in order to avoid the blockage of water flow. Silt, sand, gravel but also garbage can be washed into the drains. Such blockage of water results in standing pools of dirty water, which is a potential breeding place for mosquitoes. Also flooding from overflowing water can occur. Therefore cleaning of the drains is essential. The cleaning of the open drains is simple. Also the partly covered drain is easy to clean since the covers can be taken off.

The retention basins and the basin shaped area also have to be cleaned regularly to enable the storm water to seepage. According to an expert from the ZMC (Kh. Mzee 20.02.2002) drains should be cleaned daily during rainy season.

An important factor is to remove the waste out of the cleaned drains to a suitable disposal site. This prevents the waste to be washed back into the drains again or to build a barrier for the storm water flow into the drains. Already existing disposal sites outside the settlement should be used.

It is especially important to keep the storm water system clean to ensure proper functioning. For the short run a waste management like in the already explained example from Kenya can be used. The children of the football club gain extra points for their league if they collect garbage within their settlement (see chapter 5, p. 46). Additionally the parents of those children in Kenya started to help because they felt ashamed leaving the responsibility to their children. This could also be used to clean the storm water system and later on it could be extended for the whole settlement. Another option is to establish a waste collecting system in the schools which also works for the storm water system. This would increase the awareness of the pupils as well as of their parents. An additional possibility would be to give sponsorships for certain parts of the drains. Then people who participated in the construction work or who donated money would be responsible for the cleaning of their part of the drain. So the feeling is strengthened that the storm water system belongs to all residents, they are benefiting from its gains but also are responsible for it.

In the long run a waste management system should be established for the whole settlement since the interdependence between SWM and waste management is rather strong. The establishment of this could be a follow-up project of the CBO. It could work as a system where responsible persons care about the collection of waste and its transport to a disposal site. These persons could be paid by the residents if the awareness of the problem and the benefits of this work are seen.

93

The second part of the maintenance is the repair works. Repair works are required when damage through several impacts, for instance after major storms, happened. Also regular inspections should take place to ensure the functioning and the security of the drainage system.

For this skilled labour force is needed. Since the ZMC is has the actual responsibility for this work the CBO could ask for its assistance . But considering the fact that the ZMCs opportunities to assist are restricted, a solution has to be found by the residents of Magomeni. The repair and inspection work could be done by a worker who gained experienced during the construction process of the drainage system. This person should then be employed by the community through the CBO. Included in his tasks would also be the organisation of the cleaning. Hence the functioning of the drains would be ensured.

Conclusion

Determinant for the success of the implementation concept is the willingness of the residents to contribute. The awareness campaigns and the general assembly need motivated and convincing individuals who understand the pay-offs and advantages of CBO work. Magomeni bears good preconditions for the emergence of a functioning CBO, because it is a neighbourhood with strong bonds and the example of the neighbouring settlement Meya shows that people start to organise themselves instead of waiting for the government. The contribution of money and labour force by the residents seems to be possible although it is questionable whether the storm water management system can be financed without the help of external donors. A high percentage of the settlers has to contribute a lot of money for success.

Another crucial point of the implementation concept is the basin shaped area which should be used for seepage according to the technical concept. It is not clear if those who bought the plots want to build there. If so it would be very expensive to find a compensation because of the high prices for houses in the area of Magomeni.

To sum up, a strong communal sense is given in Magomeni which is able to resist all crucial points and which could ensure a successful implementation of the technical concept.

Technical concept Meli Nne The development perspectives of Meli Nne are already visible today. Building activities increase and the settlement will certainly reach the same level of housing density as Magomeni. Up to now only a few residents are flooded, but the increasing blockage of natural waterways will lead to severe problems in the future. Already today damages from erosion are visible on houses and paths. To better the situation and avoid future problems with rainwater, a technical concept for SWM has to be installed. After the process of evaluating the three different methods dealing with storm water and considering the specific aspects of Meli Nne, a technical concept was developed.

For the calculation the same basis is used as in Magomeni, since in Meli Nne similar problems have occurred. Currently the sealed area of Meli Nne is 33 percent, but for the calculation an estimated density of 50 percent is used to take the probable future development into account.

94

Measures

Similar to Magomeni the aim of the technical concept for Meli Nne (see Map 6) is to discharge most of the water out of the settlement and to keep away all water runoff from the outside especially from north of the case study area.

The concept consists of seven drains. The first one is located along Makunduchi Road (drain 1) to drain the water coming north of Makunduchi Road into the swamp area east of Meli Nne. Along the main path another four separate drains have to be constructed, because of different levels of depression. Drain 2 diverts water from area I as well as drain 3, drain 4 from area III; drain 7 takes water from the catchment areas V and VI and drain 8 collects water from area VII. Drain 5 is located along the drop and will collect the water from catchment area II in order to discharge it into the lake in the west.

All collected water is directly diverted into the swamp areas which are used as seepage areas. With these measures the main path will be preserved from erosion which is the second main aim. Intakes (see concept Magomeni) lead the water controlled into the drains and are either paved with coral stones, bricks or similar material. Due to the fact that the whole settlement has partly a high slope which causes a high water runoff velocity, other details are drains which are formed as cascades. They are needed when gradients with more than three percent occur. The little lake in the west will be used as collection and seepage area for water coming from drain 5 and the cascades. To avoid overflowing an outlet to the swamp area in the south-west exists. The old river bed which is located in the middle of the settlement is used as natural drain.

Drain along Makunduchi Road (1)

The drain along Makunduchi Road catches all storm water runoff which comes from the North. Since the maps are not detailed enough and the area is out of the case study area, it is hard to estimate the total amount of storm water runoff from the North. Hence it was not possible to calculate the size of the drain and the size of the area that is needed

for the discharged water. The collected storm water will be diverted app. 875 metres further east into the swamp area. This will be done decentralised like a river delta to avoid the flooding of parts of the area. Although the swamp is partly used for housing land, there is still more than enough space for seepage of the occurring rainwater. The space to install the drain along Makunduchi road is also available. There the water discharges in some smaller seepage

areas. Therefore the drain is constructed in a way in which the water is diverted in intervals to overflow in seepage areas. (see figure 31)

Northern drain along main path (2)

The second drain (2) has a depth of 0.3 metres, a width of 0.55 metres and a capacity of 84.38 litres per second. It is able to collect rain water from catchment area I. For about 200 metres it follows the main path downwards (gradient of 1-3 percent). Then it diverts the water towards the drop into the third drain (3).

Source: Own construct

Figure 31: Detail D – Retention Meli Nne

Legend

Main drainsDrain along Mackunduchi Road (1)Northern drain alon main path (2)Drain in the middle part of main path (4)Drain at the drop (5)

Drain formed as cascadesDrain to the lake(3)

Intakes (8)

Natural stream(9)

Southern drain along main path (7)

Drain along main path southto the stream (6)

Seepage

Lake in the westand overflow (11)

Flow direction

Contour lines

area (10)

Lake

Seepagearea

Detail C

Detail D

1

8

8

3

9

2

4

8

7

6

10

10Overflowof the lake to theseepage area

11

5

N

Technical ConceptMeli Nne (Map 6)

Informal SettlementsDevelopment on Zanzibar

Project F 03 2001/2002

University of DortmundFaculty of Spatial Planning

Scale 1 : 2500 (original)

Seepagearea

100m75m50m25m0m 125m

96

97

Drain formed as cascades to the lake (3)

The cascades have a length of 125 metres with a high gradient and are the extension of drain 2. As described above, cascades are used in cases of gradients that are higher than

three percent to slow down the water (see figure 32 Detail C). Retention basins form a “stairway” for the water, which flows from basin to basin. This system slows down the velocity of the water. Another feature are the gabions which make up the wall where the water overflows to the next basin. These wire-boxes are filled with coral stones. There water can seepage step by step. The width of the drain with the cascades is 0.5 metres and a depth of 0.35 metres. The cascades are able to transport up to

118 litres per second which equals the runoff from the three connected storm water catchment areas.

Drain in the middle part of main path (4)

The fourth drain (4) is coming from the south and is connected to the cascades. The drain is starting from the peak of a hill leading north and joins the cascades at its lowest point after 112.5 metres. The drain made of concrete has a depth of 0.15 metres, a width of 0.25 metres and a total capacity of 20.83 litres per second.

Drain at the drop (5)

The construction of this drain is necessary to prevent the drop from erosion that endangers houses which are situated at the rim of the drop. Therefore the fifth drain (5) follows nearly the whole rim of the drop with a length of 112.5 metres. The distance has to be at least 0.75 metres to the rim. It has the capacity to discharge 20.83 litres of rainwater with a depth of 0.15 metres and a width of 0.25 metres. All diverted rain water of drain 5 can be led controlled into a basin which is made of big natural stones. Therefore it will be sturdy enough to be secured from erosion. The water overflowing the basin is discharged into the lake in the west which is situated at a deeper level of 1.5 to 2 metres level difference.

Drain formed as cascades along main path south to the stream (6)

Drain 7 starts at the beginning of drain 3 and discharges the water into the stream in the south. From there it runs with the stream to the swamp area. The drain is constructed like drain 3 in the form of cascades because the gradient is quite high. It runs down 237.5 metres at the eastern side of the main path. The drain has a width of 0.4 metres and a depth of 0.4 metres. The drain can cope with a maximum of 112 litres per second.

Southern drain along main path (7)

Drain 8 starts from the peak of a hill in the south of the settlement and ends in the stream which discharges the water directly into the swamp area in the west. The slight slope allows an implementation of a drain without cascades because the velocity of the water would not be too high. Hence the drain is made of concrete, has a width of 0.4

Figure 32: Detail C – Cascades

Source: Own construct

98

metres a depth of 0.4 metres, a length of 250 metres and a total capacity of 91.67 litres per second.

Intakes (8)

These intakes are the same measures as described in the technical concept for Magomeni (see p. 84) and have the same purpose.

Riverbed (9)

The old stream is located in the middle of the settlement and is used as natural drainage (chapter 6, p. 72 ff.). It takes water from drain 7 and drain 8 to the swamp area. Additionally it diverts the overflowing water of the lake in the west. A building freeze would be necessary in this area in order to secure its natural potential. Also the embankment of the river will be stabilised in order to handle the additional water.

Retention areas (10)

Two swamp areas exist; one in the west and another one in the east of the settlement. They are used as natural retention areas. Therefore a building freeze would be an urgent measure to safe the open space.

Lake in the west and overflow (11)

In the west of the settlement is a lake the water from drain 3 and drain 5 is discharged into. To avoid the flooding of the whole area around the lake, an overflow leads the water into a drain towards the swamp in the east. The overflow drain has a length of 150 metres, is 0.5 metres wide and 0.5 metres deep with a total capacity of app. 80 litres per second. Because of the missing capacity measurements of the lake the figures are just an estimation based on the dimension of the other drains. The overflowing water from the lake could seepage in the swamp.

The amount of soil material dug out for the main drain is 133.98 cubic metres. It should be handled like in Magomeni, the purpose is to put to local circular flows.

Costs and building phases

The technical concept for Meli Nne has to be separated into different building phases as already explained in chapter 7 for the example of Magomeni (p. 84 ff.). In the first building phase drain 1 has to be constructed in order to block the water from north of Makunduchi Road. The costs of this drain cannot be calculated since its size could not be estimated because of missing information about its catchment area. The costs for materials for all the other drains is estimated at about US$ 23,884.The labour costs are estimated at about one third of the material costs and are therefore US$ 7,166. This sums up to US$ 31,050.

Phase 2 contains the building of drain 2 to 5 and also the overflow-drain of the lake. The construction of this phase will be the most expensive one with nearly 50 percent of the total costs but is also the most important. These are the drains that discharge most of the accruing rainwater in the settlement. Excluded are the costs for the gabions for drain 3 since the wire-boxes have to be bought from outside the settlement. The filling of those wire-boxes could happen with coral stones but also with usual stones which can be found inside Meli Nne. In the third phase drain 7 and drain 8 will be built which divert the remaining rain water. The costs for erecting the cascades and for the

99

necessary materials are not included again. During the last and forth phase the intakes will be constructed similar to the technical concept of Magomeni.

Also the costs for the wire-boxes will be low because the materials for filling them (stones and coral stones) are available in the settlement itself or could be purchased for low price.

Conclusion

Altogether up to 95 percent of the occurring precipitation will be discharged by this concept.

In order to secure the success of the technical concept, a crucial point is to attain a building freeze to keep the sealing density at 50 percent. This measure is also urgent for the old river bed and the swamp areas which are of high importance for the technical concept.

Implementation and management concept for Meli Nne A CBO can compensate the failure of the government to provide a SWM system. The creation of this CBO (p. 99 ff.) and its work in the phases of construction and maintenance (p. 101 ff.) is subject of this chapter. A conclusion sums up the crucial points of the implementation and management concept.

The ideas and suggestions, which are applicable for Magomeni as well as for Meli Nne, will be mentioned, but again not explained in detail.

Emergence of the CBO

The emergence of the CBO for Meli Nne is based on the development process as explained in chapter 5 (p. 48 ff.) and takes the special context of Zanzibar Town and Meli Nne into account.

The first step of the emergence of the CBO will be difficult due to the fact that the awareness of a future flooding problem is very low among the residents (see chapter 6, p. 76). Once the residents are aware of this, the same steps as described for Magomeni (pp. 86-89) have to take place. An institutionalisation with the characteristic structure is recommended as well.

Awareness building

Meli Nne does not seem to have as good preconditions for grass root initiatives as Magomeni.

The awareness of the residents is very different. Many people state in the interviews that they do not have a problem with storm water, but damages of erosion and security measures are visible on the houses. This may be due to a different opinion of what is a problem to them, but also depending on the magnitude of the different obstacles or problems, which exist in their lives (Mwalim 05.03.02).

Although there are some interviewees, who clearly state that the residents are responsible for solving the flooding problem (which is a difference to Magomeni), the existing self-help organisation called “the Development Committee” has organised other projects which seemed to be more urgent up to now.

Therefore awareness building in Meli Nne has to consist of two steps: First the problems that emerge from flooding has to be made clear to the people. It is very

100

important to explain the impacts a certain behaviour will have in the future and what can be done at present time to prevent this process. Especially the impacts of building activities on the problem of flooding and the impacts of flooding on waterborne diseases have to be explained. Secondly the people have to feel responsible and be motivated to tackle the problem.

To create a closer relation and more responsibility for the urban settlement, the identification of the people with their settlement has to be fostered. This identification process also leads to a strong neighbourhood, which is able to provide a certain social control.

One method is to extend the feeling of “partly urban, partly traditional rural life in the settlements” (Mwalim 18.02.02.). The traditional values the people had when living in their villages in a tight rural community have to be transferred to the new environment. Urban agriculture or gardening might bring the village life feeling into the urban setting. This helps the people to understand that living in town can take place with the same values they had in their rural villages. This is fostered by the fact that most of the residents come from the same rural area of Makunduchi and hence strong linkages among the residents already exist.

Other possibilities to create identification and strengthen the neighbourhood are social events. This can be football games or similar recreational activities like dances and other celebrations. Religious activities are also important for the creation of a community. Finally working together for the community creates identification, but before that is realised, there has to be a direct personal incentive to work for the community.

The awareness and motivation building process has to be organised by a group of persuasive and inspirational people, who initiate the CBO. Since no one is aware of the problems coming up in the future, there has to be some external input first. This can be done by the ZSP or another NGO concerned with that matter.

In general the measures for creating awareness and motivation can be the same as described in Magomeni, but a special effort has to stress the possible further development of Meli Nne. One way to achieve this is an exchange of information between the two settlements of Meli Nne and Magomeni. Meetings are organised, in which residents from Magomeni, preferably from the self-help organisation in Meya (see chapter 6, p. 66 ff.), report their experiences with the reasons and impacts of flooding.

Potential initiators and members

Potential key persons for creating awareness in Meli Nne are the members of the Development Committee, although it did not tackle the problem of flooding until now. The fact that they are involved in the Committee underlines their ambition to improve the living conditions in their settlement. Nevertheless this potential has to be initiated by external input.

Another pool for potential key persons is the Sheha’s committee. The disadvantage is that both, the Sheha and the committee, are responsible for the whole Shehia of Mwanakwerekwe and the Sheha’s knowledge of and interest in Meli Nne seem to be limited. But he still plays an important role in the awareness building process, since he is aware of the flooding problem and has told the people not to settle in the flooded areas. He can bring the flooding problem onto the agenda of one of the committees. The man who claims to be the assistant Sheha is less informed but he really wants to do something. Still it may be a problem to involve him as he is not respected among the residents.

101

Another potential are the political activities in the settlements. The existing organisation and structure of the two parties CCM and CUF can be used, since the relationship between members of the two opposing political parties are described as “very good”. The political work can be extended to constructive work for the settlement. The meetings can include discussions about prospects of the settlement and awareness campaigns can be done in co-operation with political campaigns. Since the organisation of a SWM system is a long term project, no politician has used it for election campaigns. But the party-members in the settlement can still promote both, their party and settlement development.

Structure

The existing Development Committee is a very good basis for the implementation and maintenance process in Meli Nne. In fact there is no need to create a new organisation, as the old one already tackles problems concerning the whole settlement and is able to ensure continuous work on different projects including maintenance. The topic of flooding has to be brought upon their agenda and the structure has to be a little bit more institutionalised.

All the measures which ensure the participation of all members have to be taken in Meli Nne as well.

Relation to government and other organisations

For the same reasons as explained for the case of Magomeni this CBO has to get in contact with the different self help related organisations.

One big problem of Meli Nne is its location, being situated in an area with no district boundaries (see chapter 3, p. 18, on the confusing boundary organisation). This leads to a situation, in which nobody feels responsible for Meli Nne. The ZMC, usually willing to support actions from the residents, may refuse to help. In comparison to the situation in Magomeni it is probably impossible to get support by skilled workers and equipment for erecting the drainage system in Meli Nne.

The ZSP also works with the municipal boundaries and not with the ones from the Chinese Masterplan, inside which Meli Nne lies. Therefore, it will be difficult to apply for their help.

The Committee will get in touch with ANGOZA to become part of their scheme and benefit from their network. The exchange of information with other GRIs about the topic of SWM is very important.

The existing committee in Meli Nne has a good relation to the Sheha to whom they present their ideas. It indicates that the Sheha is interested in such projects and may help the new CBO. This is the link to the governmental institutions.

Tasks and responsibilities of the CBO

Tasks and responsibilities of the CBO, i.e. financing, construction, protection and maintenance of the storm water management system are stressed in this subchapter.

Finance

As mentioned before, the costs for the technical concept in Meli Nne are approximately US$ 23,884 for materials and machines and US$ 7,166 for manpower, which makes a total amount of US$ 31,050 plus maintenance costs.

102

There is already a well established system for money collection, which has to be integrated in the new CBO: Every active member is responsible for collecting money from a certain number of households. The personal contact is an important part in this strategy. The procedure of collecting money for one specific purpose increases the identification with the project and may later on simplify maintenance: someone who has paid for the drainage system has a bigger incentive to keep it working afterwards. The leftover money is used for the next project. Projects of the Development Committee realised in the past prove that the residents are able to contribute about US$ 20 over a longer period of time. Because there is no data about the current population in the Meli Nne Area available it is difficult to estimate how many households should be involved to raise the needed amount of money for the installation of the SWM-system. In the case of a contribution of US$ 15 per household 690 households could raise the money over a period of three years. This splitting of financing fits with the proposed division into three building phases.

Like in Magomeni a solution is suitable in which the participants can choose whether they want to pay or work. There is also the potential to increase the contribution of work by the inhabitants. That would reduce the labour costs for external workers. For example, a decrease of labour costs from US$ 7,165 to US$ 4,778 is calculated if the inhabitants would reduce the cost for external workers by a third.

Meli Nne bears a different situation than Magomeni as the population is more heterogeneous in their income situation. The wealthier residents can be integrated just like the Development Committee approached the external donors during former projects. Their incentive may even be higher, as they can gain some social reputation within the settlement. The existing committee is already successful in getting donations from people outside the settlement, this has to be continued and extended. Therefore the methods, which are described for Magomeni before (p. 85), can be used.

Measures

The construction of the measures from the technical concept for Meli Nne is organised in the same way as in Magomeni. Since some measures – excavation, installation of drains and intakes – are already explained for Magomeni (p. 90 ff.), only different features from the technical concept are mentioned here.

One measure is the installation of the gabions for the cascades, which is fairly simple, because they are just made of wire mesh filled with coral stones or any other similar material. The stones will be taken from the settlement itself if available otherwise the organisation and transportation from somewhere else is necessary. The provision of transport facilities such as lorries has to be organised by the CBO. Since Meli Nne does not officially belong to the administrative area of Zanzibar Town, consulting the ZMC is no option. So money has to be raised to finance it. The more difficult part, in comparison to the usual drains, is to implement the cascades especially in a high slope. So during their implementation it is important to supervise the actions by experts to ensure a stable installation.

The advantage of Meli Nne is that there are still enough open spaces. In comparison to Magomeni the housing density of Meli Nne is only about 33 percent. This seems to be a satisfying status quo, but since the settlement is fairly young and still growing it will face problems later on with increasing density and too much sealing of the ground. Many houses are still under construction. A preventive measure is therefore to stop the building process at a maximum of 50 percent of sealed area.

To ensure the realisation of the building stop the residents have to be convinced that a high building density leads to several problems including increased flooding.

103

Currently there is enough space for the measures. The owners of the specific plots will be convinced by explaining the necessity of a SWM system. The benefits for the individual and for the community will be made clear and it will not be a problem for the CBO to take possession of the ground, since the long term benefits are higher than the short term ones (also stated by resident flooded Magomeni 1 2002).

A special case for Meli Nne are the large retention and seepage areas, which have to be kept free. Only few building activities have started on the fringe of these areas but as space for plots close to the city is highly demanded, measures to keep it free have to take place in advance. On the one hand, people, who want to build in these areas, have to become aware of the fact that these areas bear the risk of flooding during rainy seasons. Uses have to be found which gain advantages for the owner, so they do not need to sell this land. Since most of the land is still not settled on yet, it will be easier to establish a customary right for the new use. A use from which people will benefit is agriculture. The CBO can take over the swamp areas as communal land to use it for agriculture. The crops can be either used by the residents themselves or, if the land is fertile enough, be sold to earn money. The land becomes valuable to the residents, who will protect it from being built on, just as the football grounds are being protected. Hence the customary right will be secured by social control. Responsible for this measure is the CBO as a supervisor and mediator for the residents.

Another area where a building stop has to be realised is the surrounding of the embankment of the stream. After implementing the technical concept, a great amount of the discharged water will be led into the stream. Therefore the embankment has to be secured and kept free from buildings, due to the increasing building activity the area will be flooded even more severely in the future. Since the residents, who already live near the stream have a certain understanding for the arising problem, a communal use like the agricultural use mentioned above can convince the people to implement the building stop (also stated by residents Meli Nne 1 and 2).

Maintenance

The maintenance of the SWM system in Meli Nne is generally comparable to the one from Magomeni, except the cleaning of the drains and cascades is even more important in Meli Nne. The cascades are blocked by waste a lot easier than the concrete drains. Another problem is the pollution of the seepage areas, because possible contamination will endanger the agricultural use or any other activity, which takes place in that area. It most probably will turn into a disposal site. It is important to establish a functioning solid waste management system for the future, but beforehand a short term solution for the drainage system is unavoidable. The residents have to understand the impacts of haphazard waste disposal for the drainage system and hence for the flooding problem. Measures to implement both can be taken from the chapter on maintenance for Magomeni (p. 92 ff.).

Conclusion

The preconditions for the implementation concept in Meli Nne are different from those for Magomeni. First of all the awareness towards the problem of flooding is very low because the impacts are hardly visible yet. Secondly the settlement is rather young and it can be estimated that the relations between the residents are not as strong as in Magomeni.

Still there is a big advantage for the implementation concept in Meli Nne. The existing Development Committee has already solved different infrastructure problems

104

and presents a very good basis for the establishment of a CBO. The committee has earned itself a certain reputation, so it is easier to encourage possible actors. The residents are also familiar with the pay-offs of invested money and labour force.

One of the crucial points is, similar to Magomeni, the protection of unsealed areas. It is not clear whether the remaining plots are already sold and second whether there are plans to develop them. In the worst case it is impossible to convince the owners to leave the plots as they are and thus the flooding problem will increase.

105

CHAPTER 8Conclusions and Recommendations

This research work deals with informal settlements and its aim is to answer the question: How can basic infrastructure in informal settlements be provided?

During the fieldwork in Zanzibar Town the detailed back stocking and analysis of two case study settlements took place. The result is a proposal for a technical solution to provide infrastructure supposed to be carried out with the help of an implementation concept. The work of the student project focuses on storm water management as a basic infrastructure facility. A technical solution to prevent flooding in the case study areas is designed. The project further deals with CBOs, self-help organisation and participation to make the inhabitants of the settlements able to implement the technical concept.

The search for the answer of the above mentioned research question is guided by the research hypotheses. These hypotheses deal with a functional settlement structure developed through a minimum of building guidelines, a participatory environment to support grass root initiatives, CBOs and self-help organisations replacing the government regarding the responsibility to provide infrastructure.

There are two sources from which the answer to the research question is derived. Firstly there is the example of the provision of football grounds in Zanzibar Town. It shows that it is possible to provide infrastructure in informal settlements. Secondly there are many examples of existing CBOs and grass root level organisations in the literature working on infrastructure provision. The main findings are summarised in the following:– The willingness to provide land, necessary for infrastructure development, depends

on the advantages the residents gain from a certain use of land. If this willingness is high it is possible to influence the settlement structure and provide needed infrastructure.

– It is more likely for residents to tackle a problem in their settlement if they realise that the government can not be expected to solve it.

– After first steps towards a successful provision of infrastructure and the required land for this have been taken, it is necessary to institutionalise the efforts to preserve the infrastructure facilities and the plots needed in the long run.

Following the findings out of the case study areas are applied to future settlement. The second subchapter presents a scenario which has been developed to underline the possible success of a preventive strategy. The example chosen is waste management in order to demonstrate the possibility of transferring the findings to other infrastructure services. Finally recommendations for future research projects that derived out of this one are developed.

Preventive strategies to provide infrastructure in informal settlements This report focuses on the shift of responsibility to provide infrastructure from the government to the settlers of informal settlements. Looking at the predicted population growth and the rapid increase of the urbanisation rate it is foreseeable that the inability of the government to serve the dwellers’ demand for infrastructure will be more evident. Therefore it is more than obvious that the necessity of self-organisation will become much more important in the coming years. Talking about the future the opportunity to

106

avoid problems in the first place instead of just responding to them is given. An upgrading strategy is only the curing of the symptoms but it is not treating the causes of the problems.

The subsequent section analyses which steps have to be taken to avoid a lack of infrastructure in future informal settlements; i.e. the research is extended: How can basic infrastructure be provided in future settlements through a preventive strategy?

The analyses of Magomeni and Meli Nne and the design of the technical and implementation concepts lead to the conclusion that a preventive strategy regarding the infrastructure provision is more efficient. Many problems occur if placing a technical concept into an existing settlement because many infrastructure facilities are highly depending on the settlement structure.

To give an example, the most effective alignment of a storm water drain would imply the demolition of buildings due to the haphazard and non functional settlement structure. Since this it not possible because of the organisational and financial expenditures a compromise solution, which is less capable, has to be applied. Therefore a functional settlement structure from the beginning on is necessary. Functional in this case is a settlement structure which leaves enough space for the provision of infrastructure according to the demand of the settlement.

The following proposals can assure a development which results in a functional settlement structure: – Building guidelines have to be applied in the beginning of the settlement

development. In Meli Nne it has been observed that the owners of the Three Acre Plots (TAPs) have set up certain rules referring to the distance between houses. Such building rules are able to influence the distribution of the plots and the way they are built up positively. If enough space between the buildings is secured, it is obviously possible to provide the necessary and demanded infrastructure facilities.

– Areas with subject to a building stop have to be declared before the start of the building activities. Those areas should obviously be endangered plots or important areas concerning the mutual benefit to the settlement (e.g. flood prone areas, seepage areas, waste collection points etc.).

The measures named above depend on the involvement of the actors. In such an early stage of development, the key persons able to intervene in this process of urbanisation, are in the first place the TAP-owners, who sell the plot, and the Shehas of the settlement.

In second place the inhabitants of the settlement also have to take their role. It is very important to make them aware of the necessity of a functional settlement structure as well. Further on a kind of social control mechanism to secure the achieved settlement structure has to be created among them to compensate the lacking responsibility of the government. As seen in the example of the football club in Magomeni that kept the pitch free from building on (which can be regarded as a kind of building rule or ban), institutionalising the efforts by founding an organisation is supportive. Therefore a CBO, responsible for the functionality of the settlement, should be founded. Through this CBO, which enforces building guidelines, building bans and prevents infill housing, the functionality can be secured in the long run. If these steps are taken, the implementation of any kind of infrastructure is possible at any stage of settlement development.

107

Excurse: Scenario To demonstrate the necessity of a functional settlement structure for the future development of a settlement, following the idea is illustrated by a scenario. It is based on the outcomes of the research work and gives hints for further working steps. The imaginary settlement “Meli Sita” exemplifies the circumstances and preconditions.

The year 2004

The informal land management process is legalized. The municipality, local authorities and civil societies introduce a new development strategy to secure the legal basis of a new land management process. The new Municipal Act comes into force in 2004. It constitutes a legalisation of the former informal land management process by fixing building guidelines. These guarantee the functionalisation of new emerging settlements.

The distance between houses has to be fixed and building lines have to be followed in order to create a linear structure of the settlement. These measures avoid infill housing to secure space for access and other necessary infrastructure facilities. Furthermore development should refer to existing paths and topography to avoid erosion and keep infrastructure costs low. Areas which are endangered by flooding or with a mutual benefit to the settlement (e.g. seepage areas, waste collection points etc.) are secured by a building ban.

The year 2005

Negotiations under the moderation of the ZSP take place including TAP-grantees, middlemen and Sheha. The goal is to apply building guidelines during the development process. In the end of the year the selling of plots is starting in Meli Sita.

The year 2006

During the year 2006 most of the plot-buyers start constructing their houses according to the building guidelines given by the local authorities.

The year 2007

In February 2007 the Meli Sita Development Organisation (MSDO) is founded to control the violation of building guidelines by settlers. In the following years the CBO tackles several problems. For example, it solves the conflict between the two neighbours A and B. Mr A encroaches on the road by building a shop extension. The MSDO starts negotiations and also informs the municipality. Due to the pressure, Mr A finally gives in and demolishes the extension.

The year 2008

The Meli Sita Community House is build to initiate an official meeting point in the settlement. It is used to communicate common problems, solve conflicts between neighbours and for social gatherings.

The year 2009

In one of the monthly community meetings storm water management and solid waste management are declared as the number-one problems within Meli Sita. Following the efforts made by the MSDO and the settlers to establish a solid waste management system are described. The existing problem of haphazard waste disposal is tackled with the assistance of the ZMC due to the following preconditions:

108

Waste collection has to be organised by the settlers and a proper road has to be provided to enable trucks to enter the settlement.

The MSDO sets up a solid waste committee for solid waste management with the following preparatory tasks: Initiation of a motivation and awareness campaign, development of a solid waste management concept, organisation of financing and organisation of labour and equipment.

The year 2010

The construction phase starts. A gravelled road passable by a collection vehicle and several waste collection points are build along the road. Labour force is largely organised by those inhabitants of the settlement, who prefer working rather than contributing money. The technical equipment is provided by the ZMC. The construction is completed in the end of the year.

The year 2011

Maintenance becomes the most important task to ensure a functional solid waste management. The organisation of waste collection and regular controls to maintain the condition of disposal sites and roads is further on done by the MSDO. The inhabitants still contribute a small amount each year to ensure the maintenance including repair works.

The year 2011 and further on…

Meli Sita is an example for a successful functional settlement. The settlers are no longer living in a haphazard area. There are no health problems. Meli Sita is a good environment and a place to live at!

Recommendations for further studies Based on the topics and issues that are related to this study and on the emerging opportunities, following recommendations on topics for further research are presented:

The problem of gentrification

Upgrading a settlement always means that it gains attractiveness. The normal process that results from this is gentrification. After the implementation of a storm water management in Magomeni and Meli Nne the plot prices will definitely increase noticeably. Rich people who are able to pay the high prices try to buy the improved plots. On the contrary, the original inhabitants are tempted to sell their plots. That means that those settlers who were responsible for the upgrading and the enhancing will leave the settlement. But it is very important that those people who took part in the work of the CBO benefit from the results. Otherwise it would lead to a counterproductive process. Nobody would be motivated to do anything if he or she is not gaining from it. The upgrading of Hanna Nassif is an example where this negative development can be seen. A solution has to be found which strengthens the identification of the dwellers and makes them resistant against the financial temptation of selling their plot.

Regarding a preventive strategy to supply infrastructure in informal settlements, the problem of high prices due to the functional development of the settlement probably also plays a major role. It has to be avoided that only those can settle in these settlements that are able to afford it.

109

Planning without planners

The approach of this project was to solve the problems informal settlements face by using endogenous potentials. Because of the limited capacity of the government and the lack of planning resulting from this, the people in informal settlements have to solve their problems on their own. If these facts are generalised they could be described as: planning without planners.

Further research should examine this issue and find out how much of this responsibility can be placed on grass root initiatives without overcharging their capability.

It has to be mentioned that a planning-without-planners-process should not compete with the government. The shift of responsibility from the government to the settlers should be a temporary support through release. Ideally the aim in the long run should be a re-integration into governmental structures

Prevention

Further studies, on how to make actors of the early development stage of informal settlements (e.g. TAP-Owner, Shehas, middlemen, first settlers) aware of this necessity, have to be made. Negotiations between them have to be moderated to find solutions which represent everybody’s interest. The most important issue is to make them aware which simply means showing them the benefits they could gain if applying simple guidelines and rules to create a functional settlement structure. Further the adequate building guidelines and how they could be developed by a CBO (i.e. using but not misusing their power of social control) would have to be examined.

The power of football

The fascination and importance of football plays a major role. Through the case study approach the project transferred the findings from the research on providing a football ground to the establishment of a storm water management system. Football has a lot of power which can influence peoples behaviour as the example of Mzalendo FC, the football club in Magomeni, has illustrated. There is a secret behind football. Why is it so fascinating and why does it motivate fans to do things they usually do not do, like providing infrastructure facilities. Simplified this means: There is a potential behind football and this can have huge influence to create motivation and interest for other maybe more important issues.

All findings play an important role regarding the work of externals in developing countries as the project work focused it on informal settlements in Zanzibar. It is often better to have a close look on visible and, on the first sight, invisible structures. Finding out potentials and develop strategies and concepts out of them is sometimes better than to use theories in order to solve existing problems with utmost importance.

110

111

References Abgola, Tunde. Planning laws, buildings standards and the politics of illegality in human settlements: a

case study from Ibadan, Nigeria. Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Workshop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001.

Andreasen, Joergen. The Legacy of Mobilisation from Above: Participation in a Zanzibar Neighbour-hood. In: Tostensen, Arne; Tvedten, Inge; Vaa, Mariken. Associational Life in African Cities. Popular Responses to the Urban Crisis. Stockholm: Elanders Gotaab 2002. Pp. 263-281.

Apuzzo, Gian Matteo. Urban communities and participation in the XXI century: The informal urban century. Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Workshop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001.

ATV. ATV-Information – Regenwasserversickerung. Hennef: 1997. Awadh, Ghalib O.; Juma, Mjaja; Saad, Khadija M.; Schuttenbelt, Paul. Environmental Profile. Zanzibar

Town: 1998. Axelrod, Robert. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books, 1984. Baums, Britta; Hawig, Judith; Kolmans, Carlos; Völker, Vera. Solid Waste Management in Hanna Nas-

sif, Dar Es Salam, Tanzania – Analysis and Outlook. Dortmund: SPRING 2000. Booch, Graham. Die Leoparden von Zanzibar. (deutsche Fassung von Ingo Helm). w.y. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.). Informationen zur politischen Bildung, 3. Quartal 1999,

Afrika . Bonn: Franzis print & media GmbH, 1999. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.). Informationen zur politischen Bildung, 3. Quartal 2001,

Afrika II. Bonn: Franzis print & media GmbH, 2001. Commission for Land and Environment. National Land Use Plan. Zanzibar: 1995. Dickel, Reinhardt; Mentlein, Horst; Paulun, Jürgen; Peschel, Peter. Tabellenbuch Bautechnik. 3.

überarbeitete Auflage. Haan-Gruiten: Verlag Europa Lehrmittel, 1995. Directorate of Surveys and Urban planning. Proposed Layout Plan for Kisauni, scale 1:1,000. Zanzibar

Town: 2001. Fekade, Wubalem. Deficits of formal urban land management and informal responses under rapid urban

growth, an international perspective. Habitat International 24/2 2000. Pp. 127-150. Fernandes, Edesio. Regularising informal settlements in Brazil: legalisation, security of tenure and city

management. Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Workshop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001.

Geiger, Wolfgang F.; Dreiseitl, Herbert. Neue Wege für das Regenwasser – Handbuch zum Rückhalt und zur Versickerung von Regenwasser in Baugebieten (2.Auflage). München: Oldenburg Verlag 2001.

Government of the United Kingdom (Directorate of Overseas Surveys) for the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania (ed.). Zanzibar Sheet 10/2016 Zanzibar Town 1:10,000. 1982.

Grohmann, Peter. Soziale Bewegungen und städtische Umwelt. In: Grohmann, Peter; Hannemann, Veit; Hoffmann, Dirk (ed.). Andere Städte Anderes Leben. Saarbrücken: 1996. Pp. 39-65.

Grundström, Karin; Liuke, Laura. Coping in Costa Rica. Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Work-shop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001.

Hutchison, Jim. Miracle in the Mathare Slums. In: Reader’s Digest (Indian Edition): 1/1995. ILO: Könye, Lupala, Malombe: Evaluation of Hanna Nassif Community Based Urban Upgrading Proc-

ess Phase I. Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania: 1997. Karcher, Silke. Stadtsanierung in Bamako. Die Rolle lokaler Selbsthilfegruppen für die Sattsanierung in

Bamako/Mali. In: Grohmann, Peter; Hannemann, Veit; Hoffmann, Dirk (ed.). Andere Städte Anderes Leben. Saarbrücken: 1996. Pp. 223-242.

Karrenberg, H; Münstermann, E. Gemeindefinanzbericht 1998. In: Der Städtetag 3/98. Kasozi, Duncan. Official building standards versus adapted standards in housing – the case of Kampala

Uganda. Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Workshop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001.

112

Kombe, Wilbard J.; Kreibich, Volker. Informal Land Management in Tanzania. Dortmund: SPRING Centre, University of Dortmund, 2000.

Kreibich, Volker. Verstädterung in Armut. In: Kistella, Irene; Kurth, Detlef; Wagener, Maria T. (ed.). Städtebau... dem Ort, der Zeit den Menschen verpflichtet. Dortmund: druckwerk 2000. Pp. 270-278.

Lückenkötter, Johannes; Fieger; Roger. Improvement of squatter settlements: Between successful com-munity organizations and lack of cooperation – A case study of self-help activities in squatter settle-ments of Dar es Salaam. München: 1994.

Muhajir, Makame A.; Nnkya, T.; Mutero, J.. Draft Report of the Evaluation Mission. Zanzibar Town: 2000.

Mwalim, Mwalim Ali. Football in Zanzibar: A passtime, sport, ritual or religion?. Zanzibar Town: 2002. Ndegwa, Elijah N.D. Grassroot Participation in Development Planning in Kenya: Empowering Local

Communities. In: Überleben im afrikanischen Alltag. Improvisationstechniken im ländlichen und städtischen Konzept, ed. by Beat Sottas and Lilo Roost Vischer. Bern: Peter Lang, 1995.

Nohlen, Dieter. Lexikon Dritte Welt. Reinbek (Hamburg): 1991. Oestereich, Jürgen. The local community: a legal mediator between private property and the state?

Working paper taken from the N-AERUS Workshop Leuven and Brussels, Belgium: May 2001. Quian, K. Chinese Master Plan. Zanzibar: 1982. Schönhut , Michael; Kievelitz, Uwe. Partizipative Erhebungs- und Planungsmethoden in der

Entwicklungszusammenarbeit: rapid rural appraisal; participatory appraisal; eine kommentierte Einführung. Eschborn: GTZ, 1993.

Scholz, Wolfgang. Research Application DFG. Unpublished paper, Dortmund: 2000. Scholz, Wolfgang. Stadtplanung in Afrika. In: Raumplanung 101/2002, Dortmund: 2002a. Pp. 77 –81. Scholz, Wolfgang. Stories of 1000 and One Nights of Urban Growth – Informal Settlements and Informal

Land Management in Zanzibar/Tanzania. Unpublished paper for TRIALOG. Dortmund: 2002b. Scholz, Wolfgang; Hanel, Bettina. Sustainability of Informal Settlements - the Case of Zanzibar Town.

Revised summary of the findings of fieldwork I in April 2001. Unpublished Report, Dortmund: 2001. Sperling, Carsten. Nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung beginnt im Quartier. Freiburg: 1999. The Aga Khan Trust for Culture. Zanzibar – A Plan for the Historic Stone Town. Geneva: 1996. Törhönen, Mika-Petteri. Land tenure confused; Past, Present and Future of Land Management in Zanzi-

bar. Espoo: 1998. United Nations Centre of Human Settlements. The Habitat Agenda. Nairobi: 1996. United Nations Centre of Human Settlements. The State of the world’s cities report 2001. Nairobi: 2001. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Statistical Profiles of the Least Developed Coun-

tries. 2001. Veijalainen, Marjukka. The uncontrolled land delivery in Zanzibar Town. Helsinki: University of Tech-

nology, 2000. Vischer, Daniel; Huber, Andreas. Wasserbau – Hydrologische Grundlagen, Elemente des Wasserbaus,

Nutz- und Schutzbauten an Binnengewässern. Berlin: 1993. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Unpublished maps and data of Zanzibar Town. Zanzibar Town: 1998. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Common strategy for the upgrading of Ng’ambo. Zanzibar Town:

2000a. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Establishing Storm Water Drain Trunk in Jang'ombe/Urusi Area.

Zanzibar Town: 2000b. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Financing Zanzibar Municipal. Zanzibar Town: 2000c. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Haphazard Construction. Zanzibar Town: 2000d. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Municipal Boundary and Institutions' Responsibilities. Zanzibar

Town: 2000e. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Solid waste management. Zanzibar Town: 2000f. Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Water Supply, Wastewater, Flooding and Drainage. Zanzibar Town:

2000g.

113

Zanzibar Sustainable Programme. Working Group Report Jang`ombe/Urusi. Infrastructure improvement. Zanzibar Town: 2000h.

WebsitesWebsite Bank of Tanzania

http://www.bot-tz.org/Statistics/qreviews/table1_2.htm (access: 01.06.2002) Website FUPROVI

http://www.fruprovi.org (access: 28.05.02) Website International Labour Organisation

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/recon/eiip/publ/1998/tanzania/ (access: 30.05.2002) Website Sustainable Cities Programme

http://www.unchs.org/scp (access: 09.12.2001) Website Tanzania Network

http:// www.tanzania-network.de/info/pdf/HABARI_3-00.PDF (access: 6.06.2002) Website United Nations

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environmentgl/gesform.asp?getitem=665 (access: 01.06.2002) Website United Republic of Tanzania

http://www.tanzania.go.tz/Zanzibar.html (access: 11.01.2002) Website Waterpage

http://www.waterpage.com (access: 5.06.2002) Website Zanzibar

http://www.zanzibar.net/weather (access: 26.01.2002) Website Zanzinet Forum

http://www.zanzinet.org/zanzibar/position.html and www.zanzinet.org/zanzibar/hist.html (access: 11.01.2002)

InterviewsAbdullah, Haji Miraji. Interview with the initiator and treasurer of the self-help organisation in Mago-

meni – Meya on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni. Final research discussion with the experts on Zanzibar on March 6th, 2002. Participants: Habib, Mo-

hammed; Zahran, Mohammed; Mwalim, Mwalim Ali; Mzee, Khamis Juma; Pessel, Sigrid; Rahma-dani, J. Muhsin; Sheha, Sheha Collegga. Zanzibar Town.

Final research discussion with lecturers from the University College of Lands and Architectural Studies, University of Dar es Salaam on March 8th, 2002. Participants: Kyessi, Alphonce; Lupala, Aldo; Mmbopyo, George; Mwapilinda, Dr. Phillip; Sheuya, Shaaban. Dar es Salaam, University.

Haji, Ali. Interview with the club secretary of the Magirisi football team on February 18th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town.

Hassan, Hassan Ali. Interview with the Sheha of Magomeni on February 18th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Jaha, Mtumwa. Interview with the assistant Sheha for Meli Nne on February 27th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Meli Nne.

Kassim, J. Omar. Interview with the Councillor of Mkele Ward during the site visit on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Mkele Ward.

Key Person Meli Nne. Interview with a shop owner in Meli Nne on October 9th, 2001 conducted by Wolf-gang Scholz. Zanzibar Town, Meli Nne.

Khamis, Khamis Mkadam. Interview with the Sheha of Mkele Ward during the site visit on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Mkele Ward.

Lerise, Fred. Interview with a lecturer from the University of Dar es Salaam, University College of Lands and Architectural Studies, on November 13th, 2001. Dortmund.

114

Mahubaka, Mariah. Interview with the acting director of ANGOZA on February 25th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Mpoto, Ali Said. Interview with the Sheha of Mwanakwerekwe on October 7th, 2002 conducted by Wolf-gang Scholz. Zanzibar Town, Mwanakwerekwe.

Mpoto, Ali Said. Interview with the Sheha of Mwanakwerekwe on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Mwanakwerekwe.

Mwalim, Mwalim Ali. Director of the Stone Town Conservation Development Authority. Final research discussion with the experts on Zanzibar on March 6th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Mwalim, Mwalim Ali. Interview with the director of the Stone Town Conservation Development Authority on February 11th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Mwalim, Mwalim Ali. Interview with the director of the Stone Town Conservation Development Authority on February 18th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Mzee, Khamis Juma. Interview with the Vice Town Clerk of the Ministry for Water, Construction, Energy and Lands on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Mzee, Rajab. Interview with the club secretary of the Mzanlendo Football Club on February 15th and 29th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Omar, Mohammed. Interview with a storm water management expert of the Zanzibar Municipal Council on February 27th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Pessel, Sigrid. Interview with the external assistance of the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme on Febru-ary 11th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Pessel, Sigrid. Interview with the external assistance of the Zanzibar Sustainable Programme on April 10th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Rahmadhani, J. Muhsin. Head of the Solid Waste Department. Final research discussion with the experts on Zanzibar on March 6th, 2002. Zanzibar Town.

Resident Magomeni 1. Interview with a flooded resident in Magomeni on February 19th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 2. Interview with a flooded resident in Magomeni on February 19th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 3. Interview with a flooded resident in Magomeni on February 20th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 4. Interview with a flooded resident in Magomeni on February 28th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 5. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Magomeni on February 21st, 2002. Zan-zibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 6. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Magomeni on February 21st, 2002. Zan-zibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Magomeni 7. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Magomeni on February 21st, 2002. Zan-zibar Town, Magomeni.

Resident Meli Nne 1. Interview with a flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 25th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 2. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 25th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 3. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 28th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 4. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 26th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 5. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 28th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 6. Interview with a non-flooded resident in Meli Nne on February 27th, 2002. Zanzi-bar Town, Meli Nne.

Resident Meli Nne 12. Interview with a flooded resident in Meli Nne on March 23rd, 2002 conducted by Wolfgang Scholz. Zanzibar Town, Meli Nne.

115

Schlichting, Dr. Rolf. Interview with a civil engineer on May 24th, 2002. Dortmund. Sheha, Juma Mjaja. Interview with the acting programme co-ordinator of the Zanzibar Sustainable Pro-

gramme on February 18th, 2002. Zanzibar Town. Suleiman, Abdul Ali. Interview with the chairman of the self-help organisation in Meli Nne on February

27th, 2002. Zanzibar Town, Meli Nne. TAP-Owner 1. Interview with a former Three-Acre-Plot-Owner on March 18th, 2002 conducted by Wolf-

gang Scholz. Zanzibar Town. TAP-Owner 2. Interview with a former Three-Acre-Plot-Owner on March 26th, 2002 conducted by Wolf-

gang Scholz. Zanzibar Town.

Site VisitsSite visit Magomeni. Site visit to gain first impressions of the settlement on February 12th, 2002. Zanzi-

bar Town, Magomeni. Site visit Meli Nne. Site visit to gain first impressions of the settlement on February 13th, 2002. Zanzibar

Town, Meli Nne. Site visit Mkele Ward. Site visit to gain first impression of the situation in Mkele Ward before conducting

the interview with the Development Committee on February 20th, 2002. Participants: Kassim, J. Omar (Councillor); Khamis, Khamis Mkadam (Sheha); Pessel, Sigrid (Zanzibar Sustainable Pro-gramme); Ramadhani, J. Musim (Solid Waste Department). Zanzibar Town, Mkele Ward.

116

117

APPENDIX

118

119

Appendix 1: Interview topics for residents (flooded areas)

Date of Interview:Name of Interviewed person:Interviewer: Settlement: Condition:Place:Time:

1. Personal 1.1 How old are you? 1.2 Where are you from? (rural/urban) 1.3 Since when do you live in this settlement?

Why did you move into town/urban area? Do you feel at home here or are you more attached to your old village?

1.4 What is your occupation? Where do you work?

1.5 How many people live in your household? Household-Size, number of children:

2. The Plot 2.1 Are you the owner of this plot or are you a tenant? 2.2 From whom did you buy/rent it?

When did you buy this plot? 2.3 How much did it cost? 2.4 How much money would you get for it today? 2.5 Does the space around your house belongs to your plot (is the path alongside your

house public or belonging to your house)?

3. Settlement

3.1 Are there any changes in the settlement since you moved here?

What are the differences? What stayed the same?

3.2 Are you happy to live in this settlement?

Why/why not? Where do you meet friends/neighbours? For what purposes do you meet your friends /neighbours?

3.3 What are the problems that occur in the settlement?

3.4 What effects do these problems have on you?

120

3.5 What would be needed to solve the problems?

What has been done? Who does something against it? Who do you think should improve the situation in the settlement?

3.6 In general: What are the things that the government is responsible for and what are the things the residents are responsible for themselves?

3.7 Can you describe specific self-help activities?

Where do people meet? What kind of people? (Age, gender, educational level, economic situation) Who initiated the activities? How did you hear about it? Is there a main person that organises the activities? Can you describe the structure of the activity? How is the self-help activity linked to the government?

3.8 What activities do the parties (CCM,CUF) organise in the settlement? 3.9 Who represents the party in the settlement?

(where are they from, age, gender, economic/social situation) 3.10 How is the relationship between the two party branches (CUF, CCM) in the set-

tlement? 3.11 How is the relation between residents that belong to different parties? 3.12 Who are the people that have influence among the residents?

Why do these people have influence?

4. Flooding 4.1 How does the rainy season affect your household/property etc.? 4.2 Is there a flooded area nearby?

For how long does the water stay in the flooded area? 4.3 What are the reasons for flooding/storm water problems in flooded areas from your

point of view? 4.4 Who do you think is responsible to solve the problem of flooding/storm water? 4.5 What has been done to improve the situation?

What do you do to protect yourself and your property? What kind of action does the rest of the settlement take? Are there any governmental activities?

4.6 What would be the best solution to improve the situation? Is there a possibility for the people in the settlement to solve the problem by themselves? (What would be needed?)

4.7 Why do you settle in this area? Were you aware of the problems with storm water when you decided on your domicile? Did the Sheha tell you that your plot is located in a flood-prone area before you bought it?

121

4.8 Have you ever tried to collect/use rain water? If so: How/What kind of experiences have you made? If not: Why not? (we have heard that people from rural areas collect rain-water)

5. Football 5.1 Do you spend time/visit on the football ground?

Do you play football?Are you member of a football club?

5.2 What activities take place on football grounds except football?Which is the privileged use of the football ground in case of an overlapping schedule?

5.3 What does football mean for you concerning your every-day-live? What is more important for you, football or other leisure activities?

5.4 How did the football ground develop from farmland to football ground? Are there any specific reasons for the location of the football ground? When was the football ground established? Who took the initiative?

5.5 Are there been people who want to use the plot for other uses?

122

Appendix 2: Interview topics for Sheha of Magomeni

Semi structured interview with: The Sheha of Magomeni Date of Interview: Interviewer:

Introduction Structure: the head questions (with numbers) have to be asked. While the Sheha is talk-ing it is to be checked whether the sub questions are answered. Otherwise they have to be asked additionally.

1. Settlement

1.1 How many people live in Magomeni today? What is the average household size, how many children?

1.2 When did the development of your settlement start? (selling of first TAP) 1.3 How was your settlement developed?

Where did it start to develop? Please tell us about the planning scheme which was used in some areas?

1.4 Is it still developing? Are new houses build which then block streets or other access? Is it still possible to buy land? Do people still build houses?

1.5 Is the land between houses public or private property? Where is the border of the plots?

1.6 How is the economic/income situation in the settlement? Income range estimated between ........TSh and .........TSh?

1.7 Are there social institutions in the settlement? How many schools? How many children (percent) go to school (primary and secondary)?

1.8 Which social activities take place in this settlement? Where do people meet? (buildings, open spaces) For what purposes do people meet? (religious/ political/ recreational) What kind of people?

1.9 We noticed one plot kept free where children play. Why is this plot still kept open? Is it already sold?

2. Problems concerning the settlement 2.1 Since when are you the Sheha of Magomeni? 2.2 Are you living in the settlement?

Since when do you live there? 2.3 What are your main tasks as a Sheha? 2.4 What are the problems which people report to you? 2.5 What are the things that you would improve in the settlement?

123

2.6 Is there enough space for all the setters? (access, infrastructure and social activities) Do people have any problems that occur because of high density? Are there any problems with accessibility (of buildings)? Compared to other settlements are there more or less open space/ land for public uses?

3. Self-Help, CBOs and NGOs 3.1 Are there any self-help initiative that solve problems in the settlement?

What has been done? Who is participating? (age, gender, education, kind of job)

3.2 How is the initiative established? Which connection is between participants? (e.g. neighbourhood) Are there any assemblies? Where and how often do they meet? Do you participate in these assemblies? Is there a law concerning assemblies?

3.3 Are there any examples, where people worked on solving a problem that doesn’t affect them?

3.4 What kinds of finances/ resources are necessary to organise these initiatives? 3.5 Are there any CBOs/ NGOs or any other organisations acting in your settlement?

What are they doing? Who is participating? (age, gender, education, kind of job) Who are the initiators? Could you name us some contact persons?

3.6 How are you and your Shehia involved in the ZSP process?

4. Flooding If this has been mentioned as a problem in 3.4 this could be the link. Otherwise the In-terviewee should be introduced smoothly: We have heard of flooding problems, what is your opinion? Avoid an examination/interrogation situation! 4.1 What areas are affected by flooding? (Location, Area size, How many house-

holds/inhabitants) 4.2 What are the reasons for flooding of area X inside the settlement? (no drainage,

blockade of drainage..) 4.3 Why do people settle in flood prone areas?

Are they aware of twice-year-flooding when they decide on their domicile? We noticed that the plots at the bottom of the depression are not yet build on. Are all the plots already sold? Why did the owners not started building? What kind of people settle in the flooding areas? (e.g. Financial situation)

4.4 Are also the settlers in the non-flooded areas aware of the diseases and other prob-lems which occur from flooding?

4.5 Who should solve the problem of flooding and the impacts?

124

4.6 Are there any efforts to solve the problems caused by flooding? What do people do who are directly affected? (We noticed protection walls) Are there activities from the not flooded dwellers? Do they feel responsible? Are there any governmental activities? What actions do you take as the Sheha to improve the situation?

4.7 Are there any circumstances that would make it easier to provide a solution? What are conditions which lead to success? (certain settlement structure?)Most important lacks? (e.g.: lack of finance, settlement structure)

5. Football grounds We noticed that there is a (xy) football-ground in the settlement. We are interested in football grounds because that seems to be a successful example for the provision of space without governmental support.

5.1 Are you interested in football? Do you play football?

5.2 What does football mean for the people concerning their every-day-live? Why do people need football-grounds? Is it important for the whole settlement? Why it is important?

5.3 What other activities take place on football grounds? Are there settlers who want to use it for other purposes, which are now not allowed?

5.4 Who is allowed to use the football ground? Who is excluded? (e.g. Women)

5.5 Does each football ground belong to a certain football club? Is there a specific owner of the ground? IF YES: When were the plots sold and purchased? Who maintains it?

5.6 How did people manage to establish the football ground?If there is a owner: Who bought it? Where did people get the money from to buy it? If there is no owner: Why was the space kept free?

125

Appendix 3: Expert interview: Topics for Mr Mzee (Vice Town Clerk of MWCEL engineer expert for drainage)

Date of interview: Interviewer:

1. Personal 1.1 Please describe your working fields in the Zanzibar Municipal Council. 1.2 We prepared a sketch about National and Local Government institutions. Please

check its correctness.

2. Technical infrastructure 2.1 Where do you see problems in providing water, drainage, energy or waste man-

agement for the Zanzibar Municipality in general? (Please refer to planning / im-plementation /costs)

2.2 Are there any specific norms concerning technical infrastructure which have to be followed?

2.3 How far differs the reality in informal settlements from the official norms? 2.4 Are there any special problems for the settlements of Magomeni and Meli Nne con-

cerning technical infrastructure?

3. Drainage 3.1 Please explain shortly the phenomenon of storm water in terms of amount of storm

water, period of time in a year, spreading over days and within one day! 3.2 Are there any non-governmental self-initiatives for protection against flooding? If

yes, please explain and estimate the impacts. 3.3 What kind of problems have you noticed going along with storm water in the short

run/long run? 3.4 Which possibilities do you see in preventing the flooding problem in Magomeni

and Meli Nne? In terms of discharging

a) Do you see any possibilities to discharge storm water in Magomeni and Meli Nne into the swamps/next to them?

b) Is there enough capacity to absorb? c) Do you see any environmental problems d) We have heard about the project in Jangombe/ Urusi and their teamwork between

the Municipality and Privates. Is this transferable to Magomeni and Meli Nne? e) How can the maintenance of the drainages be organised? If yes, by government

and/or privates? In terms of harvesting

a) Are there any experiences of individual water harvesting? If yes, please describe. b) Who pays for it? c) Is it affordable for a group of people or even for individuals?

In terms of seepage a) What is the soil-absorption-capacity in Magomeni and Meli Nne?

In terms of other methods a) Maybe you see any combination possibilities?

126

Appendix 4: Interview topics for football-key person

Semi-structured interview with: Date of Interview: Time: Interviewer:Place:Condition:

1. Personal1.1 How old are you? 1.2 Where were you born? 1.3 In which settlement do you live?

Since when do you live there? Why did you move here?

1.4 How many people live in your household? 1.5 What is your job/occupation?

Where do you work?

2. Football club 2.1 What is the name of the club? 2.2 When was the football club founded? 2.3 What is your position/task in the football-club? 2.4 How many members your club consists of?

What kind of people? (age, gender, economic situation, occupation…) 2.5 Can you tell us something about the structure of the club?

Do you have a constitution or certain rules every member has to obey? Does a certain hierarchy of members exist? (leaders)

2.6 For what purposes (e.g. bulldozers to prepare grounds) do you need money? Where does it come from?

2.7 How are the divisions and games (appointments) organised? 2.8 Do members of the clubs have any advantages? 2.9 Is anybody excluded?

We heard that mainly Makunduchi people are members of the club, why?

3. Importance of football grounds 3.1 What does football mean for the people on Zanzibar concerning their everyday

live? What does football mean for you?

3.2 Who plays football on this football ground? Are women allowed to play football?

127

3.3 Is the football ground used for activities except football? What kind of activities? Who is using the football ground (women, age of users,…)? Why are these activities taking place on the football-ground?

3.4 Do all the settlers see the importance of the football-ground? Do they wish to use it for other purposes which might be prohibited?

4. Development and maintenance4.1 Does each football ground belong to a certain football club? 4.2 Who owns the football ground? 4.3 We heard that you had to move from one football ground to another, why? 4.4 Can you describe the establishing process of your current football ground?

When was it established (Stadium of settlement development)? Was the plot bought from a farmer (how much)?

4.5 For how much money could you sell it today? 4.6 If you compare the establishment of your current football ground to the one the

club used before, are there any differences/ similarities? 4.7 Who is responsible for maintaining the football ground? Do you face problems with

disposal of solid waste? 4.8 Why do you think is it possible to keep space open for football-grounds but not for

providing technical infrastructure such as drainage, roads …?

128

Appendix 5: Layout plan designed for a TAP-Owner in Kisauni

Figure 33: Kisauni Layout Plan

Source: Director of Surveys and Urban Planning 2001

Explanations This layout plan consists of 204 building plots for settlers (numbers 1-204) of different size: 15mx32m, 17mx25m, 15mx25m, 16mx24m and 15mx24m.

The bigger plots are areas for the community. Nr. 1: Nursery school Nr. 2: Dispensary Nr. 3: Mini super market Nr. 4: Quran School Nr. 5: Mosque Nr. 6: Open space Nr. 7: Local madrasa

The main roads have a width of about 15 metres and the smaller ones of 8 metres. Thus, nearly every plot is accessible by car. This definitely does not meet the demand of a locally adapted settlement structure.

129

Appendix 6: Data for Calculation

1*10^-5 = 0,00001 m/sY1 = 1,0Y2 = 0,5rT;n = 222,23 l/(s*ha)

49,5%50,5%70,0%30,0%

33,0%67,0%50,0%50,0%

Calculation of the total rain discharge affecting the fieldwork area

GradientAges Ym=(Y1*A1+Y2*A2)/Ages Qr=rT;n*Ym*Ages*Kf-Wert

Area I 55.200 m² 1%Area II 56.250 m² 1%Area III 61.450 m² 1%Area IV 48.200 m² 3% - 8%

221.100 m²

Ages

Area I 55.200 m² 1%Area II 56.250 m² 1%Area III 61.450 m² 1%Area IV 48.200 m² 3% - 8%

221.100 m²

Ages

Area I 50.625 m² 1% - 3%Area II 12.500 m² 1% - 3%Area III 12.500 m² 1% - 3%Area IV 4.000 m² 1%Area V 25.000 m² 1% - 3%Area VI 22.500 m² 1% - 4%Area VII 55.000 m² 1% - 2%

182.125 m²

Ages

Area I 50.625 m² 1% - 3%Area II 12.500 m² 1% - 3%Area III 12.500 m² 1% - 3%Area IV 4.000 m² 1%Area V 25.000 m² 1% - 3%Area VI 22.500 m² 1% - 4%Area VII 55.000 m² 1% - 2%

182.125 m²

rain discharge [l/s]

33,25

18,47

36,955,91

91,7093,44

80,07367,28

design rain fall rT;n=166,7*80/60 [l//s*ha)]

permeability coefficient (Kf-Wert) sandy soil:

coefficent of discharge non-sealed area A2

coefficent of discharge sealed area (gradient of roof > 15°) A1

0,85

0,665

percentage of non-sealed area Magomeni (real)percentage of sealed area Magomeni (real)

percentage of sealed area Meli Nne (real)

percentage of non-sealed area Meli Nne (future proposal)percentage of sealed area Meli Nne (future proposal)

percentage of sealed area Magomeni (future poposal)

percentage of non-sealed area Meli Nne (real)

Magomeni (70% sealed area)

percentage of non-sealed area Magomeni (future proposal)

0,85

0,74750,7475

0,7475

coefficient of dischargeMagomeni (49,5% sealed area)

0,7475

0,85

74,81

269,15

104,27106,25

91,05417,64

41,67

84,38

18,47

81,28

Meli Nne (50% sealed area)

91,67

0,75

0,75

0,75

0,7520,83

6,67

37,50

20,83

0,75

0,75

0,75

0,665

0,665

0,665

Meli Nne (33% sealed area)

0,665

0,6650,665

303,55

102,08

0,85 116,07

130

Appendix 7: Calculation for drainage size

Estimation: flow speed: v= kSt*rhy^2/3*IE^1/2= 0,8 m/s Average value Manning-Stricker-Value kSt= 70 Concrete with wood mould

GradientAges 49,5%[m³/s] 70%[m³/s] 49,5%[m²] 70%[m²]

Area I 55.200 m² 1% 0,0917 0,1043 0,115 0,130Area II 56.250 m² 1% 0,0934 0,1063 0,12 0,133Area III 61.450 m² 1% 0,1021 0,1161 0,13 0,145Area II+III 117.700 m² 1% 0,1955 0,2223 0,24 0,278Area I+II+ 172.900 m² 1% 0,2872 0,3266 0,36 0,408

GradientAges 33%[m³/s] 50%[m³/s] 33%[m²] 50%[m²]

Area I 50.625 m² 1% - 3% 0,0748 0,0844 0,094 0,105Area II 12.500 m² 1% - 3% 0,0185 0,0208 0,023 0,026Area III 12.500 m² 1% - 3% 0,0185 0,0208 0,023 0,026Area V 25.000 m² 1% - 3% 0,0369 0,0417 0,046 0,052Area VI 22.500 m² 1% - 4% 0,0333 0,0375 0,042 0,047Area VII 55.000 m² 1% - 2% 0,0813 0,0917 0,102 0,1151/2*Area I+III 63.125 1% - 3% 0,0933 0,1052 0,117 0,1321/2*Area I+III+V 88.125 1% - 3% 0,1302 0,1469 0,163 0,1841/2*Area I+III+V+VI 143.125 1% - 4% 0,1635 0,1844 0,204 0,230

flow cross-section A=Q/v

flow cross-section A=Q/vMagomeni

Meli Nne flow passage

flow passage

131

Appendix 8: Formula to calculate the bank width (B) A=(B+b/2)*h with A=flow cross-section => B=(2*A/h)-bvalues for sole width (b) and depth of drains (h) are estimated

Ages b h BArea I 55.200 m² 0,20 0,40 0,37Area II 56.250 m² 0,30 0,40 0,28Area III 61.450 m² 0,30 0,40 0,34Area II+III 117.700 m² 0,40 0,50 0,58Area I - III 172.900 m² 0,50 0,60 0,70

Ages b h BArea I 50.625 m² 0,15 0,30 0,45Area II 12.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,21Area III 12.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,21Area V 25.000 m² 0,15 0,25 0,22Area VI 22.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,45Area VII 55.000 m² 0,20 0,40 0,311/2*Area I+III 63.125 0,20 0,30 0,581/2*Area I+III+V 88.125 0,20 0,50 0,451/2*Area I+III+V+VI 143.125 0,30 0,50 0,52

Ages b h BArea I 55.200 m² 0,20 0,40 0,45Area II 56.250 m² 0,30 0,40 0,36Area III 61.450 m² 0,30 0,40 0,43Area II+III 117.700 m² 0,40 0,50 0,71Area I - III 172.900 m² 0,50 0,60 0,86

Ages b h BArea I 50.625 m² 0,15 0,30 0,55Area II 12.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,25Area III 12.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,25Area V 25.000 m² 0,15 0,25 0,27Area VI 22.500 m² 0,10 0,15 0,53Area VII 55.000 m² 0,20 0,40 0,371/2*Area I+III 63.125 0,35 0,35 0,401/2*Area I+III+V 88.125 0,35 0,40 0,571/2*Area I+III+V+VI 143.125 0,35 0,50 0,57

General measurements of the small paved drainagesh=0,1 m; b=0,1 m; B=0,4 m; => A=0,09 m²

Seepage

1*10^-5 = 0,00001 m/srT;n = 222,23 l/(s*ha)

Duration of the rain event T= 60 minconnected area (full size) Ages Ages

area for seepage As

Duration [d]Ages AS [m²] VS=(rT;n*(Ages+AS)*10^-7-AS*Kf/2)*60*T t=VS/(86400*AS*Kf/2)

Area III 48.200 m² 2.800 4.029,68 3,33

Retension area (Magomeni)Area I-III 111.450 m² 10.000 9.536,19 2,21

Ages

Area IV 4.000 m² 4.000 568,01 0,33

VS=(rT;n*(Ages+AS)*10^-7-AS*Kf/2)*60*T t=1 => VS=86400*AS*Kf/2

=> rT;n= (VSX/(60*T)+AS*Kf/2)/((Ages+AS)*10^-7)

=> rT;n= 69 l/(s*ha) => VSX= 1209,60 m³ => rT;n= 103 l/(s*ha) => VSX= 4320,00 m³

Magomeni

Meli Nne

Variate I (49,5% sealed area)

Variate I (33% sealed area)

Magomeni Area IMagomeni Retention area

permeability coefficient (Kf-Wert) sandy soil:

Volume for seepage capacity VS [m³]

Meli Nne (33% sealed area)

design rainfall rT;n=166,7*80/60 [l//s*ha)]

Magomeni (49,5% sealed area)

What must be the design rainfall to be able the sepage the full rain amout of an area in one day?

Meli Nne Variate II (50% sealed area)

Magomeni Variate II (70% sealed area)

132

Appendix 9: Calculation of concrete needed

Amount of concrete (15 cm thick) Amount = (2*Depth+Width)*Length*0,15cm

Depth Width Length Amount [m³]0,40 0,40 525,00 94,500,50 0,60 880,00 211,200,40 0,35 210,00 36,23

Depth Width Length Amount [m³]

0,30 0,55 200,00 34,500,35 0,50 125,00 22,500,15 0,25 112,50 9,280,15 0,25 112,50 9,280,40 0,40 237,50 42,750,40 0,40 250,00 45,00

Sum 2.652,50 505,24

A B C Dpercentage costs (30%) costs (20%) just material material without 30% additional costs

18,70 17.966,81 16.584,75 13.820,63 9.213,75 (price for concrete only)41,80 40.154,40 37.065,60 30.888,00 20.592,007,17 6.887,28 6.357,49 5.297,91 3.531,9467,68 65.008,49 60.007,84 50.006,53 33.337,69

6,83 6.559,31 6.054,75 5.045,63 3.363,754,45 4.277,81 3.948,75 3.290,63 2.193,751,84 1.764,60 1.628,86 1.357,38 904,921,84 1.764,60 1.628,86 1.357,38 904,928,46 8.127,84 7.502,63 6.252,19 4.168,138,91 8.555,63 7.897,50 6.581,25 4.387,5032,32 31.049,79 28.661,34 23.884,45 15.922,97

Costs

m³ of concrete = cement + sand + gravel+ watercement = 50 kg = 5000 TSh = 5 US $

1 m³ Concrete = 2500 kg => 2500kg * 505,24 m³ = 1.263.093,75 kg of concrete300kg/m³ of cement = 378.928,13 kg of cement

Price for cement = 37.892,81 US $ Magomeni Meli Nne

D + 30% costs for sand, gravel and water = 49.260,66 US $ 33.337,69 15.922,97

C + 50% of additional cost (machines, cascades, basins ...) = 73.890,98 US $ = material 50.006,53 23.884,45

A + 30% working costs 22.167,30 = 96.058,28 US $ 65.008,49 31.049,79

B + 20% working cost 14.778,20 = 88.669,18 US $ 60.007,84 28.661,34

7

Messurements [m]

Messurements [m]

3456

3

Drains Meli Nne12

Drains Magomeni 12

7

3

3456

Drains Meli Nne12

Drains Magomeni 12

133

Appendix 10: Calculation of costs The proportions of a mixture for concrete depend on the requirements for stability and friction. To meet all requirements for the special case of the research areas it is neces-sary that the concrete has a proportion of one third of cement, one third of gravel and sand and one third of water. Additionally the drains have to be constructed with a thick-ness of 15 centimetres. This is necessary because of high run-off velocities of the water, the high potential of friction by sand, gravel and rubbish inside the storm water drains and the uncertain underground of the drains.

Based on information of the Zanzibar Sustainable Program, a bag of 50 kilograms of cement is priced at about 5.000 TSh (US$ 5). The following details of the calculation concerning the percentages of additional costs are based on information by the Hanna Nassif Community Upgrading Project and the International Labour Organisation which are related to similar storm water drainages systems.

Besides the costs for cement the calculation of the costs for concrete has to consider the price for the additional materials sand, gravel and water. Their proportion to the costs for cement is estimated to one third. (Dickel et. al. 1995)

Also the expenditures on building up the intakes, the basins for seepaging the rain water and the cascades have to be taken into account. Most of the intakes could be erected with low expenditures by paving them with stones from the settlement itself which do not cost anything but have to be collected. The necessary materials for filling the wire-boxes of the cascades could be coral stones, which are available everywhere as well, or stones like the ones for the intakes. Supplementary to the cost for intakes, ba-sins and cascades, the costs for machines and equipment have to be added. All of these expenditures have an estimated share of additional 50 per cent based on the costs for the concrete.

Concerning the information by the Hanna Nassif Community Based Urban Upgrad-ing Project the labour costs have a share of approximately 30 per cent on the total costs. But it is possible that these costs can be reduced by a higher degree of work by the in-habitants of the settlements. Therefore skilled labours only have to be called for special tasks that have to be done by professionals. Regarding this fact the figures show how much of the costs can be reduced, by shifting the costs from 30 to 20 percent of the total material costs.

134

Appendix 11: Financing of Drains Magomeni

Drain 1Bank/sole width: 0.40m Depth: 0.40m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 525 m Concrete: 94.50 m³ Labour costs: US$ 4,146.19 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 2,764.13 Other costs: US$ 13,820.63

Drain 2 Bank/sole width: 0.60/0.70m Depth: 0.50/0.60m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 880m Concrete: 211.70 m³ Labour costs: US$ 9,266.40 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 6,177.60 Other costs: US$ 30,888.00

Drain 3 Bank/sole width: 0.35m Depth: 0.40m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 210m Concrete: 36.23 m³ Labour costs: US$ 1,589.37 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 1,059.58 Other costs: US$ 5,297.91

Appendix 12: Financing of drains in Meli Nne

Drain 2 Bank/sole width: 0.55m Depth: 0.3 Thickness: 0.15m Length: 200m Concrete: 34.50 m³ Labour costs: US$ 1,513.69 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 1,009.13 Other costs: US$ 5,045.63

Drain 3 Bank/sole width: 0.50m Depth: 0.35m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 125 Concrete: 22.50 m³ Labour costs: US$ 987.19 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 658.48 Other costs: US$ 2,193.75

Drain 4 Bank/sole width: 0.25m Depth: 0.15m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 112.5m Concrete: 9.28 m³ Labour costs: US$ 407.21 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 271.48 Other costs: US$ 904.92

Drain 5 Bank/sole width: 0.25m Depth: 0.15m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 112.5m Concrete: 9.28 m³ Labour costs: US$ 407.21 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 271.48 Other costs: US$ 904.92

Drain 6Bank/sole width: 0.40m Depth: 0.40m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 237.5m Concrete: 42.75 m³ Labour costs: US$ 1,875.66 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 1,250.44 Other costs: US$ 6,252.19

Drain 7 Bank/sole width: 0.40m Depth: 0.40m Thickness: 0.15m Length: 250m Concrete: 45.00 m³ Labour costs: US$ 1,974.38 Reduced Labour costs:

US$ 1,316.25 Other costs: US$ 6,581.25