The Stark Contrast in Nairobi's Urban Development: A Tale of Inequality

The Stark Contrast in Nairobi's Urban Development: A Tale of Inequality

Nairobi City County's urban development policies have sparked significant debate and concern among residents and observers alike. A glaring contrast in how different neighborhoods are treated, especially regarding housing demolitions, raises serious questions about the city's planning strategies and priorities.

In recent years, the Nairobi City County government has embarked on a series of demolitions, ostensibly to clear structures on riparian land and other areas deemed unsafe or illegal. However, a critical look at these actions reveals a disturbing pattern: informal settlements, home to the city's most vulnerable populations, are disproportionately targeted for demolition.

These demolitions often leave thousands of residents homeless, further intensifying the already dire living conditions in these areas. The rationale provided by the authorities typically hinges on issues of public safety and urban planning regulations. Yet, the selective enforcement of these rules suggests a deeper, more troubling bias.

The Untouched Affluence: A Tale of Two Cities

Contrasting sharply with the fate of informal settlements is the situation in more affluent areas of Nairobi. For instance, in Pangani, a residential area that remains largely untouched by the demolition crews, the disparity becomes glaringly apparent. Despite ongoing efforts to clear structures elsewhere, many affluent neighborhoods escape scrutiny and action, even when similar violations are present.

This discrepancy reveals a profound inequality in how urban policies are implemented. Affluent areas enjoy a level of protection and consideration that is starkly absent for those in informal settlements. This selective approach not only perpetuates existing inequalities but also undermines the very principles of fair governance and urban development.

Perpetuating Vulnerability and Inequality

The impact of this biased approach is profound. By targeting informal settlements while ignoring similar issues in wealthier neighborhoods, the Nairobi City County government is effectively entrenching social and economic disparities. The demolitions in informal settlements do not just displace families; they destroy communities and disrupt lives in ways that can have lasting consequences.

Moreover, this approach fails to address the root causes of the housing crisis in Nairobi. Informal settlements arise from a lack of affordable housing options and inadequate urban planning. Simply demolishing these areas without providing viable alternatives does nothing to solve the underlying problems and instead shifts the burden onto the most vulnerable residents.

A Call for Equitable Urban Planning

For Nairobi to move towards a more equitable and just urban future, its planning policies must be re-evaluated and reformed. Urban development should be inclusive, addressing the needs of all residents, irrespective of their socio-economic status. This includes providing adequate housing options and ensuring that enforcement of regulations is consistent and fair across all areas.

The case of Pangani and other affluent areas remaining untouched by demolition efforts serves as a stark reminder of the need for a more balanced approach. It highlights the importance of considering the human impact of urban policies and striving to create a city where all residents can thrive, not just the privileged few.

The Aftermath of Floods: A Crisis further intensified.

Following the intense flooding that led to the destruction of lives and property, particularly along riparian zones, the government's response has further highlighted these inequalities. The flooding prompted a Cabinet Directive on April 30, 2024, followed by Public Security Orders on May 2 and May 4, 2024, mandating the 'voluntary evacuation' or 'forcible relocation' of individuals in riparian zones. These directives threaten to displace over 127,000 vulnerable residents in Nairobi alone, without a viable Relocation Action Plan, proper enumeration, or a clear compensation scheme.

In response, a Community Town Hall Meeting was held on May 9, 2024, at the Ruben Centre in Mukuru kwa Reuben. Over 500 residents from settlements including Mathare, Kawangware, Kibra, and Mukuru voiced their frustrations about ongoing evictions, which contradicted previous government assurances. The community highlighted issues of transparency, fairness, and respect for their rights, as encapsulated in their statements:

• Rights of Slum Dwellers: The community demands a fair, humane, and well-researched eviction plan.some text
  • “Mama alipigwa risasi juu ya kuuliza swali.” (A woman was shot for asking a question.)
  • “Wanatwambia hakuna kubomolewa lakini kwetu kuna maiti juu ya kubomolewa.” (They tell us there will be no demolitions, but we have corpses from demolitions.)
• Selective Enforcement: There is a perception of discrimination in eviction enforcement, targeting slum areas while affluent areas and businesses along rivers remain untouched.some text
  • “Ni kama hii ubomoaji inalenga tu vijiji. Kuna nyumba wamejenga karibu na mto huku Kibera, hizo zitabomolewa?” (It seems these demolitions only target villages. There are houses built near the river in Kibera; will those be demolished?)
• Eviction Procedures: The community demands clear steps for eviction, including proper mapping, enumeration, verification, a proper resettlement plan, and adequate notice periods.some text
  • “Jana tractor ilikuja. Mama aliyekuwa amejifungua akawaomba waache atoke polepole but tractor ikakanyanga nyumba yake.” (Yesterday a tractor came. A woman who had just given birth asked them to wait as she left slowly, but the tractor crushed her house.)
• Government’s Compensation: The government’s offer of 10,000 KShs is deemed inadequate for those evicted, many of whom are in low-income jobs.some text
  • “Sio kupenda kwetu kukaa karibu na mto. Wengi wetu ni mama mboga na watu wa bodaboda na mapato yetu ni ya chini. Hatuwezi afford nyumba huko juu.” (It's not our choice to live near the river. Many of us are vegetable vendors and motorbike taxi operators with low incomes. We can't afford houses elsewhere.)

Recommendations from Civil Society Organizations

In solidarity with the affected communities, several organizations, including SDI Kenya, KDI, PSN, Akiba Mashinani Trust, Amnesty International Kenya, and Habitat for Humanity Kenya, have put forward the following recommendations:

1. Develop a robust and community-centered Relocation Action Plan (RAP) that is inclusive, transparent, and accountable, ensuring the safeguarding of lives, properties, and livelihoods.
2. Provide immediate emergency assistance in the form of cash transfers of 30,000 KShs per month for three months to each affected household.
3. Integrate existing data concerning affected households into the State Department for Housing and Urban Development's Affordable Housing Programme, designating these households as priority beneficiaries.
4. Hold government officials accountable for allowing and facilitating the occupation of riparian zones and prevent future unauthorized occupations.
5. Ensure accountability and justice for the lives lost, properties destroyed, and livelihoods disrupted during the forced evictions, advocating for humane disaster management interventions.

In conclusion, Nairobi's urban development and housing policies must shift from perpetuating inequality to fostering inclusivity and fairness. Only then can the city hope to build a future that is truly sustainable and equitable for all its inhabitants.

‍