Conference Report - Centre For Urban Innovations · a platform for young professionals and students in the built environment to participate in the interactive sessions and presentations

University of NairobiDepartment of Urban and Regional Planning

ConferenceReport

PROSPECTS FOR INNOVATIVE, RESILIENT AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT

CENTRE FOR URBAN RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS CONFERENCE 2016

Centre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI)

University of NairobiDepartment of Urban and Regional PlanningCentre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI)P. O. BOX. 30197 00100 GPO NAIROBI, KENYAEmail:[email protected]


ConferenceReport

October 27th - 28th 2016



2

Convened By:


Centre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI)P. O. BOX. 30197 00100 GPO NAIROBI, KENYA

[email protected]

Conference Secretariat:Dr. Romanus Opiyo, Jacinta Mwikali Mbilo, Philip O. Olale, Sharon Boit,

Isaac Kang’ethe

Prepared By:Philip O. Olale and Jacinta Mwikali Mbilo

Editors:Prof. Peter M. Ngau and Dr. Musyimi Mbathi

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................................. 11.1: Background ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11.2: Rationale ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11.3: Conference Objectives................................................................................................................................................................................................................................31.4: Conference Program ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................31.5: Who Attended? ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 41.6: About the Organizers ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................5

2. CONFERENCE OUTCOME ............................................................................................................................................................. 62.1: GLOBAL AGENDA FOR INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... 6

2.1.1: Thematic Overview .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 62.1.2: Resilience in Urbanizing Developing Countries’ Cities – Mr. Grace Lubaale .............................................................................................. 62.1.3: Inclusivity in the Global Development Agenda - Prof. Peter Ngau .................................................................................................................. 7

2.2: LOCALIZING THE AGENDA FOR INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT ............................................... 92.2.1: Thematic Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 92.2.2: Role of Resilience in Urban Development – Mr. Stephen Otieno ...................................................................................................................................102.2.3: Resilient and Inclusive Urban Development in Africa, Countering the narrative of World Class Cities - Prof. Alfred Omenya ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 122.2.4: Approaches to Resilient & Inclusive Urban Development in Emerging Towns in Kenya - Prof. Caleb Mireri ........................................ 132.2.5: Planning Approaches for Inclusive and Innovative Urban Development - Samuel Mabala ..........................................................................14

2.3: INNOVATIONS, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT UNDER DEVOLVED GOVERNANCE ...................................152.3.1: Thematic Overview ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................152.3.2: Planning for Inclusive Urban Development in the Context of Challenges and Prospects or Opportunities - Dr. George Wagah ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................162.3.3: Human Rights and Inclusive Sustainable Cities - Josiah Omotto ..................................................................................................................................182.3.4: Innovations for Effective Public Participation in Urban Areas - Dr. Lorraine Amollo ...........................................................................................202.3.5: Prospects for Inclusive Urban Development: Case of Local Urban Forums - George Wasonga ............................................................... 222.3.6: Good Governance and Inclusive Urban Development Areas: Case of Kiambu County - Eunice Karoki ................................................242.3.7: Role of Public Participation in Achieving Inclusive Planning: Case of Makueni County - Judith Kalinga ................................................252.3.8: Inclusive Development under Devolved Governance; Case of Lamu County - Amin Rashid .......................................................................262.3.9: Inclusive Slum Mapping - Grace Githinji ........................................................................................................................................................................................27

2.4: RESEARCH TOWARDS INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO FACILITATE RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................28

2.4.1: Thematic Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................282.4.2: Mediating Conflicting Planning Rationalities in Low-Income Neighborhoods in Nairobi - Dr. Munyua Mwaura ...............................292.4.3: Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning (SUMP) Approach, Case of Ruiru, Kenya - Dr. Romanus Opiyo ................................................. 302.4.4: Sustainable Solutions towards Prevention of Slum Gentrification after Land Allocation to Individual Squatters: Nyamaroto Informal Settlement, Nakuru County - Diana Kinya ...........................................................................................................322.4.5: Negotiating Access to Land by Squatters: Case of Gandini, Maunguja and Kashani Land in Mombasa County, Kenya ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................33

2.4: SCALING UP RESILIENCE, INNOVATION AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................362.4.1: Thematic Overview ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................362.4.2: Transforming Urban Landscapes through design: Slum Architects Initiatives - Belinda Tuju ......................................................................362.4.3: Improving Urban Mobility: Case of Bus Rapid Transit System in Nairobi (BRT) - Maina Gachoya ........................................................... 372.4.4: Improving Accessibility and Mobility in Urban Areas case of Bike Share Program in University of Nairobi - Charles Katua ...... 382.4.5: 100 Cities Resilience Project: Nairobi Case - Dr. Musyimi Mbathi...................................................................................................................................39

3. CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................................................................42

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................................................43

5. APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................................................44

4

1.INTRODUCTION

5

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1: Background

The Centre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI) and its partners namely Akiba Mashinani Trust (AMT), Slum Dwellers International (SDI), the Federation for Urban Poor (Muungano wa Wanavijiji)

and University of California, Berkeley, have in the last 7 years been focused on research and collaborative action aimed at promoting sustainable urban development. One of the outcomes of this collaboration has been the realization that innovations, resilience and inclusivity are fundamental in promoting sustainable urban development. However, with so many new innovations and emerging urban paradigms around the world we acknowledge the complexities in implementing these solutions. Coming home most urban areas continue to be poorly planned and face numerous challenges with the continued urbanization, including poor access to basic services, such as water, electricity, sanitation and housing.

Against this backdrop, the Centre based at the University of Nairobi hosted a 2-day conference on 27th- 28th October 2016 with the theme “Prospects for Innovative , Resilient and Inclusive Urban Development”. This conference focused on two main concerns; a) Is attainment of inclusive and resilient urban development real in Africa urban cities? b) What innovative mechanisms can be relied on in the realization of inclusivity in Africa cities and urban areas? The conference brought together key actors in the region to dialogue, engage in self-reflection and constructive critique on inclusive urban planning and policy development. In addition, the conference provided a platform for young professionals and students in the built environment to participate in the interactive sessions and presentations. Suffice it to say, the conference provided an opportunity to reaffirm commitments and actions from key stakeholders in addressing urban challenges in contemporary and future African urban cities.

1.2: Rationale People have always viewed urban areas as avenues for improving their lives, accessing better education, job opportunities among other benefits. Indeed, urban areas are engines for driving economic productivity, poverty alleviation and sustainable resource utilization towards a more prosperous country. Given their importance, it is critical to promote and facilitate inclusive, smart and sustainable practices within urban areas. As the world continues to urbanize, sustainable development challenges will be increasingly concentrated in urban areas, particularly in developing countries where pace of urbanization is faster.1 Today’s big challenges of poverty, inadequate infrastructure and services, stagnated economic growth, environmental degradation, and the need to create and maintain inclusive, progressive and peaceful society, will only be met through sustainable development practices.

UN HABITAT reports that the world’s urbanization and growth is expected to add over 2.5 billion people by 2050 and, close to 90 percent of the increase would be added in Africa and Asia. Though, Africa and Asia are rapidly urbanizing than other regions in the world, both remain the least urbanized. In 2014, both continents had the highest rate of urbanization2 at 1.5 percent and 1.1 percent per annum, respectively. Within Africa, East Africa region remains highly varied but overall experiencing one of the highest urban growth rates. It varies from a low 4.4 percent in Kenya to 5.8 percent in Rwanda and 5.4 percent in Uganda.3 Though Kenya has the lowest rate than its counterparts, it tops in the proportion of urban population. Increasingly, urban areas in East Africa are faced with numerous urbanization challenges of over-crowding,

1 UN HABITAT (2014) Worlds Urban Prospects https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2014-Highlights.pdf

2 The rate of Urbanization is measured as the average annual rate of change of the percentage urban area

3 World Bank http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.GROW

6

deteriorating infrastructure and services, high mortality rates, environmental degradation and housing shortage.

In Kenya, the total urban population is 12.5million or 32.3 percent of the total population.4 UN HABITAT projects that by 2050; half of Kenya’s population will be living in cities and urban areas.5 Against the rapid urban growth the country is registering deteriorating physical infrastructure and institutions. As a result, Kenya’s urban areas are characterized by expansive informal settlements. In fact, 60 percent of the total urban population resides in slums and informal settlement. And, 76.5 percent of the workforce is employed within the informal sector.6 In spite of the high urbanization growth, only 53 percent of the urban population has access to piped water supply and sanitation;7 only 31 percent have access to private improved sanitation including sewerage8 . About 60 percent of the urban residents have access to legal electricity connection9. Public housing production is low. The annual housing deficit stands at 80 percent and it is even higher among the urban poor considering the high rate of informal settlements proliferation. In addition, the urban poor in Kenya’s capital, for example, spend about 30 percent of their income on transportation.10 The high costs force majority of them to walk or cycle to areas of work. In most urban centers, non-motorized provisions remain poorly planned. As a result, the high rates of road

4 KNBS, “Kenya 2009 Population and Census Highlights,” 2010, http://www.countrystat.org/Country/KEN/Doc/Census/2009_Census.pdf.

5 Redfern Paul, “Kenya’s Population to Hit 97 Million in 2050,” 2014, http://mobile.nation.co.ke/news/Kenya-population-to-hit-97-million-in-2050/1950946-2418678-format-xhtml-d4o8uk/index.html.

6 DanishTradeUnion,“KenyaLabourMarketProfile,”n.d.,http://www.ulandssekretariatet.dk/sites/default/files/uploads/public/PDF/LMP/lmp_kenya_2014_final_version.pdf.

7 KNBS, “Kenya Population 2009 - Statistics, Distribution and Demographics by Ethnicity,” accessed August 9, 2016, http://www.kenya-information-guide.com/kenya-population.html.

8 ibid 9 International Energy Agency, “Africa Energy Outlook: A Focus

on Energy Prospects in Sub-Saharan Africa,” 2014, www.iea.org 10 “Kenya:Nairobi’sPoorSpendSignificantlyonTransport,UN

Report Says | ARCHITECT AFRICA ONLINE,” April 1, 2015, http://architectafrica.com/node/18358.

accidents affect mainly the non-motorized, who are mainly the urban poor. These pointers are measures of exclusion for the urban poor from equitable opportunities in infrastructure, basic services and housing.

1.3: Conference ObjectivesBroadly, this conference aimed to provide a multidisciplinary platform where partners and participants would reflect and share their contributions to achievement of inclusive urban development. The specific objectives of the Conference included: - a. To share experiences of good governance practices towards

innovative, resilience, inclusive and sustainable urban development, strength and challenges;

b. To explore challenges and opportunities for innovative, inclusive and sustainable urban development under devolved government;

c. To explore innovative approaches/methodologies of facilitating inclusion of all stakeholders particularly the urban poor, in planning and development of urban areas; and

d. To develop principles and guidelines to upscale resilience, innovations and inclusion in urban development.

1.4: Conference ProgramThe Conference adopted a robust program, which was organized around six themes reflecting the objectives of the Conference. Table 1 gives a summary of these themes – also see appendix 1 on the detailed conference program.

7

Session Theme

Session 1 Innovative, Resilience and Inclusive Urban Development Global Agenda

Session 2 Innovative, Resilience and Inclusive Urban Development African Context

Session 3 Good Governance and Inclusive Urban Development

Session 4 Innovative, Resilience and Inclusive Urban Development under Devolved Governance

Session 5 Research Towards Innovative Approaches to facilitating Inclusion and Resilience in Urban Development

Session 6 Role of Government in Scaling Up Resilience, Innovation and Inclusion

Table 1: Summary of Key Conference Themes

1.5: Who Attended?

This conference brought together a broad spectrum of actors and stakeholders responsible for shaping the urban fabric in Eastern Africa. Over 70 delegates comprising relevant National and County government level policy makers and technical officers, independent constitutional commissions, university academia, consultants in the built environment, professional associations, and civil society organizations.

8

Part of the Participants

A Section of the Participants

9

1.6: About the Organizers

This conference was organized by the Centre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI). CURI is a research centre based at the University of Nairobi, School of the Built Environment. CURI seeks to create a forum for exploring innovative methodologies for enabling planners and professionals in the Built Environment to be more responsive and effective in addressing urban challenges in contemporary and future African urban settings. University of Nairobi through the Center is a recipient of research support grant from the Rockefeller Foundation to promote infrastructure development programs that are scalable and responsive to local community needs in informal settlements.

A Panoramic View of the Conference Hall

10

2.CONFERENCE

OUTCOME

11

2. CONFERENCE OUTCOME

2.1: GLOBAL AGENDA FOR INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT

2.1.1: Thematic Overview

This conference sought to contribute to the global debates the New Urban Agenda arising from Habitat III, following the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development that took place in Quito, Ecuador, from 17 – 20 October

2016. The New Urban Agenda promulgated by Habitat III reaffirms this need to implement sustainable goals to improve the quality of life within urban areas. The agenda supports the Sustainable Development Goals and targets SDG 11 of making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable by among others promoting inclusive urban planning, investing in affordable public housing and public transport. The New Urban Agenda is the outcome document agreed upon at the Habitat III cities conference in Quito, Ecuador, which will guide the efforts around urbanization of a wide range of actors — nation states, city and regional leaders, international development funders, United Nations programs and civil society, for the next 20 years. Certainly, this agenda will also lay the groundwork for policies and approaches that will extend, and impact, far into the future.

Therefore, within this paradigm, the management of the urban transformations requires sustainable and innovative social, economic and environmental approaches. Two key presenters set the global agenda for the CURI Conference. Firstly, Grace Lubaale gave a presentation on the nature of resilience in developing cities under the realm of the global urban agenda. Lubaale noted that for these developing cities to realize the fruits of the new urban agenda, they should adopt structural inclusiveness and ensure that urban developments are equitably

implemented based on an elaborate monitoring and evaluation framework. Prof. Peter Ngau who noted that social exclusion characterized by unequal access to resources, capabilities and rights was a major bottleneck towards the realization of the New Urban Agenda supported this school of thought. Based on what he called “poverty penalty”, Ngau argued that social exclusion is a real threat to growth and development as evident in cases where a few wealthy urban residents pay less for basic services like water compared to the urban poor in informal settlements. A summary of the presentation by the two presenters is provided below.

2.1.2: Resilience in Urbanizing Developing Countries’ Cities – Mr. Grace Lubaale

In this opening presentation, Grace Lubaale noted that the new trends of urbanization especially in Africa should be sufficient in making policy makers and decision takers appreciate the multifaceted nature of resilience. According to Grace, the increasing urbanization is unmatched with service provision and this coupled with the rapid population increase causes significant strain on existing basic services. Nevertheless, he noted that urban areas provide more opportunities thus with the rapid urbanization, comes a heavy rural-urban migration shift in search for greener pastures.

As a result, these urban areas are characterized by an array of challenges, which jeopardize their resilience. Some of the challenges that Grace identified include: unemployment in urban areas mainly fueled by rural-urban migrants who leave their rural economic activities and move to urban areas with the hope of finding better-paying jobs; increase in crime mainly characterized by joblessness; and air pollution from concentration of vehicles and growth of industries. In addition, he argued that in developing countries’ urban areas are characterized by weak economies and revenue base, poor basic infrastructures, high poverty rates, poor management and, governance.

12

In providing a way forward for urban areas to realize resilience despite the above challenges, Grace proffered a definition for resilience to include the ability to cope with the changing dynamics of the urban areas. Thus according to him, the New Urban Agenda addresses a number of issues that are germane in ensuring resilience in urban areas. The first issue is devolution of power and services to smaller units within the urban realm to enhance public participation and resource allocation. According to Grace, this has the potential of accelerating sustainable socio economic development, strengthening inclusivity of vulnerable groups and improving emergency response to disasters.

The second issue that Grace talked about was the inclusion of a robust monitoring and evaluation mechanism to help in improving performance and achieving intended results. He noted that the goal is to improve current and future management of outputs, outcomes and impact. In addition, he said that the monitoring and evaluating framework is mainly used to assess the performance of projects, institutions and programmed set up by governments and identifies key weaknesses and strengths to guide future process of developments.

The third issue in Grace’s presentation was about structural inclusiveness. He noted that structural inclusiveness is a term that is used to describe a series of positive actions to achieve equality of access to goods and services, to assist all individuals to participate in community and society so that their voices are heard. Hence, according to him, this is done to encourage the contribution of all persons to development issues and to be aware of and to challenge all levels of development for the advancement of the community. Conversely, Grace argued that a socially inclusive society is one where all people feel valued, their differences are respected, their voices heard and their basic needs are met so they can live in dignity and feel incorporated in the well-being of the society at large.

2.1.3: Inclusivity in the Global Development Agenda -

Prof. Peter Ngau

This was the second presentation on setting the global agenda for innovative, resilient and inclusive urban development. Prof. Peter Ngau who is the Principal, College of Architecture and Engineering at the University of Nairobi, gave this presentation that mainly revolved around the impact of social exclusion in urban development. According to Prof. Ngau, social exclusion consists of a dynamic, multi-dimensional process driven by unequal power relationships interacting across four main dimensions; economic, political, social and cultural. He argued that these dimensions manifest at different levels including individual, household, group, community, country and global levels. In effect, Prof. Ngau noted that this phenomenon results in a variety of inclusion or exclusion characterized by unequal access to resources, capabilities and rights.

Prof. Ngau argued that social exclusion has been a thorn in the African skin going back to the apartheid days in South Africa, which culminated in an uprising. According to him, social exclusion is a real threat to the growth of the continent as a whole as evident in cases where a few wealthy citizens pay less for basic services compared to urban poor. To demonstrate this manifestation of social exclusion, Prof Ngau gave a detailed case of Kenya. Prof. Ngau argued that one of the reasons why exclusion continues to persist is the increasing levels of ‘poverty penalties’. Peter Ngau defined ‘poverty penalty’ as a phenomena in which the poor in urban areas pay more to access basic services while they remain the least served. He argued that the increasing poverty penalty has led to the poor paying more in terms of bills on services provided by government and the quality of services remain poor. He gave a case in Nairobi where the main sewer line passes through Mathare slums to connect households in Eastleigh and Parklands area but with only a few households being connected to the sewer line from the informal settlement. This according to him is not a matter of cost incurred to connect the urban poor but that of a high level of exclusion.

13

In his presentation, Prof. Ngau also postulated on what could be causing persistent exclusion in urban areas. According to him, the main cause of persistence exclusion disparities is in budget expenditures where budgets are skewed towards recurrent expenditures and less on basic services and development. He argued that this has also been devolved to other lower governance units where much of their budgets are used to pay salaries rather than focusing on basic services and development. He thus noted that a paradigm shift in allocation of more resources on developments could help to improve the quality of life especially the urban poor.

He gave an example of Kenya where the County governments are yet to fully assume their mandates and requisite allocations as per the Constitution of Kenya 2010. He argued that key functions are yet to be devolved from the national governments and parastatals. For example in Nairobi City County, the county government has only control over collecting of waste (Waste management). Water supply is managed by NAWASCO, electricity supply by KPLC, and roads by Kenya Highway Authority (KeNHA) and Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA) which are either parastatals or semi-autonomous edities. This, he noted, denies county governments a chance to manage major operations of their counties hence delays in access to basic urban services for the urban residents, including the urban poor.

In addition, Prof. Ngau said that disparity between policy and action causes a major operational challenge in many urban development frameworks. He argued that in many developing countries such as Kenya development plans remain mainly at policy level, which are either not implemented or take longer time before they are implemented. This disparity derails urban development because resources are wasted on policy level, which does not scale up to implementation.

In concluding his presentation, Prof. Ngau noted that social exclusion needs to be addresses and for the success of its suppression various solutions can be implemented. Prof. Ngau said that this could be done through a collaboration of lead actors and policy actions. Based on his conceptualization, policies and action should be grouped on the basis of two criteria: the lead ‘actors’ involved and the ‘theory of change’ underlying the policy/action. He therefore noted that the importance of partnerships between more than one of these actors is crucial to tackling social exclusion.

Prof. Peter Ngau

14

2.2: LOCALIZING THE AGENDA FOR INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT

2.2.1: Thematic Overview An important aspect that has played a key role in institutionalizing urban exclusion in majority of cities in Africa is a legacy that has been continued from the colonial era. The absence of social protective measures has remained hostile to urban new comers in search for employment, thereby creating innumerable roadblocks for their citizenship entitlements. The failure of these models to accommodate the dynamic urbanization trends in the face of increasing economic growth and informality has resulted to social and spatial marginalization in urban areas. It is from this standpoint that this session was mainly geared towards nuancing new innovations and a paradigm shift in planning and development approaches.

Therefore, presentations in this session covered some pragmatic arguments and normative procedures that can be implemented to ameliorate the challenge of non-resilience and exclusion in urban development. The presentations here largely focused on Africa with a few scaling down to use Kenya as a case study and/or to illustrate a point. Presentations by Samuel Mabala, Prof. Alfred Omenya, and Stephen Otieno were more focused on Africa while Prof. Caleb Mireri focused on Kenya. Broadly, Otieno talks of the role of resilience in urban development giving key factors that make cities in Africa resilient and at the same time also giving concrete steps that cities should adopt in realizing resilience. Prof. Omenya on the other hand, characterizes the phenomenon of world-class cities, which has become a catchphrase vision for many cities in Africa. Prof. Omenya mainly argues that solutions for African Cities lie in their appreciation of indigenous knowledge and practices.

After the discussion on the role of resilience and the challenges therein, Prof Mireri and Mabala give approaches that can be adopted to realize inclusive and resilient urban areas. Prof. Mireri argues that achieving a fully resilient and inclusive urban

development requires three key approaches namely; demand driven research, effective policy guidelines and enhancement of governance frameworks. On the other hand, Mabala talks of the need for a paradigm shift in planning, financing, designing, and implementation of governance. He notes that this shift in planning is capable of delivering inclusive and resilient urban development in a view to answer some of the challenges noted by Prof. Omenya and Otieno. The key arguments form these presenters is outlines in the subsequent sections below.

2.2.2: Role of Resilience in Urban Development – Mr. Stephen Otieno

Stephen Otieno, who is a Research Fellow at East African Institute (EAI) of the Aga Khan University, talked about that various factors that make cities resilient and the steps that cities can take towards realizing resilience. Otieno began his presentation by characterizing the challenge of resilience in urban areas. He noted that challenges that may arise from urbanization are cross cutting in East African countries and include urban sprawl, poverty hazards, social exclusion, climate change and environmental unsustainability. He argued that in 2008, for the first time in Nairobi, food aid was provided, exposing the fact that Nairobi was unable to respond to the food shock due to the political climate at that time thus its inability to be resilient.

Further, Otieno postulates that an assessment based on existing studies show that these resilience battles will be won and lost in the cities, mainly because cities are coming together as engines of economic growth and centres of innovations. While noting that cities are spaces that metamorphosis and change over time, Otieno advises that much focus should be on how cities will respond in line with the sustainable development goals. He therefore presented factors that make cities resilient to include;• Reflectiveness; which is the ability to learn from the past

and how to deal with future hazards. For example, a study undertaken by EAI back in 2012 showed that 60% of the water in Nairobi was unaccounted. The project to divert water to increase water volumes in Nairobi, is ongoing but the massive water loss has not been addressed, fixing the loopholes that are there to reduce challenges of future

15

projects.• Resourcefulness; ability to find alternatives to sort out

problems and reduce dependence on county and national government, where the grassroots organizations work to provide some amenities, such as water to the community. This is most common in informal settlements, where there are strong women and youth organizations that come together to provide services and amenities within the informal settlements.

• Robustness; Cities need to have the ability to provide elements to foresee challenges, more so in areas where the cities is vulnerable along the fault lines.

• Redundancy; this is the ability to accommodate disruptions and the willingness to adapt to change. For example, if Nairobi water quality was compromised, how many people have alternatives?

• Inclusivity; entails broad consultations and engagements with different stakeholders to share common and different ideas and shared goals

• Integration; is the ability to bring together different systems, disciplines and institutions.

Otieno concluded his presentation by putting forth some fundamental steps to resilience. He noted that in most urban areas and cities in the region, including Nairobi, resilience is in the diagnosis stage, where these cities are trying to address resilience with the various existing organizations coming up with appropriate tools. Hence, to move towards the implementation stage, he argued that a full understanding of the various elements that will aid implementation is important. According to him, these include: a) Strong leadership, which stands up for progressive urban development ideas. A good example is South America, where mayors have stood up to overhaul the transport system, with others overhauling the health system; b) Coordination across national and local levels to minimize the duplication of projects between central and devolved governments; c) Scaling up of bottom-up approach to projects, so as to maximize on the trickle down effects to all the urban communities; d) Engaging the private sector, which provides financial investments in various urban sectors; and e) Promoting and engaging technical expertise, which develops the innovative tools.

2.2.3: Resilient and Inclusive Urban Development in Africa, Countering the narrative of World Class Cities - Prof. Alfred Omenya

Prof. Omenya began his presentation by recognizing that urbanization is one of the single biggest phenomena happening in an unusual way in Africa. He argued that over the years, significant numbers of rural folks have flooded urban areas in search for greener pastures. Thus, their demands for basic services like infrastructure provision and housing have doubled overtime. According to Prof. Omenya, urban authorities and managers have responded to the ever-changing nature of urban areas by implementing plans to cater for the growing needs and demands. He noted that some prioritize social and economic developments to support the ever-changing demands and needs while in others, development remains stagnant or the rapid urbanization strains the existing infrastructure and services.

In addition, Prof. Omenya argued that urbanization in Kenya and especially the rural-urban shift raises a number of questions: What does the shift from rural to urban mean structurally for us? What does the shift mean for the urban settlements, what does it mean for the rural settlements? What does it mean for the optimization of the deeper urbanization dividends for development?

These questions guided the rest of Omenya’s presentation. He noted that though numerous opportunities exist, a number of challenges stand out. These include the phenomena of ‘urbanization of poverty’, poor governance and management, and less monitoring of the implementation of laws. According to Omenya, solving these challenges would require concerted efforts from different stakeholders. Some concerns to address would be the economic disparities between urban and rural areas. Thus the solutions according to him would include making the economies in villages and rural areas fully viable. For example, governments should undertake huge rural development program to improve the rural economy base. This would ensure only the surplus manpower not absorbed in villages migrates to urban areas, argued Prof. Omenya.

16

Similarly, Prof. Omenya reasoned that governments should be actively involved in finding innovative policies and practical solutions to urban challenges such as lack of affordable housing. He noted that based on Habitat III declarations, countries can draw lessons on how to guide urbanization. The first lesson according to Omenya is the appreciation of ‘Indigenous praxis’. He said that through this concept of ‘indigenous praxis’; “we must start to look at what we are doing, our own experiences and then link theory and practice and generate grounded solutions”. Secondly, he noted that laws that are formulated should maximize contextual potential and should focus on the people and their immediate needs. Lastly, he argued that there should be thorough understanding of the objective of service provision. For example, he noted that governments should provide infrastructure for the consumption of the citizens, not the other way round where the citizens find infrastructure already in place and have to adapt around it.

2.2.4: Approaches to Resilient & Inclusive Urban Development in Emerging Towns in Kenya - Prof. Caleb Mireri

Prof. Mireri started his presentation by acknowledging the increasing rates of urbanization being experienced in Sub-Saharan Africa. He noted that urbanization in Kenya is mainly attributed to growing economy, natural growth as well as increasing rural-urban migration. According to him, the growth of towns and cities has seen an emergence of marginalized urban communities; excluded from important urban development dialogues and agenda, thereby creating urban areas and cities that are not socially inclusive and resilient. Nevertheless, Prof. Mireri noted that Kenya has been making strides in ensuring inclusivity of citizens on urban development, as evidenced by the formulation of the draft 2016 National Urban Development Policy through engagement of all relevant urban stakeholders. The draft National Urban Development Policy is part of the Government’s efforts to implement the provisions on urban

Prof. Omenya (Standing)

17

development contained in the Constitution, particularly in Article 176 and 184 dealing with devolution, classification and management of urban areas, including public/citizen participation.

Conversely, Prof. Mireri reasoned that achieving fully inclusive and resilient urban development throughout the country is still a work in progress, and achieving this will require three key approaches, which he outlined. First, he argued for demand driven research to create a niche for specific research measures for actionable urban development programmes. He noted that urban research should be demand driven based on context specific urban needs and followed through by implementation. Secondly, he said that there should be effective policy guidelines to create effective structures based on the existing development policies. Thirdly, he contended that there should be an enhancement of governance framework to ensure effective implementation of urban development projects. This according to him is the most challenging approach as it may lead to actionable projects being stalled. Therefore, good collaboration of governance structures to ensure successful implementation is necessary for this approach to work.

Prof. Mireri concluded by contending that ensuring inclusive and resilient urban development is more than just a pipe dream. He noted that it is possible, but not easy, as it calls for various urban stakeholders to actively and continuously engage in order to create resilient and inclusive engines for sustainable growth.

2.2.5: Planning Approaches for Inclusive and Innovative Urban Development - Samuel Mabala

Principally, Mabala’s presentation was centered on the need for a new planning approach to urbanization challenges in Africa. He reasoned that innovative urban development could only be realized through a paradigm shift in planning, financing, designing, and implementation of governance.

Mabala argued that a careful look at the African cities reveals a lot of segregation; the proverbial two sides of a coin, where one face is orderly and the other is unplanned. He noted that the current urban planning and development approaches are not inclusive thus excluding the social, economic, political and spatial dimensions, and have largely been unresponsive to urbanization, as evidenced by the growing slums and waves of insecurity.

Moreover, Mabala argued that the organic and not effectively guided urbanization currently being witnessed in East Africa will similarly lead to resource limitation, human resource limitation, market distortion resulting to informality, marginalization of the poor in land, housing and labor, continuous growth of informality, abuse of office, and, emergence of territorial boundaries restricting the flow of ideas and investment resources.

Based on the above challenges, Mabala underscored the need for a paradigm shift in the approach to planning. He further said that there is need to reconsider re-planning the already developed areas to effectively accommodate the ever-growing impacts of urbanization. Therefore, Mabala outlined five key areas, which should define the paradigm shift in planning. These include planning for future expansion, redevelopment for densification, understanding the significance of statistics, adoption of 3 Dimension spatial configuration of projected city development, and an innovative planning approach.

On Planning for future expansion, Mabala noted that urban development should focus on the planning for future expansions. He argued that with cities growing at 5% annually, the social growth would be 3 and a half times thus posing a big challenge as it means that the city will continue sprawling due to lack of capacity to meet the needs within. Therefore, to tackle the sprawling, he said that managers of urban areas should pursue policies that encourage redevelopment through densification.

According to Mabala, tackling the challenges of urbanization through a revamped planning approach requires that countries in Africa adopt a more robust use of statistics. This, he noted,

18

should be firmly included in budgets to support collection and maintenance of reliable data. He further argued that without proper maintenance of data, the plans that most cities and urban areas aim to produce are not implementable. This emphasizes the need to define minimum acceptable standards in terms of housing units, power consumption per capita, and water consumption, among many urban strategic areas, to help assess the needs and come up with long term, short term and long-term strategies.

Lastly, Mabala emphasized the need for an innovative methodology of preparing urban plans. He argued that spatial development plans for urban areas should be developed through a multi-disciplinary team and the final plans represented in 3 dimensions. He noted that such visualization would give clear provisions for what should be where and why.

2.3: INNOVATIONS, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT UNDER DEVOLVED GOVERNANCE

2.3.1: Thematic Overview Good governance and management of urban areas becomes a vital part in the realization of resilience and inclusivity in urban development. Movements towards democratization and political pluralism, an emphasis on decentralization, and the rise of civil society have affected governance of cities throughout the developing world. Under the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the country has embraced a two tier devolved system of governance at the National and County levels. Moreover, the Constitution of Kenya 2010 recognizes the sovereignty of the people, which they either directly or indirectly exercise through their leaders. Similarly, Article 102 (i) of the County Governments Act 2012 provides that a county shall serve as a basis for engagement between county government and the citizenry, other stakeholders and interest groups. Specifically, the Urban Areas and Cities Act 2011, article 22 provides for Citizen Forum (a forum for citizens organized for purposes of participating in

the affairs of an urban area). All these legal provisions provide a strong basis for public participation in development in Kenya.

Consequently, presentations under this theme underscored the urgent need to refocus on capacity building to enable effective participation of citizens in urban development. The presentations also focused on outlining some of the innovative approaches that are currently being used to implement public participation. Principally, the presenters underscored the benefits of a bottom-up approach to planning and development prioritization as opposed to a top-down approach. George Wasonga, Eunice Karoki, Dr. Lorraine Amollo, Josiah Omotto, Dr. George Wagah, Judith Kalinga, Amina Rashid and Grace Githiri made key arguments under this theme.

Prof. Wagah outlines attributes, indicators and challenges of inclusivity while Omotto addresses issue of Human rights (the 3 Ls – land, lodging and labor) as the basis of devolution. Amollo talks of the role of design in facilitating effective participation in governance. She argues that effective participation requires the organizers to package the exercise in a manner that is appealing to the participants.

The other presenters give highlights of case studies where innovations in public participation and inclusivity have been realized in Kenya. Wasonga gives a practical example in Kenya where public participation has been implemented. Wasonga talks about the implementation of participatory planning in Kilifi and Mombasa Counties based on a rigorous Local Urban Forums (LUFs) approach. He argues that these LUFs have enabled these counties to effectively involve the local communities at the grassroots and other stakeholders in contributing to governance and resource use decisions. Similarly, Karoki, Kalinga and Amin present cases of participation processes in Kiambu, Makueni and Lamu respectively through county framework (top down). Lastly, Grace talks of grassroots participation (bottom-up) as applied in informal settlement upgrading.

In the ensuing discussions participants argued that despite the existing policy and legal framework, implementation of effective public participation and devolved governance

19

framework has not been fully realized. It was noted that the lack of implementation of policy in managing urban entities does not only threaten their survival but also exclude them from benefits of devolved governance. One of the participants noted that it’s important for county governments to establish governance entities within urban areas in respect to Article 184 of the Constitution. Participants also noted that the devolved governance system in Kenya has been greatly hampered by challenges such as lack of capacity, inadequate funds, lack of awareness among others.

2.3.2: Planning for Inclusive Urban Development in the Context of Challenges and Prospects or Opportunities - Dr. George Wagah

Planning for inclusive urban development in the context of challenges and prospects or opportunities can provide an interesting scope when looking at it in an urban development perspective. As Dr. Wagah noted, this could mean looking at it in terms of how it starts from a small hamlet or village and how it finally grows into a big urban center. While these centers can be viewed as centers for investment, he said that the big question always remains; “how can these investments be translated into development and how will they have some physical manifestation in a given geographical space or location?”

He pointed out that this can be seen especially when an investment starts in a place, (a posho mill, a hospital, a church) - it is just one investment in one place and it possesses that physical manifestation; it would occupy some space. He argued that from that little investment it would generate some chains of development impulses and this would be reflected in terms of more attractions coming in terms of institutions, industries, as well as commercial nodes, which would similarly generate some form of impulses in addition to the initial investment. As a result of that, an old spatial layout tends to develop into what can be seen as a town or a city with all those many developments around. According to Dr. Wagah, this spatial pattern is what ought to be discussed in relation to inclusion; where urban

managers and planners should critically look to promote the type of land use that presents or mitigates inclusion.

Dr. Wagah further noted that the components of inclusion are closely related and that these components influence inclusive urban planning. Such components, he noted, include institutions that are coming in as relatives of social components, which are related to the economy. Other components include environmental, physical, financial and cultural, and he argued that integration of these components is key when discussing inclusion in handling of open spaces in cities, disparities in wages, employment and opportunities.

In addition, Wagah reasoned that the concept of inclusion can be related to the aspect of citizen participation and its magnitude in terms of implementation in Kenya. He argued that this can be scaled using the Constitution of Kenya 2010, which under chapter IV talks about the right to life, equality and freedom from discrimination. From these statutes, he said that it is clear that citizen participation in decision-making is a right of the people. He also noted that the County Government Act Part 8, talks about citizen participation in various ways including timely access to information, protection and promotion of the rights and interests of minorities and promotion of public private partnerships. Part 12 of the Act also talks about service delivery where there is need to give priority to the basic needs of the public, promote the development of the public service delivery institutions, and ensure that all members of the public have access to basic services. Also, the Urban areas and Cities Act of 2011; specifically Part 3 talks about governance and management of urban areas and all cities while the rights of participation of urban residents in the affairs of cities and urban areas is enshrined under schedule 2 of the Act.

While planning for inclusive urban development, Dr. Wagah challenged planners, urban managers and development stakeholders to have a keen understanding of the basic attributes of inclusivity, which include opportunities, access and security. He said that in urban areas and cities, there are varied ways for people to earn a living and increase their incomes over time, which is basically provided by the existence of utilizable opportunities to make ends meet. However, he noted that it is

20

not enough just to be on an income because of the inflation and economic pressures. The income is also increasing therefore the odds of accessing various facilities are enhanced. This looks at capability in terms of providing means of people to get and enhance their capacity to exploit available opportunities.

Dr. Wagah argued that access is another critical component that not only looks at the existence of facilities but also goes ahead to find out if these facilities are actually accessible to the public. He argued that the facilities might be there but cannot be accessed thus become of very little benefit to the citizenry. In terms of security, he said that it is very critical to any kind of development since investors need to have enough trust in security before committing to any kind of development. Therefore, according to Wagah, development and security are relatively interdependent.

After developing an understanding of the basic attributes of inclusivity, Dr. Wagah further challenged urban planners and managers to get to the next step of understanding indicators of inclusion within the urban environment. He said that urban development stakeholders should take into cognizance a large number of indicators needed to properly assess the multidimensional nature of social exclusion. He said that these indicators could be presented in tiers; Primary indicators consisting of a restricted number of lead indicators which cover the broad fields that have been considered the most important elements in leading to social exclusion; and Secondary indicators supporting these lead indicators and describing other dimensions of the problem.

He highlighted the indicators of inclusion and/or exclusion to be characterised by income distribution measures, employment opportunities, long-term unemployment, education and training, access to health, access to housing, access to transport, utilities and amenities, and environmental management. Dr. Wagah submitted that despite the challenges, there is hope for inclusion and accessible benefits to the people. He argued that the opportunities as well as the various existing legislations provide an avenue for the realization of these goals of inclusion.

2.3.3: Human Rights and Inclusive Sustainable Cities - Josiah Omotto

Josiah Omotto began his presentation by reminding the participants that in the year 2015, Kenya had the honour of hosting His Holiness Pope Francis who challenged the country to uphold the 3 L’s; Land, Lodging and Labour. According to Omotto, whatever the country does, be it by urban planners, urban developers, urban managers, or the country leaders, the focus should be on these three issues. Josiah reasoned that for the country to uphold human rights in the urban spaces, then urban development should revolve around these 3Ls; where in land, there should be security of tenure for all, in Labour there should be equal employment opportunities, while in lodging, adequate and affordable housing should be provided.

Josiah said that a city could best be described as a relationship between government and its people, between government departments and other government departments, between the government and the private sector, between the government and academics. He noted that other than city residents, there are other important stakeholders within the cities, such as universities, the private sector, industries, and hawkers among others. He argued that inclusive cities therefore entail creating relationships amongst all these stakeholders, and understanding the complexity of these relationships in upholding the 3L’s.

Surprisingly, even with all these stakeholders, he said that cities such as Nairobi are now transforming into City of Contempt and Walking City. According to Omotto, a “city of contempt” arises from the living conditions within parts of the city, which is currently inadequate, while the walking city stems from the fact that within the city, there exists an urban community who walk to work, as they cannot afford transport fares. However, even as these marginalized urban communities go on with their day-to-day life, Josiah noted that they require basic services, which they can afford. Thus there arises a thriving informal economy characterized by hawkers selling items such as roast maize, bananas, clothing among others along the streets. Josiah described this phenomenon as a “Maize Cob Economy” mainly due to its ease of access and affordability of the goods, which are usually sold in very small quantities. This maize cob economy,

21

though important, has experienced challenges of exclusion, where the city officials normally harass the operators.

In creating inclusion in both the city of contempt and the walking city, Josiah said that it will require addressing the ‘L’ that is the lodging; providing safe and adequate access to housing; and ensuring adequate and affordable access to services for the low income in the urban space.

Similar to cities of contempt and walking cities, he further pointed out the existence of a “city of unemployment” where within the people’s settlements (slums), there are so many boys and girls basically idling because the city has not created employment. In such a city, the unemployment crisis sees the residents walking to the city expecting to find jobs in industrial and commercial areas, and this has created a new phenomenon of a city; the rebel city; the angry city; the “city of protest”. These are characterized by violence, and one may have to be escorted by police or have to get some strong men to walk around because there are other people in the city who regard you as enemies. He said that the residents of such settlements within the city have found the ideology of radicalized groups much more appealing since the living conditions in such areas provide little ground for resisting radicalization. This therefore provides a challenge to planners on how they ought to rethink inclusive urban development, by first and foremost understanding and getting to terms with the issues and concerns within the cities of unemployment and cities of protest.

He therefore called on urban planners to rethink the development strategies to solve the issues in all these types of cities so as to provide sustainable solutions. He noted that previous strategies have led to growth of other challenges within cities; a perfect example being the National Youth Service (NYS) in Nairobi’s Kibera slums, a program, which sought to address the challenge of service and infrastructure, provision in the slum. Although the program held much promise, it has since failed and Kibera is worse off today than it was before NYS because it became a cash cow. The result of failing urban development strategies, as Josiah noted, is the emergence of a breed of politicians who see the desperation and protest in the informal settlements as their ticket to access political

power. In such settlements, an allowance of 500 shillings, buys a politician young boys and girls who are willing to fight, justifying that cities are transforming into cities of protest.

Aside from the negative facades of the urban areas and cities, Josiah pointed out that there are also beautiful things about urban areas and cities such as Nairobi. While part of the city is protesting, there is another beautiful part of the city; city of music, dance and drama, where there are quite a number of very creative artists. This provides urban planners with an opportunity to leverage how this creative potential among the youth can be used to develop cities, and how it can ensure inclusive cities by communicating and interacting through these forms of expression and through creating space where the youth can dialogue, make money and contribute to better society.

Josiah finished his presentation by pointing out that a city is a relationship; therefore upholding inclusivity and human rights in cities means working with all the partners and stakeholders in a city, seeking inspiration from other cities and domesticating the doctrine of the right to city, by upholding the right to land, right to lodging and the right to labour. He also said that one cannot talk about inclusive cities or urban development without effective leadership; leadership that seeks to break away from the maize cob framework and consult, engage, and set up structures of engagement to the village level.

2.3.4: Innovations for Effective Public Participation in Urban Areas - Dr. Lorraine Amollo

Dr. Lorraine Amollo started her presentation by providing the premise for public participation. She noted that the 2010 Constitution mandates public participation in key decision-making processes. However, this process has two sides to it; on one hand, there is the argument of working with a small number of people which poses the risk of being taken to court for not casting the net of participation sufficiently while on the other, if there is the argument of engaging with a broad cross-section of the population where it is subject to diverse and

22

pressing demands that they cannot meet. This, as Dr. Lorraine noted, usually poses the question; “how can the requirements of public participation be met without disappointing the public?”

In her presentation, Dr. Lorraine provided four ways that the requirements for public participation could be achieved. These include effective timing, aggregating public opinion, ensuring representation, and, designing urban dialogue.

Dr. Lorraine reasoned that effective timing is important for effective public participation. When implementing this requirement, Dr. Lorraine said that there is need to carefully consider at what stage of the governance process public participation will be the most effective and beneficial. Given that governments make decisions throughout the year the ideal scenario would be to have ongoing public participation throughout the year. However, she said that such extensive participation may not be possible immediately, and so this ideal may be best thought of as a long-term goal. She however noted that in the short-term, it is becoming increasingly accepted both within Kenya and in global best practice that the budgetary planning process represents the ideal opportunity to engage with citizens because it represents an opportunity to engage with multiple groups in a focused way, and because this is when key decisions are made over the way in which resources are distributed.

Dr. Lorraine noted that even if effective public participation takes place, there is the constant challenge of aggregating public opinion into a specific set of actionable ideas. In her view, citizens may not always all agree, especially if they are consulted in a variety of meetings, such that different groups select different priorities. She argued that the point of participation is not simply to allow citizens to have their voices heard, but to allow them to shape policy proposals. For this to happen, she said that a mechanism must be developed through which the outcome of public participation is translated into the budget planning process. According to her, this will require answers to difficult questions, such as how much weight to give to public consultations, and how to accommodate divergent points of view. She also stated that while it is important that citizens’ views are not ignored, it is also important that the

public understands that it might not be possible to respond to all of their demands.

Based on Dr. Lorraine’s presentation, public participation processes should be genuinely representative of diverse interests. She said that this is essential if counties are to fulfil their legal obligations, but it is also important because it will empower the county to better respond to the needs of citizens, and to earn their trust and support. In many cases, this will not be easy, and will require counties to think creatively about how citizens can be engaged. She gave an example by noting that although women should be supported to participate equally to men, this rarely happens. She therefore submitted that it is important for counties to think carefully about how they can make sure that individuals from a full range of economic, ethnic and religious backgrounds participate.

Dr. Lorraine also noted that in the urban context, questions often arise as to how urban dialogue may be “designed”. Traditionally, design was mainly viewed as creative e.g. in fashion, art and design. She argued that ‘design’ could be described by the color wheel relationship; it is a cyclic process and not linear, and may be used in creative enterprise. In her view, ‘Designing Urban Dialogue’ can therefore be achieved by using creativity to include people in urban discourses. She argued that while planning is normally seen as a top-down approach whose target is the city, Design is different, in that it tends to adopt a bottom-up approach; where it concentrates on the persons they are designing for. Therefore, planning ought to be more design oriented, and should be able to provide tangible solutions that people can relate to and easily understand at a very localized context.

Further in her presentation, Dr. Lorraine stipulated that there exist efficient tools, which may ensure effective participation in the urban sphere. These include Human Centered Design, Inter-disciplinary Processes, and, Participatory 3D Mapping. She noted that human centered design involves incorporating the needs of the people in terms of design and involving them to come up with the desired design goals that will ensure development of the society by the society. By coming up with human centered design, she said that it becomes so easy to

23

make design decisions that will improve the lives of the people; where “The heart of urban design is with the people who you are designing for.”

According to Dr. Lorraine, inter-disciplinary processes is a central component to an all-round design process which involves involving professionals who complete the whole circle of design through strategic inputs towards the desired outcomes or goal of the design process. This ensures the back up of that professional output.

She noted that participatory 3D mapping is where the participants who in this case are the public, team up with the experts to come up with the complete output composed of relative ground information provided by the public and the professional output provided by the professionals. For dialogue to be effective, it must be well presented and thus inviting to participants. The use of info-graphics is thus important as it makes the information more palatable, which is why social media is more attractive.

She concluded her presentation by noting that it is not always rosy with participation. More often than not, participation tends to be very involving, as there is need to design research with the participants. Also, in the process 0f participation, urban managers and planners may uncover deep societal problems that they were not prepared to deal with at the moment. In terms of ensuring total inclusion in urban development, she said that it is therefore important to ensure that voices are represented in all sectors. Dr. Lorraine contended that a good dialogue therefore, entails everyone bringing their different opinions and perspectives but harmonizing them all like instrumentalists in a concert.

2.3.5: Prospects for Inclusive Urban Development: Case of Local Urban Forums - George Wasonga

Wasonga discussed a case study of two counties in Kenya where inclusivity in the process of urban development has been realized through a participatory planning framework. The two

counties that Wasonga referred to are Kilifi and Mombasa. He noted that these counties have adopted participatory planning through a rigorous Local Urban Forums (LUFs), which is one of the innovative participatory techniques within the devolved governance framework in Kenya. According to Wasonga, this technique seeks to promote inclusive and sustainable urban development. He noted that LUFs are multi-stakeholders platforms for promoting constructive urban dialogue and consensus building on key urban issues relevant for sustainable local urban development. He also argued that LUFs are basically how people engage in urban space, guided by the participatory principles as enshrined with the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and espoused through the County Governments Act (2012) and Urban Areas and Cities Act (2011).

Wasonga narrated the experience from Kilifi. He reported that the implementation of LUF in Kilifi started by selection of an active town, which saw Malindi selected. This was followed by identification of active society organizations, groups and other stakeholders to engage in public participation. At the end of the process, Kilifi had an active LUF from grassroots to county level, which included: 347 Village Citizen Forums; 24 Ward Citizen Forums; and 2 Sub-County Citizen Forums. Same as Kilifi, Mombasa County was involved in LUF, which has played a major role in driving citizen driven policy formulation. Through the same process of stakeholder identification and local level mobilization, the LUFs have assisted Mombasa residents to address emotive issues of land and resulted to formulation of local land policy.

Generally, Wasonga noted that these LUFs have among others; provided platform for local debate and knowledge sharing to address urban poverty, brought in new thinking and awareness of the importance of living in a better and smarter urban places, and has provided a legitimate case for accountability especially on budgetary process and negotiating on development alternatives against government development and public needs oriented developments. This, he said, is evident in Kilifi where community members seek to know the county budgetary allocations and the justifications associated with them.

24

Hence, according to Wasonga, inclusivity should focus on planning with people and not planning for people. Conversely, he reasoned that while, planning is very key and basic as a stimulant of sustainable urban development, there is need to engage the people in the planning processes and dialogues so as to tailor all developments in the urban set-up towards healthy human interactions. In this light, the LUFs have brought great influence in the area of governance, and have been instrumental as a platform for national policy influence having effectively contributed to the formulation of the National Urban Development Policy (NUDP) and National Slum Upgrading

and Prevention Policy (NSUPP). Other policies where the LUF influence include the Evictions and Resettlement Bill and the Community Land Bill amongst a host of others.

2.3.6: Good Governance and Inclusive Urban Development Areas: Case of Kiambu County - Eunice Karoki

Eunice Karoki who is the County Executive Committee Member for Lands, Housing and Physical Planning in Kiambu County

George Wasonga (presenting)

25

gave a presentation on good governance and inclusive urban development in Kiambu. Eunice started her presentation by providing a working definition of governance, as a process through which decisions are either implemented or not implemented. According to her, good governance should refer to how public institutions efficiently and effectively conduct public affairs and manage public resources and it is a process that includes everyone; the isolated, the urban poor and the vulnerable. In her submission, Eunice said that the Constitution of Kenya 2010 saw the introduction of county governments, with specific roles and functions, which include planning. Thus, the Counties are now responsible for making area specific actions plans and capital investment plans from the County Spatial Plan.

Eunice further submitted that good governance and inclusive development in the urban areas requires bringing on board all the urban stakeholders and communities in the decision and plan making processes and dialogues. She noted that this process should put into focus important urban agenda, such as the urban environment, infrastructure development and poverty reduction in urban areas. She pointed out that this has been applied in Kiambu County, where inclusivity has been applied in areas of public transport, climate adaptations, and urban renewal.

She gave a case of Thika town, a town in Kiambu County where good steps towards achieving good governance and inclusive urban development have kicked off. Thika is a major town in Kiambu County, and the most vibrant economically. Once considered the Birmingham of Kenya due to its industrial presence, the town’s strategic location, just 40km from Nairobi has gradually transformed it into the capital’s dormitory. Due to this, the town has experienced high population growth over the years, but this has not deterred service provision and development. Eunice said that while the town is developing at an alarming rate, good governance measures have been put in place to ensure sustainable growth and development.

To achieve this, she said that the County Planning Department of Kiambu has undertaken a population projection of the town to the next ten years, and a comprehensive projection and analysis

of the amount of amenities and infrastructural services such as water consumption, transport needs, energy consumption, housing needs, sewerage and waste disposal, that the town will require and made necessary strategies to ensure that they will be fulfilled. This, as Eunice pointed out, has underscored the value of good governance in ensuring inclusive and resilient urban development.

2.3.7: Role of Public Participation in Achieving Inclusive Planning: Case of Makueni County - Judith Kalinga

Judith began by defining Citizen Participation as the democratic decision-making process where private individuals and those in public domain take the opportunity to influence public decisions. She noted that the Constitution of Kenya 2010 recognizes public participation as a key national principle and value in decision making (Article 14(a)) where it identifies public participation as a national value and a principle of governance. Article 174 of the Constitution identifies it as a key object of devolution, and she pointed out that Makueni County has fully embraced this article and is integrating public participation in their planning. Also, the County Government Act, 2012, has elaborate requirements for public participation in section 87 and section 111, which talk about actual preparation of plans and public participation is envisaged.

On the model of participation, Judith highlighted that Makueni County involves its citizens in various levels including the preparation of budgets, implementation of projects, and even in payment for projects. She said that the county holds consultations when they start to prepare the budget for each financial year, at various levels; the Village level, Ward level and sub-county. She noted that the process starts by each village, which is about 20 homesteads, meeting to prioritize their projects for that financial year. They then meet with a cluster of villages at the location level, where they prioritize the priority project for the financial year and then the same at the sub-ward.

At each level, she said that the citizens appoint representatives to represent them at the next level. For example each village

26

has 11 representatives at the village cluster. Each village cluster appoints another 11 to represent them at the sub-ward meeting. Each sub- ward sends 11 members to the ward meeting. Each ward sends 11 representatives to the sub-county meeting and each sub-county sends 11 to the county meeting where the public actually agree or disagree on the affairs at hand. The committee is appointed there but the meeting is a public meeting where everyone has a say and they get to identify what is their priority project. The projects identified in these meeting are then taken up as the project for that village cluster, sub- ward, ward, sub-county or county for that financial year.

She also reported that the County ensures budgetary allocation for each ward for each financial year, to take care of projects and participation costs, then everything that comes from the sub-county and county level is then taken up in the headquarters budget. Once the headquarters’ budget is out for various projects, she said that it involves various key players; the executive committee for the department who have a say in determining what is the priority headquarter budget for the year; and the County Assembly.

To conclude her presentation, Kalinga highlighted the benefits that Makueni County model of public participation has had in ensuring inclusive development within the county. These benefits include; empowerment of people in decision-making, enhanced ownership of projects and plans, promotion of awareness circle for decisions and actions, and effective involvement of marginalized and disadvantaged groups.

2.3.8: Inclusive Development under Devolved Governance; Case of Lamu County - Amina Rashid

Madam Amina noted that Lamu County has historically experienced marginalization mainly due to its location. However, despite this, she said that the county has made milestones to ensure inclusive and participatory development throughout the county. These milestones include the development of the county spatial plan, regularization of

human settlements, and, enhancing citizen participation in the planning processes.

Amina said that currently, the county is at the stage of producing a zero draft of the County Spatial Plan, which would be shared with the residents of Lamu County for comments. In addition to ensuring effective protection and conservation of the natural, terrestrial and marine resources that Lamu County is blessed with, the Spatial Plan will also ensure economic growth, and address urban settlements growth and strategy

According to Amina, the County has over the years been experiencing a challenge, where developments are always ahead of planning. However, the Lamu County government has made strategies to address this by regularizing settlements that are already there; majority being Swahili informal settlements and villages. The process of regularization started with issuance of title deeds to residents who have lived without these for over 50 years.

Amina also noted that Citizen Participation in the planning process has been implemented through the formation of resident committees, which are engaged in planning process such as in carrying out surveys. In addition to forming these committees, the county government also ensured that there is representation from the youth, the women and persons with disabilities.

She finished he presentation by saying that the greatest expectations of many citizens in Kenya is that through devolution, they will be able to regularly participate in their own governance in order to deliver the promise of faster development and access to basic amenities and services. She argued that for the County of Lamu, the milestones covered represent potential for a greater future of inclusive and resilient development.

27

2.3.9: Inclusive Slum Mapping - Grace Githiri

Grace Githiri works with the Slum Dwellers International- Kenya. Shack/Slum Dwellers International (SDI) is a network of community-based organizations of the urban poor in 33 countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. It was launched in 1996 when federations of the urban poor in countries such as India and South Africa agreed that a global platform could help their local initiatives develop alternatives to evictions while also influencing the global agenda for urban development.

Grace noted that owing to urbanization, slums have sprouted within the urban landscape, and continue to be a common phenomenon in the cities and urban areas in the 21st century. Further, Grace noted that urban slums present a number of complexities in urban development, given that they experience unique challenges that include insecure land tenure, inadequate access to basic services such as water, secure shelter, access and sanitation, and this has exposed them to threats such as eviction and excluded them in urban development agendas.

She pointed out that as a result the slum residents and other stakeholders, have engaged in the process of slum mapping; an exercise that entails mapping of the settlements’ physical, economic and social characteristics; in a bid to advocate for their right to access land, basic services, and ultimately, inclusion in the urban development agenda. SDI is therefore present in each country where federations operate, where they mobilize around core SDI practices and principles to build a voice and collective capacity in urban poor communities; a programme known as SDI’s “know Your Community work”. In this programme, organized federations throughout the SDI network profile, map, and enumerate their settlements to gather invaluable planning data and catalyse community action and partnerships. She reported that SDI’s Know Your City website combines hard data and rich stories from urban poor communities in 224 cities across the Global South. Federations then use their data and collective capacity to co-produce solutions for slum upgrading. These projects make up the third category of SDI’s work – “Improve Your City”.

Grace said that these exercises have exposed the Slum dwellers’ capability of collecting their own data, which can be used for profiling slums all over the world. In Kenya, the exercise is invaluable, owing to the existing gaps and deficiencies in official data on informality. She further highlighted various types of data collected during a slum mapping exercises. These include structure numbers, spatial data and socioeconomic data. Structure numbering is a special way of numbering that uses codes which gives settlement /cluster /structure and door number. A special relative code is then assigned for each 0f the above-mentioned areas. This helps relate to a specific attribute that might be a point of focus when going through a given slum. She gave an example of KMLA/A/001A; which represents Kiandutu Molo A/Cluster A/structure number 1, door number A.

Spatial data involve mapping of settlement’s services, roads, landmarks. Grace said that this involves collecting data related to settlement in terms of service provision, infrastructure and landmarks, which identify specifically to the area in focus. These maps can then be digitized to provide soft information for manipulation depending on the intended use of the data. Socio-economic data e.g. population, housing, and rents ensures that when the need to profile a specific settlement arises the data is available and also when planning activities are to be carried out it is easier to understand the area being planned for using this kind of data.

She concluded by noting that besides collecting data, the slum dwellers are able to model desired outputs – which they also present to the government institutions and interested urban stakeholders such as Civil Societal Organizations, Universities and County Authorities.

28

2.4: RESEARCH TOWARDS INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO FACILITATE RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT


Innovative research has always been the hallmark of CURI’s vision. CURI has been steadfast in carrying out research on various aspects of urban development including housing, infrastructure, transportation, and land use. A considerable number of the research activities have been on finding solutions to challenges of informality within urban areas. In carrying out these studies, CURI has collaborated with various stakeholders such as national government, county government, other universities, civil society, development partners, and community groups. Indeed, CURI believes in a co-production approach to action-oriented research where all these stakeholders are engaged as key producers of the final research output.

Therefore, this session provided an opportunity for CURI Associates to present some of the research work that they have undertaken. The four presenters who included Munyua Mwaura, Romanus Opiyo, Diana Kinya, and Philip Olale make a case for research as an instrument of fostering innovation, resilience and inclusive urban development. Mwaura discusses conflicting rationalities of low income housing reflected in different types of upgrading models. Opiyo makes a case for sustainable mobility calling for a shift in the reallocation of space to diverse users (cars, pedestrians, cyclists) away from the dominance of the car. Kinya shares research insights on preventing of gentrification after land allocation to individual squatters while Olale presents a study on negotiating access to land by squatters to avert exclusion. Some of the options available for land access that Olale discuses include revocation, adverse possession, compulsory acquisition, land sharing and land purchase.

2.4.2: Mediating Conflicting Planning Rationalities in Low-Income Neighborhoods in Nairobi - Dr. Munyua Mwaura

Dr. Mwaura submitted that low-income neighborhoods are in most cases defined as poverty concentration, however it is important to emphasize that low-income areas, including urban slums, differ markedly from each other. He noted that, whereas high population mobility, high crime levels and a lack of social cohesion characterize some areas, others could be described as relatively harmonious, safe and stable. He said that generally, low-income neighbourhoods experience a number of conflicts that include, but not limited to; creation of a divisive ‘us and them’ mentality between social groups based on length of residence; unsightly or messy property mainly due to the poor state of the buildings; building and development issues; noise generated by the light industries and the high population; and damage to property/theft.

To understand complexities of low-income neighbourhoods in Nairobi, he argued that one would require an understanding of the unique characteristics of the low-income neighborhoods characterized by high population, poor layout of infrastructure utilities, insecure land ownership, poor quality of living spaces/houses, inadequate access to water and sanitation services, high levels of social ills such as high teenage pregnancy levels, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence and crime; low involvement in economic activities; and in some cases low social cohesion. Dr. Mwaura noted that a critical question then arises, “How do we achieve sustainable outcomes in low income neighborhoods?” For this to be achieved, he said that it has to be looked at in two perspectives; a) what are these conflicting planning rationalities in low-income neighborhoods?; and b) different types of upgrading models and how sustainability could be achieved in terms of the outcomes if one used a different approach. In light of this, he pointed out that over the years, there has been schemes in Nairobi which have been selected for intervention by the county government, NGOs as well as professionals. These include; Kibera Soweto East (KSE), Kibera Decanting Site, and Huruma Kambi Moto Site.

29

He concluded his presentation by proving insights into the concept of Rationality. He stated that rationality refers to a state of acting on reason or the making of decisions based on logic, and that the concept of rationality can be used to understand what drives the logic and reasoning of the two interventions which is that of professionals and that of the community themselves. This involves trying to understand the decisions made by people in informal settlements, and how that informs the decisions and rations that they make towards the kind of environment they live as well as work. The other perspective looks at the decisions and actions taken by professionals towards providing intervention in the informal settlements.

2.4.3: Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning (SUMP) Approach, Case of Ruiru, Kenya - Dr. Romanus Opiyo

The introductory part of Dr. Opiyo’s presentation noted that the vast majority of street space in African cities is devoted to moving or parking cars, and this has promoted exclusion in that it pushes the majority who walk, bike or take public transport to the margins. However, with this growing awareness, that cities around the world are reallocating space formerly devoted to cars to other public purposes, encouraging the use of low-carbon modes of transportation in a bid to promote inclusion.

In his presentation, he defined a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) as a strategic plan designed to satisfy the mobility needs of people and businesses, focusing on towns/cities and their surroundings for a better quality of life. He noted that SUMP builds on existing planning practices and focuses on integration, participation, and evaluation principles and aims at providing viable mobility needs by integrating various modes of transport in an innovative and participatory manner. He further highlighted the characteristics of SUMP to include; long-term vision and clear implementation plan; participatory approach; balanced and integrated development of all transport modes; horizontal and vertical integration; assessment of current and future performance; regular monitoring, review and reporting; and consideration of external costs for all transport modes.

To help understand the design and working of SUMP, Dr. Opiyo provided insights into the case of Ruiru town SUMP, which was developed by the University of Nairobi, in collaboration with UN Habitat and Kiambu County Government. He said that the design of the Ruiru SUMP was guided by 5 operational objectives which included to: ensure all citizens are offered transport options that enable access to key destinations and services; improve safety and security; reduce air and noise pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption; improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the transportation of persons and goods; and contribute to enhancing the attractiveness and quality of the urban environment and urban design for the benefits of citizens, the economy and society as a whole.

He further pointed out that the Ruiru SUMP process was inclusionary and was carried out in the following 11 steps: determining an area’s potential for successful SUMP; defining the development process and scope of plan (that is geographical & time scope); analyzing the mobility situation and development scenarios; developing a common vision; setting the priorities and measurable targets; developing effective packages of measures; agreeing on clear responsibilities and allocating budgets; building monitoring and assessment into the plan;

Dr. Munyua Mwaura Presenting

30

adoption of a sustainable urban mobility plan; ensuring proper management and communication when Implementing the plan; and learn key lessons. Concerning the methodology, he said that the development of the SUMP entailed a Collaborative Exercise (between Kiambu County Government, UN Habitat & University of Nairobi), Launch and Visioning, Literature Review, field survey which involved 266 travelers from the 8 study zones as well as Traffic Counts, Institutional mapping, FGDs& Key Informants (To deal with the Iceberg concerns), Validation of data, and, Adoption& Implementation.

The Ruiru SUMP proposal considerations, as highlighted by Dr. Opiyo, included: general design principles in relation to convenience, accessibility, safety, comfort& attractiveness; urban planning considerations based on network profiling by mapping the main activity areas, the road/street network and connectivity, street furniture and hardware: and institutional mandates and responsibilities for National and County government, road and transport agencies, donor community, private sector and local actors. Specifically, he noted that the proposal provides for; connectivity and integration of transport with land use, dedicated lanes for NMT, improvement of Informal business premises, enhanced NMT Safety by defining secure crossing levels, provision of terminal facilities, revitalization of boulevard for leisure and as a waiting area among others.

Dr. Opiyo concluded his presentation by arguing that the Ruiru SUMP showcases steps towards engaging innovativeness and upholding inclusion in solving urban challenges, as well as creating resilient urban areas, in that it combines an inclusive and participatory methodological framework and a rapid assessment methods, and integrates land uses with transport systems and seeks to develop responsive strategies such as traffic calming of hazards (traffic accidents) in a timely manner.

2.4.4: Sustainable Solutions towards Prevention of Slum Gentrification after Land Allocation to Individual Squatters: Nyamaroto Informal Settlement, Nakuru County - Diana Kinya

Diana noted that one way through which poverty in cities is manifested is through proliferation of slums and informal settlements. To address the question of growing slums, Diana noted that various policy interventions have been attempted including but not limited to; issuance of land titles to informal settlers/squatters, slum upgrading through enabling approaches such as infrastructure improvement and slum eradication through evictions. Nonetheless, she argued that these initiatives have failed to fully address the core problem as they privatize land and transfer it to individuals who further transfer the land back to the market and return to slums creating a vicious cycle of gentrification.

With an increasing population moving to cities, she said that there is continued pressure on infrastructure and other basic services such as housing, sanitation and land. Unlike the other services land is a fixed asset, which is a captive of its use. Once put into a certain use, it’s no longer available for any other use. Due to this complexity in land, there is need for creative and sustainable land management, administration tools and policies to match this rate of urbanization. However, she argued that land management and administration has remained one of the main challenges facing African governments and cities today. She noted that access to secure land and shelter is widely accepted to be a precondition for securing basic living conditions, livelihood opportunities and a necessary means to reduce poverty.

In her presentation, she submitted that 32% of the total world population is currently living in slums; with 43% of this in Africa, Sub Saharan Africa taking 71% share of urban slum dwellers. A look at Kenya would indicate that 66% of the total Kenya urban population lives in informal settlements. This means that the conventional and recognized systems - land titling and individual ownership - accounts for only slightly

31

over 30% of the country. Majority of the citizens are left to the uncertainty of informal systems. Increased landlessness and expansion of informal settlements in the developing cities can be attributed to the attitudes that promote land ownership rather than access to land. She argued that there is little policy attention focused on unlocking land and mass affordable housing and that there is also little international support for housing supply for the middle-income, hence they tend to displace the lower income dwellers from the established housing meant for the low income.

In her presentation, she focused on a case study of Nyamaroto settlement in Nakuru. She said that Nakuru is one of the fastest growing urban areas in Africa with an annual growth rate of 13%, pointing out that the town has numerous informal settlements on individual land. The lack of land tenure security in this area has led to people face a high level of exclusion when it comes to services, plan approvals etc. She said that this highlights the need to promote models that promote communal responsibility in land management in order to safeguard land after allocation. However, in order to do so, she argued that there is need to recognize land as a bundle of rights. These entail; right to use, right to occupy, right to develop/cultivate/produce, access services and access formal credit.

She thus argued for a collective land rights/communal ownership through a community-managed structure, which may necessitate the establishment of a community representative body, which then exercises management authority over communal land. Such a structure allows a representative body to develop and oversee localized rules for land use and transfers. Ideally, all user groups and prominent stakeholders will have a voice in the development of the usage framework. She also highlighted the two outstanding elements of this model, which include; participation of communities and, decentralization of land management authority.

To conclude her presentation, Diana provided the benefits of communal ownership model. She noted that the model engages tenure security as both formal and informal relations, process and product. She argued that this interchange between the formal and informal mechanism in secure land tenure

enables re-positioning of land from the market driven idea of property to a mechanism of citizenship, livelihoods and lifestyle. Moreover, she said that this model recognizes the fact that secure tenure consists of not only formal ownership but also the social relations and institutions governing access to land. Finally, she reasoned that organization into a cooperative model also offers an avenue for development of the settlement after allocation; that can take the form of sectional properties with beneficiaries as shareholders.

2.4.5: Negotiating Access to Land by Squatters: Case of Gandini, Maunguja and Kashani Land in Mombasa County, Kenya - Philip Olale

Olale started by noting that various commentators have underscored the fundamental role of secure land and property rights, specifically, access to land rights which is essential to reducing poverty, as they underpin economic development and social inclusion, as well as increasing urban areas and cities’ resilience. He said that rights to land and property are firmly provided for under Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and, Article 40 of the Kenya Constitution 2010. Nevertheless, he pointed out that securing sustainable access to land for all, and especially for the poor, women, youth, persons with disability among other marginalized groups continues to be a contested issue in the Kenyan political and legal landscapes.

Despite the initiatives and milestones under Agenda 4 to resolve historical land injustices, he said that there are numerous communities that still continue to be deprived of land and property rights, particularly in the Coastal region of Kenya, along the ten-mile coastal strip. He noted that these injustices have their roots in the pre-colonial era, when the settling of the Arab (Yarubi, Busaudi and Mazrui) and Swahili community during the slave trade period contributed to the disenfranchisement of the local Mijikenda community. He argued that this led to the Arab and Swahili controlling the

32

land and establishing large plantations around the coast on land whose ownership was not a subject of dispute since the Mijikenda inhabitants had fled to the interior. He further noted that the advent of colonial rule contributed to deepening of the problem by introducing legislation that enabled only the subjects of the Sultan (comprising mainly Arabs and Swahili) to register land as private property on the coast. He argued that the post-colonial period worsened these problems by giving grants of land to politicians even in areas already occupied by indigenous Mijikenda groups.

He reported that Gandini, Maunguja and Kashani (GAMAKA); settlements along the ten mile coastal strip are examples of areas within the Kenyan coast that have experienced historical injustice in terms of right to access land; where local indigenous communities squat on what they claim to be their ancestral land. In line with provisions of the Constitution of Kenya 2010 that guarantee existing property rights, Olale said that the historical injustices claimed by the GAMAKA community as well as other communities within the country deserve to be addressed. On the resolution of historical land injustices, the government is obligated to establish mechanisms to resolve historical land claims, and putting focus on the case of GAMAKA. Olale highlighted some of the options for access to land rights by the Gandini, Maunguja and Kashani squatters. These include revocation of titles, litigation based on adverse possession, compulsory acquisition and regularization, land sharing, and, purchasing.

He argued that revocation involves cancelling or annulment of something made by some authority and usually results in privilege, title, or status being removed. Olale submitted that the process of revocation entails application of revocation to the Registrar of Titles, who must in turn apply to the court to determine and give appropriate orders, which may go either way. Essentially, this option attracts a protracted and lengthy court battle whose end result may go one way or the other, depending on evidence before the court.

Concerning litigation, he said that it will entail the claimant bringing the case before the Environment and Land Court, claiming the rights of the portions of land contested based

on adverse possession. Nevertheless, the titleholder also retains the right to counter the claim. He noted that under this framework, the inhabitants may have to individually prove to court that they have right over the parcels of land they lay claim over. To do so, Mr. Olale said that the inhabitants will need to carry out an enumeration and mapping exercise to document their claim. Such a process should aim to capture tenure conditions including size of land being occupied, who occupies it, and what is the current use on the land, among others.

According to Olale, compulsory acquisition can only be an option once it is proved and agreed by the contesting parties that the title held by the titleholder was acquired legally, hence not contested, in which case it would be the responsibility of the government to proceed with the motions of compulsory acquisition pursuant to Articles 19, 22, 23, 40, 47, 50 and 64 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.

He defined land sharing as a compromise solution where the owners of encroached land and the community occupying the land collectively agree to split the land between them. In this scenario, the community buys, leases or receives one portion for free, while the more commercially attractive part of the site is returned to the titleholder. He also noted that land sharing relies on strong community organization and the ability of the community the community to negotiate effectively with the landowners to create a “win-win” situation for both parties.

Purchasing land and applying for individual titling may entail the squatters negotiating with the titleholder to purchase the land either at market rate or any other agreed formula. He argued that if the purchase is successful, the community could then apply to the national government to be issued with individual titles. He said that this option however, has various complexities in that there may be those who may have bought land from the squatters albeit without proper documentation, and the other issue would be the ability of some of the squatters who might not be financially able to afford the land. Therefore, he submitted that land-purchasing option might not be as straightforward as one would expect in a normal land transaction.

33

Therefore looking at cases of land contestation, Olale concluded by arguing that finding a lasting solution to claims over land by the squatters requires a more inclusive and negotiated framework. However, he said that it is important to ensure that at all times, the rule of law is upheld to ensure that every citizen’s rights and freedoms are respected.

2.5: SCALING UP RESILIENCE, INNOVATION AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT


The presentations under this theme focused on actual strategies, activities and projects being implemented on various aspects of urban life. Belinda Tuju presents on the work of slum architects in shaping urban landscape through design. Maina Gachagua provides background on current plans for eBRD to improve transportation in Nairobi. Charles Katua of C4DLab introduces the upcoming Bike share program in University of Nairobi. While Dr. Mbathi gives the final presentation introducing the 1000 City Resilience Challenge project in Nairobi.

2.5.2: Transforming Urban Landscapes through design: Slum Architects Initiatives - Belinda Tuju

Belinda’s presentation focused on Slum Architect’s portfolio, and how they employ the use of design to transform the urban spaces. She started by introducing the Slum Architects, which she said is a multidisciplinary organization involving students and professionals from the University of Nairobi, Technical University of Kenya and Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology. She noted that the mission of the group is to provide voluntary services, design of housing and infrastructure in slums. She said that Slum Architects does not focus only on design and infrastructure architecture, but also provides a good social background to the slums.

She pointed out that the Slum architects’ initiatives aim at: volunteering technical expertise; researching on innovative materials and technology to provide affordable housing; capacity building through transfer of knowledge; integrating requirements of the building code and grade 2 by laws in informal settlement upgrading designs; and providing a forum for informal settlement residents to air their views.

Belinda added that through these initiatives, the Slum Architects contributes to professional development by giving back to the society, broadening work experience, building on social capital, and engaging in research opportunities to contribute towards Sustainable Development Goals. Given that bulk of the members are students, she pointed out that the initiatives benefit students by offering them learning experience, providing internship opportunities, as well as providing easy access to professional advice.

Finally, she presented a portfolio of the Slum Architects’ initiatives, mentioning that the Slum Architects as an organization has been vocal in transforming the landscapes in Nairobi through local projects that include: a) designing and development of a playground in a school in Korogosho slum, a project done in collaboration with Playing without Borders; b) renovation of happy promotion center in Mukuru kwa Njenga slum: and c) redevelopment of Kamunde Road in Korogosho slum. She noted that the latter is a project that the organization was currently involved in, and one that was a result of 8 months of research and 3 months of fieldwork. She reported that the project addresses issues of use of space, vitality of outdoor spaces and strong woven social network.

34

2.5.3: Improving Urban Mobility: Case of Bus Rapid Transit System in Nairobi (BRT) - Maina Gachoya

While introducing his presentation, Maina argued that as more of the world’s cities become congested and polluted, new business models and technologies are emerging to solve the mobility challenge. He noted that people hurry from corner to corner; cars and trucks roll along the roads, while bicycles are left to scramble for space. However, he argued that sometimes that movement falters, and so does the dynamism that is the hallmark of great cities. In the same light, he noted that unhealthy smog levels and traffic jams, with their uniform horns and shouts, are routine irritations of urban lives, and that things could worsen. He argued that the World’s cities are facing an urgent set of challenges when it comes to ensuring that fundamental rights of urban life like mobility are ensured.

As a result, he said that it is important that every area of the city is studied comprehensively and where possible, changes made in order to first reduce the need for traveling long distances. This should include ensuring that certain services like homes, schools and health centres are located within close range. He also said that this process, which requires a multi-sectoral approach, could also be extended to workplaces and other commercial land uses. He therefore argued for efficient and less energy consuming means of mobility such as increasing walkability and other NMT facilities in the city.

He pointed out that already over 50% of Nairobi residents walk due to lack of alternatives and this proportion can be increased with the development of proper walking facilities and network within a 10 Km radius of the CBD. Although majority of people in Nairobi walk to work, there is negligible investment in walking and cycling in Nairobi mainly because the design is not intuitive. He also noted that the walking environment is also not quite up to standard and the cycling environment too does not provide park and ride facilities, and that there is also slight investment in public transport, creating heavy competition with rowdy public transport and no pick up or drop off schedules.

With an increase in the population, Maina noted that the number of trips within the city is set to increase. He argued that if no measures are put in place, the resident population would be forced to increase the use of private cars. The typical reaction to this would be to increase the infrastructure on an already strained environment, but he said that this only offers temporary solutions. For example he noted that when a road is built, there is improved access, more people get to use the facility, but after a short time it becomes congested.

Highlighting the transport situation in Kenya, Maina noted that Kenya’s transport sector currently is dominated by road transport. Private cars provide the bulk (about 60 per cent) of the transport services within the Nairobi metropolitan region. He said that public transport is relatively under-developed and is dominated by some 16,000 minibuses (matatus), transporting an estimated 3 million (30 per cent of urban commuters) commuters daily, with buses transporting another 0.4 million people. He further noted that the total vehicle population excluding motorcycles is estimated to have doubled from 600,000 vehicles in 2000 to 1,200,000 vehicles in 2010. He argued that the Nairobi metropolitan region experiences severe traffic congestion during the extended peak hours, which contributes to local air pollution and leads to significant economic losses in time and fuel.

He said that as a result, in Nairobi, there has been efforts by Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA) to support the development of a Bus rapid transport system for greater Nairobi by incorporating a single rout for an electric bus rapid system (eBRT), which will be named after the big five animals. He pointed out that NAMA plans to use the existing and approved Government of Kenya-World Bank program to upgrade Highway A104 infrastructure as the “window of opportunity” to incorporate a single route for an eBRT. NAMA also plans to support the development of the first line, the Ndovu (elephant) line, of the BRT system for the Nairobi Metropolitan Region, and also support the overall implementation of the BRT system, beginning with construction of dedicated bus lanes through to the commissioning of the eBRT stock, which is scheduled for 2018. He ended his presentation by noting that a BRT system for Nairobi is a priority action in the National Climate Change

35

Action Plan because it would lead to significant greenhouse gas emission reductions, as well as generate significant sustainable development benefits.

2.5.4: Improving Accessibility and Mobility in Urban Areas case of Bike Share Program in University of Nairobi - Charles Katua

Mr. Charles Katua started by highlighting the importance of mobility in urban areas, stating that mobility has always been part of human life, interaction between developments in transport and telecommunication technologies and developments in the urban economic, social and cultural sphere. He argued that promoting accessibility and mobility in the urban areas is a prerequisite for upholding sustainable and resilient cities as envisioned by goal 11 of Sustainable Development goals.

He provided insights into the initiatives of C4D lab in improving mobility and accessibility. He pointed out that the C4D lab is a prototyping and innovative startup incubation lab domiciled at the University of Nairobi, and through collaboration with UN Habitat and JS Research, it has made steps towards promoting accessibility and mobility within the University of Nairobi through the Bike Share Interest Programme. The Bike Share Interest Programme is a mobility option that employs a mix of bike rental and bike share system that allows users to access bicycles located at a network of self-service stations.

Being a prototype project, Mutua said that C4D undertook a feasibility study that employed analysis of lessons learnt from other Bike shares in the country and abroad as well, such as Friends of Karura and the Cornel University Bike share programme, as well as public stakeholder engagement where students, lectures and non-teaching staff were involved. The feasibility study revealed the need for a sustainable model of Bike share within the University, the importance of stakeholder/sponsor engagement to make the project a success and the need for stationing docking stations at visible locations to encourage

riding, and the importance of effective supporting actions that include advertising, marketing, promotion and partnerships.

He finally highlighted the various benefits that the Bike Share programme is expected to induce. These include ensuring ease of accessibility through out the University premises, reduction of travel time and promotion of the social fabric amongst students and staff within the University.

2.5.5: 100 Cities Resilience Project: Nairobi Case - Dr. Musyimi Mbathi

Dr. Mbathi started his presentation by describing urban resilience as the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience. He argued that a resilient city is one that has developed capacities to help absorb future shocks and stresses to its social, economic, and technical systems and infrastructures so as to still be able to maintain essentially the same functions, structures, systems, and identity.

He further noted that time and experience has shown that many cities share common challenges. He said that these range from climate change and energy consumption to population growth and housing among other issues. These concerns have led to cities slowly recognizing the importance of building their resilient capacities. As a result of this growing awareness, Dr. Mbathi noted that the Rockefeller Foundation pioneered the 100 Resilient Cities Programme. He pointed out that the 100 Resilient Cities Programme has an ambitious goal of helping cities worldwide build resilience to the growing social, economic, and physical challenges of the 21st century. He also said that the initiative aims at enabling cities to work together towards solving their challenges in a proactive and inclusive manner rather than in a reactive secluded manner. He noted that Nairobi joined the 100 resilient cities programme in 2016.

Dr. Mbathi then highlighted the case of Nairobi city, pointing out that resilience has always been tested in the city due to a number of challenges which include destruction of property and loss of lives during long rain seasons, lack of a social

36

housing policy, poor access to safe drinking water and adequate healthcare by the urban poor, aging infrastructure and the failure to adapt to various needs of a modern city; factors which have hindered the development of Nairobi. He also said that over the last 10 years the city has experienced construction of roads some 30 years after they were planned.

To achieve resilience, Dr. Mbathi pointed out that Nairobi will require the understanding of the qualities of resilient systems, and juxtaposing this with the current Nairobi status, so as to bring out the gaps and inadequacies that need to be worked upon. He highlighted the quality of resilient systems, which include: reflectiveness which is the ability to learn from the past and act in times of crisis; resourcefulness where people and institutions are able to recognize alternative ways to use resources at times of crisis; inclusivity which relates to the processes of good governance and effective leadership that

Characteristic: Description: Review with Respect to Nairobi

Reflective Using past experience to inform future decisions

Have the residents in Nairobi used past flood related tragedies to inform decision-making?

Resourceful Recognizing alternative ways to use resources. How can Nairobi residents use their resources like rainwater better?

Inclusive Prioritizing broad consultation to create a sense of shared ownership in decision-making.

Do residents feel that they are part of the decision making process as regards responding to flooding?

Integrated Bringing together a range of distinct systems and institutions.

Are all County Departments – Roads, Environment, Planning etc all involved in the decision making process, do they share ideas?

Robust Well-conceived and managed systems. Will most city systems continue working in spite of heavy rains or flooding?

Redundant Space capacity purposefully to accommodate disruption.

How can the heavy rain disruption in the city be appreciated?

Flexible Willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances.

Are the people ready to make radical changes as a response to flooding?

ensure investments and actions are appropriate, address the needs of the most vulnerable and collectively create a resilient city for everyone; integrated processes that bring together systems and institutions; robust design that is well-conceived, constructed and managed; redundancy that includes diversity where there are multiple ways to achieve a given need; and flexibility which refers to the willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances or sudden crises. he said that systems can be made more flexible through introducing new technologies or knowledge, including recognizing traditional practices.

Dr. Mbathi concluded his presentation by providing an analytical framework that can be used by researchers in analyzing the quality characteristics of resilient systems in Nairobi City – see table 2.

Table 2: Analytical Framework for Resilient Systems

3.CONCLUSION

38

3. CONCLUSION

The conference was highly successful, given the high attendance within the two days, and the highly interactive and energetic presentations and discussions. National governments, national agencies, county governments, international

development agencies and partners, institutions of higher learning, civil society organizations as well as non-governmental organizations and partners were all represented in the conference. The success of the conference also stemmed from the successful achievement of the objectives.

The keynote speakers, presenters and participants managed to share experiences of good governance practices towards innovative, resilience, inclusive and sustainable urban development. Through the presentations and deliberations, challenges and opportunities for sustainable urban development especially under devolved government were explored. These deliberations provided a good starting point that urban managers and citizens can leverage. Specifically,

the presentations and discussions also brought out innovative approaches/methodologies of facilitating inclusion of all stakeholders particularly the urban poor, in planning and development of urban areas. This is key especially in facilitating participatory development towards creating resilient communities. Moreover, participants were able to suggest principles and guidelines that ought to be adapted, to upscale resilience, innovations and inclusion in urban development. Essentially, there was concurrence that these principles of resilience and inclusivity should be mainstreamed into day-to-day operations under the urban governance realm.

At the end, the participants collectively agreed that the conference was timely and much needed, given the current trends of development called for efficient guidance and innovativeness, to ensure sustainable development and resilient urban areas and cities. In addition, it was noted that such a conference, organized locally, was germane in articulating the vision of the New Urban Agenda.

4.BIBLIOGRAPHY

40

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agency, I. E. (n.d.). Africa Energy Outlook: A Focus on Energy Prospects in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Energy Outlook Special Report .

Architect Africa Network, Kenya: Nairobi’s Poor Spend Significantly On Transport, UN Report Says. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2016, from Architect Africa Network: http://architectafrica.com/node/18358

Cooperation, D. T. (2014). Kenya Labour Market profile. Copenhagen: LO/FTF Council’s Analytical Unit.Kenya Information Guide, Kenya Population Demographics by Ethnicity. (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2016, from Kenya Infor-

mation Guide: http://www.kenya-information-guide.com/kenya-population.html KNBS. (2010). Kenya 2009 Population and Housing Census Highlights. Nairobi.Redfern, P. (n.d.). Kenya’s Population to hit 97 million in 2050. Daily Nation .United Nations. (2014). World Urbanization prospects: The 2014 Revision Highlights. Department of Economic and Social Affairs,PopulationDivision.

World Bank, Urban population growth (annual %). (n.d.). Retrieved August 9, 2016, from World Bank Group: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.GROW

5.APPENDICES

42

THURSDAY, 27th OCTOBER (DAY 1)

TIME ACTIVITY

08.00 – 08.30 Registration

08:30 – 08:45 Welcome RemarksDr. Musyimi Mbathi Ag, Director, Centre for Urban Research and Innovations

8:45 – 10:15 Session One: INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT GLOBAL AGENDA

George Wasonga, Director, Civil Society Urban Development ProgrammeDr. Grace Lubaale, UN-HABITATProf. Caleb Mireri, Kenyatta UniversityProf. Peter Ngau, Principal, College of Architecture & Engineering, University of Nairobi

10:15 – 10:45 Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair: Prof. Alfred Omenya, Technical University of KenyaRapporteur: Olale Philip, University of Nairobi & Caleb Muli, M.A. Urban Planning, University of Nairobi

10.45 – 11.00 TEA BREAK (NETWORKING)

11:10 – 12.10 Session Two: INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT GLOBAL AFRICAN CONTEXT (KEY NOTE PRESENTATIONS)

Samuel Mabala, Urban Development Commissioner, Uganda - Planning Approaches for Inclusive and Innovative Urban DevelopmentProf. Alfred Omenya, Eco Build Africa - Innovative, Resilient and Inclusive Urban Development in Africa, Countering the narrative of world class cities Stephen Otieno, Research Fellow East African Institute, Aga Khan University: Role of Resilience in Urban Development in realizing Sustainable Development

Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair: Patrick Adolwa, Konza City Development Rapporteur: Sharon Boit, University of Nairobi & Eric Muiruri, B.A. Urban Planning, University of Nairobi

12:30 – 01:45 LUNCH (NETWORKING)

5. APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Detailed

43

02:00 – 03:15 Session Three: GOOD GOVERNANCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Eunice Karoki; CEC Lands, Housing and Physical Planning, Kiambu County: Good Governance and Inclusive Urban Development Areas: Case of Kiambu CountyDr. Lorraine Amollo, School of Art and Design University of Nairobi: Harnessing the Power of the Media: Prospects for Inclusion in Urban DialoguesTechnology and Urban Governance Grace Githiri, SDI: Slum Mapping and Urban Governance Ramani Communications Limited: Technology and Urban Governance

03:15 – 03:45 Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair: Dr. Musyimi Mbathi Rapporteur: Philip Olale, University of Nairobi & Lilian Maigo, M.A. Urban Planning, University of Nairobi

03:45 – 04:00 Recap of the day Chief Rapporteur: Dr. Romanus Opiyo, University of Nairobi

04:00 – 04:20 NETWORKING (TEA BREAK) & EXHIBITS

FRIDAY, 28th OCTOBER (DAY 2)

TIME ACTIVITY

08.00 – 08.30 Registration

08:30 – 08:45 Welcome RemarksDr. Munyua Mwaura, University of Nairobi

8:45 – 10:15 Session Four: INNOVATIVE, RESILIENCE AND INCLUSIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT UNDER DEVOLVED GOVERNANCE

Prof. George Wagah, Maseno University: Planning for Inclusive Urban Areas: Challenges and Opportunities Josiah Omotto, Director Umande Trust: Human Rights and Inclusive Sustainable Cities The Role of Public Participation in achieving inclusive Planning, Case of Makueni CountyJudith Kalinga, Minister Lands, Housing and Physical Planning, Makueni County: Role of Public Participation in Achieving Inclusive Planning: Case of Makueni CountyAmina Rashid, CEC Lands and Planning, Lamu County: Inclusive Development under Devolved Governance; Case of Lamu County

10:15 – 10: 45 Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair:, Philip Olale, CURI, University of NairobiRapporteur: Isaac Kang’ethe B.A. Urban Planning, University of Nairobi

44

10.45 – 11.00 TEA BREAK (NETWORKING)

11:00 – 12:00 Session Five: RESEARCH TOWARDS INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO FACILITATING INCLUSION AND RESILIENCE IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Dr. Munyua Mwaura, University of Nairobi : Mediating Conflicting Planning Rationalities in Low-Income Neighborhoods in Nairobi, KenyaDr. R. Opiyo, University of Nairobi: Sustainable urban Mobility Planning Approach, Case of Ruiru, KenyaDiana Kinya, Research Associate, Centre for Urban Research and Innovations: Sustainable Solutions towards Prevention of Slum Gentrification after Land Allocation to Individual Squatters: Nyamaroto Informal Settlement, Nakuru CountyPhilip O. Olale, Research Associate, Centre for Urban Research and Innovations: Negotiating Historical Land Injustice: Mombasa County, Kenya: Land Contestation between GAMAKA Communities and Thathini Development Company Limited

12.00 – 12:30 Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair: Charles Karisa Dadu, University of Nairobi Rapporteur: Dennis Wakaba, B.A Urban Planning, University of Nairobi & Benjamin Ayoro,

12:30 – 01:45 LUNCH (NETWORKING)

02:00 – 03:00 Session Six: ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN SCALING UP RESILENCE, INNOVATION & INCLUSION

Maina Gachoya, ITDP, Kenya : Improving Urban Mobility: Case of Bus Rapid Transit System in NairobiBelinda Tuju, Chair, Slum Architects: Transforming Urban Landscapes through design: Slum Architects InitiativesCharles Katua, CD4Lab University of Nairobi: Improving Accessibility and Mobility in Urban Areas: Case of Bike share program in NairobiModix Okeyo, Chairperson, Planning Students Association, University of Nairobi: Role of students in scaling up the debate on innovative resilient and inclusive urban developmentMbathi Musyimi, University of Nairobi: 100 Cities Resilience Projects: Case of Nairobi

03:00 – 03:20 Plenary (Q/A)Session Chair:, Rapporteur: Jacinta Mbilo Research Associate, CURI, University of Nairobi & Muge Jepkosgei, B.A. Urban Planning, University of Nairobi

03:20 – 04:00 Session Seven: CLOSING SESSION

Conference ResolutionsChief Rapporteur: Charles Karisa Dadu, University of Nairobi

Closing RemarksProf. Peter Ngau, Principal College of Architecture and Engineering, University of Nairobi

Vote of thanks

04:00 -> NETWORKING (TEA BREAK) & EXHIBITS

45

Mr. George Wasonga

George Wasonga is an environmental planner with over 20 years of local, national and regional experience on a wide range of urban development sector issues including policy research, urban governance and management, organizational development, integrated planning, environmental assessments, vulnerability assessments, financing for development, natural resource management and sustainable urbanism. With work experience in regional and national urban development programmes, he is exposed to the fine details of implementing complex urban programmes, networking amongst multiple stakeholders, managing government and donor relations and fundraising. He has designed and implemented successful urban intervention programmes for public sector and civil society organizations. Through his extensive work experience in the urban sector, he is fully acquainted with the relevant local, national, regional and international policies and strategies and their implications on the global urban trends.

Mr. Grace Lubaale

Grace Lubaale is an Urban and Regional Planner with an inter-disciplinary training and experience in management, finance, development and urban and regional planning. His professional experience covers community, civil society, national and local government, academic, and bilateral and multilateral contexts. Grace’s consulting experience covers East, Central, Southern and West Africa. He has extensive experience working with participatory methods. Grace is also an active planning and urban development researcher with special interests in urban poverty, food, climate change, and public interest issues. He has authored articles and book chapters.

Prof. Caleb Mireri

Prof. Mireri is a planner and an academic, with extensive experiences in government and the academia. He has published extensively in his areas of research, and supervised several Masters and doctoral students. He has collaborated in research and consultancy internationally with such organisations as: Inter University council of East Africa, Earth Watch Institute, Waginengen University, University of Dar es Salaam, University of Makerere, IDRC, UN-Habitat, FAO, etc. He has been Chairman of Department of Environmental Planning & Management, and Chairman, Centre for Research and Extension at Kenyatta University, where he has also played other significant administrative roles.

Dr. Romanus Opiyo

Dr. Opiyo is planner, with strong social science research skills particularly use of participatory techniques. He has worked with UN-Habitat and University of Nairobi. He has over ten years experience in consultancy, research and teaching. His research work mainly focuses on urban challenges in developing countries, especially in the realm of safety and livelihoods. His planning work is mainly based on interventions for vulnerable groups (more specifically, slum dwellers, informal sector workers and the urban poor generally), crime-risks and policing including evaluation of community policing. Dr. Opiyo has also done significant studies in the area of micro-enterprise development with a focus on locational and clustering theory, use and impact of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and learning processes and innovation systems within the small and micro-scale enterprise sector.

Appendix 2:

About the Presenters

46

Prof. Alfred Omenya

Prof. Alfred Omenya is an environmental Architect trained in architectural design, sustainable urbanism and development. He has been the Dean, School of the Built Environment at the Technical University of Kenya and Principal Researcher at Eco-Build Africa. He taught at the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg and University of Nairobi, Kenya, as Associate Professor of Architecture. He has published extensively in his research areas. Prof. Omenya has also worked in the private Sector, as a Principal Architect, in Planning Systems Architects (Kenya) and Sync Consult (South Africa). He has undertaken various research consultancies for many international organisations including the World Bank, UN-Habitat, UNEP, African Union, Sida (Sweden), UK-Aid, Oxfam GB, GOAL Ireland, etc. He collaborates in research with Harvard Graduate School, ETH Zurich, University of Manchester, University of Florida, the Woodrow Wilson Center, African Centre for Cities, Institute of Security Studies, etc. His recent works include African Union Common Position on Climate Change; African Union Strategy on Climate Change, State of African Cities Reports and the Swedish SymbioCity Programme.

Mr. Steve Otieno

Steve is a former research fellow at the East African Institute of the Aga Khan University. Here, he was responsible for coordinating the implementation of a donor funded project on Urban Food Systems in East Africa which sought to address one overriding issue: feeding people living in cities while minimizing the ecological footprint of their food procurement systems.

Prof. Peter Ngau

Prof. Peter Ngau is an urban planner and currently the Principal of the College of Architecture & Engineering, University of Nairobi. He has Ph.D in Urban Planning from University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). He has over twenty years of University teaching and research experience. He served for six years National Expert United Nations Center for Regional Planning (UNCRD) – Africa Office. He was chairman Department of Urban and Regional Planning (2002- 2008). His publications include: Informal Settlements in Nairobi, Research Design, Data Collection and Analysis (2004); University/City Partnerships: Creating Policy Networks for Urban Transformation in Nairobi (with Jackie Klopp, Elliot Sclar, 2011); Challenges in Urban and Peri-Urban Land Governance in Nairobi: Dynamics, Tactics and Issues, a World Bank Report, (with Jackie Klopp, Jeremiah Ayonga and Rose Musyoka (2011). He is managing editor, Regional Development Studies Journal.

Mr. Philip Olale

Mr. Olale is a graduate of the University of Nairobi with an Honors Degree in Urban and Regional Planning and a Master of Arts degree in Environmental Law, and currently pursuing a PhD at the University of Nairobi. He has research interest in land use planning/law, land tenure, natural resource planning, marine spatial planning and environmental law. His professional engagements and experience has over the years focused on areas of project management and coordination, preparation of master plans and physical development plans; environmental impact assessment; strategic environmental assessment; land and land use policy, sustainable human settlements planning especially within informal settlements and slums, land tenure and administration; urban housing; local community development; program/project conceptualization, planning, management, monitoring and evaluation; sustainable livelihoods development; community mobilization; participatory integrated planning; teaching, research, documentation and report writing. He previously worked at KENMT BILL Engineers and Planners as an Assistant Physical Planner and then at the Architectural Association of Kenya (AAK) as a Project Assistant. He is currently an Assistant Lecturer at the University of Nairobi and Research Associate at the Centre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI). He is also a Consultant with Silverwind Consultants Ltd.

47

Dr. Musyimi Mbathi

Dr. Mbathi holds a PhD in Urban Planning from University of Newcastle, UK. He is a Consultant Urban and Regional Planner/ GIS Expert. He has worked as a planner with the Government of Kenya for over 10years and the United Nations (UN-HABITAT) as a consultant within the Global Urban Observatory where he managed the 1000 cities GIS project. He has urban planning experience in Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Somalia. He has been involved in numerous informal settlement planning initiatives within Nairobi, Nyeri, Thika , Kisumu and Nakuru.

Eunice Karoki

Eunice is currently the County Executive Committee Member (Lands, Physical Planning & Housing), in the Kiambu County Government. She holds a Master’s degree in Urban and Regional Planning, a Bachelor’s degree in Science (Survey), and a Certificate in Environmental Impact Analysis and Environmental Audit. She has accumulated a wealth of experience in the planning field, having been actively involved in the preparation of Awendo Town Physical Development plan (2010-2011), Macalder Town Development plan (2009-2010), Rongo Town Physical Development Plan (2008-2009) and Kisumu Metropolitan Integrated Structure Plan (2009-2010).

Dr. Lorraine Amollo

Dr. Lorraine is a design researcher with expertise in design education, design ethnography, transdisciplinarity, social innovations and informal settlements. She works as a tutorial fellow in the School of Arts and Design, University of Nairobi, and is the founding director of Ufunzi Research Management and Consultancy.

Grace Githiri

Grace is a graduate of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Nairobi, with a Bachelors degree in Urban and Regional Planning. She works with Slum/Shack Dwellers International (SDI)-Kenya, as the Programme Officer.

Josiah Omotto

Josiah is the senior advisor, Umande Trust; a non-governmental organization based in Kibera slum, Nairobi. He has decades of experience in working with the informal settlements in Nairobi and Kenya in general.

Judith Kalinga

Judith is the current County Executive Committee Member, (Lands, Mining & Physical Planning) in Makueni County Government, and an advocate of the High Court of Kenya of 16 years standing, 12 of which she spent in active legal practice. She also worked as the Executive Officer of CLEAR Kenya, a legal aid organization and as the Africa Liaison of Advocates International. She is a Certified Public Secretary and a certified mediator, and is presently taking a Masters’ degree course in Leadership and Governance at the International Leadership University. Outside of her official duties Judith is a trustee of the Africa International University, a board member of Advocates Africa, and legal advisor to the continental board of the Association of Evangelicals in Africa among other social and corporate responsibilities.

48

Amina R. Masoud

Ms. Amina Masoud is the County Executive Committee Member (Lands), in Lamu County Government.

Dr. Munyua Mwaura

Dr. Mwaura is a architect-planner and lecturer at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Nairobi, Kenya. His research interests are in Housing Studies, Urban Planning and Urban Design. He is a member of the International Society of City and Regional Planners, an International Associate Member of the Royal Town Planning Institute and a corporate member of the Architectural Association of Kenya and the Kenya Institute of Planners. Dr. Mwaura holds a PhD from the Department of Planning, Oxford Brookes University, UK, where his research project sought to develop a theoretical framework for the mediation of difference between the socio spatial change processes adopted by professionals and those adapted by low-income urban households.

Diana Kinya

Diana holds a Masters degree in Urban Management from the IHS, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands, and a Bachelors degree in Urban and Regional Planning, from the University of Nairobi. She is a practicing planner, EIA expert and lecturer at the school of the Built Environment, Technical University of Kenya.

Belinda Tuju

Belinda is a graduate Architect from The University of Nairobi. She successfully undertook her final year research thesis at Korogocho slums in Nairobi, Kenya, att the same time working in the University of Nairobi Master Plan Project. She is also a CAD trainer at the same university, Department of Architecture; taking second and third years through Architectural Visualization; and teaches ArchiCAD, SKETCHUP, 3DS MAX & VRAY. She has also worked as an Architect assistant at Otieno & Kung’u Associates, Sketch Studio and EmacsCAD, all firms based in Nairobi Kenya.

Maina Gachoya

Maina is a transport planner working at the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). He has years of experience in planning and appraising urban transport networks with a passion for sustainable urban transportation solutions.

Charles Katua

Charles is a researcher at the C4DLab (Computing for Development Lab) at the University of Nairobi who studies technology; innovation and interactivity focusing on the makeup of online relationships, online influence, and information diffusion through the social networks and other related ICTs. He is responsible for design, analysis and coordination of C4DLab Surveys.


ConferenceReport


CENTRE FOR URBAN RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS CONFERENCE 2016


University of NairobiDepartment of Urban and Regional PlanningCentre for Urban Research and Innovations (CURI)P. O. BOX. 30197 00100 GPO NAIROBI, KENYAEmail:[email protected]

Documents

Conference Report - Centre For Urban Innovations · a platform for young professionals and students in the built environment to participate in the interactive sessions and presentations