Slum relocation projects in Bangkok: what has contributed to their success or failure?

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174 www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

Slum relocation projects in Bangkok: what has contributed to their success or failure? Vichai Viratkapan, Ranjith Perera Urban Environmental Management Field of Study, School of Environment, Resources and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Phaholyothin km. 42, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand

Abstract Many slum relocation projects have been implemented in Bangkok during the last three decades. Studies conducted on some of these projects have focused on the impacts of resettlement on slum dwellers, while a few have focused on the process of slum relocation. This paper presents the findings of an empirical study on factors that influence the post-relocation performance of such projects. The study reveals that there are a number of pre-requisites for achieving success. These include factors external to the community such as the location of the new settlement and award of compensation and factors internal to the community such as unity, availability of strong leadership, active participation and positive attitude of community members. The study finds that slum relocation projects require specialized activities in the consolidation stage, in order to sustain the momentum generated at the eviction and transition stage of the projects. r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Slum relocation; Bangkok; Success; Failure

Introduction Displacement and eviction of communities is often associated with urban development in many developing countries of Asia. When the demand of land for various development activities in Corresponding author. Tel.: +66 2 524 5606; fax: +66 2 516 1418.

E-mail address: [email protected] (V. Viratkapan). 0197-3975/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2004.09.002

ARTICLE IN PRESS 158

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

prime areas is high and the supply is limited, developers (in both public and private sectors) target sites that are underutilized in economic terms. Most often, these sites happen to be living and working areas occupied by the weaker strata of the urban society. Supported by favourable urban development policies and powered by financial strength, developers are often able to pressurize on people occupying economically attractive land. Most often these lands happen to be occupied by slum and squatter1 settlements. For households living in squatter settlements, security of tenure offers a respite from the pressures of forced removal, eviction, resettlement or relocation (UN-HABITAT, 2003, pp. 164–188). Resettlement and relocation has been a subject widely discussed for the last three decades. The discussion has generally centred around various impacts on re-settlers, with a particular focus on socio-economic hardships. Studies of relocation projects2 invariably highlight the sufferings of people that occur due to changes in their places of living and the livelihoods. The critics of resettlement projects usually argue that relocation creates tremendous negative impacts on communities as well as the micro-economy of the area. In contrast, the proponents argue that the prime land occupied by slum dwellers need to be utilized for economically more productive purposes. Over the decades the attitude towards slum dwellers has changed from outright eviction to resettlement and relocation. For more than a decade since 1990, the global policy of UN-Habitat has even gone further to emphasize the need for security of tenure in low-income housing, especially security of land tenure in the city areas (UNCHS, 1991; UN-HABITAT, 2003). Regarding The Habitat II conference held in 1996 emphasized that all people should have equal opportunity and access to the housing and infrastructure services (UN-HABITAT, 2001). Although relocation approach creates extensive impacts on the re-settlers, it is an alternative for giving land tenure to the poor. A publication by the World Bank has reviewed causes and effects of resettlement programs implemented in some developing countries since 1980s, in order to give policy guidelines on 1 The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS/HABITAT) defines slum and squatter settlements, as follows: Slum settlements usually consist of run-down housing in older, established, legally built parts of the city proper. Slum buildings are mostly old and poorly maintained. Most of the residents rent their accommodation, although owners occupy some space or detached structures. In some cases, many of the buildings have more than one floor and house several families. Squatter settlements are mainly uncontrolled low-income residential areas with ambiguous legal status regarding land occupation. They are to a large extent built by the inhabitants themselves using their own means and are usually poorly equipped with public utilities and community services. The usual image of a squatter settlement is of a poor, under serviced, overcrowded and dilapidated settlement consisting of make-shift, improvised housing areas. The land occupied by squatter settlements is often, but not always, located further from the city centre than in the case with slums. Often, but not always, the houses are built and occupied by their owners. The land is often occupied illegally (UNCHS, 1982, pp. 14–15). Usually in the Thai context, the term ‘slum’ refers to both slum and squatter settlements since both portray an image of poor physical conditions of the occupied dwellings. In 1990, the National Housing Authority (NHA) and the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration defined the term ‘slum’ as: ‘a group of buildings with a housing density of not less than 15 houses per rai (0.16 ha), in an area characterized by overcrowding and flooding with deteriorated and unsanitary conditions that offer stuffy, damp and unhygienic accommodation, and which might be harmful for health, security or as the source of illegal or immoral activities.’ (NESDB & GHB, 1995). 2 The target group of relocation projects normally consists of slum communities, which are displaced by various urban development activities in the inner city areas.

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

159

project formulation, implementation, and operation (Cernea, 1988). Several international funding agencies have subsequently used these guidelines. In 1998, the Asian Development Bank has also recommended implementation of guidelines for resettlement projects (ADB, 1998). These guidelines have been useful in minimizing the impacts of urban development projects on relocated people. A review of the experience of a city like Bangkok, which has witnessed a number of evictions and resettlement of slum communities during the last two decades, can offer valuable lessons for other cities which are going through similar processes. This article presents the findings of a research study on the factors that contribute to the development performance3 of slum relocation projects implemented in Bangkok during the period of 1984–19954. It is expected that the lessons learned from this research can be utilized to increase effectiveness of planning and operation of slum relocation projects in other emerging economies.

Eviction and relocation of slums in Bangkok Metropolitan Bangkok has been facing problems associated with slums for many years. The city has a large number of slums that serve as the most important housing delivery system for the poorest strata of its population. In 1968, only 50 slum settlements have been identified in Bangkok. By 1985, 943 slum settlements have been found in the city alone, inhabited by 956,400 people in 173,890 households. In addition to these numbers, the immediately adjacent provinces of Nontaburi and Samut Prakarn, have had 77 identified slum settlements with 143,600 inhabitants (Pornchockchai, 1985). The latest reports from the NHA reveals that in 2000, the number had grown to 1208 slum settlements with 243,204 households in the city alone (NHA, 2002). In recent years, it has been observed that slums are expanding into suburban areas and adjacent provinces of Bangkok. In 1998, there had been 452 slum settlements in the five adjacent provinces of Bangkok, comprising 77,452 households and 387,125 persons (CODI, 2000). These figures show that the numbers of slum settlements are increasing both in the city as well as in adjacent provinces since 1990s. Although some settlements have been removed from the central city areas, new settlements have appeared in the outer city areas as well as in the adjacent provinces (Pacific Consultants, 1997). It is estimated that the number of slum settlements have increased by 84% in the outer-zone of Bangkok during the short period of 1990–1993. This indicates that low-income settlements are being pushed out of the core urban areas to the suburban fringe. Some settlements have even been pushed to the adjacent provinces such as Samut Prakarn, Nontaburi and Phathumtani.

3 ‘Development Performance’ does not refer to a dualistic model of success or failure, but to the level of achievement (see study methodology for a working definition of development performance). 4 The field investigations for this study were conducted in 2000. Projects with at least 5 years of history of existence in the new location were selected for the study. Hence the study period was limited to the year of first relocation project undertaken in Bangkok (1984) to 1995.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 160

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

Slum eviction The fundamental problem faced by slum dwellers is lack of secure land tenure. The NHA reported in 1994 that only 50% of total slum households in Bangkok had some security of land tenure, while the remaining 50% had none (NHA, 1997). Usually, the slums with unclear or no tenure status face eviction when land for new urban development are in demand. By comparing the aerial photos taken in 1974 and 1984, NHA had estimated that 150 slums with approximately 30,750 households had disappeared and the land changed to other uses. Moreover, between 1984 and 1988 another 107 slums have disappeared (Khan, 1994). The Human Settlement Foundation (HSF) reported that 36,739 slum households had been evicted in 1998 alone (HSF, 1998). The NHA has addressed the housing problems of 39,819 families evicted from 82 settlements during 1978–2001 (NHA, 2002). Most of the slum communities that faced relocation experienced it when the economy of Thailand was booming from 1987–1997. Since the Asian economic crisis of 1997, Thailand’s economy has been in recession until 2003. As a result, land required for infrastructure and real estate developments during this period has been initiated. This situation has created a favourable atmosphere for slum dwellers. While the pressure mounted on slum communities in the central area of Bangkok has been very little, new settlements have emerged in the peripheral areas occupying government and private land. Although, evictions have become less of a threat from the public sector, there are still reports of evictions by private sector in central areas of Bangkok. There are still more than 200 slum settlements, with approximately 30,000 households, currently earmarked for relocation (FRSN, 2000). The policy on low-income housing in Thailand had been on giving security of tenure since 1970s. This policy had been implemented through four alternative strategies: (1) land sharing, (2) re-blocking, (3) reconstruction, (4) relocation. Among these, the first three are on-site strategies while ‘slum relocation’ has been the main off-site strategy used to solve the housing problem of people evicted from slums. The on-going housing development programs for low-income people in Thailand are Baan Mankong program5 and Baan Eur-Ah-torn program6. The first project attempts to give security of tenure for the poor by offering long-term lease of presently occupied land or even opportunity to purchase if the landowner agrees (Noppaladorom, 2004). The second program offers affordable housing with basic infrastructure and service areas (NHA, 2004, http://www.nhanet.or.th/pplan/eng/ arthorn.html).

5

Baan Mankong targets the slum and squatter dwellers in Thailand. This program attempts to create security of tenure for the slum and squatter people on the land they currently occupy. The government encourages the communities to either negotiate for a long lease period or buy the land from the landowners. If the negotiation is a success, the government, through CODI and NHA will provide the mortgage for the land at a special interest rate, and subsidize the infrastructure cost (Noppaladorom, 2004, pp. 77–89). 6 Baan Eur-Ar-torn is a housing program targeting lower-middle income people who want to own a house. There are two types of houses: (1) detached house on a 20–25 sq wah (80–100 sq m) plot located in the suburban areas of Bangkok, and (2) apartment units located in the intermediate zone of Bangkok.

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

161

Slum relocation The first slum relocation project in Bangkok has been implemented in 1984. During the period of 1984–1999, 59 such projects have been implemented in 50 locations of Bangkok metropolitan region (Viratkapan, 1999). The other three policy directions had been applied to approximately 10 projects, including land-sharing projects. These figures indicate that off-site relocation has been generally preferred over on-site reconstruction, re-blocking or land sharing. Off-site relocation has been the obvious preference for low-income housing projects because that enables to release land occupied by slums for more productive purposes. However, it is questionable whether all relocation projects are successful in terms of consolidating slum dwellers in new locations. In order to find answer to this question, 25 slum relocation projects having at least 5 years history of existence in the new locations were selected for the purpose of this present study. Only the slums relocated in the outer zone of the city were selected in order to assess the effect of distance on development performance of a project. The research aimed at assessing the degree of development performance of all 25 projects (see Table 1), and then identified the factors that have contributed to the development performance.

The study methodology ‘Development performance’ is an indicator, which is used to assess the process as well as the outcome of a development project. For the purpose of this study, it is defined as the development outcome of a slum relocation project that reflects the effectiveness of relocation. Development performance as a composite indicator is considered as manifested in several attributes, which have physical and non-physical dimensions. On the basis of an opinion survey involving slum dwellers, housing professionals, and community development experts the following five attributes were chosen as indicators to assess the development performance of selected relocation projects:


Original land ownership: This attribute relates to the percentage of original land recipients who




are still remaining in the new location of the community. It is assumed that an existence of a higher percentage of original recipients indicates a strong development performance. Plot occupation: This attribute considers the percentage of land recipients who actually occupy the plot of land. A higher percentage shows a strong development performance in that particular project. Completion of house construction: This attribute considers the rate of completion of the housing units, in that a higher percentage of completed houses in the project is indicative of a stronger development performance. Condition of infrastructure7: This attribute considers the present condition of on-site project infrastructure. A better condition of infrastructure in the project is indicative of a stronger development performance. 7

Assessed using the visible condition of: (1) road condition, (2) drainage system, and (3) water supply system.

Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 9 Sub-Nukul Pattana Onnuth Phase 1 (40 Rai) Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 12 Luang-por-kow Klong Jed Klong Song Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 8 Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 10 Suwanprasith 2 Onnuth Phase 2 (19 Rai) Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 11/1 Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 11/2 Bangbua Ruamjai Samakkee (Sena) Suwanprasith 3 Saithong Pattana Petch Siam Sahachumchon Ruamjai Pattana 1 Suwanprasith 1 Fuen Nakorn Romklow zone 7 Kaew Nimittr Klong Hok (Soon Prasanngan) Or-Nguen Porn Praruang (Wat Ladprow) Average value

1991 1992 1991 1993 1993 1995 1995 1989 1992 1989 1993 1994 1994 1984 1988 1990 1991 1989 1993 1988 1985 1990 1994 1988 1991

9 8 9 7 7 5 5 11 8 11 7 6 6 16 12 10 9 11 7 12 15 10 6 12 9 9.12

4.320 0.702 6.400 3.520 1.120 5.719 4.607 8.320 4.000 1.094 3.064 8.640 3.200 1.340 2.416 1.102 0.376 3.184 0.576 1.664 4.672 2.400 9.653 1.560 0.960 3.384

725 85 416 285 108 426 321 381 356 100 269 342 726 168 169 118 43 140 53 161 412 247 540 112 102 272.20

74.35 77.65 60.67 77.20 84.26 88.97 78.50 65.29 70.79 70.00 65.80 71.83 71.43 75.44 84.42 76.07 87.50 80.13 67.92 44.74 30.34 28.74 87.99 33.03 71.57 68.99

96.89 64.71 79.85 60.23 71.30 70.42 67.91 78.51 84.55 75.00 75.84 57.82 62.37 90.06 89.61 82.90 64.71 80.13 94.34 57.02 80.82 76.11 10.60 68.75 66.67 72.28

Plot occupation (%)

Original land owners (%)

Total no. of plots

The year of first relocation

Age of the Total projects project (as of area (Ha) 2000)

Attributes for conjoint analysis

Basic information

92.75 61.18 72.82 52.05 65.74 60.33 60.75 68.32 77.53 67.00 69.14 50.54 55.05 73.68 87.01 78.63 81.40 61.54 79.25 44.74 75.97 59.51 7.07 55.36 31.37 63.55

Good–excellent Poor–fair Poor–fair Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Good–excellent Poor–fair Poor–fair Good–excellent Poor–fair Poor–fair Poor–fair Good–excellent Poor–fair Poor–fair Poor–fair Poor–fair Poor–fair

Completion of Condition of houses infrastructure construction (%)

Sources: Viratkapan (1999), Sananikom (2000) and field survey of Viratkapan (2001).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Name of new settlements

Strong Strong Strong Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak

2.5434 1.0436 0.8976 0.7918 0.7918 0.7918 0.7918 0.6458 0.6458 0.6458 0.6440 0.0834 0.0834 0.2916 0.2916 0.2916 0.2916 0.2934 1.0000 1.5625 1.5833 1.5833 1.9166 2.1457 2.6250

Participation Assessment of community values of members development performance

1 2 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14

Rank of the projects

Result of conjoint analysis (as of 2000)

162

Table 1 Basic information of the slum relocation projects selected for the study and the results of conjoint analysis

ARTICLE IN PRESS

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

163


Participation of community members8: This attribute considers the participation of the members of community in regular meetings. A higher participation by members is considered as an indication of a stronger development performance. The level of development performance of 25 resettlement projects selected for the study were assessed by using the ‘conjoint analysis (CA)’ technique9 and the above five attributes. This technique was useful to categorize the projects in the two groups according to the positive and negative values. A negative value indicates a weaker performance while a positive value indicates a stronger performance. Table 1 indicates that 13 resettlement projects have experienced stronger development performance, and the other 12 resettlement projects have experienced weaker development performance. All 25 projects were ranked according to the development performance indicator as revealed by the CA. The projects showing the three highest positive values and three lowest negative values were identified in two groups viz., strong development performance group (SDP group) and weak development performance group (WDP group). The SDP group comprised of Romklow Zone 9, Sub Nukul Pattana and Luang Por Kow, the WDP group comprised of Kaew Nimitr, Pornpraruang and Suwanprasith 1 (see Table 1 and Fig. 1). A total of 215 randomly selected respondents from these six settlements were interviewed using a standardized survey questionnaire. The Chi-square test was used to compare the two groups in terms of the factors that could have contributed to the development performance of settlements.

Factors contributing to development performance A number of factors have been cited by various agencies and authors as contributing to the effectiveness of overall development performance of resettlement projects. Cernea (1988, pp. 12–15), identifies five factors viz.: (1) resettlement policy, (2) legislation, (3) pre-planning, (4) public participation, and (5) adequate compensation as significant factors influencing the success of formulation and implementation of resettlement projects. Moreover, the UNCHS (Habitat) has advocated that the process of relocation in terms of planning and implementation is of vital importance for the success of such projects. The main elements of the process contributing to successful relocation initiatives has been identified as (1) participation of members, (2) physical development of the resettlement area, (3) award of compensation (4) social development, and (5) consolidation of livelihood (UNCHS, 1991, pp. 18–40). A subsequent study by the ADB highlights community participation in every step of the process, compensation or funding of resettlement activities and socio-economic restoration activities as the key factors which ensure an effective relocation process (ADB, 1998). Similarly, Davidson, Zaaijer, Peltenburg, and Rodell 8

Assessed using the indicators: (1) frequency of meeting and (2) percentage of members attending meeting. The ‘CA’ technique has its theoretical roots in the literature on psychology concerning complex decision-making. Now, it is also used in other fields of study such as geography, transportation, urban planning, sociology and many other areas. Sometimes CA is called ‘trade-off analysis’ because it is based on the assumption that complex decisions, such as purchase decisions, are based not on a single factor or criterion but on multiple factors. Thus, CA enables the researcher to model the human decision-making process in a realistic manner. Respondents perform realistic behaviours, and to these the researcher applies statistical modelling to infer the respondents’ underlying values (AMA, 2000). 9

ARTICLE IN PRESS 164

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

Fig. 1. Locations of the case studies.

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

165

(1993) have identified five factors that influence relocation and resettlement viz; (1) policy, legal and institutional framework, (2) public participation in the relocation process, (3) good location of the new site, (4) good physical development, and (5) effective socio-economic development in the form of employment opportunities. The above studies enable to identify contributing factors, which are external and internal to the community experiencing the process of relocation. External factors consist of aspects such as new location and award of compensation, while internal factors constitute unity of the community, strength of leadership, and participation of members in the process. One of the important factors that none of the above studies explicitly indicate is positive attitude of the community towards the whole experience of relocation. In other words, if people are optimistic about life in new location that will contribute to the success of the process. In contrast, if the people are pessimistic about the new life at the new location, the chance of failure of the project is high. The analysis presented in this article is centred on both external and internal factors, including the attitude factor identified outside the context of available literature. The analysis also deals with the three stages of a relocation project, which are (1) eviction stage, (2) transition stage, and (3) consolidation stage. External factors The external factors examined are the concerns often raised by the affected communities such as convenience of the new location and award of compensation. How these factors have contributed to the SDP and WDP groups are analysed below. Convenience of new location The influence of location to development performance was investigated using distance as an indicator. The distance from the new location to the nearest main road, sub-centre, local market and the CBD of Bangkok was assessed assuming that in previous locations in CBD, such facilities were available at a very convenient distance. The analysis revealed that the relocation projects in the SDP group are generally located closer to the CBD than the projects in WDP group. However, the analysis also revealed that the projects in WDP group are better situated than the projects in SDP group, in terms of proximity to a main road, sub-centre and the local market. Moreover, the new locations of WDP projects were found to be closer to the location of the original settlements. These findings contradict the general belief that the new location should be as close as possible to the original location, in order to make minimum disruption to the livelihoods and socio-economic linkages of people. The comparison of distances indicated that location is not really a significant factor contributing to the level of development performance of relocation projects. This finding supports the view expressed by UNCHS (1991, p. 37) and Misra and Gupta (1981) that location is not the only factor which determines the success of a relocation project but it should also be considered together with other factors such as social organization and employment potential at the new location. Award of compensation A review of basic information on individual projects revealed that two of the three projects of SDP group have been offered compensation for displacement. On the other hand only one of the

ARTICLE IN PRESS 166

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

three projects of WDP group has been compensated. The compensation has been given in the form of cash and/or land and in most cases it has been given to the community but not to individual households. The field survey also confirmed that almost 75% of the households in the SDP group received compensation while about 40% of the households in the WDP group have received the same. There is a significant difference between the two groups in terms of receiving compensation for displacement. In other words, compensation has made more contribution to the SDP group’s development performance than the WDP. It was also found that the amount of compensation is another significant factor for enhancing the success of a relocation project. Although not numerically verified, the interviews with respondents revealed that communities in the SDP group had received better deals from the landlords for moving away from original settlements resulting in contributing to higher development performance. These findings also confirm the recommendation of the World Bank, UNCHS and ADB that award of compensation is essential for the success of a relocation project. Internal factors These factors are related to the characteristics of the community and its members. For the purpose of analysis following characteristics were selected as indicators: (1) unity of the community, (2) strength of leadership, (3) participation of community members, and (4) the attitude of community members to the new location. Since these characteristics are bound to change in time, the analysis of each factor was conducted in relation to the three stages of a typical relocation project viz.: (1) the eviction stage, (2) transition stage, and (3) consolidation stage. Unity of the community and strength of leadership Once a community gets to know that it will be displaced, the members usually have to engage in two types of activities, (1) organizing opposition to eviction and (2) prepare for relocation if opposition to eviction eventually fails. During the eviction stage, community leaders emerge automatically if they do not already exist. Thus pressures of strong leadership and community involvement are significant factors at this stage. Strong leaders can both unite community members and mobilize them for protesting against eviction. If such protests are unsuccessful, they can negotiate with the involved agencies to obtain suitable land and resources for a resettlement project. In other words, the unity of community and leadership are necessary for leading a relocation project to successful implementation. When these factors became crucial, the development performance of a project was analysed for the three stages noted above. Opinions of respondents presented in Table 2 reveal that at the eviction stage the unity of the community of both SDP and WDP groups had been somewhat strong. The SDP group had shown slightly stronger unity than the WDP group but there had not been a significant difference between the groups as suggested by Chi-square and significance value. Similarly, the opinions of respondents reveal that the performance of the community leaders in leading the community at the eviction stage had been equally stronger in both WDP and SDP groups. A clear majority of the respondents in both groups confirmed that the community leaders received very strong support from community members at the eviction stage. These findings indicate that the pressure of eviction, which is an external threat, has united people and as a result the two groups have

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

167

Table 2 Unity of the communities, performance of leaders and relationship between leaders and community members at the eviction stage Opinion of the respondents Weak development performance group

Strong development performance group

Total

%

Number

%

Number %

31.8 68.2 100

32 98 130

24.6 75.4 100

59 156 215

27.4 72.6 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 1.319, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.251 (B) Leaders’ performance Weak level 12 14.5 Strong level 71 85.5 Total 83 100

16 106 122

13.1 86.9 100

28 177 205

13.7 86.3 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.076, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.783 (C) Relations between leaders and community members Weak level 4 4.8 Strong level 80 95.2 Total 84 100

11 111 122

9.0 91.0 100

15 191 206

7.3 92.7 100

Number (A) Unity of the communities Weak level 27 Strong level 58 Total 85

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 1.334, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.248

shown equally strong development performance at that stage. In other words, the overall difference of development performance of the two groups has not occurred at the eviction stage of the projects. In the transition stage (first 2 or 3 years), the communities continued to be strongly united (see Table 3). This may be due to the initial insecurity associated within unfamiliar/new surroundings. During this period the strength of leadership, the relationship between the leaders and the community members have also sustained. However, it was noted that the leaders’ performance in the SDP group has slightly improved by this stage, while in the WDP group it has slightly declined as reported by the respondents (see Tables 2 and 3). The Chi-square value and significance level indicated in Table 3 reveals that there is a significant difference between the two groups, in term of performance of their leaders. The reason for the continued strength in leadership have stemmed from two reasons: first, the leaders who had already established a good relationship with the community members were the same persons who actively provided leadership during both the eviction and transition stages. Second, the severe difficulties faced during this stage propelled the re-settlers to cooperate closely with the leaders in order to overcome their individual problems. The declined strength of leadership in the WDP group and inclined strength of leadership in the SDP group indicate that the differences of development performance of the two groups have begun to appear as early as transition stage. This infers that a continuation of strong leadership is crucial at the very beginning of a relocation project, in order to sustain the momentum of development initiatives. Table 3 does not indicate the opinion of respondents on the unity of the community as it was reported as somewhat unchanged during the eviction period as well as during the initial 1 to 3

ARTICLE IN PRESS 168

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

Table 3 Performance of leaders and relationship between leaders and community members in the transition Stage (the first 2 or 3 years) Opinion of the respondents Weak development performance group

(A) Leaders’ performance Weak level Strong level Total

Strong development performance group

Total

Number

%

Number

%

Number %

23 61 84

27.4 72.6 100

12 112 124

9.7 90.3 100

35 173 208

16.8 83.2 100

10 115 125

8.0 92.0 100

20 189 209

9.6 90.4 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 11.214, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.001 (B) Relations between leaders and members Weak level 10 11.9 Strong level 74 88.1 Total 84 100 Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.885, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.347

years of the transition stage. However, by the time of field survey, that is about 10 years (average) after initial relocation, the unity of the communities in both SDP and WDP groups have become significantly weaker. A clear majority of respondents in both groups opined that the unity of the community at present is much weaker than that during the stage of eviction and stage of transition (see Tables 2 and 4). Even with weaker unity, there is a significant difference between the two groups as shown by Chi-square and significance values (see Table 4). These statistical indicators and percentage values imply that in overall term the unity of community in both groups were weaker at the time of field survey. Parallel to the decline in community unity, the relationship between the leaders and the community members have also declined sharply in both groups over the 10 year (average) period since initial relocation. There are two reasons for this declining trend: first, when the individual households gradually consolidate and solve their problems, the need for collective action ceases to prevail. Secondly, the new generation of community members or the new comers who replace the original settlers may not involve equally in community activities. Data reveals that about 70% of original settlers have moved out in the WDP group. In the SDP group also the percentage is as high as 30%. While these astonishing figures clearly indicate why there is a significant difference in terms of development performance between the two groups, they also explain why community unity and the relationship between leaders and members was so weak at the time of field survey. It is clear that the respondents of the survey, who are only the original re-settlers, view that the unity and cooperation which existed at the eviction and transition stages are no longer there. They also view that the performance of the community leaders at present is also below average. This is because the leadership has now gone to the next generation, or even to the new settlers. They do not have to perform as intense as their predecessors due to lack of external pressures such as eviction and hostility of landlords. This finding reiterates that a strong leadership at all stages is necessary to sustain the development performance of a relocation project.

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

169

Table 4 Unity of community, performance of leaders, relationship between leaders and members, in the consolidating stage (approximately 3rd to 10th year) Opinion of the respondents Weak development performance group

Strong development performance group

Total

Number

%

Number

%

Number %

84 1 85

98.8 1.2 100

108 22 130

83.1 16.9 100

192 23 215

28.4 10.7 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 40.085, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.000 (B) Leaders’ performance Weak level 44 53.0 Strong level 39 47.0 Total 83 100

68 50 118

57.6 42.4 100

112 89 201

55.7 44.3 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.421, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.517 (C) Relations between leaders and members Weak level 23 28.0 Strong level 59 72.0 Total 82 100

29 88 117

24.8 75.2 100

52 147 199

26.1 73.9 100

(A) Unity of community Weaker than or similar to Stronger than Total

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.266, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.606

Participation of the members Among the internal factors that attribute to the success of a relocation project, participation of the community members in every stage of the process is considered very crucial. Participation is a complex phenomenon, which varies with the stage of the project. For the purpose of detail analysis, following types of participation were considered: (1) participation in activities against eviction, (2) participation in pre-relocation activities, (3) participation in post-relocation activities, and (4) participation in community development activities at the consolidation stage. The analysis of opinion of respondents revealed that participation of community members at the eviction stage has been very strong. At the eviction stage, members of both SDP and WDP groups more or less equally participated in conducting protests against eviction, determining condition for negotiations with authorities and landlords, and in collective decision making (see Table 5). Participation in these activities has helped fostering unity among community members at the eviction stage and it has positively contributed to development performance as seen above. In addition, the savings and credit group activities at the eviction stage have been effective tools for organizing, training and strengthening the leaders in management and administration skills. These activities had also been good tools to foster cooperation, coordination and solidarity among the members in the communities. Once the decision on eviction of community is finalized, the community members usually turn their attention from protesting to relocating in a new place. Activities at this stage normally include:


selection of the new location,
actual relocation and construction activities, and
basic infrastructure development.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 170

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

Table 5 Participation of community members in eviction activities Opinion of the respondents Weak development performance group

Strong development performance group

Total

Number

%

Number

%

Number %

21 64 85

27.7 75.3 100

33 97 130

25.4 74.6 100

54 161 215

25.1 74.9 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.013, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.911 (B) In determining conditions for negotiation Not participated 28 32.9 Participated 57 67.1 Total 85 100

41 89 130

31.5 68.5 100

69 146 215

32.1 67.9 100

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.046, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.829 (C) In final decision making Not participated 25 29.8 Participated 59 70.2 Total 84 100

46 83 129

35.7 64.3 100

71 142 213

33.3 66.7 100

(A) In protest Weak participation Strong Total

Pearson’s Chi-square: value ¼ 0.796, df ¼ 1, significance ¼ 0.372

In addition, special activities such as savings and credit group activities and vocational training for generating livelihoods may happen depending on the need of the community. Community meetings are very common activities which happen in most communities irrespective of their size and status. The survey findings revealed that the majority of community members had participated in selecting a suitable location from several alternatives presented to them by the authorities or landlords. There is no difference in the extent of participation between the WDP and SDP groups. However, only a half of the members in both groups had participated in activities pertaining to relocation, subdivision of plots and construction of houses. Planning of actual relocation and subdivision of plots had been organized by community leaders, and the members had usually accepted their decisions. Construction of houses had been a responsibility of each household and therefore it had not gone through a participation process except mutual helping between two or more households. However, participation in constructing infrastructure networks has been equally high between both groups particularly because the activities involved supplying basic necessities such as water and access to the communities. The sudden change in situation had been a reason that had compelled the community members to extend their cooperation and participation to leaders and other community members during the eviction and relocation process especially in activities related to selecting of the new location and infrastructure development. Participation at meetings between leaders and members in both groups had been very high at the time of relocation. However, a similar level of participation has not been observed in the savings and credit societies. Particularly, in the WDP group such activities had been very limited whereas in the SDP group only an average level of participation had been observed by the

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

171

respondents. There had been a clear difference between the two groups in terms of involvement in savings and credit societies at the time of relocation. Even in the vocational training activities organized to support livelihoods of the community members, participation had been observed as very low in both groups. These findings reveal that participation in activities at relocation stage had been more or less similar in both SDP and WDP groups. The only differences had been seen in secondary activities such as savings and credit group, and vocational training. Therefore, the present differences between the two groups in terms of development performance have happened after the initial period of relocation. At the present stage, which is about 10 years after the time of relocation, the participation of community members are seen in several continuing activities and new activities. The continuing activities include:


community meetings,
infrastructure development and improvement,
savings and credit society, and
vocational training. The new activities include:


women’s group,
youth group,
anti-drug group, and
public health voluntary service. The opinion of the respondents reveals that participation of members in community meeting is lower in the SDP group compared to the WDP group. This was in contrary to the general expectation. Similarly, participation in infrastructure development work also is lower in SDP group. More detail discussions with some original settlers revealed that most households are well established now and as a result they do not have compelling reasons to participate in general meetings of the community. Moreover, the WDP group has fewer original inhabitants remaining than in the SDP group. This indicates that the number of potential participants in the WDP is expectedly lower than the SDP. Although the respondents do not participate in continuing activities, most of them participate in new activities. The findings reveal that there is a clear difference of participation between SDP and WDP groups in new activities, such as women’s group, youth group and public health voluntary group. While there is negligible participation by the members of WDP in these new activities, there is a sizable portion of respondents in SDP group who regularly participate in such activities. Similarly, participation of members in the SDP group was seen as significantly higher in savings and credit group and in vocational training which are in fact continuing activities. These participations have undoubtedly contributed to the higher level of development performance in the SDP group. These findings lead to confirm that the difference in development performance in the two groups have occurred much after the initial time of relocation. It can also be inferred from findings that strengthening of specific groups for savings and credit, vocational training, youth affairs, women affairs, etc. will contribute to the state of development once people are reasonably settled in the new location.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 172

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

On the other hand, a new generation is gradually replacing elders as household leaders. This new and younger generation of residents, most of whom are more educated than the older generations, are gradually entering the formal sector for employment. This may potentially affect the amount of time that they can commit to community development activities. At the same time, they may not realize the needs of the community as their previous generation did. In the near future, as the younger generation continues to relate less to community unity as their parents did, it generates a decrease in inhabitants’ participation level in associated development activities and can also be reflected in the transferring or selling of their original plot to the outsiders. Considerably more attention needs to be paid on this issue in order to maintain and/or improve the development performance of the slum relocation projects. This expected change to a more process oriented approach may pose a hard question for the involved agencies and organizations. Attitude of community members to the new location It must be noted that the lower level of development performance in the WDP group may also be attributed migration of a large number of original settlers to other places. While those who decided to stay on have already consolidated in their given places and the new comers who replaced the original settlers are still trying to adjust. In fact, the percentage of original re-settlers who have consolidated in the new location is an indicator of the development performance. If a large percentage of original beneficiaries has been replaced by new settlers, it is not a successful relocation project. Therefore, it is very vital that adequate support is given until people consolidate in new communities. The motivation to continue in the new place is also a contributing factor for the development performance. The survey findings reveal that only 10% of the SDP group intend to leave for new place while 20% in the WDP group intend to leave during the next 2 years. In any community, there may be households who plan to move elsewhere for a variety of reasons. However, if a significant proportion of the re-settlers plan to move out that will affect the motivation of those who will continue in the community. Therefore, positive attitudes need to be built in the community towards the new location until all households are firmly consolidated and show signs of upward mobility to the next stage a phenomena that Turner (1967, pp. 354–363) termed as the ‘status sealing’ stage.

Conclusions and policy implication The foregoing analysis confirmed the findings of UNCHS, that location of the new settlement is not a major influencing factor for development performance if compensation and security of tenure are awarded to beneficiaries. Since all relocation projects have dealt with the issue of secure tenure to the satisfaction of the beneficiaries, it is in fact only one external factor, which is the award of compensation, that is seen as affecting the development performance of slum relocation project. This finding also confirms the view of World Bank and ADB on the significance of awarding compensation in cash and kind. In contrast, all the internal factors viz, unity of community, strength of leadership, participation of members and attitude of members to new location were found to be affecting the development performance. However, it was revealed that

ARTICLE IN PRESS V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

173

the development performance of slum relocation projects start to differ at the time of consolidation, while on the time of eviction and transition most projects perform in a similar manner. Therefore, careful attention should be paid to the progress of the projects during the consolidation stage. Usually, housing professionals dealing with relocation projects pay more attention to the major objectives such as giving security of tenure, generating of livelihoods and ensuring social welfare. Most housing policies also address the issues at eviction and transition stages but not necessarily on the issues that emerge at the consolidation stage. People are usually left to themselves after tenure. The attention usually disappears especially after the completion of the project. The analysis revealed that the people’s enthusiasm also dies down and as a result unity of communities, strength of leadership, and people’s participation also decline affecting the development performance of the project. Therefore, in order to sustain the development performance, specialized community activities need to be introduced and supported through a partnership mechanism involving community based organizations, housing professionals and also the local authority in the project area. The findings on active participation in specialized activities such as women’s group, youth group and vocational training revealed that housing professionals and the local authority should shift their attention from relocation to community development when a project progresses from transition stage to consolidation stage. For long-term sustainability of the project, community empowerment, sense of togetherness and belongingness need to be fostered through community activities. The policy implications of these findings are that relocation projects should not be formulated only on the objective of giving security of tenure and social welfare. In other words, a project should not end when beneficiary families are firmly relocated in a new place with secured tenure. It should continue with a new set of objectives targeting social welfare and community development until the beneficiaries are firmly integrated with the surrounding context and the next generation takes over the community leadership. Especially continued support and assistance from housing professionals and local authority as needed in order to facilitate the consolidation of beneficiaries. If most of the original beneficiaries leave the project and new households move in to occupy the vacuum that could not be an indication of a higher development performance.

References ADB (1998). Handbook on resettlement: a guideline to good practice. Manila: Asian Development Bank. AMA (2000). Preference structure measurement: conjoint analysis and related techniques—a guide for designing and interpreting conjoint studies (2nd ed.). IntelliQuest, USA: American Marketing Association. Cernea, M. M. (1988). Involuntary resettlement in development projects: policy guidelines in world bank-financed projects. Washington, DC: World Bank. CODI (2000). Urban low-income in Thailand—a profile (mimeo in Thai). Bangkok: Community Organization Development Institute. Davidson, F., Zaaijer, M., Peltenburg, M., & Rodell, M. (1993). Relocation and resettlement manual: a guide to managing and planning relocation. Rotterdam: Institute of Housing and Urban Development Studies. FRSN (2000). Slum settlements on the property of state railway of Thailand—summary (mimeo in Thai). Bangkok: Four Regions Slum Networks. HSF (Human Settlements Foundation) (1998). Swept under the carpet of affluence: evictions in Bangkok. In Fernandes, K. (Ed.), Forced evictions and housing right abuses in Asia—second report (1996–1997) (pp. 145–148). Karachi: City Press.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 174

V. Viratkapan, R. Perera / Habitat International 30 (2006) 157–174

Khan, S. A. (1994). Attributes of informal settlements affecting their vulnerability to eviction: a study of Bangkok. Environment and Urbanization, 6, 25–39. Misra, K. G., & Gupta, R. (1981). Resettlement policies in Delhi. New Delhi: Times Press. NESDB & GHB (1995). An analysis of slum and squatter settlements in Bangkok, housing situation report, 1994–1995 (in Thai). Bangkok: National Economic and Social Development Board and Government Housing Bank (pp. 108–115). NHA (1997). Slum settlement Bangkok—a survey report (in Thai). Bangkok: National Housing Authority. NHA (2002). Housing development program for slum and urban poor for national economic and social development plan IX (2002–2006) (mimeo in Thai). Bangkok: National Housing Authority. NHA (2004). Baan Eur Ah-thon Project, http://www.nhanet.or.th/pplan/eng/arthorn.html. Noppaladorom, T. (2004). Baan mankong: a national program of community-driven upgrading of housing with local participation, endogenous development for sustainable multi-habitations in Asian cities. Bangkok: Center for Sustainable Development Studies, Toyo University and Asian Institute of Technology (pp. 77–89). Pacific Consultants International (1997). The study on urban environmental improvement program in Bangkok metropolitan area: sector plans and technical studies, Vol. 3. Bangkok: Japan International Cooperation Agency. Pornchockchai, S. (1985). 1020 Bangkok Slums—Evidence, Analysis, Critics, Bangkok. School of Urban Community Research and Action. Sananikom, D. (2000). A study on classification of slum relocation projects in the greater Bangkok from 1984–1995. Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology (Unpublished M.Sc. thesis). Turner, J. F. C. (1967). Barriers and channels for housing development in modernizing countries. Journal of American Institute of Planners, 33, 354–363. UNCHS (1982). Survey of slum and squatter settlements. Dublin: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (HABITAT). UNCHS (1991). Evaluation of relocation experience. Nairobi: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (HABITAT). UN-HABITAT (2001). Cities in a globalizing world—global report on human settlements 2001. London and Sterling: Earthscan Publication, United Nations Human Settlements Programme. UN-HABITAT (2003). The challenge of slums—global report on human settlements 2003. London and Sterling: Earthscan Publication, United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Viratkapan, V. (1999). Relocation of ‘‘slum’’ and squatter housing settlements under eviction in the greater Bangkok area: case studies of three relocation settlements (unpublished special study submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of doctoral of philosophy). Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology.