In Brasil, 1 percent of the population owns 49 percent of land. Source (Financial Times, 0 April 2010)
In Britain, 0.3 percent of the population owns 69 percent of land. Source (Financial Times, 0 April 2010)
Globally, more people now live in cities and towns than in rural areas
Africa is now the World’s fastest urbanizing region and by 2050, 55% of Africans will be living in urban areas (from 38% in 2000)
Over 90% of new urban development in Africa is taking the form of slums
About 70% of urban population in Africa presently live in slums, and yet occupy less than 10% of urban and peri-urban lands
Research shows that in Africa about 60% of GDP is created in cities and towns
Formal land registration and administration have been unable to cope with rapid urban growth and as a result, between 50-70 percent of urban land in Africa is delivered through informal practices
In Zimbabwe, on 19 May 2005, with little or no warning, the Government embarked on an Operation to 'clean-up' its cities. It was a 'crash' operation known as Operation Murambatsvina and affected over 700,000 people.
In Ghana, some 800 people also had their homes destroyed in Legion Village, Accra, in May 2006, while approximately 30,000 people in the Agbogbloshie community of Accra have been threatened with forced eviction since 2002.
In Kenya, at least 20,000 people have been forcibly evicted from neighbourhoods in or around Nairobi since 2000.
In Equatorial Guinea, at least 650 families have been forcibly evicted from their homes since 2004, when the government embarked on a programme of urban regeneration in Malabo and Bata.
In Luanda, the capital of Angola, at least 6,000 families have been forcibly evicted and have had their homes demolished since 2001.
In Sudan, more than 12,000 people were forcibly evicted from Darusalaam camp in August 2006.
58 per cent of all households in South Africa are living without security of tenure.
In Nigeria, some 2 million people have been forcibly evicted from their homes and many thousands have been made homeless since 2000.
More than 3 million Africans have been forcibly evicted from their homes since 2000.
In Trinidad and Tobago, the 1998 Regularization of Tenure Act established a Certificate of Comfort that can be used to confer security of tenure to squatters as the first step in a process designed to give them full legal title.
Some 25,000 evictions are carried out annually in New York City alone.
In Atlanta, some 30,000 people were forcibly evicted prior to the 1996 Olympic Games, while the oldest public housing project, Techwood Homes, was deliberately de-tenanted because it stood in the way of a 'sanitized corridor' running through to CNN headquarters and the city centre.
Between 40 and 70 per cent of the population of Brazil’s main cities are living in irregular settlements.
Some 720,000 people were forcibly evicted in Seoul and Inchon, Republic of South Korea, prior to the 1988 Olympic Games.
The number of people forcibly evicted to give way to dams in India alone since 1950 has been estimated at 50 million.
The economic boom in China has significantly reduced security of tenure. Rapid urban growth is a major cause of forced evictions. 1.7 million people have reportedly been evicted in Beijing (China) in the run-up to the 2008 Olympic Games.
Everyone who returned to Phnom Penh, Cambodia, after the collapse of the Khmer Rouge regime was a squatter.
In Sri Lanka, large numbers of those displaced by the tsunami in late 2004 are still prevented from returning to their original homes and lands.
The Government of Myanmar forcibly evicted more than 1 million residents of Yangon, Rangoon.
An restitution programme in Kosovo has provided legal clarity regarding tenure and property rights to 29,000 disputed residential properties in the province since 2000.
Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/10 15:52 GMTDear All,
Its good to reconnect once again and most importantly to discuss issues that are core to gender and land. This forum would provide that space for many especially women across the globe to share best practices and information on issues concerning land in thier various countries. However in the course of the on-going discussions, it would be very important to also focus on tools that addresses the issue of women's property rights and land inheritance under customary law.
The second issue will be gender, land and poverty.
| | The topic has been locked.
Dr. Jennifer Whittal
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 10:28 GMTWelcome Jennifer- good to hear from you, please see my comments incorporated in your text below, prefixed by DD:
Hi from Cape Town! I am a land surveyor and academic at UCT, so converse with that hat on. Moderator - please throw this back at me if this type of discussion is not intended ....
DD- Its good, many thanks for your thinking
There are three main aspects I am trying to sort out in my own mind - 1) I am struggling with the idea that a tool can be responsive. Legislation is a tool and the way I see it legislation can be gendered, but it does not itself respond, rather it demands response. SA legislation is some way along this road, but that does not make it responsive (or does it?). Legislative impediments to gender equality can be removed, but structures and processes (e.g. accessibility to/communication between government departments, procedures of land acquisition etc.) are where gender responsiveness is likely to fail. This is difficult to sense/measure/quantify, but is this the domain of the tools envisaged by the GLTN?
DD - agreed, there is a division between a gender sensitive tool and actually making it happen. This has been the subject of both workshop discussions to varying degrees, recognising that land tools are based on historical contexts and ways of doing things. DD- To start our aim is to find ways to ASSESS how gender sensitive the existing tool/ policy is - So criteria and indicators will provide this answer, and next, we expect these criteria to highlight areas to be improved upon. This, then may be your DEMAND for a RESPONSE? DD- [Brainstorm any other criteria from All please]
DD- Turning next to your ACTUAL RESPONSE. This could be incorporated into the tool drafting? because it legislates to DO something, not simply state "it would be ideal to have XYZ" DD- [Comments from All please]
DD- And your point about structures is very well made. This will be recognised in our journey. DD- An action for me and Asa will now be to post the framework that outlines the concept of the journey up on the site - please allow a few hours, it will follow
2) Not having a background in gender studies puts me at a disadvantage, so please excuse my ignorance in the following observations - it is not the fact of gender, but rather its context in society which can lead to inequality? From what I see in South Africa, one can remove legislative/structural/procedural impediments, but without the transformation of society, success is limited and probably short-lived. In other words, the effects of gender are highly correlated with social norms and these have a much stronger influence (even on land delivery) than material/technical aspects which are more formalized.
DD- Agreed also in the Bagamoyo workshop (see Bagamoyo report, especially conclusion), much was said about the need to influence "change agents" those that influence society through policy making, global power, politicians (and so their own electorate) some NGO's etc. The workshop debate recognised the "societal fabric" and how groups interact at all community levels. Moreover, in order to best influence change, all interested stakeholders, i.e grassroots, professionals etc need to act together to begin to make a real impression on the norms of society and those with influence and power.
DD- ALL any comments please?
3) Gender responsiveness on its own is much easier to tackle than gender responsiveness when combined with responsiveness to poverty/illiteracy/refugee status/poor health(HIV)/homelessness together. The more challenges in an individual's basket, the greater the disadvantage of the individual and the greater the challenge of finding solutions. Is this not where we need to head? The reality of female gender in the midst of poverty is more complex than simply poverty plus being female. We need integrated tools. This is a challenge as it demands cross-disciplinary engagement - perhaps that is one of the main benefits of a forum such as this.
DD- All I'd welcome your views on this point?
Once again thanks Jennifer, do add further if I've misunderstood any of your observations; and add more along with comments from All passengers
Post edited by: AwoDumashie, at: 2008/09/11 13:36 GMTGod bless Africa, guard her children, guide her leaders, and give her peace
| | The topic has been locked.
diane dumashie
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 13:00 GMTMany thanks Priscilla for your obeservation- absolutely right inheritance is a key strand in this disucssion.
Priscilla and All fellow passengers- do look at the merged criteria list (see tab on left, draft evaluation criteria) . It would be good to gain your views on the content and to identify if you support/ disagree or wish to add to these lists.
For example, 1. Does the merged list capture all of your issues, and picking up from Priscilla, particularly those issues that fall within customary practices. If not why not? 2. Should the focus remain on the lists that have arisen from the workshops (Lukenya/ Bagamoyo), rather than trying to merge them into a composite?, but 3. Noting that we will need to move to an agreed list in order to develop further
Priscilla's point about gender, land and poverty has continued with Jennifer's response...
Any views most welcome
| | The topic has been locked.
diane dumashie
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 13:44 GMTWelcome Jennifer- good to hear from you,
My response is embedded in your earlier posting text, but in case its easier I've set out my response in this posting.
In order of your numbering
1) DD - agreed, there is a division between a gender sensitive tool and actually making it happen. This has been the subject of both workshop discussions to varying degrees, recognising that land tools are based on historical contexts and ways of doing things.
DD- To start our aim is to find ways to ASSESS how gender sensitive the existing tool/ policy is - So criteria and indicators will provide this answer, and next, we expect these criteria to highlight areas to be improved upon. This, then may be your DEMAND for a RESPONSE?
ALL- Brainstorm any other criteria please
DD- Turning next to your ACTUAL RESPONSE. This could be incorporated into the tool drafting? because it legislates to DO something, not simply state "it would be ideal to have XYZ"
ALL Comments from All please
DD- And your point about structures is very well made. This will be recognised in our journey.
DD- An action for me and Asa will now be to post the framework that outlines the concept of the journey up on the site - please allow a few hours, it will follow
2) DD- Agreed also in the Bagamoyo workshop (see Bagamoyo report, especially conclusion), much was said about the need to influence "change agents" those that influence society through policy making, global power, politicians (and so their own electorate) some NGO's etc. The workshop debate recognised the "societal fabric" and how groups interact at all community levels. Moreover, in order to best influence change, all interested stakeholders, i.e grassroots, professionals etc need to act together to begin to make a real impression on the norms of society and those with influence and power.
ALL any comments please?
3) All - I'd welcome your views on this point?
Once again thanks Jennifer, do add further if I've misunderstood any of your observations; and do add more along with comments from All passengers
Best wishes dd
| | The topic has been locked.
diane dumashie
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 15:15 GMTDear Jennifer and All
A postcript to my earlier response today - I promised that the draft framework outlining the conception for the entire journey would be posted...
Please refer to the tab on left hand side of web page- marked "Proposed Framework"
Of course this is a draft concpetual approach, and is dependent upon all your inputs
Best wishes
dd
| | The topic has been locked.
priscilla achakpa
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 15:48 GMTDD, Thanks for your incisive response and reference to merged criteria which i have just finishing reading. Quite some good work that is done. Now having read the merged criteria, some thoughts were running in mind and was wondering for instance where does the issue of gender and property rental comes in the whole discussion.
| | The topic has been locked.
diane dumashie
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/11 16:24 GMTHmm, interesting point, to my knowledge this has come up in a slightly different way.
To explain,
During a workshop discussion, after some time it was acknowledged that not every body would own property- no matter where consideration was given in the world. i.e there would always be those who could never afford to own, but they could afford to rent (as long as they were not being penalised by unscrupulous landlords).
But this raises the question of market forces- and how affordable is rented accommodation?
If Gender sensitivity is about equal rights to access to RENTED property to all sections of the community then would a criteria/ indicator merely demonstrate that this is so? - or does it need to promote change to make the rented property both i) accessible to all, but also ii) affordable to all?
Any thoughts on direction of this?
Best wishes dd
| | The topic has been locked.
Dr. Jennifer Whittal
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/12 06:56 GMTDear all - this raises what I think is a critical issue of conflicting goals.
Yes, we need to promote equality, but what does this mean and is it realistic in the real world? In South Africa, policy and law support equal ACCESS to land and housing. Not equal ownership, nor even equal occupation, simply equal access to these. I support this - it is impossible to deliver equal ownership, and I don't believe we should even try. Even if everyone owns a piece of land there is still inequality due to other factors which influence land value such as location - one can never deliver absolute equality in land and housing. Lets deliver to address needs, rather than to feed some ideal which is unachievable, or only generationally achievable (i.e. unsustainable for subsequent generations - and I think we need to start thinking in this way).
However, what is included in the assessment of access? If it is only equal access under the law, that excludes any inequality created due to varying personal wealth. This is not progressive, but in South Africa is countered by policy and practice of government-led housing initiatives for the poor. Unfortunately the structure of this promotes only freehold rather than rental and is hence unsatisfactory in my view due to the point mentioned above. Rental schemes suffer from many problems such as rent collection, maintenance. What can the state do if a person simply cannot afford to pay rent in a state housing scheme? Eviction is regressive and undesirable. However, we need an alternative to freehold. I believe that this alternative should preserve the ability of the state to service the poor in subsequent generations - this implies that the land should not be alienated. I am aware that this flies in the face of current thinking in terms of a continuum of land tenure in which freehold is the result after a process of "tenure upgrading". I personally believe that location is more important than freehold in terms of poverty reduction. In areas of high land demand for the poor, there is practically no market, and anti eviction laws prevent practical use of the land as collateral for raising finance (I am not a fan of De Soto's thesis). Location affords an individual or a family ACCESS to work opportunities and state services - these can break the cycle of poverty more easily than simply land ownership, and there is evidence of this.
My views in summary: - no to equal ownership, yes to EQUAL ACCESS (after all, we are physical and need space to exist - we don't need ownership) - no to alienation of state land, yes to provision of land and housing for the poor (in the City particularly) FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.God bless Africa, guard her children, guide her leaders, and give her peace
| | The topic has been locked.
diane dumashie
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/12 10:18 GMTJennifer, Many thanks for considering further the question posed.
Dear All - the debate thus far leads to the questions of access and affordability possibilities to be intertwined into criteria-
Are we all together on the need for access? but,
What about together on the idea of affordability?
Is a gender sensitive tool one that allows the very poor members of communities the ability to afford land? or As Jennifer points out, the question may not be one of ownership?
Any comments gratefully received.
Please note that this ride continues over the weekend ending Nairobi, Kenya time Monday 22nd at 1800hrs
Bests wishes dd
| | The topic has been locked.
priscilla achakpa
Re:Establishing criteria for gender responsive Large - 2008/09/12 10:43 GMTDD & Jennifer,
To further raise the issue of gender and property rental in northern Nigeria, it might interest you all to know that as a female gender as long as you are not married even though you have the means to rent a property, you cannot because the society sees you as not being responsible, therefore, for you to rent a property you must present a man who will act as your husband if even if he is not, in that way you are seen to be not only responsible for someone whoc can be respected. So what kind of tools will be appropirate for addressing this kind of situation. Because there is absolutely no law regulating the landlords in Nigeria.