Creating a model in community based disaster risk management for informal settlements : a case of Kanyama Settlement, Lusaka - Zambia

Abstract

Informal settlements provide residence to over fifty percent of the urban settlers in many developing nations. These settlements have gained notoriety as hot spots for exposing citizens to a variety of environmental hazards and disasters. Informal settlements are commonly neglected by governments that do not provide them with basic services safe water, adequate sanitation and efficient waste management systems. Furthermore, settlements are often located on fragile lands that are prone to flooding, hilly and more often than not close to heavy industries where pollution and indiscriminate waste disposal is rampant. The communities of informal settlements generally earn their livelihood with unauthorised or low-wage casual employment. This includes street vending, illegal quarrying and domestic work among other things. Kanyama is an informal settlement located in the western direction of Lusaka, the capital of Zambia. The settlement‘s topographical and hydrogeological characteristic is that of a flat terrain with an impervious dolomite rock formation below it. This makes it one of the worst flood-prone areas in Lusaka. The historical profile of the settlement reveals that Kanyama was part of the Chiefdom of Chief Mwalusaka of the Soli tribe of which the city was name as Lusaka. The land was not suitable neither crop production nor human settlement due to the presence of rocks. However, with the increased pressure for land to settlement, Kanyama attracted immigrants from rural parts of the country and developed into an illegal settlement to become one of the biggest informal settlements in Zambia today. Until 1996, when the government came up with a programme to upgrade informal settlements, Kanyama was an illegal settlement with no mandate from the government to offer basic services to the area. The settlement has undergone rapid urbanisation since 1991 with migrants coming from the rural parts of Zambia and other urban centres. With government following a policy of liberalising economy, companies were privatised. Privatisation led to subsequent job losses in the mines and in the stateowned companies. The Zambian economic management was diversified and developed in a haphazard manner with no physical and land use planning. Residents of Kanyama are exposed to disaster risks, especially flooding, that is caused by the impervious dolomite rock and the lack of proper drainage. Accessing safe water is a big challenge. The members of the community depend upon hand dug shallow wells and they use pit latrines and open spaces. The settlement gets flooded nearly every rainy season. This causes outbreaks of cholera and dysentery. Flooding leads to houses collapsing or being submerged which seriously disrupts the functioning of the community. While natural hazards such as floods are largely unavoidable, they only become disasters when communities‘ coping mechanisms and capacities are exceeded and they cannot manage the impacts (IFRC, 2009:7). Kanyama residents have at times been so badly hit by flooding that the government, through the Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) had to relocate victims to safety outside Kanyama. Soon after the floods, however, the community returns to their usual flood-prone area. CARE International Zambia became involved in assisting vulnerable communities in the Kanyama settlement since 1992 by invitation of the Government of the Republic of Zambia. Interventions included provision of safe water and sanitation, solid waste management, drainage system construction and rehabilitation, capacity building of community structures and community participation in developmental programmes. The aim of this thesis is to create a model for Community based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM). Interventions from projects implemented by CARE International, the government through Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) and the role played by the community are reviewed. This research seeks to answer several research questions such as why communities at risk choose to continue living in unsafe settlements despite facing numerous hazards. Furthermore, the vulnerabilities of the settlement and the risks of being exposed to disaster in Kanyama will be analysed. A comparison between the reactive approach of the emergency response and the proactive, community based approach by CARE International Zambia is presented. The research is based on the theory that ineffective governance and the lagging in the implementation of legal frameworks and policies have contributed to the failure of government to manage disaster risks sustainably. Research shows the most effective way to manage disaster risks is to involve the community in identifying and analysing their vulnerability and capacity to carry out disaster reduction interventions. The analysis of interventions was done by reviewing project reports by CARE and interviewing local leaders and members of the Ward Development Committees, Resident Development Committees and Zone Development Committees (WDC, RDC and ZDC). Community members and staff involved in the implementation of these projects were also interviewed. CARE International‘s community based risk reduction approach had a greater impact on the community than the government‘s top-down approach. The model CBDRM approach puts the responsibility in the hands of community while working hand in hand with the community at risk. The model CBDRM approach starts by empowering the community with an understanding of the conceptual framework of the management of disaster risks and hazards. The capacity of the community has to be built to understand the disaster risk management process holistically. Secondly, the profile of disaster risks and hazard has to be identified and developed. The third step is the involvement of the community in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) interventions. This model premises on active community participation to reduce the vulnerability and exposure to disaster risks. It involves participatory approaches in the planning and implementation of DRR activities. Lastly, the legal framework of the country has a special role in providing guidance to the entire implementation process and the evaluation of DRR intervention. If communities develop a dependency syndrome where perpetual receivers of relief become unwilling to initiate activities on their own to improve their well-being, it may lead to failure of the community to appreciate their capacity and their own resources for intervention.