Justice, Equity, And Sustainability


Published on

An analysis of how better planning within the Dadaab refuge camps could impact the social landscape.

Published in: Design, Technology, Real Estate
1 Comment
1 Like
  • Impressive presentation.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Justice, Equity, And Sustainability

  1. 1. Justice, Equity, and Sustainability <ul><li>Environmental Degradation and Human Inequity within Dadaab Refugee Camps </li></ul><ul><li>Mitchell Sipus 2008 </li></ul>
  2. 2. Problem <ul><li>Although a great deal of literature exists for the planning of refugee camps, such camps continue to pose a threat to the natural environment and are concentrations of human inequity. </li></ul>
  3. 3. Problem <ul><li>If such camps will continue to exist, how can they be better planned to offset the negative environmental impact and support the empowerment of the refugee community? </li></ul>
  4. 4. Camp Planning Literature <ul><li>Transitional Settlement / Displaced Persons , Oxfam and University of Cambridge 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>UNHCR Handbook on Emergency Settlements , 2004 </li></ul><ul><li>SPHERE – Human Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response 2004 </li></ul><ul><li>Temporary Human Settlement Planning for Displaced Populations in Emergencies , Overseas Development Institute 1998 </li></ul><ul><li>Studies on Emergency and Disaster Relief: Shelter Provision and Settlement Policies for Refugees , Nordika Afrikaininstitutet 1995 </li></ul>
  5. 5. Case Study: Dadaab
  6. 6. Dadaab Kenya Somalia
  7. 7. K E N Y A S O M A L I A Dadaab
  8. 11.
  9. 12.
  10. 13.
  11. 14.
  12. 15.
  13. 16. Dominant Structures <ul><li>Historical </li></ul><ul><li>Political </li></ul><ul><li>Social </li></ul><ul><li>Physical </li></ul><ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul>Camp Planning
  14. 17. Dominant Structures <ul><li>Historical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>European Refugees </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>War Camps </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Political </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cold War Developments in Refugee Policy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multi-Lateral Agency Goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Host Country Goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Source of Conflict or purpose for migration </li></ul></ul>
  15. 18. Dominant Structures <ul><li>Social </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Relations between refugees and host population </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relations between refugee groups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction of native practices and new context </li></ul></ul>
  16. 19. Dominant Structures <ul><li>Physical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Characteristics and demands of settlement location </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Characteristics of available infrastructure </li></ul></ul>
  17. 20. Dominant Structures <ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Consideration of Camp as Heterotopia </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inside / Outside implications of Heterotopia </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Panopticon </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>barren landscape </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  18. 21. Observed consequences of present camp plan <ul><li>Environmental Deterioration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Aid Assistance vs. Aid Dependence </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Poor distribution of goods and services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Breaking down of traditions, social institutions, needless increase of poverty </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Segregation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Security vs. Threat? </li></ul></ul>
  19. 22. Observed consequences of present camp plan <ul><li>Reinforcements of existing power structures </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of focus on development </li></ul><ul><li>Presents complications to data collection </li></ul>
  20. 23. Environmental Impact
  21. 29. Social Consequences of Environmental Impact <ul><li>Violence </li></ul><ul><li>Sexual Abuse </li></ul><ul><li>Difficult to raise animals </li></ul><ul><li>Incurs greater expense on refugees </li></ul><ul><li>Deteriorates opportunities for agriculture </li></ul><ul><li>Forces stronger security protocol by UNHCR, creating greater friction between agencies and refugees </li></ul>
  22. 30. … <ul><li>Poor physical planning strains the environment and a strained environment demands that additional demands be met by agencies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Distribution of these demands is critical </li></ul></ul>
  23. 31. Landscape and Planning <ul><li>Planning Processes to offset Environmental Impact </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ration Distribution Center </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Firewood Distribution Center </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local UNHCR and Medical Facilities for Assistance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Site Planning and Green Belt for new settlements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Delivery of Soil for house construction at IFO2 </li></ul></ul>
  24. 32. Access to Goods and Services
  25. 33. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul>
  26. 34. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul><ul><li>Rations </li></ul>
  27. 35. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul><ul><li>Rations </li></ul><ul><li>UN services </li></ul>
  28. 36. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul><ul><li>Rations </li></ul><ul><li>UN services </li></ul><ul><li>Medical </li></ul>
  29. 37. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul><ul><li>Rations </li></ul><ul><li>UN services </li></ul><ul><li>medical </li></ul>20 Minutes
  30. 38. Access to Goods and Services <ul><li>Firewood </li></ul><ul><li>Rations </li></ul><ul><li>UN services </li></ul><ul><li>Medical </li></ul>Protected Block 20 Minutes
  31. 39. Physical demands of food ration distribution Population located farthest from distribution center
  32. 40. Fire Wood Distribution Center
  33. 41. Consequences of Present Plan <ul><li>Benefit - Agencies incur least expense and difficulty for deliverance of aid </li></ul><ul><li>Loss - Increased tension and miscommunication between agencies and refugees </li></ul><ul><li>Loss - Sense of hopelessness for refugees furthering dependence on agencies </li></ul><ul><li>Loss - Those in the most need are the least served through the physical distribution of infrastructure and services causing additional costs by institution over time </li></ul>
  34. 42. Consequences of Present Plan <ul><li>Loss - Reinforced power structure also reinforces instability and insecurity within camps </li></ul><ul><li>Loss - Agencies must continually apply more severe security measures placing further restraints upon an already displaced, and impoverished population, relegating the refugee to the status of a prisoner. </li></ul><ul><li>Cause….effect…cause…effect… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Example: Tree removal – conflict, segregation, agricultural impact, and security measures </li></ul></ul>
  35. 43. Given the protocol of existing power structures, the greatest threat to the refugee population is the Police
  36. 46. <ul><li>Given the existing frameworks which determine refugee camp planning, a more sensitive approach to the local environment and existing social capital will reduce costs and need for security/protection measures for agencies as scarce resources will be more equitably distributed. </li></ul>Conclusion
  37. 47. Implications and Opportunities <ul><li>Solutions which redistribute the balance of power within existing structures are unlikely to ever be implemented </li></ul><ul><li>Thus there is a demand for creative solutions for Planning of refugee settlements </li></ul><ul><li>One strategy is to engage refugee camps as projects of community development, not as political fiascos. </li></ul>
  38. 48. Environment <ul><li>Site Planning should conform to landscape, not fight against it </li></ul><ul><li>As the site locations of services are of crucial significance, it is imperative that planners consider access for all populations </li></ul><ul><li>Look toward alternative conceptions of infrastructure </li></ul>
  39. 49. Environment and Community <ul><li>Need for a Development oriented approach to planning </li></ul><ul><li>as opposed to Long Term Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Infrastructure can move beyond basic necessities: high technology, communications, money transfers, modern finance and judicial systems should be considered relevant options to refugee populations </li></ul><ul><li>Perhaps approach development as the removal of “bottlenecks” to development, vs. installation of expensive infrastructure and services, thus considering social overhead as a starting point and not a later consideration – after all, ‘building capacity’ is generally of greater interest to consultants and agencies than the actual populations. </li></ul>
  40. 50. Community <ul><li>Need for new methods for determining existing or overhead social capital </li></ul><ul><li>Instead of attempting to build capacity, search for viable channels to exercise existing capacity </li></ul><ul><li>Demand for clearly defined methods for incorporation of refugee participation within decision making processes </li></ul>
  41. 51. Thank you for your attention!