Community-based housing organizations in Third World cities: Case studies from Zimbabwe.

Abstract

Urbanization rates in the Third World are climbing at an alarming rate. This has created an urban housing problem of enormous proportions. Policy approaches to this problem in the past have included slum clearance, sites-and-services provision and squatter settlement upgrading. A more recent development is an "enabling strategy" which facilitates the efforts of individuals and community-based organizations to provide their own housing. However, little formal research has been carried out to support this effort. An empirical study of five housing co-operatives was carried out in 1989-90 in two major urban centers in Zimbabwe: Harare and Bulawayo. Three of the organizations were workplace-based (comprised of workers at private sector companies) and two, community-based. Information was gathered primarily by means of unstructured interviews of the leaders of the co-operatives and participant observation of their general meetings. The study revealed that the policies of local governments and financial institutions, such as the lack of recognition of collectives in the allocation of land and financing, limited the building strategies available to the organizations, affecting internal cohesion, and ultimately, costs. In addition, certain external actors had significant but varying impacts on the organizations. The three workplace-based organizations enjoyed technical assistance, as well as direct and indirect resources from their employers; whereas the two community-based co-operatives were strongly influenced by local politicians and members of the ruling political party who attempted to control membership composition and size, as well as the internal decisions of the co-operatives. Also significant was the ability of the community-based co-operatives to appeal to women, who are becoming increasingly represented among the urban poor. The study provides evidence that community-based housing organizations can be viewed as effective instruments for mobilizing savings and, despite considerable constraints, are able to build houses at costs comparable to or lower than both the private and government-sponsored sectors. However, a more positive policy environment and a non-governmental umbrella support organization would both facilitate their activities and diffuse the potential of interference by various political actors.