Downloads: 114 | Views: 210
Research Paper | Management | Kenya | Volume 4 Issue 7, July 2015
Effects of Governance Practices on Provision of Housing as a Basic Right for the Low Income Urban Areas in Kenya; A Case of Mombasa City
Edna Kwamboka Riechi | Dr. Mike Iravo [5] | Dr.Samuel Obino Mokaya
Abstract: This study sought to determine the effects of governance practices on provision of housing as a basic right for the low income urban areas in Kenya. A case study of Matopeni settlement, Kongowea ward, Nyali constituency in Mombasa city. In spite of all efforts and the introduction of various housing policies and laws in Kenya, informal settlements continue being on the rise while housing conditions continue to deteriorate particularly in urban areas. This is in addition to other government and stakeholder-led housing programmatic interventions. In particular, the study sought to assess the effects and extent to which policy frameworks, have contributed to the state of housing in the urban low income areas. The study was conducted through survey method and data collected using questionnaires and interview guides from 100 household out of a 598 households and a target population of 6, 153. The selection was done through stratified random sampling in Matopeni slum and 10 key informants purposively selected. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and presented in tables, percentages, pie charts and graphs. The study revealed that the poor housing conditions were as a result of inadequate sector policy frameworks coupled with poor implementation strategies or the total unwillingness to implement them due to personal or group interests. The frameworks range from housing, urban planning and infrastructure and land. It also revealed that despite the various policy frameworks in the land and housing sector, the laws had been particularly land laws and conflicting. There hasnt been political will in legislation processes or implementation of the policies. This had resulted to poor land management systems leading to land grabbing and squatting, evictions and serious tenure issues. Similarly was the lack of government strong focus on housing programmes for the low income groups by government beyond efforts by KENSUP which were minimal compared to the housing deficit experienced over the years. Further revelation was that most of the laws were still new or undergoing reviews as a result of the promulgation of the new constitution in 2010 and introduction of devolved units. The studies further revealed that housing has never been a core area of government interest and that the government had not driven or give guidance on housing. There was also lack of attempts by the government to broaden focus on housing policy and integrate it with wider economic, social and environmental goals despite its statement of intent on shelter in its development and strategic plans. Others were poor promotion of security of tenure, inadequate supply of affordable land and infrastructure, inadequate resource allocation, lack of policies on housing financing as well as community participation of on low costs housing provision. Recommendations for policy action include finalization of the review of the current national housing policy and passing of the Housing Bill, improvement on implementation strategies for sector policies as well as those related to financing and infrastructure, provision of services. Further, there should be regularization of land and operationalization of land laws to improve on land management systems to solve land tenure issues. There is also need for the adoption of more inclusive and participatory housing approaches, devolution of social and public housing programmes and an increase in budgetary allocation to the sector.
Keywords: Participation, policy frameworks, public services, housing policies, urban-poor, adequate housing, social housing, low-cost housing, Social infrastructure, slums, security of tenure
Edition: Volume 4 Issue 7, July 2015,
Pages: 2658 - 2664