Affordable and safe housing for single mothers in Japan

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Affordable and safe housing for single mothers in Japan

Mismatches Diversity Vulnerable groups Gender

Policies and regulations National policies Governance

Financing Cultural actors Public funding

Urban Design Quality Equity

Promotion and production

Main objectives of the project

Housing single mothers in Japan

Single mothers in Japan are being provided with a safe and stable home to live in, thanks to an innovative project that utilises some of the millions of vacant properties in the country.

It can be hard for single mothers to find an affordable place to live because it is difficult for women to work after having children in Japan and they are often assumed to be financially unstable. Social stigma, lack of economic opportunities and sky-high living costs in cities like Tokyo mean the majority of single mothers and their children live below the poverty line.

Little Ones – a non-profit organisation established in 2008 to support the rising number of single parent families – works with property owners, estate agents and local government to acquire empty or abandoned homes. These account for 14 per cent of Japan’s total housing stock and are considered a huge problem. The properties are renovated using government subsidies and rented out to single mothers at discounted rates.

The project has received national recognition for its work to eliminate housing poverty and has been identified as best practice in the management of Japan’s vacant properties. Since 2013, Little Ones has housed more than 200 single mothers using this approach, turning problematic abandoned houses into much-needed homes for a vulnerable group of women and children.

Date

2018:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: Japan, Tokyo

Description

Being a single parent is tough wherever you might live, but single mothers in Japan live in a culture that makes them particularly vulnerable to poverty and social isolation. Japanese society is very conservative and it is considered taboo to be a single parent. A culture of shame means single mothers are looked down upon and often hide their situation from friends and family.

Women traditionally stop working when they have a child and it can be very difficult for single mothers to find employment. In nearly 80 per cent of divorces, full custody is awarded to the mother and because there is no system for enforcing child support payments in Japan, single mothers often shoulder the financial burden of bringing up their children alone.

Little Ones – a Tokyo-based non-profit organisation established in 2008 by social activist Koyama Kunihisa – is working hard to support the rising number of single parent families in Japan (90 per cent of which are single mothers) and raise awareness of the growing issue of child poverty.

The number of single mother households in the country rose by around 50 per cent between 1992 and 2016, according to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Finding somewhere to live can be especially challenging for these women because landlords are wary of giving tenancies to single mothers, who they assume to be financially unreliable.

The prejudices faced by single mothers have an extremely negative impact on their lives and also on the prospects of their children. According to Ministry of Health statistics, 16 per cent of Japanese children live below the poverty line but among working single-parent households the rate hits 54 per cent, affecting health and educational outcomes.

Little Ones operates an innovative scheme that provides single mothers and their children with safe, affordable and stable housing, while also making use of the nation’s problematic glut of empty homes.

Empty homes crisis

Japan’s population is both ageing and declining. When a family member moves out of their home or dies, their property is often inherited by relatives who have no use for it and view it as a financial burden. A healthy construction industry coupled with a lack of buyers means the resale market is slow. There is no obligation to register ownership of properties in Japan, so owners can simply walk away from an unwanted property and avoid paying inheritance and land taxes. The result is that around nine million homes in Japan (14 per cent of total residential stock) are unoccupied.

The number of vacant or abandoned homes – known as ‘akiya’ – is expected to rise as the population continues to decline. The Nomura Research Institute predicts the number of akiya will reach 21.7 million by 2033 – roughly one-third of all Japan’s homes. To address the growing crisis, the Japanese government passed the Vacant Houses Special Measures Act in 2015 to promote the demolition and reuse of abandoned houses.

Little Ones identified the new law as an opportunity to expand its existing work turning abandoned or unoccupied private houses into affordable homes for single mothers. The organisation works directly with property owners, estate agents and local government to acquire empty homes to renovate and rent out.

Little Ones helps owners of vacant homes apply for a government grant, which covers two-thirds of renovation costs for homes that will be rented to low-income tenants. These costs can be prohibitively high for individuals to meet alone, because the homes must comply with building standards and stringent earthquake regulations.

Once renovated, single mothers sign a two-year rental contract and can request subsequent extensions. Little Ones manages the properties that have been let to single mothers on behalf of the local government. Rent is typically 10 – 20 per cent below market rate but in cities like Tokyo, where rent and living costs are very high, single mothers can struggle to meet the payments, even if they are able to find employment.

Little Ones offers payment plans for tenants who have difficulty paying their rent, enabling them to pay by instalments. The organisation acts as a guarantor and pays the full rental fee to the landlord in advance. Tenants are provided with careers coaching and living support, for example a free helpline, emergency food and clothing, and legal advice for victims of domestic violence.

The annual running costs of the housing project are USD$18,000, which is met by government grants and donations. Little Ones receives around USD$30,000 per year in donations from companies and offers a USD$30 annual membership to people who want to support single mothers. Some akiya owners pay Little Ones a consultancy fee.

Changing lives

Since 2013, Little Ones has used its empty homes project to house more than 200 single mothers in Tokyo, Osaka and Chiba. In 2017 alone, the scheme supported more than 1,300 single mothers and renovated and rented out 68 homes to single mothers across Japan.

Through its housing project and wider support work, Little Ones is helping to change deep-rooted misconceptions of single mothers and helping to remove some of the social stigma that blights the lives of these women and their children. In 2016, the organisation set up an online support network and resource containing information on jobs, housing availability and schools etc. By offering opportunities for single mothers and their children to meet up in the community, Little Ones helps this vulnerable and isolated group create an important social network.

The impact of the project can also be seen at street level. Abandoned houses are often eyesores, posing serious health and safety risks in densely populated areas and becoming magnets for vandalism and anti-social behaviour. By renovating these homes and bringing them back into use, the Little Ones project is physically improving neighbourhoods for the community at large and providing an environmentally sustainable alternative to the ‘scrap and build’ culture in Japan. The project also offers a stable income stream to akiya owners who would otherwise have to pay a vacant property tax.

The future

Little Ones is continuing its work to eliminate housing poverty among single mother households and is keen to share its experiences with others around the world. The project is the first in Japan to provide affordable housing for single mothers and their children by renovating unoccupied or abandoned urban properties and has been recognised nationally as good practice in the management of the empty homes crisis.

Little Ones is now scaling up its approach in other cities and working towards creating a regional mechanism that would enable every single mother in Japan to find and choose an affordable home. As part of this it is advocating for the government to create a framework for rental assistance for single parent families.

For the hundreds of single mothers already benefitting from the project, having a safe and stable environment to call home is an essential first step in their journey out of poverty and towards building a better life for their children.

View the full project summary here – available in English only

Authors:

World Habitat

Düzce Hope Homes

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Düzce Hope Homes

Policies and regulations Local policies Governance Evaluation and impact

Urban Design Environments Equity

Promotion and production Public promotion Self-management Transformation and adaptation Management and maintenance

Ownership and tenure

Main objectives of the project

Formed after the community lost their homes in two devastating earthquakes, Düzce Hope Homes is the result of a 15 year rights-based struggle in Northern Turkey.

Following the earthquakes, which killed over 18,000 people and destroyed 100,000 homes in 1999, non-homeowners did not receive post-disaster support from the government. Over 140,000 people were left with nowhere to live except prefabricated emergency shelters. A co-operative was set-up to fight for the right to housing to be extended to tenant victims of the earthquakes. Through many years of mobilisation and activism, including mass demonstrations and government lobbying, they eventually secured subsidised land on which to rebuild their homes and community.

Co-operative members have been involved in the planning, design and construction from the beginning. Groundwork on the houses has begun with people expecting to move into their new homes in 2018.

This community-led approach is so unique in Turkey that it has received widespread interest, support and enthusiasm from experts and volunteers. Historically, experts (such as architects, urban planners, civil engineers, social scientists, artists and construction workers) work on developments in siloes, distant from the people who will live in the homes when built. Through this project experts, communities and volunteers have found and embraced new ways of working together more collaboratively.

Date

2017:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Düzce
Country/Region: Turkey

Description

Project Description

Düzce Hope Homes is a cooperative housing programme focused on post-disaster reconstruction in the Beyköy district of the province of Düzce in Northern Turkey. But the programme is about much more than the housing itself. The achievements of the cooperative in gaining access to suitable, subsidised land and developing secure, affordable housing for some of the province’s most vulnerable families is the result of a 15 year struggle for the right to housing.

The Düzce Hope Homes programme was established by Düzce Solidarity Housing Cooperative for Homeless and Tenant Earthquake Victims, a cooperative founded by local people in 2003. Four years previously two devastating earthquakes had hit the area killing over 18,000 people and destroying over 100,000 homes and leaving over 140,000 people with nowhere to live except prefabricated emergency shelters. When their homes and community were destroyed, people joined together to create their own housing solution. Most of the reconstruction work that took place in Turkey after the 1999 earthquakes was based around homeowners – this project extends the right to housing to renters.

The Düzce Solidarity Housing Cooperative for Homeless and Tenant Earthquake Victims was formed to address the fight for the rights of those on the lowest incomes in the community. In the same year, 2003, the cooperative organised the first of a series of mass demonstrations, involving hundreds of people in collective protest on the streets demanding subsidised loans and serviced land. Initially in Düzce and later in the capital Ankara, these protests included encampments of affected families in the capital’s parks. In some cases those involved were taken into police custody. In 2004, after much lobbying and direct action the government’s Ministry of Urban Development and Housing allocated six plots of land for the housing need of low income residents. The land initially offered by the state to the cooperative in 2004 was unsuitable and it took until 2012 following further direct action and a legal challenge by the cooperative for suitable land to be handed over to the community.

The mutual aid approach[1] of the programme has meant that future residents have been involved at all stages, including actively getting involved in lobbying for their housing rights as well as in the development of plans and designs and in the construction work.

A team of professionals who volunteer their time to the programme has formed Düzce Hope Studio, a collaborative design studio in Istanbul. This group of volunteer architects, engineers, urban planners and sociologists was formed in 2014 to support Düzce Hope Homes with designing and building houses with the involvement of local residents. The participatory workshops and activities run by Düzce Hope Studio which have been a key part of the development of the programme have included specific workshops for different sections of the community including children, older people and women. Now, the work of the cooperative involves more than 300 people (four full time employees on the site, around 40 members regularly work on the site, 234 cooperative members working once a week and 50+ volunteers from Düzce Hope Studio, a collective of volunteer architects, engineers, urban planners, and sociologists).

The criteria for membership of the cooperative ensures that the housing that is developed is only available to local people on low incomes. Membership of Düzce Hope Homes cooperative is open to people who:

Have no existing ownership of property.
Are on a low income.
Live in Düzce province.
Work one day a month per household at the construction site.
Participate in the design and management of the project.
Were resident in Düzce at the time of the 1999 earthquake.The significant progress the cooperative has made to date in lobbying for rights and achieving access to land has formed the basis for the actual construction work. The groundwork of the housing units was successfully completed in October 2016, two years after paying the first instalment for the land. The site on which the housing is being built is on a hillside situated between a government built mass housing project and an industrial area including a large glass factory.

Some communal facilities, such as an organic garden, have already been completed. The development is expected to be completed by 2018 and will include 234 housing units for members, three housing units for the building concierges – for a total of one thousand people in 29 buildings. There will also be a community centre, urban gardens, a women’s cooperative kitchen and public spaces. These public spaces will benefit an additional 5,000 people in the district.

[1] Mutual aid housing cooperatives involve people working together and supporting each other to provide their own homes. The approach uses ‘sweat equity’, meaning people contribute towards the cost of building their homes with their own labour. Homes are collectively owned by members of the cooperative.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the work of the Düzce Hope Homes cooperative is to ensure the right to permanently affordable housing for earthquake victims, in particular for people who were tenants before the earthquakes.

Several factors contribute to this overarching aim including:

Persistent activism, campaigning and lobbying for change.
Active community participation in advocating for the right to housing for all, including some of the province’s most marginalised communities.
Participation of the community in delivering their own housing including sweat equity.
Collaboration between professionals (e.g. architects) and communities to develop housing that fits with local needs and preferences.
Ensuring permanently affordable housing for local people on low incomes.
Building more resilient and environmentally sustainable housing.
Creating strong neighbourhoods which go beyond housing.
Improved public and communal spaces for community use.

Context

Housing cooperatives began to be formed in the 1930s in Turkey and there are currently about two million people living in housing that was originally formed by a cooperative. It has been the case, however, that many of the cooperatives that were set up to develop the housing have not remained as cooperatives once the housing has been built. In addition, housing cooperatives in Turkey have had a particularly poor reputation. As stated in the 2013 report of the United Nation’s Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) “… the word ‘cooperative’ implied a specific political attitude and recalled stories of fraud and corruption, particularly when associated with housing cooperatives.”

From 1993 to 2002, there was a decrease in the development of housing cooperatives, in part due to the major economic challenges facing Turkey. The state reduced its financial support and existing housing co-operatives experienced operational deficits, the price of land rose and people’s ability to save money was also affected by rising prices.

In August 1999, a major earthquake hit the Marmara region of Turkey and this was followed by a second quake in November of the same year, the epicentre of which was the province of Düzce. Between 2001 and 2005, 57 houses were built by villagers working together and with people from outside the villages but many more families were left living in unsuitable housing. Prior to the development of Düzce Hope Homes cooperative the government support for the victims of the earthquakes was only focused on homeowners, leaving tenants without any funding or rights to housing.

Key Features

This comprehensive, community-led programme has several key features, as summarised below:

Focused on and delivering the right to housing for everyone in the community, particularly people on low incomes.
Ensuring the long-term affordability of housing.
Using the actual development and construction as a way of building collaboration and a real sense of community.
Cost savings as the cooperative has managed the process themselves, sourced materials directly from producers and due to members’ ‘sweat equity’ contributions.
A Women’s Production Cooperative is in the process of being formally registered, although production has already started. This initiative has been established to generate income and the construction of a cooperative kitchen.
There are five different designs of homes, which are customised to meet the needs of different family sizes or types. These designs are based on a participatory design process including one-to-one sessions with each family.
A central courtyard system and community spaces were designed to bring neighbours together and encourage a strong sense of community.
A proactive approach to getting support from volunteers from other countries, with international collaborations and strong partnerships set up as a result including ‘task forces’ of hands-on workers and professionals.

A number of other organisations have been involved with the project:

One Hope Association is a voluntary organisation which supports low-income urban communities with regeneration projects. They helped with advice on health and safety standards for workers and were involved in providing aid immediately after the earthquake.
The Düzce Hope Studio has provided volunteer architects, engineers, urban planners and sociologists. It was set up after an open call from the One Hope Association specifically to support the cooperative.
The local council in Beyköy was in charge of zoning approvals and planning permission.
Local Planning and Design Schools and the Centre for Spatial Justice provided technical support, volunteers and fundraising.
The Swiss Housing Cooperatives Solidarity Fund financially supports members on the lowest incomes with a ‘social safety net fund’.

What impact has it had?

The policy context in Turkey has been influenced directly by those involved in the Düzce Hope Homes cooperative development. At a national level, securing the right to land and housing for non-home owners on low incomes after natural disasters is a significant achievement of the project. Through a determined campaign of activism, at a local level the cooperative has successfully gained access to suitable, serviced land for families and are on track to complete the first mutual aid housing cooperative in Turkey.

Some of the current members of the cooperative were children when the earthquake happened in 1999. Many have joined their parents in fighting for their right to housing, leading to community action across the generations.

Düzce Hope Studio is a space for architects, urban planners, civil engineers, social scientists and artists to work together towards a social aim. They have organised and launched public events, exhibitions and publications. This has helped to introduce participatory planning and design to the wider urban planning and design community in Turkey. The Studio receives invitations from other cities in Turkey to share their experiences.

The proactive approach to collaboration taken by Düzce Hope Homes has inspired people to join and help and has attracted lots of goodwill, for example, from local construction workers and bank managers who have started volunteering for the project.

The local council is now more willing to provide affordable housing within the district and some private developers have adopted participatory practices within their work.

How is it funded?

The estimated cost of the project is 18 million Turkish Lira (US$5,064,431) for 31,000 square metres of construction. These costs include:

Land payments to the Mass Housing Authority – 2.3 million Turkish Lira (US$647,122) of which 460,000 Turkish Lira (US$129,424) has already been paid.
Groundwork – around 3 million Turkish Lira (US$844,072) has already been spent.
Rough and detail construction – around 11 million Turkish Lira (US$3,094,930).

The expected costs of construction for the next two years are 15 million Turkish Lira (US$4,155,355) which will be paid from cooperative membership fees and bank loans. As interest rates on bank loans are very high in Turkey, the cooperative is seeking alternatives, including funds or loans from international development agencies. The expected costs of the project after the construction will be mainly on the maintenance and management of the site.

Once the construction is finished, an average unit cost (76,000 Turkish Lira) (US$21,053) will be lower than the cost of the cheapest two bedroom flat at the neighbouring government mass housing project (110,000 Turkish Lira) (US$30,472). The average cost to residents of renting a housing unit is approximately 600 Turkish Lira (US$168.81) per square metre. This is half of the current market rate in this area.

As the project is not yet complete, the annual running costs are not yet clear. However, these will include rubbish collection, cleaning, maintenance, electricity for public spaces and managing the community centre. Community facilities will generate income through the Women’s Production Cooperative, an organic food market, a repair shop and a children’s nursery. Some of this income will go towards the site management fund for annual running costs.

Why is it innovative?

The quality of housing available to people in Turkey is generally determined by income. Victims of the 1999 earthquakes started this programme, which is the first tenants’ movement for low-income people fighting for their right to adequate housing. This is the first mass housing project in the country to be planned and designed by its residents. Their housing needs have been identified by the cooperative members themselves.

A participatory approach to delivering affordable housing has never previously been on the national agenda. This mutual aid, hands-on approach to cooperative housing is much more common in other parts of the world, particularly Latin America. This cooperative signifies a first not only for the post-disaster context in Turkey but in fact mutual aid has not been adopted in any previous housing development in the country. The approach goes beyond housing as shelter by encouraging strong neighbourhoods and a sense of community.

The truly cooperative approach taken at all stages of the development of the programme means that it is much more likely to survive as a cooperative once the houses are lived in, unlike the majority of the existing housing cooperatives in Turkey. Longer term affordability of the housing for low income families is therefore much more likely to be assured than in other schemes.

Innovative cost-cutting measures have been developed, which have lowered the cost of the first construction phase. Workshops are held for members, the technical team and construction workers. These bring everyone together to decide on materials and techniques to be used. Materials are purchased directly from producers. This has helped to make the homes affordable to those on the lowest incomes. To keep the homes affordable long-term, members are not allowed to sell to third parties without approval from the cooperative.

What is the environmental impact?

Nineteen different materials for the exterior walls of the houses were studied by experts at Düzce Hope Studio. Based on this study, five options were presented to the cooperative and the most energy efficient option, aerated concrete, was chosen. This is light, porous and naturally improves heat insulation. Where possible, building materials have been sourced locally. Soil needed for ground level construction was sourced directly from a landfill site next door, reducing the need for transport. Sustainable local wood has been used for building the community centre.

Cooperative members have learned about producing compost from organic waste and recycling. The compost created by waste from the community kitchen is used at the community garden. They are looking into ways to use solar panels for heating and electricity at the community centre and also in the housing units when completed.

Is it financially sustainable?

Any expected costs for the future will be mainly for the maintenance and management of the buildings and gardens. These costs will be met by residents’ monthly membership fees and income generated by the cooperative. There are plans to build a community oven, which will be used to make and sell bread. Any profits on the sale of bread and money generated by the women’s cooperative kitchen will be help to bring income into the cooperative.

The project itself is not reliant on any future funding streams. However, the speed of the remaining construction works will be affected by the availability of future funds. This may delay the completion date. The funds and labour contributed by the cooperative are secure.

Membership fees for the cooperative will be increased once residents move into their new home to incorporate their monthly rent. This means that residents don’t pay rent for properties in the cooperative at the same time as construction costs.

Members on the lowest incomes are helped to pay their contributions with assistance from a fund set up by the Swiss Housing Cooperatives Solidarity Fund.

Employment is created both during and after construction. All employment will be kept within the cooperative, helping to strengthen the financial position of its members by providing jobs and incomes.

What is the social impact?

The strong sense of involvement and collaboration between local people has really strengthened the sense of community and has also strengthened the social ties which will be so beneficial once everyone is living in the new housing.

The project has reduced social inequalities by providing extra support to some of the most disadvantaged people in the community. This includes a ‘social safety net fund’ for financial assistance (in the form of a relief fund to help pay the rent of members if they lose their job), employment opportunities and the Women’s Production Cooperative Initiative. This promotes gender equality by supporting women to get involved in income generating activities. Women-headed households represent almost half of the total number of households (106 families).

By improving the local infrastructure and public spaces, Düzce Hope Homes cooperative promotes the integration of cooperative members within the wider community. It also improves the whole area for neighbouring households. Düzce Hope Studio has helped the local council to redesign a public community hall and the courtyard of a local mosque.

The completion of the multi-purpose community centre creates opportunities for members to develop their skills through the classes which are held there. An active and healthy lifestyle is encouraged. There is an urban agriculture initiative on-site to produce local healthy food for members.

The community centre will hold an ‘Open Institute Programme’ for the wider community. The aim of this programme is to raise awareness of earthquakes and encourage families to be prepared, advocate for the right to housing, promote participatory housing and demonstrate that housing is more than just shelter.

Local people and the members of the cooperative in particular have gained more confidence in addressing the government and public sector organisations in order to achieve their objectives and establish their rights.

Barriers

Before this programme started there was a perception within society and the local authorities that tenants did not have the right to decent housing. This attitude also had an influence on the cooperative members themselves and initially it was a challenge to change the members’ perception. Previous housing cooperatives in Turkey were not viewed as inclusive or democratic and experts from different disciplines were not included in the development process.

In Turkey housing is often considered to be an investment rather than a human right and this programme has taken an entirely different view. These barriers were overcome by empowering tenants to create a movement fighting for their right to housing. It was important for people to learn about the existing legal framework so they could challenge the authorities.

Some of the professionals working with the residents were not used to working directly with communities, particularly when they were so actively involved in the decision-making. This caused some issues initially but as this was such an important, strong feature of the programme, the professionals soon became familiar with how to adapt their approach to accommodate community involvement.

Lessons Learned

People must be persistent and insist on their right to safe, secure housing.
It is important to understand and use legal rights to overcome barriers.
Negative perceptions of cooperative housing can be overcome by developing a positive, community-led example.

Evaluation

The project has been evaluated by local government and construction inspection companies, as required by law. The finances of the cooperative have also been audited. Members of the cooperative and volunteers from Düzce Hope Studio evaluate the overall success of the project on an ongoing basis. So far, the results have been positive. They look at different aspects including:

Changing perceptions on the right to housing.
Active participation of members.
Including different groups in the community, such as women, older people and young people.
Affordability for the lowest income families.
Transferring knowledge and skills from experts to members of the cooperative.
Environmental and social sustainability.

Recognition

The project has been featured in local and national newspapers, online journals and on television. Several university research projects have focused on the work of Düzce Hope Homes and since the construction site is open to visitors, they regularly host people from Turkey and overseas. The Neighbourhood Union, Volunteers for the Society, Chamber of Architects, Lawyers for Environment and Urban Justice, students and academics from several universities are among those who have visited.

Transfer

The legal framework of the cooperative can be replicated in other neighbourhoods and within other housing cooperatives in Turkey. The participatory approach to planning and design can be used more widely, including state-wide housing projects. The cost-cutting measures used by the cooperative can be replicated by other low-income housing projects.

The entire Düzce Hope Homes model can be transferred to other tenant groups in Turkey. This includes creating a democratic housing cooperative which is self-financed, demanding subsidised public land for building on and having the full participation of residents. The ‘open site’ approach of the construction site has enabled the cooperative to share what they are doing with people and organisations from within and outside Turkey.

The ‘Open Institute Programme’ will teach the wider community about the risks of earthquakes and advocate for the right to housing. It will aim to transfer the knowledge and skills gained by the cooperative to others locally.

Düzce Hope Homes is also affiliated with the Neighbourhood Union of Turkey, a network of 50 informal groups from neighbourhoods facing urban regeneration. The cooperative has been active in sharing their experiences through this network.

The project organised the HOPE Exhibition at Studio X (Istanbul) in 2016 to share their experiences at a national level. In 2015, they took part in the Antalya International Architectural Biennale. Members of the cooperative have started a documentary film project and an online video platform. This has over four hundred videos about Düzce Hope Homes. They have also taken part in conferences at a number of universities including Harvard, University College London and American University of Beirut.

Authors:

World Habitat

Bringing light and air to homes in informal settlements

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Bringing light and air to homes in informal settlements

Mismatches Security Functional adequacy Vulnerable groups

Policies and regulations Local policies Regulation Governance

Urban Design Quality Liveability Inclusion Equity

Promotion and production Transformation and adaptation Favelas/Slums

Main objectives of the project

Date

2017:

Stakeholders

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Ahmedabad
Country/Region: Ahmedabad, India

Description

For many poorer women living in informal settlements in India, the home is not just a place to live but also a place of work. Homes in Indian informal settlements are deep, long and arranged in rows backing onto each other. This means that there is no natural light or ventilation from three sides. Even in the middle of the day the rear part of the house remains dark and gets very hot. Most people solve this problem with electric lights and fans. However the electricity is expensive and electrical appliances generate their own heat. This problem is recognised by the Mahila Housing Trust, a non-governmental organisation which is part of the Self Employed Women’s Association; a movement which itself emerged out of the Textile Labour Association, a trade union established by Mahatma Ghandi in 1918.

The Mahila Housing Trust work to mobilise its members. The Trust supports communities to organise, working at grass-roots level and supporting dialogue to influence government policies. Their goal is to make homes and the wider living environment more suitable for women to live and work in. This includes projects to upgrade water and sanitation, build roads, develop low-income housing and improve security of land tenure. The organisation works in rural and urban areas across India, Nepal and Bangladesh focussing particularly on areas where there is little other support from government or NGOs.

“Ujasiyu”, an innovation developed by the Mahila Housing Trust to improve working conditions for self-employed women in India, is a simple dormer window that can be fitted to the roof allowing natural light and ventilation into homes in informal settlements. The window is made of fibreglass and is moulded to fit onto the shape of corrugated steel, which almost all roofs are made out of. The window itself is made of translucent plastic. This prevents glare and diffuses the light so that it illuminates the whole room rather than creating a shaft of light. The plastic is moulded into a hump with an opening at the bottom to allow air to circulate. The gap is covered with gauze to prevent insects and other animals from getting in.

Residents buy the dormer window (Ujasiyu) with the help of low cost loans which are offered by both the Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank (cooperative bank that specialises in providing affordable finance to low-income self-employed women). Many families are able to pay back the loans within a year, through their earnings and the energy savings they make by having the window. Interventions were introduced in the state of Gujarat (West India) and are being implemented at various scales across the country in the states of Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Delhi and Rajasthan.

In this project the housing trust partnered with Yatin Pandya, an Indian architect who runs Footprints E.A.R.T.H – an architecture and environment consultancy company. He offered technical support in the project development. The Solar Energy and Light Company (SELCO), an Indian social enterprise working on solar power solutions also offered technical support and sector knowledge.

Ujasiyu focuses on vulnerable households where women both live and work as part of the informal economy. The women who benefit from the improvements carry out unskilled work such as embroidery and rolling bidis (a type of cigarette). Improved lighting and ventilation means that they can comfortably use the home for this work (increasing their productivity) as well as for leisure time. Children can also spend more time in the house doing schoolwork due to the increased light. Better ventilation and less smoke also helps to improve health issues such as breathing problems and asthma. Cost savings are made as less electricity is used due to increased natural light.

The project has a community-led component with households helping to implement the new products and provide feedback for future improvements. Awareness of energy efficiency and the benefits of ventilated homes has increased as beneficiaries share their experiences with the wider community. As part of the wider work of Mahila Housing Trust, Ujasiyu is promoted to residents alongside other solutions which reduce energy use, including energy efficient light fittings and cooking stoves.

So far Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank have helped:

635 households to improve ventilation by installing Ujasiyu dormer windows.
18,050 households to reduce lighting costs by installing energy efficient light fittings.
2,647 households to improve cooking facilities with energy efficient cooking stoves.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the project is to provide natural daylight and ventilation in dark and dingy houses throughout informal settlements in urban India using community-led design.

Its objectives are to:

Ensure community conversations and voices contribute to the design of adaptations.
Design, manufacture and fit dormer windows (selected by communities as the most effective option) for lighting and ventilation.
Empower households in informal settlements to access loans that they can afford.
Educate residents in informal settlements about energy efficiency and home improvements.

A longer-term aim of the programme is to transfer the project to more communities across India so that more households can benefit from the interventions.

Context

Women make up 28% of the labour force in India[1]. Among working women, an estimated 93% are in informal employment, earning a living through their own labour or small businesses[2]. The nature of their employment makes it difficult for them to access ‘official’ state support, and financial services like credit and pensions. The Self-Employed Women’s Association was formed as a Trade Union, gaining recognition from the government in 1972. Since it began, the association has developed as a movement to improve the lives of its members through joining together to fight for things like workers protection, fair pay, and to develop solutions to improve living standards. The Self-Employed Women’s Association spread into a wide range of sister organisations to achieve its objectives[3]. These include the SEWA Bank, a cooperative bank which uses contributions from its members to offer credit to self-employed women; and the Mahila Housing Trust, founded to improve housing and living conditions for poor women in informal employment. These two organisations are lead partners in Ujasiyu on community involvement.

The need for interventions in informal settlements results from the rapid population growth experienced in cities across India. Most have struggled to keep up with this growth, and much of the population lacks access to basic infrastructure like housing, transportation and services. Nearly half the population in urban India are accommodated in informal settlements. Homes are densely packed, often very small, and built with temporary materials. A lack of natural light and air makes houses dark, dingy and stiflingly hot. This affects residents’ mental and physical health, as well as their ability to carry out day to day tasks in the home. Even in broad daylight many families are forced to use artificial lighting, and poor ventilation means fans are needed leading to high electricity bills. These issues are particularly negative for women who are more likely than men to be in the home during the day. Ujasiyu was developed in an ‘Innovation Centre for the Poor’, an initiative by Mahila Housing Trust and SEWA Bank to find simple interventions to improve the quality of life in the communities where their members live and work.

[1] International Labour Organisation, 2016

[2] Self Employed Women’s Association, http://www.sewa.org/

[3] http://www.sewa.org/Sister_Organization.asp

Key Features

Ujasiyu was developed in an Innovation Centre for the Poor, where prototype adaptations to improve lighting and ventilation were tested and selected by the community.

The dormer window was chosen as the best solution after the testing of five different prototypes which were developed with local knowledge and mounted in initial volunteer’s homes. These prototypes were as follows:

Raising the roof sheet: allowing roofing to be raised to let air into the building.
Sliding Window: Cutting the roof around 60cm and introducing a sliding window for ventilation.
Square Skylight: Introducing a square raised skylight (of 30cm in the roof)
Dormer Window: Adding a Dormer window of around 30cm to 60cm height, by cutting a small part of the roof.
Waste Plastic Bottle Insert: Cutting the roof equal to the diameter of the waste plastic bottle. On inserting the bottle, the sun light illuminates through plastic thereby lighting the interior spaces.

After the success of the Dormer window adaptation based on volunteer feedback this was chosen to be rolled out at scale. In the pilot stage, these were provided free of charge and electricity savings were monitored for three months to understand the savings.

The main motivation behind Ujasiyu is to make homes comfortable spaces where women can carry out informal home-based work more easily. For women in informal settlements this is essential so that they can support their family and gain some financial independence in the home. A more comfortable working environment is not only healthier and more comfortable it also increases productivity. Along with savings in electricity this increases people’s income. It also benefits the family more widely in that children can study in the home improving educational success.

A wider culture of energy savings and home improvement has been developed through the work of the project to engage with the local community in discussions about the possibility of improving homes and participating directly.

The project is a collaboration between:

Mahila Housing Trust – Initial partner in setting up the project (with SEWA Bank). Worked with communities to develop dormer window product. Also provides some small loans.
Footprints E.A.R.T.H – Architect Yatin Pandya provided free technical assistance to the project
SEWA Bank – The bank provided loans to beneficiary households who wanted the installations
The Solar Energy and Light Company (SELCO) – Completed energy surveys to find out energy savings made as a result of the interventions and provided sector knowledge

What impact has it had?

Firstly, the project ensures that families live in healthier homes with access to natural light and air, improving both physical and mental health. In addition to healthier homes it has enabled families to save between 30-50% on their energy bills through having to use lights less often in daytime hours. These cost savings allow families to spend money on other needs such as education, as well as to accumulate savings and pensions. The new healthier homes have allowed many women who work from home to improve the effectiveness of their businesses and increase their income. The adaptations have also created better study environments for children in the home. Ujasiyu also has a positive environmental impact in the use of less energy.

Ujasiyu as a product is still developing and adapting. The dormer window is currently installed in 635 homes and work is underway to address the challenges of differences between building types. The wider work of the Mahila Housing Trust to promote energy saving has enabled over 17,000 households across informal settlements in seven states to benefit from one or more interventions (the total number of installations stands at 21,332). With a range of options and affordable credit, households can choose to install a single intervention even if they cannot afford to have all three (cooking, lighting and ventilation) at the same time. Currently about 20 per cent of families have been able to benefit from more than one installation. The project is working on reducing the costs of Ujasiyu further so that the product can be accessed by an even greater number of households.

Although the project has not directly impacted any policy changes it has changed the attitudes of residents enabling them to take ownership of their right to a comfortable home. It has also increased community awareness and education on energy saving and the use of simple interventions to create healthier homes.

How is it funded?

Initial set up costs were covered by international donor funding. Mahila Housing Trust worked with SEWA Bank to develop relationships with beneficiaries. This included setting up the ‘Innovation Centre for the poor’ where the project was planned and social surveys were carried out to understand people’s needs. Some fundraising was done to increase the funds available for start-up. In addition, initial design and technical support were offered for free by the architect Yatin Pandya through his practice, Footprints E.A.R.T.H. Once a family becomes involved in the project it is up to them to fund the housing improvements. They can do this through taking out loans from the SEWA Bank. The ventilation units cost each family 5,000 Rupees (approximately US$80). Instalments and interest are kept affordable in line with the bank’s cooperative principles.

The fact that improvements ensure 30-50% savings in electricity bills per month means that families can make savings into the cooperative bank and pay off loans quickly, often within a year. The ventilation units are produced locally to minimise costs. They are now sold under a private company called MHT Awaas SEWA Private Limited which was registered by the Mahila Housing Trust in 2013.

Why is it innovative?

The project is innovative in three ways: the product itself, the way in which it was developed and the focus on women.

The dormer window is the key innovation of this project. Although there are other projects (notably the 2015 World Habitat Award winner – Liter of Light) that solve the problem of poorly lit houses in informal settlements, the dormer window in this project is specifically designed for the needs of homes in India and provides ventilation as well as light.

The project’s home improvements were developed through a community-led ‘innovation centre’. The project did not begin until conversations with residents were undertaken so that their needs could be fully understood. Other approaches may focus on moving people from inadequate housing in informal settlements, instead of trying to ensure houses are more liveable in their community. The Ujasiyu product allows people to remain in their community, making it a more sensitive design innovation.

The focus on women in informal settlements is another innovative factor. Providing improvements to homes, the main workplace for many women, empowers them to earn increased incomes. Because conditions in their homes are improved and comfort is increased throughout the day and night, women are also given more control over the type and amount of work they do. The focus on women in informal employment, within informal settlements is also innovative. The collaboration with SEWA Bank means that the families can access affordable credit and not become burdened with debts from unregulated moneylenders, or be left out of the lending system all together because of lack of collateral.

What is the environmental impact?

The project works to improve current homes rather than building new ones, which saves energy and material use through the construction of new buildings.

The project reduces the amount of energy used in homes and therefore their environmental impact. Specific adaptations had specific environmental impacts. Residents who have had the dormer window installed have reported energy savings of up to 50%.

The use of locally available materials for adaptations also reduces the carbon footprint of the project.

Is it financially sustainable?

Initially adaptations (improvements to cooking, lighting and ventilation) were subsidised through grants. Once the effectiveness of the interventions was more widely known and understood, the project developed into a social enterprise. Families who want to install one or more adaptations are expected to raise their own funding. Soft loans are provided to interested households by the SEWA Bank. Costs are payable in instalments and are repaid within a year. The savings made on energy bills generate enough savings to cover the repayments. After repayment, the benefits to households will continue for the long term, enabling them to improve their income and standard of living.

Despite the potential savings, the cost of loan instalments has limited some of the poorest families from being able to access Ujasiyu products. Work is underway to lower costs so that the approach can be offered to a wider range of households.

What is the social impact?

The work of Mahila Housing Trust empowers women to be able to fulfil their right to a comfortable and healthy home. Their involvement in the project’s development and the ongoing discussions which occur once the improvements are in place mean women are partners not just voiceless beneficiaries.

The Ujasiyu dormer window improves the air quality in the homes which are cooler and no longer smoke filled (smoke can leave through the ventilation dormer) and are naturally lit. This reduces negative health impacts such as breathing problems, and improves mental health as people live in less dingy spaces. Entire families are able to spend more time inside on both work and leisure.

For women who work in the home, better light, ventilation and reduced smoke from cooking stoves has improved productivity and increased income. Families who have benefitted from Ujasiyu have more disposable income to save, and pay for things like children’s education.

Barriers

The main challenge so far has been that differences in local construction and local bylaws meant each city and state needed different size sheets to go with the dormer window installation. For example, in the city of Surat in Gujarat, homes needed much larger sheets. These needed to be developed cost effectively to maintain the affordability for the families in need. In some homes, a waste bottle roofing solution was implemented where a plastic bottle was fitted into the roof which the sun would shine onto and illuminate the inside rooms. This was less effective than the dormer window but was used where it was not possible to install dormers.

In some states, production and application has slowed down due to increasing manufacturing costs. This should be overcome if the project develops its own manufacturing centre.

A further challenge has been promoting the improvements and convincing residents that they work, so they are happy to take out the loans to pay for the solutions. Residents were also not used to their opinions being sought in projects like this. The project is currently being promoted by word of mouth and through communication between the project implementers and the local population.

Lessons Learned

As the project was implemented in states which differ in their physical context, ventilation adaptations had to be redesigned to suit the local context. Finding local manufacturers who could produce products in a cost-effective manner is an issue in some locations. To overcome this, the project aims to set up local manufacturing centres. This new expansion is still at initial planning stage. The Ujasiyu project also hopes to diversify the products they offer to provide a wider range of practical solutions to improve ventilation and natural lighting.

Evaluation

The project has not been formally evaluated yet anecdotally the product has been seen as a positive innovation amongst beneficiaries.

Recognition

The project has hosted various international visitors including representatives from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Misereor Foundation, Care Foundation (Dhaka), Millennium Alliance along with FICCI, Womanity Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Transfer

The Mahila Housing Trust’s work to improve working conditions in the home through reduced energy costs has scaled up from impacting 140 houses at the pilot stage to now 21,332 lighting, cooking, and ventilation installations in 7 states of India: Gujarat, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Odisha, Rajasthan and Jharkhand.

Work on transferring and scaling up the Ujasiyu dormer window product is continuing, and has also inspired further work led by the Mahila Housing Trust to produce modular roofing made out of paper waste and coconut husk for informal settlements. In 2016 this innovation won the ‘Urban Labs Innovation Challenge: Delhi’ an award organised by the University of Chicago and the Delhi Government in response to its success in bringing down indoor temperatures improving living conditions. The project has so far been implemented at a pilot stage in three informal settlements in Delhi around new sustainable innovations such as solar powered lights and solar eco-cooler.

Authors:

World Habitat

Residential Energy Efficiency for Low Income Households

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Residential Energy Efficiency for Low Income Households

Mismatches Vulnerable groups New family structures

Policies and regulations Governance

Financing

Urban Design Liveability Inclusion Equity Participatory processes

Promotion and production Technology

Main objectives of the project

Homeowners living in formerly state-owned buildings are supported to work together to improve their homes through the REELIH project.

Many multi-apartment blocks in former Eastern Bloc countries Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Macedonia fell into widespread disrepair following mass privatisation in the early 1990s. By creating homeowner associations, residents are able to borrow collectively to carry out energy efficiency improvements to their homes. This makes heating homes more affordable, improving the health and well-being of residents.

After proving successful in Macedonia, the approach was transferred to Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since all three countries face similar challenges, they all began with the principle of collective action and then went on to adapt to meet their different needs.

The project has developed connections between individuals, homeowner associations, local governments and banks. The work has helped spread awareness about energy efficiency and increased the funding available to residents to improve their buildings.

Date

2017:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: Armenia, Yerevan

Description

Project Description

The Residential Energy in Low Income Households (REELIH) project is about the transfer of a successful approach to improving lives through improving buildings, which Habitat for Humanity began in 2009 in Macedonia. The project objective is to tackle poverty and improve the health and quality of life of low income homeowners. It is an approach which responds to a problem common across countries of the former Eastern Bloc. Before mass-privatisation occurred across the region in the 1990s, huge state-driven building programmes had provided the majority of the housing stock as multi-apartment blocks. Once ownership of these blocks was transferred to residents, the common areas of many buildings (roofs, stairs, facades) fell into disrepair as communal maintenance arrangements were not set up or not maintained by residents. As a result, thousands of buildings are at varying degrees of disrepair, with very poor insulation and sometimes dangerous structural flaws.

This project helps residents to improve their buildings by encouraging and enabling them to work together to arrange and finance energy efficiency works. The original approach was developed and trialled by Habitat for Humanity Macedonia. This provided the starting point for the REELIH project, a transfer which has been co-ordinated by the regional office of Habitat for Humanity (covering Europe, Middle East and Africa). Local partners in Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina have led and implemented the project on the ground, adapting specific elements to fit within the different administrative, financial, political and economic contexts of those countries.

The project, which receives funding from the United States Agency for International Development, supports individual homeowners living in multi-apartment blocks to mobilise and act as Homeowner Associations to collectively manage their buildings. These resident-led groups are able to get access to technical expertise through the project so they can make their buildings more energy efficient. As a result, residents spend less on energy and also benefit from improved air quality, which has a positive impact on people’s health.

A significant feature of the project is the work that Habitat for Humanity carries out in each country to develop financial models so the improvements can be funded. One of the ways that this is achieved is through mediation carried out between residents, the public sector and the private sector. This has really helped increase the funding available for this type of work and has made it much easier for people from different backgrounds and organisations to work together to achieve improvements for residents and the wider community.

The Residential Energy in Low Income Households (REELIH) project is co-ordinated by the Europe, Middle East and Africa branch of Habitat for Humanity International. Habitat for Humanity International is a non-governmental organisation working in 70 countries around the world. The organisation’s work is focused on ensuring that everyone has a decent place to live and on finding solutions to housing issues. This project is delivered by in-country partners: Habitat for Humanity Macedonia, Habitat for Humanity Armenia, and Enova in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the REELIH project is to tackle poverty and improve the health and quality of life of low income homeowners living in multi-apartment buildings. The project – currently delivered in Macedonia, Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina but of relevance to many countries across Eurasia[1] – works by:

Raising awareness about energy efficiency as a way of tackling poverty and reducing carbon emissions.
Providing technical expertise to residents living in multi-apartment buildings to help them form Homeowner Associations.
Helping residents to plan and organise energy efficiency work to be carried out on their buildings.
Helping to develop trust between residents, lenders and local governments.
Developing and testing replicable models of collective borrowing which help residents access funding.
Improving the health of residents through improved heating and air quality in their homes.

Through the Residential Energy Efficiency project, Habitat for Humanity demonstrates the case for public and private investment in residential energy.

The work is helping:

to establish and develop an investment market for retrofitting;
to secure the financial and political support of governments;
to place an increased focus on improving existing buildings.

[1] Eurasia is a combined continental landmass of Europe and Asia. The REELIH project is applicable in particular in countries that were formerly part of the Eastern Bloc, where there has been very high subsidy and nationalisation followed by economic decline and rapid privatisation.

Context

In many countries across Eurasia, there are large numbers of blocks of flats which were built using prefabricated units. Built between 1951-1991, this type of housing was originally state-owned and managed with high levels of subsidy. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia, mass privatisation led to high levels of private homeownership. However, many of these buildings have fallen into disrepair and are now inefficient and expensive to heat. As countries in the region are mainly located in climate zones with cold winters, poorly heated homes affect the health and well-being of the residents, particularly those on low incomes, who also struggle with high energy costs. Heating poorly insulated buildings wastes large amounts of energy. Poorly maintained residential buildings also generate higher carbon emissions and contribute towards pollution and climate change. In this region residential buildings are the largest single consumers of energy and a major source of greenhouse gasses, especially carbon dioxide. However, the market for energy efficiency in the countries where the Residential Energy Efficiency project is working is not well developed. Also because households have been used to receive high levels of state subsidy to pay energy bills in the past, saving energy to save money is a new concept for many people.

Key Features

The REELIH project acts as a facilitator and mediator between homeowners and the public and private sector so that retrofit projects can be planned, funded and delivered. This mediator role has supported the formation of new Homeowner Associations, which are organisations formed of and run by residents. Through this programme these associations have become credible recipients of both bank loans and local government subsidies, enabling them to improve their homes and buildings. This is a significant development as previously residents were not able to get access to loans to improve their blocks of flats.

Capacity building is a key feature of this project and is implemented by in-country partners: Habitat for Humanity Macedonia, Habitat for Humanity Armenia, and Enova in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Training and awareness-raising helps ensure residents know about energy efficiency and their right to adequate housing. These in-country partners support Homeowner Associations to form, to plan which home improvements they will carry out and to decide if they will manage the work themselves or through contractors.

The work of the in-country partners also extends to working with banks and local authorities. The development of a market for residential energy efficiency retrofits is a great success of the project. It has created an opportunity for low income households to access funding and has helped to attract subsidy from local government in the form of match funding for loans. With the support of the REELIH project residents in Homeowner Associations have demonstrated their ability to manage projects and loan repayments, allowing them to make real improvements to their lives. The loan repayment rate of residents working with the project is 100%, which is a significant achievement.

In addition to providing technical assistance, Habitat for Humanity funds energy audits. These audits help the organisers to decide which buildings should be targeted and also help Homeowner Associations to make informed decisions about the work they will have done.

Habitat for Humanity currently shares knowledge about residential energy efficiency via three websites, one in English, one in Armenian and one in Bosnian. These explain how the project works and take people through a step by step guide on how to make improvements in their homes and in common spaces and structures (roof, facades, stairwells) in multi-apartment buildings.

What impact has it had?

In the context of former Eastern Bloc countries, the development of a market for resident-led energy-efficiency works is ground-breaking. The history of state-control over maintenance of the housing stock, combined with a heavily subsidised energy supply means there has been very little awareness of or interest in issues like energy efficiency among residents. As a result of the work of Habitat for Humanity on residential energy efficiency, more than 3,800 individuals now live in more comfortable and efficient housing across the three countries. Retrofitting has cut energy bills for low income homeowners by up to 50%, helping to reduce poverty and tackling rising energy costs. The project supports the rights of citizens to a good home, helping residents to access the means to improve their own housing.

By 2017, the project had achieved the following:

In Macedonia, 35 buildings (671 households, around 2,215 residents) have had energy efficiency works,
In Armenia, 18 buildings (519 housing units, 1,500 residents) have had work completed and the work of Habitat for Humanity has led to a commitment from the Yerevan Municipality to co-finance retrofits on 900 further units.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, four buildings (49 housing units, 133 residents) have been retrofitted. This has attracted the attention of local governments in the Tuzla Canton who have now developed an action plan to retrofit 973 further homes. The plan will provide subsidies to match loans and other funds raised by Homeowner Associations.

The continued success of the work in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia is now inspiring further work in Macedonia. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is funding a second phase of the project, which began in 2017 and will run until 2019.

The project has led several local governments to provide subsidies for energy efficiency interventions. In Armenia the Municipality of Yerevan has provided 40% subsidy for all energy efficiency interventions through the REELIH project. Habitat for Humanity Armenia is also working collaboratively to reform the national Armenian Housing Law, to create a better investment environment for Homeowner Associations. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, following the implementation of residential energy efficiency work by Habitat for Humanity, the Tuzla Canton local government has produced a five-year plan focusing on energy use in residential buildings. It is the first of its kind in Bosnia and will support large scale investments in residential energy efficiency across the area. It is expected this approach will spread to other areas. In addition, Habitat for Humanity is currently working on influencing the reforming of Homeowners Association laws in all three countries.

How is it funded?

The project costs are funded jointly by Habitat for Humanity International and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Residential energy efficiency is a key part of the Habitat for Humanity International strategy for Europe and Central Asia until at least 2020 and currently US$100,000 per year is allocated to this work from the organisation’s core funding.

First half of 2012, Habitat for Humanity invested US$35,000 from its own undesignated funding sources for the initial development of a regional initiative building on the experiences from Macedonia
Preparatory work exploring the transfer from Macedonia, identifying Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina as suitable countries, and reaching out to diverse partners and stakeholders, in addition to technical assistance and mediation with Homeowner Associations, financial institutions, local government:

- US$2,000,000 (USAID, maximum committed funding for 2012-2019).
- US$590,000 (Habitat for Humanity International, committed funding for 2012-2019).
Additional project funding leveraged in subsidy or investment to date from private institutions and governments:

- US$100,000

The costs of the energy efficiency works are covered through different routes depending on each country. Energy efficiency markets are still being developed by Habitat for Humanity and their in-country partners. In Armenia, where Habitat for Humanity has successfully set up loans for Homeowner Associations these are combined with subsidy from the local government if available.

Macedonia:

Revolving loan fund set up by Habitat for Humanity Macedonia to help finance energy efficiency works: US$912,705. This fund aims to demonstrate that Homeowner Associations reliable clients, as currently commercial banks do not lend to these actors
Additional funding for energy efficiency leveraged by local governments: US$857,360

Bosnia and Herzegovina:

Energy efficiency works are covered by a combination of financial subsidy and residents’ personal savings.

Subsidy for retrofitting works: US$125,000 budget allocated (in 2017) by the canton of Tuzla, along with match funding by five different local governments which should collectively amount to US$300,000 (final amount of match funding still to be confirmed).

Armenia:

The Municipality of Yerevan has committed to fund 40% of the building retrofit costs per each building, and up to 900 buildings following the first retrofit pilot.
Ineco Bank and AGBA Credit Agricole Bank are working with Habitat for Humanity to develop loan products for Homeowner Associations.
Loans are insured by guarantees based on an assessment of the Homeowner Association’s cash flow (typically the history of collection rates of building management fees over the past two years).
The cost of retrofitting works is split with 60% covered by loans and 40% covered by subsidy. The interest rate for the loans is 17% (the average rate for retail loans), with repayment in three to five years.

Why is it innovative?

Residential Energy Efficiency for Low Income Households targets low income households affected by high energy costs, informing them about energy efficiency and providing technical support to help them manage the retrofitting of their homes. The skills people have gained through the project help them get involved in raising awareness, sharing their knowledge and concerns about energy costs as a cause of poverty and helping municipalities to further understand their residents’ needs.

By mediating between Homeowner Associations, municipalities and banks, the approach of Habitat for Humanity has improved the financial credibility and borrowing power of low income households. This is a particular accomplishment, as banks in Armenia (as in most of Eastern Europe) were previously unwilling to issue loans to Homeowner Associations. Through technical assistance and effective collaboration, the REELIH project has helped to establish new financial mechanisms, which facilitate the distribution of public funds and loans from banks directly to the Homeowner Associations. This provides an alternative to the need for each individual household in a multi-apartment building to raise their own finances. It allows a whole-building approach to energy efficiency which can be managed collectively by the residents. As the loan is also managed by a single entity (the Homeowners Association), the whole process of making improvements to buildings has also become more efficient.

What is the environmental impact?

Approximately 80% to 90% of energy is used during the lifetime use of a building with the remaining 10% to 20% used during construction and demolition (this also accounts for embodied energy). Retrofitting has a positive environmental impact by making buildings more energy efficient, reducing carbon dioxide emissions and the use of fossil fuels. As the number of retrofitted buildings increases, so does the positive environmental impact of the Residential Energy Efficiency project.

Retrofitting homes improves air quality and helps reduce moisture and noise, provides greater comfort and reduces the required frequency of maintenance and repair work. The retrofitting works carried out through this project can reduce the total energy consumption of these homes by up to 50%.

Specific features delivered through the programme include:

Thermo-insulation of the façade of the buildings.
Repair, replacement and/or new flooring and roofing with materials with thermal features.
Replacement of windows and entrance doors.

The approach of REELIH ensures materials used for retrofits provide optimal energy saving results. Different vendors are used in each building and materials are selected based on energy audits. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, most materials are produced or available locally. Some materials are imported in Armenia. Energy efficiency interventions are sometimes implemented hand-in-hand with other work on strengthening the structural stability of the buildings, improving them for future generations.

Is it financially sustainable?

Habitat for Humanity International has placed energy efficiency within its key strategy and funding streams until 2020. As of 2017, the project has funding from USAID for at least two more years. Advocacy carried out by the project has secured commitment from a number of local governments to place energy efficiency in their budgets. This achievement has been key to the financial sustainability of this work.

The relationship building with banks is also a very important aspect. Two additional banks in Bosnia and Herzegovina have started financing window replacement and other retrofit measures, and are now interested in developing affordable residential energy efficiency products for families and Homeowner Associations. In particular, banks would like to see a Guarantee Fund to reduce the risks of loans to Homeowners Associations. This option is being explored by Habitat for Humanity, in order to expand the number of banks that would be willing to provide loans for residential energy efficiency for multi-apartment buildings.

Over time Habitat for Humanity International believe it might be possible to set up revolving loan funds so Homeowner Associations can pay for energy efficiency works without any subsidy. At the moment the market is not developed enough in any of the countries where the project is being implemented for this to happen.

What is the social impact?

Residential Energy Efficiency for Low Income Households provides practical solutions to a housing problem that negatively affects standards of living, household budgets and quality of life. The project prioritises community-building and working in partnership across different organisations and sectors, focusing on solving energy poverty for low-income families and has a real impact on residents’ lives and their homes.

Multi-sector partnership and knowledge sharing is not only carried out on the ground but also through online knowledge sharing platforms. Presently there are two national knowledge sharing website for the work in Armenia (http://taqtun.am) and in Bosnia and Herzegovina (http://topaodom.ba), and a regional website for the project at a wider level (https://getwarmhomes.org). The national platforms allow residents and stakeholders not directly involved in the project to learn about and develop their own energy efficiency improvements, and the regional one acts as an international platform to share knowledge on residential energy efficiency.

Through the REELIH project, Habitat for Humanity works with residents to set up Homeowner Associations and strengthens their ability to negotiate for improvements with municipalities and banks. Homeowner Associations and their residents are given training on energy efficiency where they can share ideas on how they can save energy and money together. The technical assistance and expertise provided empowers residents to work collaboratively and go through the process of renovation themselves. Technical support is provided for decision-making, contracting construction companies, gaining subsidies from governments and funds from other financial institutions. The training, combined with mediation, ensures Homeowner Associations are seen as credible organisations. The project also develops community relationships by supporting residents to work together.

The physical retrofits themselves lead to better health and well-being as homes are more comfortable to live in and issues of cold, dampness and air pollution are improved. Residents are able to make better use of all the space in their homes (before many would only use one room with wood or coal fires for heat). Building improvements have also led to improved community interaction by making the shared spaces (such as stairways and hallways) more useable. The infrastructure of the building (e.g. pipes, elevators, etc.) also benefitted from energy efficiency as they are now less exposed to cold and dampness and therefore need less frequent maintenance. The increased awareness and appreciation of energy efficiency has led some residents to make further improvements to their own homes, for example by fitting double glazing or investing in energy efficient appliances.

Overall the approach has tackled poverty by reducing the living costs of low income residents through energy savings.

Barriers

The Residential Energy Efficiency project works in a region where energy efficient retrofits have not been well researched and are not widely understood. The project has had to work hard to prove its worth and raise awareness about the subject.

There is little clarity about homeowners’ rights and responsibilities relating to the management and maintenance of common spaces. This means there is little trust between homeowners and other partners when it comes to organising works on buildings and cost sharing. In Armenia, Habitat for Humanity has tried to overcome this by working with others on reforming the national Armenian Housing Law to improve clarity and create a better environment for cooperation and investment. Government arrangements across the region are incredibly complex, with multiple layers of administration at different levels. This presents an additional challenge with transferring the approach – not just across, but within countries.

Banks in Armenia (and across Central and Eastern Europe) cannot offer loans on buildings but ask individual residents to provide personal guarantees which can be difficult and time-consuming. The project has facilitated new lending mechanisms so loans can be made to Homeowner Associations on behalf of the whole building. This has been achieved through good communications with banks and ongoing technical assistance to residents and Homeowner Associations.

Another challenge relates to the project’s desired focus on low income households. The state programme applies an approach which awards subsidy based mostly on the state of buildings i.e. from the time of construction until today – the building has never been refurbished, it does not have thermal insulation. Surveys are conducted to determine the buildings with the highest needs. Nonetheless, most multi-apartment buildings in the area made up of mixed incomes families. As a result this means some of the households who benefit are in higher income groups. Nonetheless, one of the criteria for the building selection is that the majority of residents/ households in the building are very low income. Therefore, the project ensures that at least the largest part of the people it reaches is indeed part of their target group.

Countries in much of Eurasia are mainly located in climate zones with cold winters, so energy and heating efficiency should be a major concern for governments and residents. However, historically energy costs have been heavily subsidised so awareness about energy saving is low.

In South-East Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (unlike in Central and Eastern Europe), legal barriers exist which create additional difficulties with maintenance and new investments in multi-apartment buildings. This is further aggravated by the fact that homeowners living in multi-apartment buildings in these areas usually have lower incomes. Since the early 2000s improving energy efficiency has become an increasing priority for Central and Eastern European countries but the majority of buildings (50-70%) are still waiting for renovation so large numbers of residents are affected by high energy costs.

Lessons Learned

Habitat for Humanity International has developed several policy recommendations based on the lessons learned from the Residential Energy Efficiency for Low Income Households project:

A system of clearly defined responsibilities is needed in multi-apartment buildings that integrates energy efficiency.
Financing mechanisms need to be available and affordable to residents. Government intervention through targeted subsidy or loan guarantees is necessary.
Assistance to all stakeholders is necessary for successful renovation of the housing stock on a larger scale.
It is vital to interlink housing and social policies to improve energy efficiency in housing.
Providing information for example through presentations, training and awareness campaigns helps more people achieve energy efficiency by promoting informed choices.
It is crucial to establish and create opportunities for knowledge-exchange and experience-sharing.

Evaluation

The REELIH project is evaluated by looking at energy savings made through pre-retrofit and post-retrofit energy audits. These are carried out using an approach Habitat for Humanity developed in 2012. Energy audits are carried out by ENOVA, an environment and energy consultancy and the in-country partner for the project in Bosnia and Herzegovina and by the in-country office of Habitat for Humanity in Armenia.

Habitat for Humanity and partners have also conducted base-line surveys of the housing stock and the financial and living conditions of residents. They have looked at things like participation in Homeowner Associations, comfort levels in the home, and awareness about energy efficiency. These surveys will be repeated in the future to help understand the impact of the project.

Recognition

Residential Energy Efficiency in Low Income Households features as best practice in the ‘Energy Poverty Handbook’ published by the office of Tamás Meszerics (Member of the European Parliament) via The Greens/EFA group of the European Parliament.
The work of Habitat for Humanity on residential energy efficiency has influenced regional initiatives including:

- Build Upon; A collaboration of ‘Green Building Councils’ (not-for-profit organisations set up to improve and protect the environment by improving buildings).
- The EU Observatory on Energy Poverty; A consortium set up in 2016 to address and understand energy poverty across the European Union.
- C4E Forum; The Central and Eastern Europe Energy Efficiency Forum, set up to share and build upon successful energy efficiency work across the region.
A conference on residential energy efficiency in May 2017 attracted a range of interest from across Europe.

Transfer

Habitat for Humanity International started the first REELIH project in Macedonia in 2009. With the continued support of USAID, the approach was successfully transferred and has been adapted in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Armenia. Following pilot projects, a number of regional and local governments are supporting more work on residential energy efficiency. Subsidies are now being provided in five areas in the Tuzla Canton region of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the Municipality of Yerevan in Armenia. These subsidies will match loans raised by Homeowner Associations to help pay for energy efficiency improvements. This was made possible by the work of the REELIH project.

Habitat for Humanity Armenia is also partnering with Spitak and Vayq Municipalities to work with them on energy efficiency in residential and public buildings in their areas. Their success with the REELIH project helped them to attract funding from the European Union to do this.

Visitors from the United Nations, European Union, the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ), United States Agency for International Development (USAID) missions and other development agencies have been to Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina to learn from the project. In Macedonia, Habitat for Humanity has helped to make energy efficiency a subject for students in technical high schools, providing training sessions and arranging internships.

Energy poverty and poor energy efficiency in residential buildings is a problem in many countries of the former Eastern Bloc. A great number of low income families could benefit from the REELIH approach to accessing finance and subsidy.

The REELIH work was shared in April 2017 at a conference in Brussels aimed at raising awareness and interest among EU-policymakers and developing opportunities for people to work together.

Authors:

World Habitat

Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing Programme

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing Programme

Mismatches Financing Vulnerable groups New family structures

Financing Public funding

Urban Design Liveability Regulación Técnica Procesos Administrativos

Promotion and production Materials Self-management Self-promotion

Main objectives of the project

Date

2017:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Dagami
Country/Region: Philippines

Description

Project Description

In 2013, Typhoon Haiyan devastated large areas of the Philippines causing significant loss of life and destroying approximately one million homes. Through the Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing Programme (2013-2016) CARE Philippines helped over 15,500 families made homeless by Haiyan to rebuild their homes.

CARE Philippines is one of CARE International’s country offices. There are over 70 such offices across the world.

CARE International is a non-governmental organisation which works to defeat poverty and achieve social justice through projects tackling a wide range of social issues including emergency response after natural disasters, education, food security, HIV/AIDs, climate change, maternal health and the empowerment of women and girls. Each of CARE’s national members works independently to lead programmes, raise funds, advocate on key issues and communicate to the public in their country.

CARE Philippines has been operating since 1949 in areas which are extremely prone to natural disasters. They develop projects which respond to the needs of the most vulnerable. This project was delivered in partnership with Accord (Assistance and Cooperation for Community Resilience and Development Inc.) and other local actors.

All phases of the rebuilding work were done in line with the families’ wishes and kept affordable so that they could work within their means. Families were supported to rebuild their homes themselves, hence being called a ‘self-recovery’ approach. Working with families to develop their own housing is different from the majority of natural disaster responses which tend to focus on temporary solutions built quickly by external contractors. The ‘self-recovery’ approach also helps families to feel more empowered and have a stronger sense of ownership over decision-making, their housing and their lives in general.

The Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing project had a strong emphasis on supporting the families who were most severely affected and most vulnerable following the disaster. This was partly because it was felt that they were least likely to be able to resolve their housing problem without support but also because enabling very vulnerable people to have an active role in delivering their own housing solutions was seen as very important.

With the support of the programme groups of ten or more families worked together as communities to share the burden of construction. Each rebuilt home is unique, tailored to the needs and means of the family who built it. Some families also benefited from livelihood grants to help them develop small businesses after the loss of jobs in many sectors (including agriculture) after the typhoon.

The project provided technical assistance, materials and cash grants to support some of the country’s most vulnerable families to build new homes. This included training people in building skills and also providing the expertise of carpenters who travelled to different areas to help families with construction. Initial materials for essential repairs (including roofing sheets, hurricane strapping and tools and nails) were supplied by CARE. Families then bought other materials using cash grants. The homes that were built were owned by the families so affordability is not an ongoing issue.

The Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing Programme developed ‘Build Back Safer’ guidelines which helped families ensure that repaired or rebuilt homes were more resilient to natural disasters. Residents were trained in how to use the guidelines through a mixture of community seminars and individual support. Although the guidance was provided by CARE, control and decision-making about rebuilding was firmly in the hands of the families.

At a national level the Department of Social Welfare and Development in the Philippines government is currently considering if the ‘Build Back Safer’ guidelines developed through this programme should be adopted to help deal with natural disasters in the future.

Aims and Objectives

The aim of the Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing programme was to support vulnerable families to rebuild their homes in the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan. It also helped replace jobs and incomes lost as a result of the typhoon.

The programme’s objectives were:

To target some of the most vulnerable people in rural communities, who are often missed by traditional post-disaster reconstruction projects. This included older people, widows and widowers, people living with disabilities, single women and women-headed families, pregnant women, women with young babies and large/extended families.
To provide training to families so that they could develop their own housing to a better standard than before the storm, increasing their resilience to further natural disasters. This also provided new skills they could use in the future.
To give materials to families so essential building work could be carried out.
To provide families with cash grants so they could buy more building materials and/or labour if they were unable to carry out the work themselves.
To develop ‘Build Back Safer’ building guidelines so that resilient building practices could be followed at that point and in future, creating a legacy of improved construction techniques.
To encourage the development of new opportunities for employment and income generation to replace what was lost as a result of the typhoon.

A longer term aim of the project was to:

Offer an alternative to traditional post-disaster housing by demonstrating that working with people who are actively involved in ‘building their own recovery’ can be successful and effective.

Context

As many as 4.1 million people were made homeless and more than 10,000 people were thought to have died in the affected areas after Typhoon Haiyan struck in 2013. It was the strongest tropical cyclones to have ever been recorded. Many homes in the Philippines are made of timber and bamboo and could not withstand the force of the typhoon. Over one million homes were damaged with almost half of these being totally destroyed, so there was a significant and widespread need for rebuilding.

In addition to typhoons the Philippines is prone to multiple hazards including earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Eighty-one percent of the country’s population are vulnerable to typhoons and the country is third in the world after Vanuatu and Tonga for being most prone to natural disasters. Since Haiyan, a further three particularly strong typhoons (Hagupit, Haima and Nok-Te) have hit the Philippines and in February 2017 a 6.7 magnitude earthquake also affected the country.

The CARE Philippines programme worked in Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas that were hardest hit by the typhoon. These included barangays (wards) on the islands of Leyte, Samar and Panay. These wards are small rural communities who rely on farming as their main source of income. This work is often supplemented by running small convenience stores but there are few opportunities for income generation. Average incomes in these areas are low (US$40-80 per month) so rebuilding without outside help from CARE Philippines would have been very difficult.

The ethos of ‘self-recovery’ meant that villagers were able to control the rebuilding of their homes and the construction work they undertook was fitted around their everyday life. For example, if they wished to prioritise a day working rather than completing any building work this was their personal choice. This freedom and flexibility meant people could still earn an income whilst completing building works.

Key Features

The Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing programme ensured that the most vulnerable people in local communities were selected as it was felt that they would be least able to carry out successful self-recovery without support. As a result of this programme, over 15,000 people who had been made homeless by the typhoon are now living in stable housing that they have built themselves.

The programme was community-led – resident choice and input into housing design was prioritised throughout. Following training families completed the rebuilding themselves but could ask for help from carpenters funded through the programme.

Grants were also given out which meant that people who were unable to do the building work themselves could pay others to do it. Communities also grouped together to share labour and help each other. These groups were informal but often ten or more families would come together to work on their houses as a team.

To guide the building process, ‘Build Back Safer’ building guidelines were developed by CARE Philippines and shared with families. These guidelines focused on three key techniques that significantly improve safety and are affordable:

Construction techniques that strengthen homes, for example cross-bracing.
Building strong foundations as a starting point for construction.
Ensuring roofs are securely nailed onto the structure.

Additional grants given by CARE Philippines helped some families develop small businesses in addition to their homes helping them generate income and support the wider recovery of the community.

CARE Philippines was the main lead on the project. CARE also collaborated with Assistance and Cooperation for Community Resistance and Development (ACCORD), a Philippine organisation which provides capacity building for communities and promotes resilient building practices. ACCORD led on providing the training to educate residents how to rebuild sturdier homes using the ‘Build Back Safer’ messages. In addition to ACCORD, other smaller organisations also acted locally as an interface between CARE Philippines and the communities. They were responsible for much of the day-to-day implementation of the programme. These include cooperatives and NGOs such as the Leyte Center for Development, the Metro Ormoc Community Multi-Purpose Cooperative, and the USWAG Development Foundation.

What impact has it had?

The programme has had a positive impact in several ways:

Ensuring that over 15,000 people affected by the typhoon now have a safe place to live which is more resilient than their previous home.
Developing an increased sense of involvement and ownership due to the self-recovery approach.
Significant scale was achieved as resources were focused on enabling people to help themselves rather than paying for more expensive contractors, who would have delivered fewer homes for the same budget.
The materials used and the focus on the Build Back Safer building guidelines means homes built have been a big improvement on homes where families lived before the typhoon.
The focus on both housing and income generation has meant families have a safe home and new job opportunities.

The development of ‘Build Back Safer’ guidelines has been seen positively by the Philippines government’s Department of Social Welfare and Development. They now wish to incorporate these codes into future natural disaster responses. The programme has also helped inspire the academic research programme ‘Promoting Safe Building, supporting safer self-recovery after disasters’ which will highlight the potential of self-recovery approaches in disaster responses.

How is it funded?

The majority of costs were funded through CARE’s fundraising and donations, for a total of 145.6 million Philippine Pesos (US$3 million). Homeowners were provided with grants of 3,000 Philippine Pesos (approximately US$55) to buy building materials.

When this grant was combined with the materials which CARE provided (roofing sheets, hurricane strapping and nails and tools) the total cost to CARE per house was around US$190 dollars. Residents were expected to provide some financial contribution. However, the most vulnerable families (about 45% of the beneficiaries of the programme) received a top up grant of 5,000 Philippine Pesos (approximately US$90) if they could not afford to contribute. Families also salvaged materials from storm debris and provided free labour to reduce costs.

Additional livelihood grants were given by CARE from their fundraising reserves to many of the families to buy, for example, livestock. There is even an example of 70 families coming together to purchase a rice mill.

The financial support provided through the programme meant that families were less likely to get into debt in the rebuilding of their homes.

Why is it innovative?

The use of ‘self-recovery’ at such a large scale is innovative when it comes to post-disaster work on housing, as recovery work is often expert-led rather than community-led. This programme was able to reach more of the population by using the self-build method. Its success has demonstrated the beginning of a shift in mainstream humanitarian shelter practice towards recognising that self-recovery can be an effective, quick and sustainable post-disaster response.

It is the norm for the community themselves to start the recovery process after a natural disaster. The Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing programme was able to respond quickly and in a way that built on the recovery work the community had already started.

CARE’s comprehensive recovery package also makes it innovative. Right after the typhoon, CARE and local partners gave food, water and shelter kits to beneficiaries. Orientation on the Build Back Safer guidelines was given before giving out the shelter kits to ensure beneficiaries knew how to use them. Livelihood grants were given to the communities and CARE and local partners continue to implement livelihood recovery projects in the affected communities. This approach is quite different from typical disaster aid projects that mainly focus on providing one product (e.g. temporary shelter or core housing or relocation) for a specific period of time but do not, for example, follow up with livelihood projects which beneficiaries need in order to earn a living and stay in the community.

The project put control and decision making in the hands of the families themselves rather than the implementing organisation, giving families greater ownership over what happened to them. Families will also be able use the building techniques they have learnt in the future. The fact that cash was given to families so that they could choose to purchase their own building materials and/or pay for labour meant that work was carried out more quickly than if they had had to wait for help to get to them. The response could begin swiftly thanks to this approach.

The focus on both housing and income generation is a more holistic approach to recovery, recognising that homes and livelihoods are often interconnected.

What is the environmental impact?

The project used local building materials and salvaged debris after the typhoon to reduce environmental impact. Hundreds of thousands of palm trees were blown down by the typhoon and coco lumber became the main construction material used to build the houses. This also meant that materials were sourced as locally as possible, often in the vicinity of the new buildings.

The programme also allowed local entrepreneurs to set up small chain mills to make use of the fallen timber, providing new job opportunities. The use of valuable hardwood, which is less environmentally sustainable, was limited to foundation stub posts and was often recycled from destroyed housing. Bamboo was also used, which is a fast growing and environmentally sustainable crop.

‘Self-recovery’ supports the use of local materials and imported, high embodied energy[1] products are limited to a few materials. Houses are also built in the same areas where they were before meaning that little or no new land is needed for construction.

The ‘Build Back Safer’ guidelines developed by the programme helped to educate communities in sustainable building practices.

[1] Embodied energy is the energy consumed by all of the processes associated with the production of a building, from the mining and processing of natural resources to manufacturing, transport and product delivery

Is it financially sustainable?

The Post-Haiyan Self- Recovery Housing Programme finished in 2016 and its goal was not to achieve financial sustainability for the programme itself beyond that date. However, this ‘self-recovery’ programme has been very careful to work within the families’ own means so the housing itself is affordable for them. Once rebuilding was complete, over 15,000 households owned their own home with no reliance on future funding and no rental payments.

Cash grants given by CARE were less than the total value of the cost of rebuilding. This meant that some families had to use their own money to fund their rebuild within their available resources.

The cash loans helped families start the construction process. As local labour was used in the rebuilding, if finances allow in the future, families can continue to make home improvements using these contacts.

Although the long-term impact of the programme is greater financial resilience within the communities, recovery following large scale natural disasters will always require significant amounts of external funding to deal with the immediate devastation caused.

What is the social impact?

Communities have been able to stay in their villages after the typhoon as the project has enabled new homes to be built. As the homes are more resilient families should be able to live in them for years to come, even if further natural disasters hit.

Community cohesion and cooperation were developed through the project’s focus on people working together to rebuild their homes. In the Philippines, this community spirit is called bayanihan. Many of those involved in the project felt the project allowed bayanihan to be realised as people controlled the creation of their own homes. Neighbours came together to help each other which made people feel they were working towards a common goal. Being encouraged to take charge of their own recovery after the typhoon helped some families to deal with the psychological trauma of the event.

The magnitude of Typhoon Haiyan meant that people’s livelihoods were lost as well as their homes. The project helped many families to develop new skills and access new jobs. Income generation opportunities such as setting up small businesses were supported using grants. The construction skills developed through the project were important and the techniques learned are now educating future generations on sustainable building practices.

CARE is committed globally to the empowerment of women so a gender-sensitive approach was adopted to ensure equal inclusion of women in the project. CARE Philippines particularly encouraged women to take an active role in decision-making and construction. Focus group discussions at the beginning of the project were almost entirely made up of women. In their role as key activists in the community the women also helped the carpenters give technical support by having conversations with their neighbours to find out their needs before the advice was given. It was made easier for women to take part in project management and their participation in the construction activity as a whole increased.

Barriers

The project faced two major challenges. Firstly, some families struggled to find money to complement the grant from CARE Philippines which they needed to complete their homes. CARE responded to this by distributing a second ‘top-up’ grant to families who were most in need. The combination of support led to a 92% successful completion rate of homes rebuilt through the CARE programme. The provision of essential materials at the start of the project also tried to ensure that families would be able to rebuild their homes to a good standard without having to borrow or spend large amounts of money.

A second major barrier was ensuring that families followed the Build Back Safer guidelines when constructing their new homes. This was addressed by the introduction of a team of carpenters who gave technical assistance to families. In addition, the materials given at the start of project were chosen to help families successfully follow the guidelines.

Lessons Learned

The project has enabled CARE Philippines to critically reflect on their work and to learn various lessons. These include:

Future programmes need to review whether to target the most vulnerable or whether other similar programmes should be designed to benefit whole communities.
Households that had already rebuilt before the programme did not benefit but in future the approach could be redesigned so these households might also have access to grant.
If the programme is transferred there will be a need for better integration between the housing project itself and other sectors such as water and sanitation.
In some cases there was a lack of compliance with Build Back Safer techniques which might have been avoided if further training and support were offered.
It is more effective for materials and tools to be collectively bought by communities rather than individuals. This strategy has been implemented in other programmes.
More support is needed when families are unable to undertake construction themselves.

Evaluation

The Post-Haiyan Self-Recovery Housing Programme has been evaluated a number of times in different ways. Throughout the programme CARE Philippines produced regular reports for donors and an evaluation that compares it with other responses to Typhoon Haiyan is being completed. CARE Philippines is currently producing a final presentation of the programme for donors including Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC), Global Affairs Canada and Diagio.

The CARE International UK shelter team has carried out two evaluation projects. One was completed after the first year of the programme, looking in detail at the levels of completion of houses. They discovered that the majority of houses had been completed to an adequate standard in that they had a safe roof and walls and had successfully implemented the Build Back Safer guidelines. Some residents, however, felt their homes were incomplete and had further ambitions for improvements such as plywood walls rather than bamboo. They felt they could not achieve this due to lack of money. There was also concern by residents over the vulnerability criteria and selection process used.

The second evaluation looked more broadly at the level of recovery and the lessons that can be learned from the programme. Despite the resident concerns above, both evaluations were positive overall and found that in general better built, stronger, often bigger homes had been successfully constructed. Families also expressed an evident sense of pride in and ownership of their achievements. The evaluations have been used to inform subsequent post-disaster responses in Vanuatu, Fiji and Nepal.

A separate evaluation by Habitat for Humanity GB and CARE International entitled ‘Lessons from Haiyan’ offering a comparative review of evaluations and learning documents from the shelter response to Typhoon Haiyan is in progress.

The CARE International UK research team is currently evaluating the perception of ‘recovery’ from the perspective of the affected families. This work is part of an interdisciplinary research project that investigates households’ self-recovery trajectories and how safer construction practices can be more effectively integrated into humanitarian shelter responses.

Recognition

The project has not had any specific recognition to date. However, its work has been cited in various reports and articles as an example of good practice in post-disaster recovery.

A recent Euronews article details the programme and the joint work of CARE Philippines and ACCORD. They have also been featured in the Forced Migration Review Journal and on the Humanitarian Practice Network.

CARE International has recently launched a research collaboration between the Overseas Development Institute, British Geological Survey and the Engineering Department of University College London. It will research building techniques and self-recovery processes from the perspective of those affected, using the programme as a case study.

Transfer

The programme was initially carried out on three Islands (Leyte, Samar and Panay). Since implementation in these locations CARE Philippines has started similar projects in response to Typhoons Hagupit/Ruby (2014) and Typhoon Haima (2016). These transfers were adapted based on lessons learned. For example building materials were purchased collectively to provide cost savings. Residents came together to create a list of what tools were needed instead of each family being given individual materials. The training element was still key to these projects with the knowledge of local carpenters being used to benefit the whole community.

The programme is being used as a case study to inform wider research on the effectiveness of ‘self-recovery’ as a post-disaster construction technique. It is hoped it can act as a model for future projects. Lessons have influenced similar projects in Fiji, Nepal and Vanuatu carried out by CARE.

Authors:

World Habitat

50,000 Houses for War Victims

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

50,000 Houses for War Victims

Mismatches Functional adequacy Services

Financing Demand subsidies Sustainable development financing Progressive financing Public-private collaboration

Urban Design Urban fabrics Services and infrastructure Inclusion

Promotion and production Participatory processes Self-management

Main objectives of the project

This project has provided humanitarian and financial support to help communities displaced as a result of the Sri Lankan civil war to rebuild their homes. The target is to fund and build 50,000 houses, for an estimated total of 225,000 people. The majority of the houses, 44,000 are self-build, 4,000 will be built by plantation workers, while only 1,000 are to be built by contractors.

Date

2016:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Ahmedabad
Country/Region: Ahmedabad, India

Description

Project Description

Following the prolonged civil war in Sri Lanka from 1983 to 2009, the Government of India took the decision to provide humanitarian and financial support to the Government and people of Sri Lanka to help them recover from the trauma of war. In total, the Government of India is supporting a number of self-help housing rehabilitation/development programmes costing over USD $240 million. Some of this funding is a grant, for example the funding for the 50,000 Houses of War Victims project, and some takes the form of long-term loan assistance.

For this project financial assistance and organisational support has been provided to help internally displaced people to construct their own homes. The target is to fund and build 50,000 houses, for an estimated total of 225,000 people. The majority of the houses, 44,000 are self-build, 4,000 will be built by plantation workers. One thousand houses were constructed by commercial contractors before the owner driven approach was introduced as a more suitable solution. The focus on self-build is designed to give people a real say in their own housing solutions.

The programme focuses on internally displaced people in dispersed, rural areas of Northern, Eastern, Central and Uva provinces of Sri Lanka. The basis of the programme is that people are enabled to return to land and property which they owned and lived in prior to the war. In effect, this means that some families are moving back to the area they left in 2009 or before.

The houses that are developed are on average 550 ft² in size, so relatively large compared to those often built as part of rehabilitation projects. The home owners are able to make decisions on the design, materials used, size of the house and whether they wish to add in their own savings or loans to include specific features or make the house larger.

Since the construction work started in 2012, forty-five thousand, two hundred houses of the 50,000 target have been completed. The houses are built on existing sites in villages or new sites provided by the Government of Sri Lanka.

Aims and Objectives

The main aim of the project is to deliver homes for internally displaced people in a quick and sustainable way. These people are the direct victims of the conflict: those who lost homes, property, assets, family members, livelihoods, income and social networks. The other beneficiaries are the plantation workers living in poor housing and environmental conditions for whom 4,000 houses are being constructed.

Though this project is confined to the provision of houses, it has laid a foundation for a people-sensitive and community-driven approach to development. Housing is the crucial first phase in a long-term rehabilitation process that must be eventually followed up by:

economic rehabilitation of the families who lost assets, jobs and means of livelihood;
rebuilding physical/social infrastructure and economic base of the area lost in the war;
rebuilding people, communities and social networks that suffered ruptured relations, shaken confidence, internal divisions and trust deficit and have seen much violence.The delivery of the phases beyond the house-building lie with the Sri Lankan government and the people of Sri Lanka but this project’s contribution is to develop a receptive climate for participative development action which supports future developments.

Context

The Sri Lankan civil war lasted 26 years and left large numbers of houses and public infrastructure damaged or destroyed. Around 160,000 houses were affected in the Northern Province alone. After such a long conflict, community life was shattered with networks and relationships broken down. The economy and governance structures were in crisis. Displaced families returning to their places of origin were housed in temporary shelters, constructed by the Sri Lankan Government, humanitarian agencies or families themselves. Families survived with minimal security and scant protection from the elements. People were living in widely dispersed sites, many in forests with poor road connectivity, no electricity or other services.

This project is working in the districts of Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mullaithivu, Vavuniya and Mannar in the North and Batticaloa and Trincomalee districts in the East, which were areas of considerable conflict during the war and the most severely affected in terms of human and material losses: houses, physical and social infrastructure, transport, industry, commerce, business establishments, jobs and livelihoods were either destroyed or severely damaged.

Key Features

The focus on self-build housing changed the complexion of the reconstruction process and has planted seeds for people-led recovery.

Adopting an owner-driven approach meant:

putting owners in charge of house building instead of contractors;
handing over funds and decision making to individual families;
entrusting the delivery of the programme to people who are vulnerable (internally displaced people) and who had not recently had experience of being empowered to make decisions. This meant changing ways of working, setting aside apprehensions about shattered communities and discounting arguments that the families and communities would leave houses either incomplete or spend money elsewhere or construct poor housing. The role of the organisations supporting the implementation of the project was key in this regard as they were working with the communities at a local level. Empowering people with responsibility, decision making, money management and giving them a lead role in steering their own development process has enhanced their confidence and self-worth. The impact of this culture of self-help and dignity is demonstrated in the quality of houses built, their own financial contribution in enlarging houses and in the speed of construction as well as in the confidence they display in meeting other challenges.

The potential beneficiaries applied for inclusion in the project and the severity of need was used to for selecting those who would get involved and prioritised:

age (priority for older people);
poverty (priority for the poorest);
number of dependents (priority for the ones with more children and dependents);
women-headed families;
physical condition of the head of the family (wounded, disabled).

Both the beneficiary selection and grievance redressal systems involved the entire community, as the approved lists were displayed in public places for everyone’s information and intervention. Debate and discussion around the list and the openness of the system to listen to every view and opinion made the process participatory and democratic.

Besides officers of the Sri Lankan Government the four partner agencies, namely UN-Habitat, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Habitat for Humanity and National Housing Development Authority provide assistance in the identification and selection of the beneficiaries. The project wanted to serve the most severely affected people in the greatest of need.

The key features of the project can be summarised as:

Transparent system for beneficiary selection.
Re-settlement in the original village or new sites provided by the Government of Sri Lanka and approved by the community.
Making available 15 – 20 prototype house designs to select from with required modifications for climate, local traditions and cost effectiveness.
A house no smaller than 550 ft².
Construction on self-build basis.
Grant of Sri Lankan Rupees (LKR) 550,000 (USD $3,800) per house towards construction costs.
Payment in four installments at specific construction stages through electronic transfer.
Facilitation through partner agencies for logistical support and technical assistance for speedy, cost effective and good quality construction via logistical support, technical guidance on construction, assistance in material procurement, quality, time and cost monitoring and account keeping.
Physical infrastructure and social amenities provided by the Government of Sri Lanka.
An effective grievance redressal system.

What impact has it had?

The project is still being completed and therefore it is a little early to expect it to influence policy or institutional change. However, this model of facilitation by partner agencies has been presented to the Government of India as a way to improve owner participation and the quality of construction in the national housing programme for rural communities.

The project goes beyond accepting the conflict/disaster victim communities’ right to housing and rehabilitation. It provides housing and infrastructure and it provides houses that are better and bigger than the minimum size prescribed and does so in a manner that builds community capacity to meet other aspects of full recovery challenge now.

How is it funded?

The Government of India provided a grant of LKR 34.8 million (USD $240 million) for this project.

Phase I for one thousand houses constructed by contractors at a cost of LKR 1.4 million (USD $10 million).

Phase II for the construction and repair of 45,000 houses had an outlay of LKR 33.4 million (USD $240 million) to cover the following:

Payment of fees to the four partner agencies.
Payment to beneficiaries for construction of a house – Total of LKR 550,000 (USD $4,000) in four instalments, (LKR 100,000 = USD $700; LKR 200,000 = USD $1,400; LKR 200,000 = USD $1,400 and LKR 50,000 = USD $350).
Payment to beneficiaries for repairs to houses – Total of LKR 250,000 (USD $1, 700) in three instalments (LKR 100,000 = USD $700; LKR 125,000 = USD $900 and LKR 25,000 = USD $200).

The cost of land, physical infrastructure and social amenities is met by the Government of Sri Lanka

The houses, both repaired and newly constructed, are ownership assets of the 50,000 families and so the costs of maintenance are the responsibility of the owners. The cost of maintenance of the physical and social infrastructure is borne by the Government of Sri Lanka through its departmental or development agencies.

Why is it innovative?

Self-build construction is not new in Sri Lanka. Houses had been constructed and projects had been implemented using that principle after the 2004 tsunami. What is new and an institutional innovation is the introduction of the partner agency as part of the organisational design for implementation. The facilitation role undertaken by the likes of UN-Habitat, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Habitat for Humanity and the National Housing Development Authority is new to Sri Lanka and the support and direction provided by these organisations has been key to the acceptance of the project by target communities and to the success of the project as a whole.

Innovation within a post conflict rehabilitation context can be expressed as follows:

Giving in kind, i.e. facilitation support rather than cash (benefitting families directly instead of Government to Government bilateral aid).
Self-build on a large scale programme instead of engaging commercial contractors.
Transfer of decision making responsibility to thousands of families.
Institutional innovation: conceiving, identifying, hiring, deploying and supervising work and performance of four partner agencies as facilitators, while accepting self-help as a community tradition.
The principle of “Building People and Communities while Building Houses” put the emphasis on the process as much as the product.
A government programme entrusting decision making to communities challenges custom and practice.
Investing in building a development platform while delivering a conventional service.

Though a majority of the home builders have used conventional materials and techniques, some innovations have been introduced by the partner agencies. A visit was arranged to Kerala, Gujarat and Maharashtra in India for staff from partner agencies so that they could see innovative materials, projects and experiments. Fifteen engineers and supervisors participated and tried many options such as rat-trap bonds for masonry; filler slabs for roofs; twin-pit systems instead of conventional soak-pit methods for latrines and cement soil blocks in place of bricks were tried out on experimental basis.

What is the environmental impact?

The choice of materials which are locally produced and available, usable by local craftsmen, easily repairable or replaceable, low cost and requiring low maintenance has been the main philosophy of the project. Home builders have been exposed to alternative materials, construction techniques and explained economic, environmental and social benefits. However, the project has not imposed any material or technique or technology on the home builders and the choice always remains with them.

In terms of the resilience of housing to natural disasters, several factors have been incorporated:

The structural design and detailing of the houses makes the structures disaster resilient, especially from cyclones and earthquakes.
The participatory process of decision making and construction has raised people’s overall awareness of natural disasters and how to reduce impact (bracing walls against earthquakes and roof anchors to stop roofs blowing off during cyclones).
The training of masons has also increased awareness and preparedness.

In addition, some of the partner agencies have developed features which help improve the wider environment. UN-Habitat has raised special funds for tree planting and developed a community supported tree planting program in new settlements.

Is it financially sustainable?

In terms of overall housing need in providing 50,000 houses, this project has met a quarter of the needs of the Sri Lankan people. The additional housing required and also the subsequent phase of this programme (focused on economic development and wider infrastructure) will fall to the Government of Sri Lanka to fund.

To reduce future costs for home owners care has been taken to produce houses of:

adequate size therefore reducing further construction costs;
safe and strong construction against earthquakes and cyclones;
good quality workmanship, materials and specifications;
reasonable sized plots of land.

What is the social impact?

The ‘owner-driven’ approach of this project has greater objectives than just the reduction in cost of construction through owner’s unskilled self-help labour contribution. The participatory/consultative approach is meant to see them as ‘owners’ and ’clients’ (as opposed to recipients of grants) and gives them decision making power. It has been noted that the system of self-build and decision making has not only improved the construction of the houses but has played a significant role in restoring people’s self-worth and cultivated a sense of dignity.

Housing is the first and the key input in the long term and multi-faceted rehabilitation and recovery process for the individuals and the communities. In the area of physical rehabilitation and full scale recovery much remains to be done in terms of development of infrastructure – physical and social, for example, the restoration of livelihoods, creation of jobs and employment generation. It is in that context that the social capital built through a participatory house building process will be advantageous. Over a year long process of engagement in decision making, responsibility sharing, problem solving, conflict resolving, finance management, delivering and achieving has left a more determined, confident and responsible individual and citizen.

Barriers

Initially the programme met many barriers:

lack of infrastructure facilities in the project areas;
restricted sand and timber permits;
social factors like alcoholism, divorce and separation;
increased costs of materials;
periodic inclement weather conditions;
lack of motivation for some and time constraint for others.

These barriers have been addressed by the project partners by:

working with government departments and suppliers to overcome gaps in infrastructure;
ongoing communication with government authorities to speed up the issuing of sand and timber permits;
the involvement of communities to address social issues;
collective procurement after researching sources;
adjusting the time of construction to accommodate the inclement weather;
activities to encourage motivation within the beneficiaries.

Lessons Learned

The success of the programme has been attributed to:

the attention given to factors such as involvement of beneficiaries in their house construction;
timely release of funds to beneficiaries;
transparency in beneficiary selection process;
the use of encrypted messages for transfer instructions to banks;
having an organised system of file handling;
regular monitoring of the project;
flexibility in adaptation to the ground conditions.

Evaluation

The houses have only recently been occupied and the program is still under implementation so no final assessment has been undertaken. However, a range of indicators have been considered during the development of the programme:

level of satisfaction of the users;
the sense of ownership they display;
the investment they make in extensions/upgrading;
evidence of togetherness and collective community action. In addition, there have been no cost escalations and no major delays to the construction process.

Discussions have started with local universities, NGOs, international development agencies and communities to undertake feedback studies on the impact of the owner-driven, self-help approach to construction.

Recognition

This is the first time that this project has been submitted for any award. However, the model has been acknowledged by the development partners in Sri Lanka including Diplomatic/UN Missions, INGOs and the Government of Sri Lanka.

Transfer

The model has already been adopted by the Indian government-owned Housing and Urban Development Corporation’s Committee on Rejuvenation and Strengthening of Building Centres Network, which is examining ways to revitalise the network of building centres in the country in order to support large-scale construction programmes. The approach of confidence building, motivating, initiative-taking and empowering the owners has been adopted for the 4,000 plantation workers’ houses, which are yet to be built. Beneficiaries and plantation companies have endorsed the approach. These houses were originally going to be constructed by contractors.

The positive outcome of the project approach, both in the well-constructed houses and in human terms (i.e. confident, self-respecting, initiative-taking communities) suggests the replication potential, not only in post-disaster reconstruction scenarios but also in normal circumstances where the clients are disadvantaged in some way.

Authors:

World Habitat

Passiv Solar Verandas

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Passiv Solar Verandas

Mismatches Functional adequacy

Urban Design Urban fabrics Environments Liveability

Promotion and production Participatory processes Self-construction Progressive housing

Main objectives of the project

Since March 2014, over 1,500 Passiv Solar Verandas have been built onto the houses of people living in the remote Central Highlands of Afghanistan creating additional living spaces and providing warm air, which circulates round the house. More than 100 trained local craftsmen were involved in building the verandas, creating a livelihood for them and their families.

Date

2016:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: Afghanistan

Description

Project Description

Passiv Solar Verandas are wood-framed structures built against the south-facing wall of a house. The project installs them in the highland region of Afghanistan where winter temperatures are cold and access to fuel is expensive and difficult. They act like a greenhouse using the sun’s warmth to heat the air. The warm air circulates into the rest of the house achieving an indoor temperature of around +20°C. The verandas are easy and cheap to install, constructed from timber or steel and polythene sheets. The veranda creates an additional room, extending the living space of the house.

Since March 2014, over 1,500 verandas have been built in the Central Highlands (in the Bamyan and Maydan-Wardak districts). More than 100 trained local craftsmen were involved in building them creating a livelihood for them and their families.

The project is scheduled to be completed in September 2017 by which time GERES aims to have trained a total of 170 local workers who will complete 700 verandas (in addition to those completed by individuals/communities without GERES’s input).

Acknowledged by global consulting firm Hystra as one of the world’s 15 pioneers in marketing for vulnerable populations, GERES deploys an innovative approach to the large-scale dissemination of pioneering and sustainable energy solutions.

Aims and Objectives

The project aims to help vulnerable and poor households overcome fuel poverty through a market-based approach. The veranda was developed in collaboration with households, by including them in the design and adaptation process, and then training local craftsmen. They are provided with the technical and business tools to support a veranda-based business. GERES introduced the veranda into the market but households are responsible for placing the order and paying between 80 and 100% of the total cost.

Passiv Solar Verandas offer a more sustainable means of heating than the traditional practice of cutting down trees for fuel, which has a negative impact on the environment, degrading soil fertility and leading to erosion.

There are two groups who benefit directly from this project:

The local people who are able to operate within the marketplace and generate additional sources of income.
Households who purchase the Passiv Solar Verandas (with or without a GERES subsidy) and benefit from a warmer house and an additional, warm day room as well as savings on fuel costs.

The objective is that the demand will be self-sustained once the project ends, providing households with increased comfort and warmth, while craftsmen gain an additional source of income. As the primary goal of GERES is to provide sustainable energy solutions to as many people as possible, large-scale dissemination is at the heart of its strategy. By the end of the programme, GERES aims to equip 3,000 households with energy saving solutions.

Context

The Central Highlands of Afghanistan is a mountainous area north of Kabul forming part of the HinduKush mountain range. The area is largely rural. Some parts of it are remote and very sparsely populated. The climate is dry and seasonal temperatures vary. In upland areas the average summer temperatures don’t exceed 15°C and average winter temperatures are below 0°C.

Afghanistan is a poor country ranking 175th on the United Nations’ Human Development Index. Its recent history has been affected by decades of conflict which has destroyed much of the country’s infrastructure and severely hampered trade. The Central Highlands is a relatively safe area. It is traditionally populated by the Hazara ethnic group, but there has been a significant rise in population as refugees from other ethnic groups have fled from other areas of the country to escape the war. The Hazara group has a history of being discriminated against and there are numerous reports of members of the group being attacked and kidnapped on the primary access roads that run through the region.

The population of the Central Highlands primarily relies on agriculture and livestock as a source of income. Livelihoods depend mainly on the availability and management of natural resources: land for pastures and agriculture; water for irrigation; biomass (wood) for cooking, heating and construction purposes. The area has suffered a prolonged drought. This combined with high population increases since 2001 have drastically increased the pressure on already scarce natural resources.

GERES’ passiv solar house technologies have been disseminated in remote regions of Afghanistan, Tajikistan and India since 2009. In Afghanistan, GERES has identified that the vast majority of the population live in uninsulated houses, with high indoor air pollution and energy expenses from heating. It also showed that 76% of these houses could be modified into passiv solar houses, which are cheaper to heat, energy efficient and locally installed. After a pilot initiative in the Bamyan region in 2010, and a larger scale project in Kabul, the project currently promotes the verandas at a larger scale in Central Highlands.

GERES implements its activities within the framework of the “Central Highland Rural Development Programme”, a consortium of three French NGOs (MADERA, Solidarités International and GERES as the lead partner) focused on improving the living conditions of the rural population in terms of agriculture, environment and natural resource management. Solidarités International focuses on agricultural development and water/sanitation activities and MADERA focuses on livestock and related natural resources management.

Key Features

The key features of the approach can be summarised as follows:

GERES works to find the best compromise between efficiency, acceptability, affordability and local ownership so that their technologies have a high market penetration rate and impact the largest number of beneficiaries. Finding the best balance among these four elements is the key to success, and requires lengthy analysis, research and development.
They maximise local added-value by developing or reinforcing value chains ensuring the local ownership and sustainability of their solutions by providing capacity building to local people (mainly craftsmen) so they can operate independently.
GERES also supports by generating demand through awareness-raising campaigns and enhancing policy frameworks.

Craftsmen are approached based on recommendations from the heads of communities. GERES then develops demonstration sites with these craftsmen in strategic places in their communities to raise awareness and share information about the benefits with local communities. The Passiv Solar Verandas are developed in collaboration with both households and craftsmen. GERES’ Research and Development team works with local households to identify their specific energy needs and problems and to create appropriate solutions.

Pilot designs are incorporated into houses and focus groups involving residents help ensure people’s inputs are incorporated into the adaptation process. Capacity building workshops were planned with local communities in order to explain how to use and maintain the verandas for optimal efficiency; Technical workshops were implemented with local stakeholders in order to clarify and explain the main purposes of the programme. Craftsmen were also consulted at this stage to make sure the technologies fit with their skills and the materials used are readily available locally.

What impact has it had?

In close cooperation with academia and UN agencies, the technologies and approaches developed by GERES are being embedded into the traditional construction designs of housing in the Central Highlands region of Afghanistan and GERES is currently working in collaboration with UN-HABITAT on improving the Afghan national standards for housing.

The project promotes and protects the rights of citizens by carefully considering cultural factors during the design process and by going to some lengths to ensure the solutions are affordable for the target community.

How is it funded?

The project was originally funded by the Government of France’s development agency ‘Agence Française de Développement’ (AFD) to work in Kabul with the support of the European Commission and private foundations. This agency fully funded the Central Highland Rural Development Programme (10 million euros; USD $11.1 million) for three partner organisations covering four components WASH, Agriculture, Energy Saving Solutions (ESS) in housing and capitalisation. Of these NGOs, GERES is in charge of the ESS and capitalisation components.

GERES’s development of the energy saving solutions component including the dissemination of Passiv Solar Veranda and other Energy Saving Solutions costs 4.5 million euros (USD $5 million). The annual running costs (14.5% of this amount) have been completed thanks to the support of private foundations (Fondation Abbé Pierre and Lord Michelham of Hellingly Foundation). The full implementation cost of the Passiv Solar Verandas project is 1 million euros (USD $1.1 million). This includes research and development, the direct material costs as well as a part of the HR and logistic resources needed for this activity, training and capacity building with craftsmen, toolkits and plans, demonstration units and awareness-raising and marketing.

The Government of France’s Development Agency (AFD) are fully funding the dissemination of the Passiv Solar Verandas in the Central Highlands area as a component of a wider programme of housing energy saving solutions. It is intended that by the end of the project the Passiv Solar Verandas will have been fully integrated into the local market ensuring financial sustainability for the local craftsmen. While the existing project funding ends in September 2017, additional funding is currently being sought to expand the project into new districts in the Central Highlands. At present, craftsmen have been trained in the construction of three different types of veranda. These range in price from approximately USD $130 to USD $350. The price variations are due primarily to the selection and availability of materials – from the more expensive hardwood veranda with a plastic cover through to one with a steel profile and then the cheaper round-pipe veranda. These variations make the Passiv Solar Verandas affordable for the majority of the target population.

Why is it innovative?

The programme has taken a proven technology and adapted it to deal with the challenges faced in an extreme environment due to the scarcity of materials and the geographic isolation of the community. An innovative approach to affordability has been strategically designed into this project. GERES has introduced the veranda into the market based on the need identified for such solutions in the community.

An innovative subsidy model has been used that keeps the verandas affordable without distorting the local market. The amount of the subsidy is calculated based on the average price of materials in the local bazaar and the expected time for construction. When a product is first introduced to an area a ‘high subsidy’ (approximately 12% of the total material and labour cost) is provided to the craftsmen. This ‘high subsidy’ remains for six weeks before moving to a ‘low subsidy’ (approximately 6% of the total material and labour cost). This low subsidy lasts for three months, or until the end of the project depending on the uptake in the different districts. The high subsidy coincides with a spring or winter promotional campaign which includes a series of awareness sessions and promotional events in communities to accelerate the acceptance of the technologies and increase the number of orders for the craftsmen.

A staggered subsidy campaign, with high subsidies available over two promotional periods (spring and winter) means that GERES contributes between 6% and 12% of the overall costs. This strategy allows for easier entry into the marketplace for craftsmen constructing these technologies and the staggered delivery is designed to eventually eliminate the subsidy to support the continuity and financial sustainability of the project. The subsidy is given to the craftsmen directly as they are the target beneficiaries of the project. It is then their responsibility to pass on the cost savings to the families.

The delivery is described as staggered as when the technologies are introduced into the community, the high subsidy leads to increased affordability and supports dissemination. As the subsidy decreases from high to low it is anticipated that a) the craftsmen will have gained more business and marketing skills (provided by GERES) and b) the technologies will be well known within the target area (meaning they will help to market themselves). This strategy eventually balances out to a point where once the subsidy ceases, the craftsmen have the start-up skills necessary to be sustainable, supporting themselves financially.

The programme has adapted its model as it has been implemented. The Passiv Solar Verandas developed in earlier GERES projects and at the initial phases of this project used imported Russian timber as the primary construction material. Given the lack of available local materials this timber was accepted locally and had improved durability and longevity over local materials. Since then however, the GERES team has developed variations of the timber veranda by using cheaper, locally available steel. While construction techniques differ slightly overall, these new techniques are more affordable for the most vulnerable households.

What is the environmental impact?

The veranda reduces the energy burden on the environment by significantly reducing the amount of bushes and wood that households collect to meet their daily heating needs. The Passiv Solar Verandas are primarily made up of the frame and polythene cover. The frame is made from either imported Russian timber, local timber, steel profile or steel pipes (based on the availability of material and financial constraints of the household). The local timber has the lowest embodied energy of these materials, however its poor quality and low density also make it the least sustainable in the long-term. Material selection in this region is based on availability and sustainable material selection for this project is an ongoing challenge in the Central Highlands area.

The verandas increase the household temperature by +10 to 15°C and reduce the amount of natural resources used as heating fuel in the household by between 5 and 30% per year. In the Central Highlands these fuels comprise primarily of dung, bushes and locally grown timber. The Passiv Solar Verandas, in combination with the other energy saving solutions disseminated by craftsmen as part of the programme, contribute to the overall awareness in the region of natural resource management, environmental stewardship and sustainable environmental best practices in general. For example, specific objectives have been outlined for the remainder of this project to train households on the reuse of plastic materials (at the end of each winter) and to create collection points for recycling.

Is it financially sustainable?

The programme has been developed so that once the funding comes to an end and the project is completed, the verandas will already be integrated into the marketplace and the trained craftsmen will have the capacity to further develop their enterprises without the ongoing support of GERES. The extensive replication of Passiv Solar Verandas in the project area indicates already that these technologies are being accepted into the local marketplace and are providing sources of income for craftsmen outside of the GERES project.

The current funding is guaranteed until the end of the project in late 2017. GERES is currently negotiating funding for a second phase of the project across different districts in the target provinces. While this funding is not guaranteed, it will not change the overall impact and ongoing sustainability of the current project. The project is specifically designed to ensure the trained craftsmen have a longer term source of income and will provide ongoing cost savings for the households involved. The business and marketing aspects of the project have focussed on the linkages between craftsmen and local material providers to ensure the current value-chain remains intact on completion of the project. While this project does not directly reduce the cost of building houses, the cost benefits achieved through fuel reduction does mean that household running costs are reduced.

What is the social impact?

The Passiv Solar Verandas project helps to facilitate greater cooperation and cohesion by working closely with communities and through awareness-raising activities. GERES ensures acceptance from communities by engaging community leaders in the decision making around the choice of craftsmen and the selection of verandas and other energy saving solutions.

Passiv Solar Verandas reduce social inequalities by allowing reductions in fuel consumption (giving financial savings), and increasing internal temperatures and improving living conditions in winter. In addition, the provision of an additional warm space in winter where people can undertake daily chores, such as washing dishes, looking after children and receiving guests has benefits for the whole household, particularly women, who are traditionally responsible for overseeing these activities.

The Passiv Solar Verandas project allows individual craftsmen to take a more active role in society by providing services that benefit their community. The marketing training provided allows them to reach out and generate business which increases the productivity of their enterprises. Craftsmen engaged in the Passiv Solar Verandas are trained on technical and business/marketing skills increasing their construction skills and also creating additional income opportunities for their enterprises. Given the harsh winter conditions in the Central Highlands region of Afghanistan the simple fact that the Passiv Solar Verandas increase the inside living temperature by about 10°C means the quality of life and overall health of the community is improved.

Barriers

The success of the Passiv Solar Verandas within the community is evident by the organic spread of this technology that is occurring within the community. While this is a positive development and shows the acceptance of the concept by the community, the overall quality has not been to the standard prescribed by GERES; thus not delivering the same benefits.

Quality standards are being developed with local actors and UN-Habitat to create a minimum standards framework and ensure the safety of any Passiv Solar Verandas developed through this route.

Lessons Learned

The primary lesson learned by GERES in the Central Highlands is that of accessibility and availability of materials. The region is difficult to access and many of the communities live in remote, hard to reach areas. This presents challenges for the project team and the craftsmen seeking to disseminate the Passiv Solar Verandas in these areas. These geographic challenges also correlate to the availability of materials at an affordable price. GERES has worked hard to develop variations of the original Passiv Solar Verandas design to allow for easier access to more appropriate and affordable materials.

Evaluation

Three main areas of indicators are used to evaluate the overall success of the project:

The diversification of energy-saving solutions are evaluated using a number of data sets including structural tests, load bearing (with wind and snow), plastic weathering comparisons based on price of material and these are validated in the Research and Development work.
The strength of the value chain is demonstrated by the number of craftsmen trained/training sessions delivered, marketing material distributed and perceived demand from the community for the energy saving solutions. These indicators allow the programme to assess the different stages of the value chain.
The overall impact of the project is evaluated using data regarding the dissemination of energy saving solutions, the reach of promotional campaigns and the overall mapping of the dissemination area.

Internal monitoring and evaluation activities track and analyse the implementation of the project on an ongoing basis in line with the overall objectives. External consultants have also been commission to undertake a mid-term and final review of the project activities. The overall conclusions presented as part of the mid-term review suggested that the fact that the spread of the verandas was happening organically and being led by the community themselves, without GERES’ involvement, was a testament to the appropriateness and effectiveness of the project activities.

Recognition

This submission is the first application from GERES for an award for this work. However, it is worth noting that two other solar passive technology projects by GERES in Ladakh, India have received some recognition: an Ashden in 2009 (passive solar greenhouses) and as a World Habitat Award finalist in 2011 (passive solar houses).

Transfer

GERES regularly publishes its work and attends related conferences at an international level. In Afghanistan, publications and studies are distributed via the Afghanistan Centre at Kabul University in the Dari language, so are accessible to a wider public. Professional, public, donor agency and academics regularly visit the project sites and there are regular field visits by representatives of provincial and national government.

The original veranda was developed in Kabul as well as being piloted in other districts. It has since then been transferred by GERES with the current project to the rural Central Highlands of Afghanistan. Provided there is a market and an identified need within the community there is little reason why the current Passiv Solar Verandas technologies could not be transferred and replicated elsewhere. The veranda technology could be transferable to other locations that face similar heating issues during the winter if the design is adapted to the resources available within those areas. In addition, the market-based approach could be transferred to any location. Similarly, the approach with which GERES researches, develops, pilots and validates the Passiv Solar Verandas technology could be transferred to other similar energy saving solutions and sustainable housing and construction initiatives.

GERES is interested in scaling up the existing Passiv Solar Verandas project provided there is a need and interest from the target community and there is affordable and easy access to the required materials. Future projects (currently under development) seek to build on the current successes of this market based approach to energy efficiency and cover additional districts in the provinces where they are currently working. A forthcoming project in Kabul uses a similar methodology in combination with a micro-finance element to further the potential reach of Passiv Solar Verandas in the capital of Afghanistan.

The current Passiv Solar Verandas design is an evolution of previous Passiv Solar Housing initiatives that have been implemented across part of central and Southern Asia including the dissemination of over 3,000 Passiv Solar Verandas constructed by 74 craftsmen in Kabul between 2009 and 2012. The current Verandas project has built on these successes and evolved the material and construction techniques through its Research and Development process to make the Passiv Solar Verandas more accessible and affordable for the target community.

Locally – through the consortium work, the partners integrate GERES technologies into their programmes.

Nationally – In Afghanistan, the Ministry of Public Health legislated for the inclusion of the GERES’ energy-efficiency standards into the construction of all public buildings.

Authors:

World Habitat

Comprehensive Community Development for Poverty Alleviation

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Comprehensive Community Development for Poverty Alleviation

Policies and regulations Planning

Urban Design Urban fabrics Inclusion Equity

Promotion and production Self-promotion Transformation and adaptation

Main objectives of the project

Date

2015:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Thimphu
Country/Region: Bhutan

Description

This project focused on the Olep ethnic group who live on the western fringes of an important national park in the west central part of Bhutan. Originally a nomadic hunter gatherer community, the Olep were encouraged by the government to settle in Rukha in the early 1970s, so that they could benefit from the development initiatives that were taking place in the country. With no experience of settled living and their earlier means of living off the forest no longer available, the community fell into extreme poverty. This project, run by the Tarayana Foundation, has developed skills and encouraged a self-help ethos that has successfully helped the community recover and prosper. Originally focusing on the village of Rukha, the project has spread to 150 other villages across Bhutan.

Project Description

Aims and Objectives

The project’s main aim was to empower the local community so that they could help themselves out of poverty. This was achieved through the key objectives:

Awareness creation of the roles, rights and responsibilities of the community members towards a future they wanted.
Education of the children as well as non-formal adult literacy programmes for the adults.
Capacity development.
Document the language and traditional folklore.
Promote local stewardship of their immediate environment.

Tarayana Foundation is a non-profit organisation working to enhance the lives of vulnerable individuals in rural and remote communities in Bhutan. It was founded in 2003 by Her Majesty the Queen Mother Ashi Dorji Wangmo Wangchuck (who remains Chair and President of the organisation). Although independent, Tarayana works with the Bhutanese government and the local communities to help achieve its objectives of improving rural prosperity.

Tarayana focuses on extremely remote areas that would otherwise be considered too difficult and isolated to work in. The Foundation worked around logistical and practical issues of reaching and serving these far-flung places. By doing this, they recognised small, marginalised communities as important groups to support in accessing opportunities and maintaining their unique culture. This is important as remote ethnic minorities often risk isolation and/or see young people leaving for more vibrant places.

Context

Rukha is a small, remote village of 18 households (147 people). The people are from the Olep ethnic minority. The Oleps settled in Rukha in the early 1970s as part of a government programme to settle nomadic communities so that they could benefit from the planned development that was being introduced. The government gave the community three acres of farm land in addition to half an acre for house construction and kitchen gardens.

Families settled on the land in temporary, makeshift small houses made from bamboo with bamboo leaf mat roofs. The original expectation was that these houses would be replaced with more permanent housing. However, the community had little experience of settled living and lacked the skills to improve their houses. As a result, not only was the housing not replaced, it was not well maintained and fell into disrepair. The community’s background also meant that they lacked the experience and skills to sustain arable farming. Over several years, the farm remained partly cultivated with more fallow fields that fell out of agricultural use. The nearest school was many hours walk away and few children were educated.

After the initial three years of support from the Ministry of Agriculture, where terraces were made and basic farming skills taught, they were on their own. With the failure of reliable irrigation, the crops failed, and the lack of awareness regarding seed selection and storage, the villagers slowly fell into extreme poverty. At the time of a visit from Her Majesty in 2001, the living conditions had deteriorated significantly and there was evidence of poor health and malnourishment.

Key Features

The project’s philosophy was to encourage the community to lead their own development. Tarayana’s role was to facilitate community involvement and engage key actors in helping the community to prosperity. Tarayana’s Field Officers worked and lived in Rukha with the community. This helped them understand the Olep lifestyle and concerns and build a relationship of trust.

The project used the Rural Participatory Appraisal Approach to engage the whole community in project planning as it did not require participants to be literate. Through this, the community formed a committee which drew up the project objectives and strategies. Housing improvement was given the first priority, concluding that better shelter was an essential basic need and the first step to feeling secure and confident. Other priorities included revitalising farming and starting up traditional handicraft businesses as a source of cash income.

Three sub committees were set up to oversee the three priority areas:

Housebuilding and renovation: The committee mobilised the relevant community members in receiving skills training such as carpentry, masonry, rammed earth and laying stone walls. The training and site supervision was provided by a master builder brought in from a nearby village. Additional labour was provided by trainees from the Construction Training Centre. Over a two year period, all of the bamboo houses in the village were replaced by two-story timber and mud houses built in the local traditional style. Tarayana provided materials (corrugated roofing sheets, timber, nails, etc.) The whole community took part in the construction. They drew lots to decide a fair construction schedule.
Revitalisation of traditional handicrafts: The committee oversaw training in traditional handicraft skills which included making cane and bamboo products and also many items made of maize cob sheaths.
Environmentally friendly farming: A committee was formed by women from each family to ensure that vibrant kitchen gardens were maintained by each household. Additional committee members were recruited to provide specialist skills and knowledge as required from time to time. These included a Field Officer and a specialist from the Department of Agriculture who supported them and provided training on environmentally friendly farming techniques that were sustainable.

In addition to the three sub committees, the project also included:

Support for education, sanitation and health: A primary school was built in the nearby village of Migtana, which serves as the central location for three other villages. Tarayana covered daily meals for the 60 students enrolled there. A community learning centre was set up by the government to initiate Non Formal Education for adults, and the Foundation provided basic stationeries, learning aids and facilitated other sessions for the children. English classes were provided for young people. Awareness raising activities also took place around:

Health, nutrition and sanitation.
Local environmental and natural resources management (water management, improved soil productivity, etc.).
The value of education.
Gender issues.

Access to credit: Community members wanted to access micro-credit to start up small enterprises. They took up Tarayana‘s micro credit programme to access 100.000 BTN (US$1,500) to purchase a power tiller. This served as the main transport service in the absence of any vehicle after the farm road was build.

Irrigation: Installing appropriate water pipes for agricultural irrigation and solving the previously inadequate water distribution. This piped water was also used for aquaculture.

Fishery: Smoked fish called Nga Dosem is a delicacy of the Oleps. Fish production started locally with the introduction of fingerlings from the Government fishery programme and it became a good source of cash income.

Solar electrification: Three local women installed solar home lighting systems for all 18 houses, the community shed and the learning centre. They were trained at the Barefoot College, Tilonia, Rajasthan in India, an institution that teaches community members to become ‘barefoot solar engineers’. A Rural Electronic Workshop was also set up in the village for repairs and maintenance of solar panels and the home lighting system.

What impact has it had?

Within two years, 15 houses were completed in Rukha; 33 men and 24 women were trained in carpentry and masonry skills. Tarayana facilitated the construction of 860 other houses as part of the housing improvement programme based on the Rukha model, in many remote rural villages.
The availability and variety of food increased and improved farming techniques led to surplus production that was sold in the market. With the increase in cash income, they could buy other necessary goods and services. The population saw an improvement in their access to health and education, along with increased employment opportunities through agriculture, handicrafts and selling smoked fish. A few of them also took up house construction work in other remote villages as carpenters and masons. The activities carried out to improve life in the village led to people working together that built social cohesion in the community.

How is it funded?

The United Nations Volunteers/United Nations Development Programme (UNV/UNDP) provided US$50,000 to start the project in 2006 for the duration of two years. The community contributed labour and land, while Tarayana contributed project facilitation, management staff and administration support.

In 2007, the Global Environmental Facility’s Small Grants Programme (GEF-SGP) Support funded the ‘Alternative Livelihood Options for the Indigenous Community of Rukha’ programme with US$31,845. This programme complemented the ongoing work in Rukha. Tarayana applied on behalf of the community and the funds were transferred to the community’s bank account. Tarayana helped use the fund according to the plan developed with the Oleps.

Why is it innovative?

Tarayana’s role as a grassroots facilitator in bringing together stakeholders to achieve a common goal and the focus on remote ethnic minorities are significant achievements within the Bhutanese context.
This project demonstrated the need to dissolve the sectoral silos in addressing the multi-dimensional nature of rural poverty.
It demonstrated that involving grassroots in project design, management and implementation improved the relevance of the interventions with better sequencing of activities.
Tarayana Foundation was able to bridge the gap between larger national initiatives and local realities.
The wide-ranging and people-centred nature of the project aims to address any issue within the community, instead of imposing an existing agenda that might not fit local needs.
Working together towards a common goal empowered the community to collaborate in solving housing and other collective issues.

What is the environmental impact?

The raw materials used in the construction of these houses were chosen based on what was already locally available. This reduced the need to import. For example, rammed earth was used in Rukha where mud was abundant. In the eastern part of Bhutan, the communities used stone as the main building material and bamboo in place of timber, as these were easily found in the area.
The GEF-SGP supported project helped introduce environmentally friendly technologies like improved fuel efficient cook stoves to locally designed solar dryers, locally designed basic improved hygienic facility for smoking fish with the help of the Livestock Extension Officer and solar home lighting systems to reduce the consumption of kerosene and resinous wood for lighting.
Tarayana facilitated the community to control land degradation, re-instated the irrigation system and trained the community in managing water and land effectively.
Local environmental and natural resources management was encouraged through the training of all households.
Natural and eco-friendly farming techniques including composting, mulching, crop rotation, companion planting etc. improved soil productivity. Open pollinated local seeds were used, seed selection, storage and exchanges between different villages was encouraged.
The use of relevant hand tools and implements were promoted.

Is it financially sustainable?

The Rukha project is financially sustainable as the community now has the skills to earn cash income. Their confidence has been built; all their children are able to access free education provided by the Government.
They are able to look after and build their own homes and have also understood the concept that together they can reach greater achievements.
The community has understood that they are primarily responsible for their own well-being and that much good can be done by working together. This in itself is a big step towards sustainability. They no longer wait for support from the outside and have the confidence to tackle one common issue after using local solutions.
Residents from Rukha are now working as master carpenters in other districts and villages (some hired by Tarayana). Master carpenters are paid well and are in high demand.
The community makes bamboo products on order and is conversant in the processes of pricing and marketing their products after the initial years of hand-holding done by the Tarayana Rural Crafts.
Increased agricultural yields have resulted in the Oleps eating better while selling the surplus for cash.

What is the social impact?

Community cohesion: The project brought together the whole community to achieve a common goal, despite differences in ages and gender.
Capacity-building: Training in financial literacy resulting in increased savings, artisan crafts, entrepreneurship, book-keeping, house building skills, carpentry, hygienic preparation of smoked fish, agriculture, etc. has increased the overall knowledge and capacity of Rukha. In addition, three women were trained as barefoot solar engineers at the Barefoot College in Rajasthan for six months and are members of the Barefoot Solar Engineers Association of Bhutan.
Learning opportunities: The community learning centre and the improved access to school means more education opportunities for both children and adults. And thanks to the solar panels, children have light and more time to do their homework.
Nutrition and health: The consumption of a more varied diet has helped improve the family’s nutritional intake. The community also learned how to make nutritious meals using different vegetables. Initiatives around health and hygiene, water and sanitation, HIV/Aids and other health issues, along with the importance of education and gender equality have helped raise awareness around these important issues. Traditional firewood stoves for cooking emitted a lot of smoke, often causing respiratory problems. These stoves were replaced with the fuel-efficient smokeless stoves.
Decreased inequality: Gender equality improved as women were empowered through training and economic opportunities, along with better access to information and knowledge. The elders and many men of the village admired the fact that women gained new skills. They were particularly impressed that it was the women who provided solar power to the village.

Tarayana was able to demonstrate that with opportunity and coordinated facilitation, all community or section of society could become empowered and capacitated to drive their collective developmental agenda.

From a poor and impoverished, highly indebted and food insecure community a decade ago, the Oleps of Rukha are enjoying a better quality of life. They are also better able to articulate their aspirations to their elected leaders. The community also built a common temple in their village of their own accord, mobilising support from others for the statues and altar, but putting in their collective labour to bring the temple to fruition.

While there is still much to be done, they are on a sustainable development trajectory that can only bring them more collective prosperity and well-being.

Barriers

Geographical isolation and the rugged mountainous terrain remain one of the greatest difficulties in serving these remote communities.
This in turn makes the cost of service delivery very expensive particularly the cost of transportation of both good and services.
Having lived in isolation for so many decades, the Oleps were hesitant to express their needs and desires. Tarayana had to work hard to gain their trust. Living and working with the Oleps, the Field Officer became a familiar figure in the community.
Community mobilisation is challenging, as every small community has their own dynamics. The project focused on dialogue and patience to understand local traditions. This helped overcome some of the barriers that were linked to cultural misunderstandings or a fear of change.
Funds for housing are difficult to obtain although having a decent roof over one’s head is one of the basic needs in addressing poverty particularly in rural communities. We have seen the importance of having a home, around which all else like civic awareness, access to education, health and hygiene, food and nutrition security, water and sanitation, better farming and green technologies, can be anchored.

Lessons Learned

Building up local skills is at the heart of development. In fact, the community can solve many issues when they can get support to develop the skills they need.
Proper consultation is key to the success of the project. Taking time to understand the needs of the population and assessing their capacity to carry on activities is crucial.
When the organisation’s staff live and work with the community, this provides a clearer understanding of local issues and helps build strong links with the community.
It is important to research and understand the funding opportunities at hand. Each donor has to be approached differently and it is essential to make the most of what they could offer.
We have learnt to understand the increased administrative burden with each small project implemented hence moving more towards programmes approach while working for budgetary support.
Small communities can handle big programmes if they are given the opportunity.

Evaluation

The Project Manager carried out monthly visits to the Rukha, involving four hours of drive followed by eight hours on foot, each way. The mid-term monitoring and evaluation visit was jointly carried out by representatives of the donor, member of the Tarayana Executive Committee and the project management. The project end evaluation was carried out by an independent consultant hired by the Poverty Unit, UNDP. The project was viewed as very positive in addressing multi-dimensional poverty as seen in remote, rural corners of the country.

Transfer

This model is currently being replicated in 150 villages across Bhutan in 15 of the total 20 districts. Additionally, Tarayana has signed an MOU with the Royal Government’s Gross National Happiness Commission (Planning Commission) in January 2015, as a partner in implementing the ‘Rural Economy Advancement Programme’ Phase 2 (REAP-2). Tarayana had very successfully piloted in three remote villages during the first phase of REAP.

Authors:

World Habitat

Nochlezhka

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Nochlezhka

Mismatches Services Vulnerable groups

Financing Sustainable development financing

Promotion and production Site&services

Main objectives of the project

Date

2014:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
City: Saint Petersburg
Country/Region: Russia, Saint Petersburg

Description

Nochlezhka is an independent charity that provides a wide range of services to, and advocates on behalf of, homeless people in Saint Petersburg. The city has a huge and growing homelessness problem, and, Nochlezhka apart, there are few services available to help. Nochlezhka operates in a harsh environment in which state help for homeless people is poor and there is little public sympathy for the issue. Winter temperatures are extremely cold and living on the street is perilous. Nochlezhka operates on a tiny budget and most of its services are provided to help homeless people but it is not able to make an impact in tackling the causes of homelessness itself. Nevertheless Nochlezhka is a lifeline to many people and is almost certainly responsible for saving hundreds of lives every year.

Project Description

What are its aims and objectives?

The organisation provides a large range of services to help and support the large population of homeless people who live in Saint Petersburg. It provides temporary accommodation to homeless people, as well as providing social, legal and psychological counselling for homeless people. The organisation also advocates improved systems of rehabilitation to the government and raises public awareness about the challenges faced by homeless people.
The organisation’s aims are:

To ensure homeless people are not deprived of their human rights.
To help homeless people off the street and return to an independent life.
To challenge the generally negative publicly held myths and stereotypes about homelessness.

What context does it operate in?

Nochlezhka works in a highly challenging environment. The Russian public is generally ignorant about homelessness. There is widespread public intolerance and numerous myths about the causes and consequences of being homeless. Compared to most governments in Western Europe the state government does little to dispel the public perception and arguably exacerbates the situation with poor service provision for homeless people and significant underreporting of the scale of the problem.

The state requires people to complete a registration process and have a permanent address in order to access support from the government. This is a lengthy procedure.

The majority of homeless people have not completed and are unable to complete the registration process alone and therefore without help they do not qualify for state support.

A large number of people in Russia face homelessness due to difficult social and economic conditions. The Russian state does not recognise this fully and official statistics are believed to be unreliable. There is, however, little doubt that the scale of the problem is enormous. Some studies suggest that there are 4.5 million homeless people in Russia and the number is growing rapidly. The small number of services which are available are unable to deal with the demand. It is estimated that the average homeless person lives on the street for seven years.

Saint Petersburg is the second largest city in Russia with a population of just under five million people. Official statistics state that in 2002 there were 28,000 homeless people in the city. Nochlezhka estimates that the true figure is at least 60,000 in 2014. At the turn of the century the majority (more than 90 per cent) of homeless people were older men but this is changing and there is an increasing number of homeless women (20 per cent of homeless people in the city are women).

There is also a trend of children and younger people becoming homeless. Nochlezhka believes that there is now a substantial population of people who have lived their whole lives on the street.

Saint Petersburg experiences very cold winters during which many homeless people die. Temperatures of -20ºC are not uncommon. In the winter of 2012/13, 1,042 homeless people died of cold weather related conditions between November and March.

What are its key features?

Nochlezhka is one of very few organisations in Russia working on the issue of homelessness. It provides a range of services which provide basic support for homeless people in the city including shelters and hot meals. It also helps homeless people access state services and provides advocacy, public information and campaigning to challenge discrimination of homeless people.

Nochlezhka is the Russian word for Night Shelter and indeed the organisation started in 1990 with a single shelter. Nochlezhka still operates this 52 bed unit, which is the largest in the city. In addition, they operate heated tents during the winter months with a capacity of 50-60 people. Here homeless people can get shelter, hot food and help from medical and social workers. They also operate a “half way house” for recovering alcoholics and a night bus, which distributes hot meals.

A large part of Nochlezhka’s work is helping homeless people access state help. This involves helping people obtain registration and passports and helping them access government backed health insurance policies.

They publish a handbook annually to help inform homeless people about how to access state help and benefits. A ‘social contract’ is prepared to help people to become independent and goals are set to include assistance with employment, finding relatives and arranging documents.

The organisation has an increasing advocacy role. Its lawyers frequently take legal cases to the prosecutor’s office challenging unfair discrimination of homeless people. Its work also involves working with local government to influence local polices so that they do not discriminate and are better aligned to help homeless people. Nochlezhka also runs public awareness campaigns and writes media articles to challenge public attitudes to homelessness. It has achieved a high media profile and has received significant coverage on TV and in newspapers.

How is it funded?

Nochlezhka is a charity that operates on a very small budget. Its turnover is an estimated £250,000 a year. The vast majority of its income is from a wide range of private and corporate donations. It also runs music festivals and other fundraising events. Approximately 20 per cent of its funds come from the city government. The charity returns an equivalent amount in rents and in taxes to the city government.

What impact has it had?

In 2013, Nochlezhka helped 8,083 people. Some of them received food, others used the night shelter or the services provided on the charity’s night bus. On average 1,000 homeless people request aid in terms of free meals, clothing, shelter and legal consultation every week. The charity has a growing impact on enabling people to return to independent life. In 2013, 320 people were successfully helped in this way. The charity helped 29 people get jobs, 44 moved to another city to get employment, 19 received their passport, 14 received legal support in court and 15 received temporary registration. Twenty-four people received support to overcome alcohol dependency, out of which 18 overcame the dependency.

Why is it innovative?

Nochlezhka states it is the only organisation in Russia working on the issues of homelessness. It has demonstrated a model in which people could apply for support, which includes shelter, legal advice, medical aid and protection from the cold. The NGO develops plans to move people out of homelessness. The NGO initiated an approach with a major focus on rehabilitation and a minor focus on physical shelter. They have introduced a method called, ‘case management’, which looks at the needs, situation and past history of each person requiring support. Followed by this, a comprehensive action plan is prepared which includes social workers, psychologists and others. Based on the nature of support, volunteers also used to provide the support.

What is the environmental impact?

The organisation does not construct new buildings and makes use of existing buildings. It intends to construct an eco-friendly building and promotes the reuse of goods and materials in their centre.

Is it financially sustainable?

Nochlezhka appears to have a highly effective fundraising capacity. It raises funds through a combination of foreign donors and local events including TV campaigns and music festivals. It also relies on volunteers, who are all local. The charity has a large and diverse range of donors. 40 per cent of donations are from foreign donors. Political tension between Russia and the west has led to many foreign donors suspending their donations during 2012 and 2013 but this has been more than offset by an increase in private donations from within Russia. This in itself is a significant achievement given the public’s generally negative view of homelessness.

What is the social impact?

The social impact of the organisation is significant. Not only does the charity succeed in keeping thousands of homeless people alive, it is increasingly effective in enabling them to overcome medical and bureaucratic barriers to become independent.

Significantly the charity confronts public attitudes and challenges discrimination to homelessness people in society.

Barriers

The state owned shelter centres are in poor condition and a continuous investment is needed to bring them to a minimum standard and to support ongoing maintenance. With an increasing number of homeless people, this is a major task for the project. The other barrier is about the negative public attitude towards homeless people. Nochlezhka works on these issues by raising public awareness and maintaining the centres.

Lessons Learned

The most important lesson learned is to understand that shelter is not only a temporary need and it includes all aspects of social rehabilitation. Most of the official programmes in Russia are designed to provide shelter for a certain duration, with very little support for reintegration. This means that people are rehabilitated for a short period and end up on the streets again.

Evaluation

Nochlezhka keeps a good record of the services provided and the people receiving those services. They also collect beneficiaries’ stories. However, the foundation has not provided any evidence of its long term impact.

Transfer

The scaling up of the project is limited and so far only state employees have taken up the approaches they have learned from the NGO. Nochlezhka hopes that the government will take the approach forward but this has not been done due to the challenging social and economic context.

The programme has not been transferred although Nochlezhka actively shares its experiences.

NGOs from other parts of Russia send questions to Nochlezhka on issues concerning homelessness.

The organisation has prepared a manual and videos about its work and shared internationally.

Authors:

World Habitat

Build Back Safer with Traditional Construction Methods

0

Login necesario

Username

Password

Remember Me Lost your password? Register

Forgotten Password

Enter username or email

Cancel

Register For This Site

A password will be e-mailed to you.

Username

E-mail

Cancel

Build Back Safer with Traditional Construction Methods

Mismatches Vulnerable groups Climate change

Urban Design Quality Inclusion Equity

Main objectives of the project

Date

2014:

Stakeholders

Promotor: World Habitat

Location

Continent: Asia
Country/Region: Karachi, Pakistan

Description

848,000 houses were destroyed and 9.7 million people affected by severe floods in western Pakistan in 2011. This project developed and provided support to build over 20,000 flood resistant houses by the most vulnerable families based on local and traditional building designs. The houses were built using local labour and construction skills. Water resistant and lighter weight materials, such as lime and bamboo were introduced, creating huge savings in cost and embodied carbon over standard reconstruction approaches.

Project Description

What are its aims and objectives?

The aim of the project was to quickly provide low-cost safe housing to some of the most vulnerable families affected by the floods. The project did not take the approach of direct post disaster reconstruction; instead it facilitated a mass community self-build programme. Most of the communities affected were remote, had few resources and families frequently had a poor understanding of the structural vulnerabilities of buildings.

The project achieved its aims by supplying disaster-resistant materials and facilitating wide-scale training of communities to rebuild buildings themselves using these materials.Within each district, local project partners worked in collaboration with government authorities to identify the most affected villages. Committees of local people who knew the families were formed. These committees selected the neediest families, using previously established criteria. Priority was given to families whose homes had been completely destroyed. The highest priority was given to those families who also had disabled or elderly family members, had particularly low incomes or where the family size was large. The project worked with the communities to provide training on effective building techniques. This approach helped people to build 23,387 houses at an average cost of US $300 per house.

What context does it operate in?

Floods affect large parts of Pakistan. The 2011 flood was particularly severe and 848,000 houses were destroyed or damaged and 9.7 million people were affected by severe flooding in Southern Sindh and Eastern Balochistan. These regions are amongst the poorest in Pakistan and many residents were very vulnerable, even before the disaster. Houses collapsed under the weight of waterlogged roofs and foundations were compromised by the flood waters. Many of the affected areas had also been hit by floods in 2010 and families reconstructing homes after those floods lost everything twice. This project has focused on helping rural communities which have suffered disproportionally from the extensive flooding.

The Heritage Foundation has been involved in post-disaster reconstruction since the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, where the organisation recycled materials such as stone, mud and wood from collapsed houses, adding lime and traditional cross-bracing (dhajji) to create stronger buildings. Another local material, bamboo, was subsequently tested and proven in housing displaced populations in the Mardan region. The use of these materials was then further developed during post-flood reconstruction in the Swat region in 2010, using multiple bamboo joists and cross-bracing to carry heavy roofs, withstanding subsequent flooding and several feet of snow.

This experience was then taken further in early 2011, after the 2010 floods in Upper Sindh, creating bamboo buildings on stilts, thus proving the feasibility of building two-storey structures of bamboo that have withstood several floods since; this included housing over 400 households. All this experience fed into the current project, implemented after the 2011 floods in Lower Sindh.

What are its key features?

Various aspects make this project unique. Most important is the experience gained by all the project partners including the UK Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) and International Organisation for Migration (IOM) in previous disasters and shared in this project. This experience, in terms of suitable building materials and building techniques, was then further piloted, tested and proven in the programme area, before being scaled up into this project. The project adopted materials that had proved to be durable and flood resistant in post disaster reconstruction in other parts of the world. This included bamboo, which was used in place of timber and steel. Bamboo was cheap, flexible and strong and experience had shown it to be more resilient than timber and steel to floods. Hydraulic lime is a form of mortar that is much more water resistant than other forms of mortar. It had not previously been commonly used in Pakistan but can be made easily from locally available materials. It was used instead of fired bricks and cement.

These materials were then adapted into traditional building designs and techniques used in the areas affected. A significant advantage of the use of these materials were the carbon savings. By avoiding cement and fired bricks wherever possible, the wider project has saved approximately 365,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide. Implementation was then supported by large-scale training of the communities, raising awareness around disaster risks and the vulnerabilities of their traditional ways of building. It then provided knowledge and training in using bamboo and lime materials to create safer buildings.

How is it funded?

Overall funding of £30m over three years has been provided by DFID based on detailed proposals submitted by the implementing partners, including International Organisation for Migration (IOM), which then worked with the national organisations, such as Heritage Foundation. The costs of technical consultants, training and community level training and support are included in the overall budget. The capital costs were US$300 per One Room Shelter (ORS) plus an estimated US$214 per house as the cost of overheads, transport, advisors, equipment, consultants and researchers. DFID has played a key role in the project by maintaining its funding for reconstruction after all major floods.

What impact has it had?

23,387 shelters had been completed, by Heritage Foundation by the end of the programme in 2012. The wider DFID programme, of which this was a part, implemented by various other partners, has benefitted 100,000 families in Sindh and Balochistan. The project has also enhanced the livelihoods and promoted the use of local materials. The techniques have reduced the carbon emissions and demonstrated an approach to deliver flood resistant reconstruction at an affordable price. Evaluation studies are underway to further gather the evidence of the project impact.

Why is it innovative?

Low environmental footprint due to the use of local, mainly low or zero-energy materials.
Re-introduction of lime to improve earth construction.
Improvements to vernacular construction that are innovative in each specific location.
Introduction of barefoot building entrepreneurs.
Greater involvement of women in construction, income generation and community based disaster risk management (CBDRM).

What is the environmental impact?

According to the estimates made by DFID’s advisor, by avoiding the use of cement and fired bricks this project has saved approximately 365,000 tonnes of CO2, which is equivalent to three days’ emissions from the city of London or 170,000 inter-continental return flights. The project has used local, light-weight materials. The use of bamboo instead of wood reduces the environmental impact on forests. The project does introduce improved stoves, which should be more fuel efficient.

Is it financially sustainable?

The project started by making use of the Floods Relief Fund made available by DFID. By giving beneficiaries the skills to self-build with improved vernacular technologies, no further funding is required to maintain the project, although there are still thousands of families requiring help. The decentralised procurement process also contributes to local income generation. With the help of International Labour Organisation (ILO), the Foundation has also been able to initiate a programme of village barefoot entrepreneurs, who are now marketing the project’s shelters or parts thereof, including eco-toilets, stoves and other innovations. Local tribes, known as Odhs, who are traditionally employed in construction, have also found work locally. In addition, the programme and its precursors have been piloting women-focused Community-based Disaster Risk Management Centres, which have promoted alternative income generating activities.

What is the social impact?

The project worked with the local communities and government departments.

The village committees were established to deal with the selection of beneficiaries, the management of the funding at village level and through participation in training. The project placed great emphasis on reaching all households with awareness raising regarding disaster risks and training to improve on vernacular building. As the shelters were relatively small, the project foresaw they would be extended at some stage in the future and aimed to give beneficiaries sufficient skills to do so on their own. The project has changed the role of women, enabling more women to be involved in construction and various alternative forms of income generation. Women are also now beginning to take a lead role in the Community-based Disaster Risk Management Centres.

Barriers

Though many of the improved vernacular technologies have proven their DRR in practice, funding has been lacking to actually test them structurally.
Households had to divide their time between construction and agriculture, affecting quality and donor deadlines. Quality was also affected by not all households valuing some of the support staff’s recommendations. Some further work is needed to improve the quality and reach of technical support. After reconstructed houses had proven their value during the 2012 rains, motivation to build better increased considerably.
Many households have been unable to extend their ORS due to extreme poverty and lack of access to micro-credits.
Lack of funding to support trained builders to become village entrepreneurs or provide technical support.
The programme was unable to initiate local bamboo plantations, to ensure sustainable harvesting in future.
Convincing a large number of organisations quickly of the efficacy of the project methodology was difficult, but the use of volunteers in surveys and piloting of solutions enabled the programme to rapidly provide useful information and proven options. The method was soon adopted as a key component of the “Pakistan Initial Floods Response Plan” and in grant applications to donors and thus a relatively small initiative became influential.

Lessons Learned

It is possible to improve vernacular technologies using mainly simple local means to become much more disaster-resistant, in many different locations and to transfer and adapt these experiences between locations.
It is possible to help disaster victims rebuild or retrofit damaged houses with relatively limited cash inputs, of just over US$500 per household, and, based on continued research by the Foundation, this can be further reduced.
Adequate training of each participating household is key to successful construction and its sustainability.

Evaluation

IOM monitored beneficiary selection, as explained above, as well as the proper use of cash for shelter by randomly scrutinising 5 per cent of beneficiaries. In doing so, it also ensured that monitoring would involve a visit to each village.

Transfer

Following the success of this programme in Lower Sindh, the methodology was replicated in Upper Sindh, with additions based on local technologies. Currently, 11,557 ORS are under construction there and a further 3,000 under preparation.

A survey in various programme villages revealed that community members who did not benefit from the project replicated the module with their own resources, attracted by its low cost and ease of construction, sometimes with the advice of people trained by the programme.

The Foundation has conducted training for several other agencies and communities, e.g. those affected by the Awaran earthquake of 2013 in Balochistan. And following some research, HF built several prototypes there, using earth and bamboo, with Swiss Aid. A local organisation, trained by HF will build several thousand shelters there, funded by DFID. HF is currently also being considered to provide assistance with rehousing a million people displaced from North Waziristan.

Authors:

World Habitat

0 Login necesario Username Password Remember Me Lost your password? Register Forgotten Password Enter username or email Cancel Register For This Site A password will be e-mailed to you. Username E-mail Cancel