Induced Eviction and Relocation in Inner City Areas of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

321 Pages·2017·1.65 MB·English

Land Governance in Urban Renewal-
Induced Eviction and Relocation in Inner
City Areas of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

DISSERTATION
Submitted to: School of Graduate Studies, Addis Ababa University,
College of Social Sciences and Humanities, Department of
Geography and Environmental Studies

By
Mohammed Siraje

Advisor: Prof. Tegegne Gebre-Egziabeher

June, 2016
Abstract
The thesis deals with land governance in urban renewal induced eviction and relocation (URIER) in inner city areas
of Addis Ababa. It examines the interplay of contexts, legal framework, decision making process, winners and losers
of URP, relocation options and actual practices of eviction and relocation to respect or deny the human rights of the
affected people. Political economy approach, right based model and land governance norms have been adopted to
holistically understand URIER and to look at how their interactions explain contexts, the focus of the government,
human rights and development goals. Both qualitative and quantitative data for the study were drawn from primary
sources on the basis of intensive field work at two renewal sites (Lideta and Basha Wolde II) and four relocation case
study sites. It involves interviews, case studies, FGDs and observation as the principal methods to elicit people’s
knowledge and experiences for uncovering eviction and relocation and objectives achievement. In line with this,
household survey and data from secondary sources have supplemented the analysis at all levels. The study findings
show that from the Imperial period to the present day, governments controlled the economic and political power over
land and housing allocations and decision making processes to use land in inner city areas as a tool in serving its
interests or the interests of the few. It rather did not serve as an essential asset to improve the living conditions of the
affected people and social equity. The informal tenure in Addis has been regarded as unlawful or illegal. As a means
to access land, it has been coping mechanisms to their marginalization employed by the successive Ethiopian
governments as expressions of political power relations.

The decision making processes of policies, plans and legislations also marginalized the participation of the affected
people, NGOs and other actors. The consultation meetings were marred by absence of prior and adequate
information; meaningful consultation and residents’ lack of knowledge of legislations about their rights and power to
make decisions. These facts were coupled with the provision of wrong information (absence of condos in the LDP)
and intimidating visits. The processes therefore were top-down participatory approach, emphasizing outcome over
the process. This is against politics is right conviction of political economy approach. Evictions took place without
exploring alternatives to eviction although there were viable in-situ solutions and not in truly exceptional
circumstances. URP thus relocated the original poor homeowners and all tenants, and was not mixed income
development. Added to this, monetary compensation was unfair and far below the market value, hence unable to
construct comparable houses. In most cases, affordable condos were not available, rehabilitation assistance was
ignored and effective punishment mechanisms in case of violations of the residents' rights were missing. AACA
improved the image of the city and generated large sum of money, enhancing the land lease value and housing
markets counting these government interests. Nonetheless, the living conditions of the relocated households
changed from bad to worse and their human rights were breached.

The poor, tenants relocated to kebele houses, old poor women in the waiting list and those with informal tenures
were negatively net losers of and treated unequally by URIER in accessing in-situ relocation and condo provision.
Absence of appropriate, sustainable and affordable replacement housing strategies and ineffective measures taken
by the AACA forced the poorest of the poor with little choices and opportunities to rely on informal actors and rules to
access condos. Informal exchange of condos were therefore responsive to their needs (condos) and constraints
(financial). Informal land and housing users were denied the right to compensation or replacement housing. The
study reveals that URIER was constrained by very few organizational gaps and overlap of responsibilities; and
absence of Wereda level renewal offices. Poor coordination and integration of LDBURPO with Road authority and
Housing development office as well as URP with NGOs working on urban development and parallel programs were
also evident. Some policy gaps and inconsistencies related to eviction and relocation, land use restrictions and
housing strategies that focus on image building and land value enhancement for economic growth interact in different
ways to explain the relocation of the poor, forced evictions, unequal treatment, decline in their living conditions, and
avoid mixed income societies. These are also explained by the interplay of lack of financial resources, the provision
of condo alone to restore livelihoods and we cannot satisfy all narratives.

The above findings lead to the conclusion that evictions and relocations were corresponded to the government
interests than to the genuine public interest and the wellbeing of the affected residents. URIER was not pro-poor
although the government pretended to serve the poor. URP did not balance the public and private interests, focusing
i
on economic or land market efficiency at the expense of social justice. The government thus saw eviction and
relocation of poor homeowners and tenants as the only and viable option to achieve its interests. Further, evictions
and relocations were forced or arbitrary that violated residents’ rights. The government therefore did not employ good
land governance and right based model of URIER. The final conclusion is that URP were plagued not only by gaps,
inadequacy, inconstancy and incompleteness in some of the policies, plans, regulations and strategies related to
URIER and ineffective top-down decision making process, but also by implementation and organizational constraints.

Last, but not least this research concluded that the major problem for enacting inadequate policy, disregarding the
available rules, not owning policies, carrying out forced evictions and enjoying renewal benefits inequitably was lack
of political will. This informs that maintaining the poor, preserving and strengthening mixed income societies, carrying
out legitimate eviction in the genuine public interest, reversing unequal treatment and the subsequent living
conditions improvement are possible and viable if the government displays political will. Toward this end,
mainstreaming a right-based approach, land governance norms, inner city contexts and mixed income development
would go a long way. It also requires pro-poor policies coupled with preferential treatment and affirmative action and
a comprehensive city wide and integrated URP into all aspects of eviction policy, directives and plans related to
URIER. The policy should also endorse balance and improvement principles; and acknowledge specialized livelihood
support program and benefit sharing mechanisms. Finally, the donor agencies and NGOs should find ways to jointly
involve in rights and policy advocacy, right sensitization program and community development to reverse relocation
of the poor, forced eviction, inequalities in relocation process and impoverishment.

ii
Acknowledgements

This study has benefitted from the support, insights, and continuous encouragement of many wonderful people and
organization which I wish to thank. First of all, I owe this work to my father, Siraj Mohammed, who worked hard
commuting six to ten kilometers on a daily basis in educating and offering me the necessary learning materials. It is
also to my brother Seid Siraj who encouraged me to pursue my tertiary level education. Marifa Negash, my beloved
mother, thank you for your love, encouragement and support. I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude to my beloved
sister, Rahmet Siraj. She has been very supportive, for which I am very grateful. I would be still struggling with my
work but for your unfailing assistance. I would never have come thus far without you and the rest of my loving family.

My wife, Nuria Edris, deserves my special gratitude. I was very fortunate to have her who morally and patiently
supports me in this process waiting until the mid-night. She has been very understanding, for which I am very
grateful. Her collaboration and encouragement made this process most rewarding. Our two children, Amer and
Selim, deserve very special thanks for their generous love and I appreciate their sacrifice. I love you all. Thanks a lot
for everything!

My special appreciation goes to my dissertation advisor Professor Tegegne GebreEgzabigeir who instilled
confidence in my abilities. It has been a privilege and honor to be his student. Your hours spent on reviews and
discussions and in selecting urban land issues greatly assisted me through the field research and dissertation writing.
Prof. has been more than my department dissertation advisor. Your trust in my abilities to conduct research of any
kind also makes me confident and inspired me to pursue this project. I would never have been able to carry out this
research without your friendliness insights, constructive inputs, invaluable guidance, suggestions, comments and
feedback. I am very grateful to Prof who generously assisted me with his inputs despite his busy schedules.

I am indebted to thank Mulatu GebreHiwot who encouraged me to pursue my doctorate. His steady economic, moral
and accommodation support made the timely completion of this project possible. He was extremely helpful during my
work and made this process enjoyable. I also thank Dereje Mulu who has helped me enormously in all stages of this
process when I most needed his help. I would also thank Ayele Tefera, Addise Demessie, Anbessie Ergete,
Getachew Dechassa and Ermias Yilma, Mitene, Abebaw Mekonen, Mamusha G/Hiwot, and other wonderful friends
for their cooperation and friendship. Friends, you made this journey unforgettable to me. Thank you for everything.

I also wish to extend my appreciation to all of the interviewees who expressed their opinions and views that I
considered as basis for this research. My special gratitude goes to my enumerator and field assistant Ato
Wodewosen for his tireless contribution in collecting data. I want to thank Urban Planning Institute; Compensation
and resettlement sub-process at city level and in Lideta and Arada sub-cities; and wereda officials for providing me
crucial and valuable information for this study. Finally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Wollo
University for granting me this scholarship which enabled me to be a member of PhD program in Socio-economic
Development Planning and Environment in Geography and Environmental studies in Addis Ababa University.

Dedication: To my beloved father, Siraj Mohammed, who sacrificed his life to grow me up; Seid Siraj (my brother);
and the relocated poor households with little choices from Lideta and Basha Wolde II in Addis Ababa

iii
Table of Contents Page
Declaration ...................................................................................................................................................................... i
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................................... ii-iii
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................................... iv
Contents .................................................................................................................................................................. v-vii
Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................................ viii-x
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Photos ................................................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Maps .................................................................................................................................................................. xi
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Background of the problem ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Statement of the problem .................................................................................................................................... 7
1.3. Objectives and research questions ................................................................................................................... 12
1.4. Scope and limitations of the study ..................................................................................................................... 14
1.5. Significance of the study ................................................................................................................................... 17
1.6. Organization of the study .................................................................................................................................. 18
2. Research design and methods ................................................................................................................................ 20
2.1. Knowledge claims .............................................................................................................................................. 21
2.2. Strategy of inquiry .............................................................................................................................................. 24
2.3. Selection of sub cities, study sites and households……………………………………………………………….. 27
2.3. Data collection methods ..................................................................................................................................... 31
2.3.1. Focus Group Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 31
2.3.2. Household Survey ........................................................................................................................................ 32
2.3.3. Household and Institutions Case Studies ..................................................................................................... 32
2.3.4. Semi-Structure Interview .............................................................................................................................. 35
2.3.5. Observation .................................................................................................................................................. 37
2.3.6. Secondary Information ................................................................................................................................. 38
2.4. Data analysis ..................................................................................................................................................... 40
2.5. Reliability and validity considerations ................................................................................................................. 41
3. Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................................................................ 44
3.1. Political economy of land ................................................................................................................................... 45
3.1.1. Historical and Power analysis ..................................................................................................................... 52
3.1.2. Institutional and Stakeholder analysis .......................................................................................................... 53
3.2. Land governance principles ............................................................................................................................... 57
3.3. Right based approach ........................................................................................................................................ 62
4. Review of related literature ...................................................................................................................................... 70
4.1. An overview of land governance in URIER in Ethiopia ...................................................................................... 72
4.1.1. Land governance and Urban renewal Approach .......................................................................................... 72
4.1.2. Procedural protection and social safeguards of eviction and relocation ....................................................... 78
4.2. Research gaps on land governance and URIER ............................................................................................... 80
4.2.1. General literature at national level .............................................................................................................. 81
4.2.2. Specific URIER literature in Addis Ababa .................................................................................................... 82
5. Country contexts ...................................................................................................................................................... 90
5.1. Land tenure system ............................................................................................................................................ 91
5.1.1. Imperial land tenure system .................................................................................................................... 92
iv
5.1.2. Derg land tenure system .............................................................................................................................. 96
5.1.3. The existing government land tenure system .............................................................................................. 97
5.2. Housing Policies ............................................................................................................................................... 102
5.3. The original and planned development of Addis Ababa ................................................................................... 106
5.3.1. Origin of Addis Ababa ................................................................................................................................ 106
5.3.2. Master Plans .............................................................................................................................................. 107
5.4 Urban renewal and Upgrading in Ethiopia.......................................................................................................... 112
6. The legal framework of eviction and relocation ...................................................................................................... 117
6.2. Exploring alternatives to eviction and exceptional circumstances ................................................................... 123
6.3. Prior information and meaningful Consultation ......................................................................................................... 126
6.4. Adequate compensation .................................................................................................................................. 131
6.4.1 Adequate monetary compensation ............................................................................................................ 132
6.4.2 Administrative arbitration ........................................................................................................................... 136
6.5 Eligibility to compensation, replacement housing and rehabilitation ................................................................. 137
6.6 Adequate replacement housing ........................................................................................................................ 140
6.7 Date of relocation ............................................................................................................................................. 142
6.8 Rehabilitation support ....................................................................................................................................... 142
7. Decision making process and meaningful consultation .......................................................................................... 148
7.1 The process of decision making ...................................................................................................................... 148
7.2 Prior Information and Meaningful consultation ................................................................................................. 155
7.3 Actors in the process, interests and influencing mechanisms .......................................................................... 168
8. Procedural protection of eviction and relocation .................................................................................................... 171
8.1 Adequate compensation ................................................................................................................................... 172
8.1.1 Adequacy of monetary compensation ........................................................................................................ 173
8.1.2 Replacement cost and compensation ........................................................................................................ 178
8.1.3 Administrative Arbitration ........................................................................................................................... 179
8.2 Adequate replacement housing ....................................................................................................................... 184
8.2.1 Relocation to public-low cost housing ........................................................................................................ 184
8.2.2 Relocation to public or kebele owned houses ............................................................................................ 189
8.3 Date of relocation ............................................................................................................................................. 196
8.4 Location of relocation sites .............................................................................................................................. 200
8.5 Rehabilitation assistance ................................................................................................................................. 207
9. Objectives, Losers and Winners of Urban Renewal Program ............................................................................... 211
9.1 Objectives and approaches of Urban Renewal Program ................................................................................. 211
9.1.1. Improving the living conditions of the affected people .............................................................................. 212
9.1.2. Image building .......................................................................................................................................... 215
9.1.3 Land value enhancement ........................................................................................................................... 216
9.2 Mixed use and income development............................................................................................................. 219
9.3. The Losers and winners of urban renewal program ........................................................................................ 224
10. Organizational issues and land governance principles in LDMBs ....................................................................... 240
10.1 Organizational responsibilities and coordination ............................................................................................ 240
10.1.1. Assignment of responsibilities ................................................................................................................. 242
10.1.2. Coordination and integration ................................................................................................................... 244
10.1.3 Frequent meetings and transfer of employees ......................................................................................... 249
10.1.4 Restructuring the CMO and the establishment of LDMB ......................................................................... 249
10.2 Land governance principles and LDMB ......................................................................................................... 252
10.2.1 Decentralization of urban renewal activities ....................................................................................... 252
10.2.2 Tenure security ........................................................................................................................................ 254
v
10.3. Actors in urban renewal induced eviction and relocation ............................................................................... 262
11. Summary of study findings, Conclusion and Policy implications ......................................................................... 268
11.1. Summary of study findings and conclusions ................................................................................................. 268
11.2. Policy implications ......................................................................................................................................... 286
12. Theoretical and methodological reflections ......................................................................................................... 298
12.1 Theoretical considerations .......................................................................................................................... 298
12.1.1 The issue of tenure security and the rights to compensation and replacement housing .................... 298
12.1.2 Exceptional circumstances and viability of alternatives to eviction……………………………………….300
12.1.3 Restitution principle and improvement in the living conditions of residents ……………………………..301
12.1.4 Informal actors and rules, and access to condos .................................................................................. 302
12.1.5 Rehabilitation assistance for socio-economic disruptions as a separate right ...................................... 303
12.1.6 Process and outcome ........................................................................................................................... 304
12.1.7 Economic efficiency and/or social justice to the realization of residents’ rights…………………………305
12.1.8 Unequal treatment to relocation options and the net losers………………………………………………307
12.2 Multiple theories and methods to eviction and relocation ......................................................................... 308
12.3. Further study ............................................................................................................................................. 310

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................................... i
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................................... xi
I. Survey questionnaire .............................................................................................................................................. xi

vi
Acronyms
AACA = Addis Ababa City Administration
AACG = Addis Ababa City Government
AAHDPO = Addis Ababa Housing Development Project Office
ADLI = Agricultural Development Led Industrialization
AMCHUD = African Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban Development
BWUD = Bureaus of Works and Urban Development
CBOs = Community Based Originations
CESCR = United Nations The commission for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
CMO = City Manager Office
CSA = Central Statistics Agency
DFID = Department for International Development
ENWA = Ethiopian Network of Women Association
FDRE = Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
FIDH = International Federation of Human Rights
FIG = International Federation of Surveyors
GDP = Gross Domestic Product
GHP = Grand Housing Program
GLTN = Global Land Tool Network
GSDRC = Governance and Social Development Resource Centre Framework
GTP = Growth and Transformation Plan
HDPO = Housing Development Project Office
HDA = Housing Development Authority
HIC-HLRN = Habitat International Coalition – Housing and Land Rights Network
ICES = International Conference of Ethiopian Studies
ICESCR = International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
vii
ICTDA = Information Communication and Technology Development Agency
IDS = Institute of Development Studies
IHDP = Integrated Housing Development Program
IISD = International Institute for Sustainable Development
ILISIPO = Integrated Land Information System Installation Project Coordination Office
IPRIA = Immovable Property Registration and Information Agency

IRP = Involuntary Resettlement Policy
LDA = Land Development Agency
LDBURPO = Land Development, Bank and Urban Renewal Project Office
LDM = Land Development and Management
LDMB = Land Development and Management Bureau
LDCRA = Land Development and City Renewal Agency
LDPs = Local Development Plans
LGAF = Land Governance Assessment Framework
LITC = Land Information and Technology Centre
MDGs = Millennium Development Goals
MWUD = Ministry of Works and Urban Development
MUDC = Ministry of Urban Development and Construction
MUDHCo = Ministry of Urban Development, Housing and Construction
NGOs = Non Governmental Organizations
NEWA = Network of Ethiopian Women Association
ORAAMP = Office for the Revision of the Addis Ababa Master Plan
PASDEP = Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty
RPF = Resettlement Policy Framework
SDPRP = Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program
UDCBO = Urban Development and Capacity Building Office
ULDMB = Urban Land Development and Management Bureau
viii
ULDMP = Urban Land Development and Management Policy
ULGDP = Urban Local Government Development Project
ULM = Urban Land Management
UN = United Nation
UNCHS (Habitat) = United Nations Commission for Human Settlement
UNDP = United Nations Development Program
UNECA = United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
UNESCAP = United Nations Economic and Social Council for Asia and the Pacific
UPI = Urban Planning Institute
UPII = Urban Planning and Information Institute
UPSBB = Urban Planning Sanitation and Beautification Bureau
URIER = Urban Renewal-Induced Eviction and Relocation
URP = urban renewal program
WB = World Bank
WBIRP = World Bank Involuntary resettlement Policy

ix