Development in Practice, 2015

Vol. 25, No. 4, 551–562, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2015.1026878

Community participation and inner-city slum renewal: relocated people’s

perspectives on slum clearance and resettlement in Addis Ababa
Gezahegn Abebe and Jan Hesselberg*
(Received November 4, 2013; accepted November 20, 2014)

The article explores the process of residential relocation in inner-city slum renewal in Addis
Ababa. Drawing on qualitative research methods involving interviews and focus group
discussions with members of relocated households, it examines the nature of people’s
involvement in inner-city renewal and how it affects their lives. The article argues that the
process of planning and implementation of relocation is not only top-down, but also does
not involve the perspectives, needs, and livelihood strategies of those affected. The article
concludes that the city administration needs to work closely with NGOs, the private sector,
and community-based organisations in order to meet the housing needs of relocated
households.

Cet article examine le processus de la réinstallation résidentielle dans le cadre du

réaménagement des bidonvilles urbains d’Addis Abeba. À l’aide de méthodes de recherches
qualitatives employant des entretiens et des discussions en groupe de réflexion avec les
membres des ménages réinstallés, il examine la nature de la participation des personnes au
réaménagement des quartiers défavorisés et les effets qu’il a sur leur vie. Les auteurs de cet
article soutiennent que le processus de planification et de mise en œuvre de la réinstallation
non seulement est directif, mais qu’il ne tient pas non plus compte des points de vue,
besoins et stratégies de subsistance des personnes touchées. Cet article conclut que
l’administration de la ville doit travailler en étroite collaboration avec les ONG, le secteur
privé et les organisations communautaires afin de satisfaire les besoins en logement des
ménages réinstallés.

El presente artículo examina el proceso de reubicación de viviendas llevado a cabo en Adís

Abeba en el marco de la rehabilitación de zonas urbanas marginadas. Apoyándose en
métodos de investigación cualitativos que incluyeron la realización de entrevistas y
discusiones a nivel de grupos de enfoque con integrantes de viviendas reubicadas, el
artículo analiza la naturaleza de su participación en la renovación del espacio urbano
marginal y los efectos que esta tuvo en su vida. En este sentido, sostiene que el proceso de
planeación y la implementación de la reubicación se aplicaron de manera vertical,
suprimiendo, además, las expectativas, las necesidades y las estrategias de subsistencia de
las personas afectadas. El artículo concluye que, para satisfacer las necesidades de vivienda
de las familias reubicadas, la administración de la ciudad debe trabajar en estrecho contacto
con las ONG , con el sector privado y con las organizaciones comunitarias.
Keywords: Aid – Development policies; Civil society – Participation; Conflict and
reconstruction – Forced displacement

*Corresponding author. Email: jan.hesselberg@sgeo.uio.no

© 2015 Taylor & Francis

552 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

Introduction
Many governments in the developing world, including Ethiopia, are presently responding to the
growth of slum settlements by bulldozing and relocating the inhabitants to low-cost housing units
situated in the urban periphery (Burgess 1992; Jha et al. 2005; Yitbarek 2008). Although this
response has been widely criticised, it is not only common but also a legacy of an urban devel-
opment strategy underpinned by the modernisation paradigm. It is argued that the lack of
modernisation during the pre-socialist and socialist eras have resulted in the formation and expan-
sion of slum settlements in Addis Ababa (UNHSP 2007). Currently, the city is undergoing rapid
socio-economic change including high-rise buildings and apartments. This happened by clearing
the old residential neighbourhoods to construct new buildings which are seen as symbols of mod-
ernity. In other words, in Addis Ababa displacement of the urban population is the result of the
disorderly growth and the consequent reordering of urban living space (Mejia 1999). Yet, appre-
ciating only the physical development of the city in terms of its vertical and horizontal expansion
can be misleading. It does not show the negative effects of the process of inner-city renewal on the
lives and livelihoods of urban poor residents. The causes and the process of slum resettlement are
complex. In Ethiopia, a significant number of people are internally displaced due to conflict,
drought, floods, and government-sponsored slum renewal projects (Muggah 2008). The latter
occur mainly when the demand for land for various development activities in prime areas
(centre of city, potentially attractive residential and commercial districts) is high and the
supply limited. The typical resettlement approach is that developers – private and public – put
pressure on the poor to vacate economically underutilised land, which they are occupying, in
favour of investments (Vichai and Perera 2006).
Inner-city slum renewal involves a wide range of actors. It includes complex processes invol-
ving planning, land acquisition, providing notices for dwellers, provision of resettlement site
infrastructure and social services, payment of compensation, and other forms of social and econ-
omic rehabilitation (Majumdar 1995; Cernea 1999; World Bank 2004; de Wet 2006). At best,
slum relocation is done by agreement with dwellers through community participation. Despite
this complexity, relocation of people is commonly experienced in many developing countries.
The majority of these removals tend to be executed involuntarily. In Ethiopia, resettlement
programmes are mainly designed and implemented through bureaucratic structures. This is
done despite international and national policy documents that stress the significance of
people’s participation in decision-making processes of urban development. The World Bank
(2001) has developed guidelines for the resettlement of people displaced by development
projects. In accordance with the Operational Policy 4.12 of the World Bank, the Ethiopian gov-
ernment formulated a Resettlement Policy Framework and proclamations as well as directives.
Research (Owusu et al. 2008; Omolola 2012) documents that the implementation of resettle-
ment policies is complicated by the fact that slum dwellers are not a homogenous group. Resi-
dents of slums comprise diverse groups with distinctive needs, priorities, and problems.
Although community participation in inner-city slum renewal is considered a central component
of any development project, the diversity of interests among members is one basic challenge that
deserves special policy consideration (Lemanski 2008). A small but growing body of literature
highlights that participation through consultation with people is indispensable in the planning
and management of any development endeavour (Sen 1990; World Bank 2001; Koenig 2006;
Arputham 2008; Banks 2008; Mitlin 2008). Studies by Arputham and Banks indicate the impor-
tance of and advantages associated with the involvement of the public, especially those people
who are directly affected, in all stages of urban development processes. Similarly, Mitlin
shows empirically how communities and their grassroots organisations are responsive and con-
tribute to policies of urban development. Participation not only reflects the needs and aspiration
 Development in Practice 553

of community members, it also facilitates that the intended result of development programmes
benefit them. Participation has an empowering effect on people’s lives by increasing their self-
sufficiency and self-respect. Koenig sees participation as an anti-poverty mechanism. He
argues that voicelessness and marginalisation are important components of poverty. Participation
helps members of a community to take control over and be responsible for their own well-being.
The above studies suggest that in the participatory urban development approach, sharing of
information is not enough; participation needs to go beyond consultation. In addition, although
many urban renewal projects include compensation in the form of cash, land-for-land and/or
house replacement; the amount of compensation may not be sufficient to re-establish resettled
people’s livelihood (Koppel 2009). Displacement and resettlement require an integrated vision;
it should go beyond just cash and/or replacement housing compensation. Parasuraman and
Cernea (1999) note that insufficient amounts of compensation are given to project-affected
people in India. Not only the poor but also low-income families now find themselves in a cost-
affordability gap between the amount of compensation offered and the price of building materials
(Hesselberg 1997; Parasuraman and Cernea 1999; ADB 2007). Consequently, displaced families
are negatively affected by the need to build a house in a new resettlement area. The lack of an
appropriate valuation process for the loss of property is often the major underlying factor for a
weak performance of relocation plans.
This article contributes knowledge regarding the process of urban redevelopment from the
perspectives of families and communities that have experienced recent residential relocation in
Addis Ababa. Based on qualitative data drawn from interviews and focus group discussions, it
examines the multiple and complex ways in which resettled households are affected by and
experience urban renewal programmes. The study brings to light the nature, forms, and extent
of community participation on resettlement, compensation options, and the differential ways in
which renewal plan/activities of Addis Ababa are experienced by different households. In so
doing, the paper uses the views and perspectives of affected people on how programmes that
do not include communities in decision-making processes can result in feelings of exclusion
and powerlessness.

The empirical context

Addis Ababa accounts for 26% of Ethiopia’s urban population (UNHSP 2007). The housing con-
ditions for the majority of its inhabitants are poor. In most settlements there are high levels of con-
gestion, inadequate provision of basic infrastructure, and many health risks. The city has rapid
population growth due mainly to rural-to-urban migration (CSA 1999). Most of the growth
takes place in slum areas. Despite the prevalence of informal economic activities, Addis Ababa
has high levels of unemployment. Most residents are involved in low remunerative sources of
income, such as home-based businesses and other informal activities. The informal sector
accounts for 60% of the total income of the residents. The low level of development is further
indicated by the fact that there is a high housing deficit and low standards of dwellings. The
result is what Francoise calls the “production of the disorderly city” (Lieberherr-Gardiol 2006).
Although Addis Ababa fulfils many economic and political functions nationally and interna-
tionally, its growth has been neglected for many decades. The city is the seat of many international
organisations, including the African Union, the predecessor to the Organization of African Unity
(OAU). With the intention of maintaining its political role, developing the city infrastructure, and
to address the growing need for land for investment, the Ethiopian government began to eradicate
slum settlements in the inner city. In order to attract large-scale investments in line with a market
economy, the government replaces poor residential neighbourhoods with modern apartment com-
plexes. However, these developments have caused the displacement and/or relocation of a
554 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

considerable number of the population to the city’s fringe lands. This paper focuses on the impact
on poor households of recent urban renewal-induced relocations.

Research methodology
This research is based on qualitative methods of data collection and analysis. The fieldwork
included observation, in-depth interviews, group interviews, and focus-group discussions. In
addition, the data collected were supplemented by field notes and household visits in order to
gain contextual insights. The study incorporated a total of 55 individuals, mostly heads of house-
holds. A total of 49 households were involved. Twelve were female-headed and 14 had dual
heads. Having diverse types of heads of households provides rich and detailed experiences of
the process of residential relocation. Twelve young people, both workers and unemployed (four
female and eight male, aged between 18 and 30 years), were also interviewed. The experiences
of unemployed individuals show how their daily income-generating opportunities were disrupted.
In addition, three focus group discussions were conducted with Idir (local-level associ-
ations) representatives, dual-headed, and female-headed households. Three group interviews
were also undertaken with young people. In the field several informal conversations with
different people were conducted, including the elderly who were willing and open to
provide information about their experiences of past practices of resettlement in Addis
Ababa. The informants were visited in their homes. This was an excellent opportunity for
the informants to feel secure and to take time to discuss the research questions. Finally,
NGOs working with resettled people were consulted. In applying diverse qualitative tools
and talking to different groups of informants, ample information was obtained in connection
with the process of slum clearance and resettlement. The study is intended to show the
views of households affected by the process of residential relocation. The study makes analyti-
cal generalisations by comparing the empirical data of the study that have shared conclusions
with previously developed urban literatures. The discussion that follows focuses on three main
themes that emerged from the research: people’s participation in development plans; power
relations between relocated households and government officials; and the valuation process
and compensation for land and property lost.

Empirical findings and discussion

Community participation in urban resettlement
One of the central issues which emerged from the study was that there was a lack of genuine com-
munity participation. Despite the rhetoric, the city government failed to engage the affected
people regarding its plans to take possession of the land and to resettle residents elsewhere.
Although the potential of community participation in making successful urban development is
widely recognised, this does not seem to be the case in Addis (Gossaye 2008). Unpublished
official documents suggest that the process of relocation should have followed a people-
centred approach. Key informants working in the city administration explained that the resettle-
ment programme was carried out after people were properly informed and consulted. However,
there was noticeable concern about the extent to which the displaced people were being involved
in the processes of resettlement. According those interviewed, there was no consultation, and their
contribution in deriving development plans and goals for the new sites of settlement was non-
existent. The authorities involved the affected people only in what was described as a token par-
ticipation to simply gain their cooperation. As a result, the idea of promoting genuine community
participation in urban renewal remained on paper.
 Development in Practice 555

Several reasons account for the lack of genuine participation in Addis Ababa. These include,
among other things, what de Wet (2006) refers to as the inadequate inputs approach. For years,
city renewal programmes and slum resettlements were conducted arbitrarily without an appropri-
ate institutional framework in charge of undertaking the programme. However, a new department
responsible for urban development and resettlement was recently established under the Land
Administration Authority. However, the limited institutional capacity contributed to the lack of
implementation of the existing policies and directives:

‘‘There is no comprehensive policy framework and therefore no commitment. Guidelines are inter-
preted variously, changed at will and applied, if at all, mechanically.’’ (Parasuraman and Cernea 1999)

The interviews and focus group discussions clearly show that the affected people were excluded
from the decision-making processes. In most cases, the authority in charge of land expropriation
did not consult the affected people on issues of fundamental concern such as compensation and
resettlement plans. Part of the reason for this is that urban renewal project agreements are made
between the government and developers, to the neglect of those who reside on the land required
for development. In Addis Ababa investors have unrestricted access to any neighbourhood of
their choice if they strike a deal with the city authority (UNHSP 2007). Such a situation not
only limits the role of concerned households in urban development, but also amplifies their
social and economic insecurity and marginality.
Heads of households explained their increasing fear associated with the likelihood of displa-
cement for a second time. It was observed during the fieldwork that people who had been dis-
placed once, might not be free from being moved again. Future development projects may
create a phenomenon of multiple displacements. The causes for re-displacement may or may
not be the same as those that caused the displacement in the first place. The following quote
from a 36-year-old housewife demonstrates the experience of families who live in temporary shel-
ters and who are told that they are going to be displaced for a second time:

‘‘I do not have a settled life. My life-plan is shortly termed. I do not know where the government takes
us. I always think about what will happen tomorrow and my children moving here and there. It is dif-
ficult even to decide where children should attend school when the school year comes.’’

Several informants heard about the resettlement plans by word of mouth and rumours. A 45-year-
old woman engaged in selling vegetables on the roadside explained:

‘‘I think the resettlement process was very spontaneous. We heard a rumour that the government needs
our land for development purposes and to put us somewhere else outside. We were not told formally
until before a couple of months before we had to move. Everything was done in a hurry.’’

The above quote represents the experience of many relocated families, that the urban renewal pro-
gramme was undertaken without prior identification of relocation sites. The selection of sites is a
major issue that has to be addressed during the preparation phase. Involving the resettling commu-
nities in site selection, site preparation, and relocation are essential procedures for reducing the risks
and impacts of resettlement on the lives of the people involved. However, as this study reveals, this
crucial task was completed without a study of the resettled groups and their livelihood strategies.
Furthermore, social capital is rooted in the neighbourhood where they have lived for decades. It
can take a long time to remake disrupted social networks. Relocation sites were selected based
on the availability of open space in the fringe lands of the city, rather than considering the social
and economic circumstances of the poor households. A female informant articulated the situation:
556 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

‘‘I did not know the place where I would be relocated, let alone choosing the sites. We were not
involved on the decision of where we will be going. We were simply told by some officials about
the fact that the government has made houses as replacement in this area. This site was the only
choice we were offered.’’

Moreover, the site selection process seems not to have considered the future city growth scenario.
Some of the research participants said that the new sites could create future positive opportunities.
However, they were also ambivalent, especially when they considered the likelihood of experien-
cing multiple displacements. The demand for land at their new site was already becoming very high.
A main problem of slum resettlement in Addis Ababa is the lack of alternative sites for relo-
cated households. People should ideally select a favourable site considering their livelihood
needs. This is difficult since the low-cost, government-owned houses located on fringe lands
have already been fully occupied. Thus, an increasing number of displaced families have to
reside in temporary shelters. Many of the temporary shelters are rudimentary, with inadequate
or no facilities like kitchens and toilets. The following quote is from a male informant (aged
37) who was displaced for a second time:

‘‘The process of relocation was not fair at all. I was not provided enough time to prepare myself.
Besides, we were only given this one room for my family.’’

Although government authorities say that most people in temporary shelters were only residing
there for three months until the government had made condominium houses ready, the research
identified many residents who had lived in such shelters for two to three years. The reality is
that the city authority had not prepared “decent houses” for those relocated. In principle, displa-
cing people should only be carried out after the basic preparations for relocating them is com-
pleted. The following quote is based on field notes and composed from stories of several
informants. It demonstrates how government officials misinformed the civil society:

‘‘The government officials gather the Kebele 49 household members in the first meeting. They told
them that their neighbourhood is needed by the government for ‘investment purpose’ and the govern-
ment has prepared a place for them and that it has a plan to allocate them condominium houses without
any down payment. Furthermore, officials promised at the meeting that the government would sub-
sidise the residents’ down payments from money given by various NGOs. Therefore, people accepted
the plan with great motivation. But the situation changed within a couple of weeks. In another meeting
the people from Kebele 38 gathered with great enthusiasm. However, they now received different
information. Government officials told them that the government did not have financial resource to
allocate houses for everyone displaced from the locality. In the meeting officials gave the participants
options: those who have economic capacity can buy condominium houses anywhere in the city. For
those who have low purchasing power, the government will make ready other Kebele houses in differ-
ent sub-city areas. Until the housing shortage is overcome, the affected inhabitants would stay in tem-
porary shelters.’’

This note highlights that the participation of the communities was limited. Their participation was
after officials had made the important decisions, demonstrating that the government used a top-
down approach. Interviews with government officials suggest that people were seen as obstacles
for the redevelopment activities, and as uncooperative in changing the future image of the city.
This view was, however, highly contested by many of the research participants. A woman
(aged 43) said: “I think no one is unhappy to see a good environment for a living but the lack
of involving us in the decision processes is inhuman.” This perspective was shared by many
households, who expressed their positive outlook on the city slum improvement efforts but
also emphasised that genuine participation is key to positive social change.
 Development in Practice 557

Current dissatisfaction regarding city development has additional reasons. These include
the failure on the part of the government to explain: why their particular residential areas
are needed for urban renewal; when demolition will occur; how they will be affected; what
the process will include; what the cost will be to them; and where they will be living in
the future.
Encouraging NGOs to focus on supporting the poor and being involved in preparation of
plans is a critical issue of intervention that was overlooked. Providing grassroots possibilities
for involvement and participation, NGOs can contribute to wider processes of development
activities through their contribution to civil society (Willis 2005). This study reveals that there
were no opportunities for the communities, NGOs, and the private sector to become involved
in the preparation of the plans. Gossaye (2008) reports that social movements in Ethiopia,
regime-critical public organisations, and local NGOs, are stigmatised and their activities are
limited by legislative repression. On the other hand, government-sponsored NGOs have been
encouraged and commissioned in positive ways. The study did not receive any information
that Idir representatives and religious leaders, who are capable of representing community inter-
ests, got involved in the displacement processes.

Communication, power, and residents’ perspectives

Community participation in development plans can facilitate communication between residents
and the city authority. This may contribute to a positive implementation process. In Addis
Ababa inadequate communication between decision-makers and the affected groups of people
is one of the root causes for the failure of compensation and resettlement plans (ADB 2007).
Research participants said that meetings were established for the sake of formality only, and
that their opinions had no impact on decisions. The meetings were held only to create awareness
among the evictees of the authority’s choice of locality. An informant explains the circumstances
of being powerless:

‘‘We did not have any power to say no; though we were not interested to move. The city government
stands only for private developers. They did not care for us. They were not listening to the hearts of the
people.’’

Officials persuaded people to accept the relocation programme by saying that they would give
them an opportunity to get a decent place to live. An elderly male informant (aged 80) said:

‘‘Where can we go to complain? We are powerless. We left our residential place to meet the interest of
the government and private investors. We were not able to make any decisions about our property. We
were not asked about how to improve the neighbourhood.’’

Similarly, the inability of poor people to retain their landholding is outlined by the following
quote from another old informant:

‘‘Money is power. Only those who have economic capacity can be heard and have the ‘right’ to live at
the centre. But those who do not have power have no chance except to be thrown away outside where
no basic facilities are fulfilled.’’

One of the central allegations that displaced people make is that they are devoid of the right to
compensation at replacement value. According to a report from the Asian Development Bank
(ADB 2007), market and transaction costs come in addition to the cost of replacing assets lost
during land expropriation. One of the informants explained the perception of evicted people:
558 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

‘‘We felt depressed with the whole process of displacement. We were considered as illegals after we
had lived in the area for about 20 years. We didn’t do anything other than keeping our sadness to our-
selves and leaving the place. The government and the system in general do not have any place for the
poor.’’

Evidence documented in the Action Professional Association for People shows that people close
to the Bole International Airport paid land and house tax to the city government. Regardless of
this, the people were evicted. A male informant said:

‘‘Nobody wants to listen to dwellers. If you hear their response you will be disappointed and feel
sorrow. They told us that the land will be bulldozed within 15 days. It was quite short even to find
private rental houses.’’

The cost of forced eviction is substantial. It includes the negative impact on people’s lives, means
of livelihood, and loss of substantial amounts of money invested in houses. Although the govern-
ment claimed that these people were occupying the land illegally, the supply of services (water
and electricity) makes them de facto legal landholders. A similar process occurred in a number
of other areas in the city.

Compensation and valuation processes

Government house renters and informal dwellers
The pattern of compensation revealed variations in different Urban Local Development Projects.
A lack of consistency in applying the existing policy gave rise to a multi-coloured image in the
management of compensation. The absence of legal title to land is a bar for compensation.
People’s experiences in this study show that the compensation process involved only private
property. Existing law says little about residents of government-owned houses, private house
renters, and informal dwellers. According to the current programme, small firms and other infor-
mal businesses do not receive compensation. This is problematic since the majority of the city
population exists by being engaged in small-scale businesses. With the exception of replacement
of low-cost housing units, most government-house renters were displaced without any form of
compensation either in terms of kind or cash. Those who refused to dismantle their houses
were denied the right to take their own materials once the government taskforce did the disman-
tling. Their materials were confiscated and then put on sale.
This contradicts the legislation related to resettlement planning in the Ethiopian constitution:
“All people who have been displaced or whose livelihoods have been adversely affected by a
result of state programs, have the right to a commensurate or alternative means of compensation,
including relocation with adequate state assistance” (MWUD 2008). This applies to all equally
since the majority of the inhabitants in Addis Ababa are either private renters or informal dwellers
who lack land titles. The legislation does not give protection to private tenants and informal
dwellers who just leave their place of residence. Although many informants agreed that displace-
ment is an unavoidable cost since land is required for “better development”, they resented the
ways in which the current urban development projects uprooted poor residents, their businesses,
and informal livelihoods.

Private house owners

The amount of compensation is the most disputed issue in city renewal programmes in Addis
Ababa. Land and cash are the two forms of compensation for private property owners who are
 Development in Practice 559

affected by the current urban renewal projects. However, although private owners get land as
replacement, they are in many cases required to rent a house until they can build their own dwell-
ing. Unpublished sources indicate that private homeowners were paid money for rent for a period
ranging from two to six months, at an average rate of about 300 birr per month (100 birr = US$5).
Many residents complained that they had to pay higher rents. It is therefore important to build new
houses before urban renewals. This would also be significant to allow residents time to make
preparations, especially for adapting their livelihood strategy.
The exercise to determine the value and amount of compensation generated a number of con-
troversies. There was variation in terms of payments made for the same kind of properties.
Although Article 9 of Proclamation 455/2005 states that the valuation of property should be
carried out by a certified private or public institution, or by private consultants or committees,
to reflect the current market price of affected assets, the task of replacement cost evaluation
was conducted by a single institution of the city authority. The compensation amount was
fixed according to the views of government officials. In addition, the process of property valuation
was not uniform due to lack of an independent valuation. It appears that lack of clear guidelines on
“fair compensation” led valuation officials to arbitrarily determine the compensation fees, a pro-
cedure that allowed for corruption and favouritism. Some informants mentioned that those people
who had good contacts with evaluators secured higher valuations of their properties than others.
An ignored aspect of the valuation process was the changing costs of construction materials,
where there has been a significant increase over the past few years. As a result, private home-
owners encountered a substantial “affordability gap”. The experience of a female informant sup-
ports this:

‘‘I received land and money for the house I lived in for 25 years. But it was not enough compared to
the loss of my assets. It was far below the current market price of land and my house. It is hardly
enough to rebuild a house. As you see, I am living in an unfinished house.’’

Similarly, an elderly informant explained: “The amount of compensation may build a hut but not a
proper house. The city government took our land with cheaper compensation and is leasing it out in
millions.” These two quotes demonstrate that the amount of compensation provided by the govern-
ment was insufficient to cover the costs of constructing an equivalent dwelling to the one lost. One
of the main causes for this was that the computation for compensation was made by using outdated
market prices for building materials. Although it is claimed that residents have a right to complain
regarding compensation amounts to the Interrogation Committee, which was established by the city
government, in practice the decisions made could not be revised. A female informant said:

‘‘The compensation amount was small. It could be spent in a short time. I complained about the result
but nobody would give me an ear. The only option I had was accepting the amount they offered me. If
I continue complaining, I lose my time, money, and energy in travelling to the concerned authorities.’’

The absence of guiding rules on compensation, coupled with the lack of people’s participation in
the expropriation process, resulted in the authorities having unchecked power. The experience of a
female respondent is telling:

‘‘They do not make any change, although I complained about the low amount I got. I asked why. They
had already decided how much I should be compensated. Many people like me have tried but no one
has ever been successful on this issue. They leave the issue when they got tired.’’

People also experience difficulties in getting construction permits in the relocation sites, as the
procedure is long and bureaucratic. A female informant stated:
560 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

‘‘The relocation process did not end easily. We had seen many ups and downs. After we took the reim-
bursement in cash and land, we visited the authority’s bureau for months to get a building permission.
The consequence was that we had to pay more money for renting a house.’’

Policy implications
This article has examined the process of urban slum resettlement programmes in contemporary
Addis Ababa. It highlights that urban development includes little or no involvement of the
local communities and affected people. As the empirical evidence suggests, the process of land
expropriation and relocation are compounded by a range of challenges. However, the situation
can improve if a number of steps are taken. First, resettlement needs to be preceded by a detailed
socio-economic survey of the people to be displaced, accompanied by their involvement in
decision-making at all stages of the relocation process (MoHUPA 2011). The process must be
people-centred in practice. Urban development policies should, among other things, promote
cooperation among neighbourhoods. This is because the dynamics of decision-making not
only encourage neighbourhood associations to mobilise residents, but also make it easier for
them to establish alliances with other neighbourhoods.
The second issue that emerges from this research is that in order to minimise the adverse
effects of a resettlement programme, there should be a central unit within the city adminis-
tration that is responsible for coordinating the involvement of different stakeholders. It is
vital to coordinate the efforts of sub-city authorities, governmental line departments, NGOs,
CBOs, and the private sector (Mitlin 2008; MoHUPA 2011). It is important to establish demo-
cratic processes of land allocation, redistribution, and resettlement. Thus, there is a need to
establish links with outside organisations that have financial and technical resources that
can assist affected groups.
Third, following other studies (World Bank 2004; de Wet 2006), the existing land expropria-
tion processes, compensation regulations, and implementation of guidelines should in addition to
being transparent also take into account the question of inflation. There is furthermore a need to
establish a separate body to evaluate the loss of assets and to address affected people’s grievances.
Above all, lack of formal title to land should not be a bar to compensation. Most of the city resi-
dents have lived for a long time in the houses they are being told to abandon. Thus, if urban
renewal is indispensable, the displaced people should be provided with ownership rights regard-
less of their previous tenure status. Moreover, it is important to consider long-term support in
terms of livelihood strategies for displaced and relocated poor people. Compensation valuation
needs to include loss of locational advantage, transitional hardships, and other opportunities
lost in the process of displacement. Since the process of slum clearance through forced eviction
becomes a potential source of social unrest, well-planned demolition programmes are essential in
order to avoid earlier mistakes experienced in Europe and America (William and Katharine 2009;
Thomsen 2012). This paper is a testimony to the importance of a participatory, people-centred
urban development approach that moves the focus away from central planning to one which con-
siders the views and perspectives of affected people and communities.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributors
Gezahegn Abebe has a Master’s degree in Development Geography from the Department of Sociology and
Human Geography, University of Oslo, Norway. He is currently working on his PhD, which looks at
 Development in Practice 561

household level food insecurity in Ethiopia. He is on leave from his position as lecturer at the Department of
Geography and Environmental Studies, Addis Ababa University.
Jan Hesselberg is Professor of Development Geography at the Department of Sociology and Human Geogra-
phy, University of Oslo, Norway. He has written extensively on urban issues as well as on agriculture and
development in general.

References
ADB. 2007. Compensation and Valuation in Resettlement: Cambodia, People’s Republic of China, and
India. Capacity Building for Resettlement Risk Management. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Arputham, J. 2008. “Developing New Approaches for People-Centered Development.” Environment and
Urbanization 20 (2): 319–337.
Banks, N. 2008. “A Tale of Two Wards: Political Participation and the Urban Poor in Dhaka City.”
Environment and Urbanization 20 (2): 361–376.
Burgess, R. 1992. “Help Some to Help Themselves: Third World Housing Policies and Development
Strategies.” In Beyond Self-help Housing, edited by K. Mathey, 75–91. London: Mansell.
Cernea, M. 1999. “Development’s Painful Social Costs: Introductory Study.” In The Development Dilemma:
Displacement in India, edited by P. Parasuraman, 1–34. London: Macmillan.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia). 1999. Analytical Report of 1994 Population and Housing
Survey. Vol. 2, Statistical Abstract. Addis Ababa: Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia.
Gossaye, A. 2008. “Addis Ababa: In Progress or Crisis?” Ethiopian Review: Ethiopian News and Opinion
Journal. Accessed October 28, 2013. www.ethiopianreview.com/content/2983
Hesselberg, J. 1997. “National Experience with Urban Shelter Delivery for the Poorest Groups.” Occasional
Paper, no. 24. Oslo: Department of Human Geography, University of Oslo.
Jha, G. et al. 2005. “Economics of Resettling Low-Income Settlements (slums) in Urban Areas: A Case for
Onsite Upgrading.” Draft Final Report. Centre for Urban and Regional Excellence, South Asia Network
of Economic Research Institute.
Koenig, D. 2006. “Enhancing Local Development in Development-Induced Displacement and Resettlement
Projects.” In Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies, and People, edited by C. Wet,
105–139. Oxford: Berghahn.
Koppel, J. 2009. “Fight for Development-Forced Displaced Communities More than Just Compensation.”
Resettlement News, no. 19. New Delhi: Resettlement News Network.
Lemanski, C. 2008. “Houses Without Community: Problems of Community Capacity in Cape Town, South
Africa.” Environment and Urbanization 20 (2): 393–410.
Lieberherr-Gardiol, F. 2006. “Slums Forever? Globalization and its Consequences.” The European Journal
of Development Research 18 (2): 275–283.
Majumdar, T. K. 1995. “Social Networks, People’s Organization and Popular Participation – Process,
Mechanisms and Forms in the Squatter Settlements.” Norwegian Journal of Geography 49 (4):
161–176.
Mejia, M. C. 1999. “The Economic Dimensions of Urban Resettlement: Experience from Latin America.” In
The Economics of Involuntary Resettlement: Questions and Challenges, edited by M. Cernea, 147–188.
Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Mitlin, D. 2008. “With and Beyond the State – Co-Production as a Route to Political Influence, Power and
Transformation for Grassroots Organizations.” Environment and Urbanization 20 (2): 339–360.
MoHUPA (Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India). 2011. Guidelines on
Community Participation. New Delhi: Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government
of India.
Muggah, R. 2008. Relocation Failures in Sri Lanka: A Short History Internal Displacement and
Resettlement. London: Zed Books.
MWUD (Ministry of Works and Urban Development). 2008. Resettlement Policy Framework: Urban Local
Government Development Project. Addis Ababa: Ministry of Works and Urban Development.
Omolola, A. O. 2012. “Urban Slums as Spatial Manifestations of Urbanization in Sub-Saharan Africa: A
Case Study of Ajegunle Slum Settlement, Lagos, Nigeria.” Developing Country Studies 2 (11): 1–11.
Owusu, G. et al. 2008. “Slums of Hope and Slums of Despair: Mobility and Livelihoods in Nima, Accra.”
Norwegian Journal of Geography 6 (3): 180–190.
Parasuraman, S., and M. Cernea. 1999. The Development Dilemma: Displacement in India. London:
Macmillan.
562 G. Abebe and J. Hesselberg

Sen, A. 1990. “Development as Capability Expansion.” In Human Development and the International
Strategy for the 1990s, edited by K. Griffin and J. Knight, 41–58. London: Macmillan.
Thomsen, K. B. 2012. “Modernism and Urban Renewal in Denmark 1939–1983.” 11th Conference on
Urban History, EAUH, Prague, 29 August-1 September.
UNHSP (United Nations Human Settlements Program). 2007. Situation Analysis of Informal Settlement in
Addis Ababa; Addis Ababa Slum Upgrading Program. Cities Without Slum, Sub- Regional Program for
Eastern and Southern Africa. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Program.
Vichai, V., and R. Perera. 2006. “Slum Relocation Projects in Bangkok: What has Contributed to their
Success or Failure?.” Habitat International 30 (1): 157–174.
Wet, C. de. 2006. Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies, and People. Oxford: Berghahn.
Willis, K. 2005. Theories and Practices of Development. London: Routledge.
William, J. C., and L. S. Katharine. 2009. “Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal in the United States, 1949–
1974.” Paper presented at the University of California at Merced, the Economic History Association
Meetings (2009), and the ASSA Meetings (2009).
World Bank. 2001. Involuntary Resettlement. Accessed October 28, 2013. http://go.worldbank.org/
64J6NBJY90
World Bank. 2004. Involuntary Resettlement Sourcebook: Planning and Implementation in Development
Project. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Yitbarek, E. 2008. “Revising ‘Slums’ Revealing Responses Urban Upgrading in Tenants-Dominated Inner-
City Settlements in Addis Ababa.” PhD diss., Norwegian University of Science and Technology
(NTNU), Trondheim.
Copyright of Development in Practice is the property of Routledge and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.