Preventive Resettlement of Populations at Risk of Disaster - GFDRR

9.1 Resettlement in Housing
Complexes
What went well in the process of resettling
people in housing complexes?
The 1994 resettlement plan for the housing complexes
involved various actions before the moves, coordinated
in a multidisciplinary effort by the different bodies and
institutions participating in the process. Through the
joint work of the secretariats, the plan was tailored to
the civil works schedule, and took account of the actions
that would have a socio-economic impact on the community.
These included:
■■
■■
■■
The use of monitoring instruments and mechanisms
(half-yearly reports and mid-term and
ex-post reviews), according to special provisions
of the IDB loan contract. Although the process
encountered some problems, it identified factors
that could have hampered the resettlement process.
One of the main achievements was community
participation in the resettlement process, due
to the creation of the Resettlement Advisory
Council.
By including commercial areas and units in
the housing complex designs, families that had
originally engaged in subsistence businesses were
able to sustain their income.
What did not work well in the resettlement
process?
■■
The very large size of the housing complexes, which
had many buildings concentrated in the same area
receiving families from different regions, made it
more difficult to build a community and provide
social services. The evaluations recommended
that future projects be smaller, with no more than
150 apartments, to make it easier for occupants
to create communities. Smaller scale also would
eliminate the large demand for infrastructure,
goods and services, such as construction of health
clinics, schools, recreation areas, streets, among
others.
■■
■■
■■
Lack of coordination among the secretariats
and the firms hired to operate social facilities
and services (schools, health clinics) hampered
the construction of the housing complexes and
moving of families. A similar lack of coordination
regarding the financing schedule occurred among
the municipal secretariats because each had its
own annual work and investment plans.
There was a time lapse between the census and
socio-economic study conducted in 1994 and
the moving of families. During that time, the
population in the area increased, making the
project more difficult, which, in turn, generated
mistrust regarding the resettlement.
The various levels of family income and cost of
the new houses were incompatible. This strained
family budgets and made it more difficult to
resettle families in the housing complexes.
9.2 Resettlement in the Upgraded
Favelas
What went well in the process of resettling
people in the upgraded favelas?
According to the report submitted after a seminar organized
to finalize the 2007 evaluation (São Paulo City
Council, GEPROCAV, IDB, PROCAV II Evaluation
Seminar, April 2007), successful features of the favelas’
urban development process included:
■■
The fact that families could remain in their own
districts was considered one of the most successful
features of this option. Instead of resettling
families in distant areas, a new neighborhood
was created within the improved favela and the
PROCAV works eliminated the risk of floods.
■■
Community participation in the urban
development meant participants could match
their expectations with the institutional, legal and
budgetary constraints.
■■
The rental option, instead of shelters, accommodated
families while new houses were built. Because
the occupants paid part of their water and
electricity bills when they moved to the rental
Chapter 4 Changes in the Quality of Life for People in High Risk Areas | Brazil |
55