Pro-poor housing policies: Rethinking the potential of assisted self-help housing

Bredenoord, Jan; Lindert, Paul van

doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.12.001

Cited by 131 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(2006) and Lyons (2009). Economic recovery and livelihood regeneration can be achieved through initiatives such as cash-for-work programmes (paying locals to become involved in reconstruction work) (Haigh et al, 2009); skills-training programmes (James Lee Witt Associates, 2005); owner-building schemes (Bredenoord and van Lindert, 2010, Johnson et al, 2006, Lyons, 2009; providing job opportunities and sustainable livelihood options (Monday, 2002, Twigg, 2007; and arranging financial help and grants for small businesses and microenterprise schemes (Asian Development Bank et al, 2005, GoSL, 2005b. Red Cross (2010), Batteate (2006) and Winchester (2000) stated that successful livelihood recovery programmes utilize grass-roots schemes and attempt to understand the requirements of the community The above information shows that BBB-based community recovery incorporates two major factors: considering the psycho-social aspects of recovery; and considering the local economy and re-establishment of livelihoods.…”

Section: Community Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-conceptualising “Building Back Better” to improve post-disaster recovery

Mannakkara

Wilkinson

2014

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand and define the concept of Building Back Better (BBB) and represent it using a comprehensive framework. Design/methodology/approach – Literature related to the concept of BBB were studied to understand the key concepts which constitute BBB. These concepts were analysed and categorised to form the basis of the proposed BBB framework. Findings – Post-disaster recovery in-line with BBB concepts can be achieved by having a holistic view of four key categories: risk reduction entails improving the resilience of the built environment through improvement of structural designs and land-use planning; community recovery includes addressing and supporting psycho-social recovery of communities and supporting economic rejuvenation; implementation addresses ways in which risk reduction and community recovery practices can be put in place in an efficient and effective way; monitoring and evaluation stretches across the first three categories, and calls for putting in place mechanisms to monitor and evaluate recovery activities to ensure compliance with BBB-based concepts and obtain lessons to improve future disaster management practices. Research limitations/implications – The BBB Framework generated in this study can be used as a foundation to determine best-practice recommendations to implement recovery activities under each of the BBB categories. Practical implications – The BBB Framework forms a guideline to holistically plan and implement recovery programmes in order to BBB. Originality/value – A comprehensive guideline or framework which clarified what BBB really means is currently inexistent. This paper addressed this research gap by amalgamating existing information to create a singular framework to simply and comprehensively represent BBB.

show abstract

Section: Community Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-conceptualising “Building Back Better” to improve post-disaster recovery

Mannakkara

Wilkinson

2014

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both organizations jointly facilitate local initiatives to improve the daily living conditions of the poor in Jinja, in particular through the establishment of community savings groups [16]. These initiatives include the establishment of a community center in Walukuba East Settlement, which aims to accommodate of the following activities for the low-income groups living in the informal neighborhoods of Jinja:…”

Section: Building Materials Facility For Cebs and Community Training mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable Building Materials for Low-cost Housing and the Challenges Facing their Technological Developments: Examples and Lessons Regarding Bamboo, Earth-Block Technologies, Building Blocks of Recycled Materials, and Improved Concrete Panels

Bredenoord¹

2017

J Archit Eng Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Journal of Architectural Engineering Technology AbstractThere is a huge demand for affordable urban housing in the countries of the Global South. Using locally available and/or produced building materials for housing can reduce the buildings impact on the environment. Climate conditions and natural disaster risks, which differ by region, determine the applicability of the sustainable building materials and building structures. This article focuses on five groups of building materials: bamboo, compressed earth blocks and stabilized soil blocks, interlocking blocks of recycled materials, and improved concrete panels. In all cases, technological development and exchange of knowledge with local communities are desired. In order to produce more sustainable building materials, local communities can be trained and educated with regard to house building. Making use of a local workforce and involving local resident's in house building is beneficial for the communities. This article summarizes the main benefits and limitations of the materials and focuses on their applications in urban areas.

show abstract

“…However, in many developing countries, individual family self-help housing is still the only possibility that poor people have for housing. In the Global South, individual self-help or self-managed housing accounts for 50% and 90% of the housing stock [2]. Many families build and improve their houses over the course of years, and gradually they make use of the possibility to rent out rooms to others, to acquire income for their family.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Managed Cooperative Housing by Mutual-Assistance as Introduced in Central America between 2004 and 2016 the Attractiveness of the ‘FUCVAM’ Model of Uruguay

Bredenoord¹

2017

J Archit Eng Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Journal of Architectural Engineering Technology AbstractThis paper discusses the importance of cooperative housing through mutual assistance and collective ownership in Latin America. Cooperative housing is a form of self-managed house building, which is of great importance for a growing number of low-income households. It makes possible the access to appropriate housing for families with lowincomes, that don't have other possibilities.The mutual self-managed cooperative housing model of the Uruguayan federation of housing cooperatives 'FUCVAM' offers a more effective alternative to individual, incremental self-help or self-managed housing that is still is prevalent in many countries, including in Latin America. Since 2004, the model has been implemented with the help of the NGO We Effect in seven Latin American countries:

show abstract

Pro-poor housing policies: Rethinking the potential of assisted self-help housing

Cited by 131 publications

References 26 publications

Re-conceptualising “Building Back Better” to improve post-disaster recovery

Re-conceptualising “Building Back Better” to improve post-disaster recovery

Sustainable Building Materials for Low-cost Housing and the Challenges Facing their Technological Developments: Examples and Lessons Regarding Bamboo, Earth-Block Technologies, Building Blocks of Recycled Materials, and Improved Concrete Panels

Self-Managed Cooperative Housing by Mutual-Assistance as Introduced in Central America between 2004 and 2016 the Attractiveness of the ‘FUCVAM’ Model of Uruguay

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About