孟加拉国非政府组织在城市贫民的住房中的问题-外文翻译.docx

浙江工业大学之江学院毕业设计（论文） 外文翻译孟加拉国非政府组织在城市贫民的住房中的问题摘要：孟加拉国许多非政府组织（NGO）参与社会经济和环境发展的方案，以此补充政府在这些领域的努力。其大多数目标群体是：缺乏适当住房的城市贫民。虽然住房状况的改善将对创收和其他项目的健康产生积极影响，非政府组织还是没有广泛地参与到城市住房建设。他们在房屋计划的参与仅是最近的政策建议性文件，尽管政府已经意识到亲自解决这个庞大住房难题的荒谬性。本文是作者在名为“非政府组织解决孟加拉国城市贫困住房中的作用”的基础上关于孟加拉国非政府组织的研究。它是由世界银行经济发展研究所的罗伯特麦克纳马拉在1998年资助的奖学金计划，讨论了在孟加拉国非政府组织能够参与解决城市贫民住房问题的可能形式，以及一些障碍和这种参与的限制。2002年Elsevier科学有限公司保留所有权利。关键词：非政府组织，城市住房，穷人的参与，土地，服务，信用，驱逐 1 简介自从1971年独立起，孟加拉国城市住房问题就伴随着城市化迅速发展。由于无法获得介入正规部门的机会，当他们的社会经济和基础设施的需求无法得到满足，贫困的农民工就成为这一进程的最大受害者。大部分城市贫民是被迫选择住进不正规房屋的（贫民区和棚户区），并且这种现象增长的趋势并没有减缓，尽管政府和其他机构一直在努力。20世纪80年代中期，在微薄的资源和许多条件制约情况下，政府也不得不承认当高收入群体享受到很多福利的同时，大部分人的房屋需求却没有得到妥善解决。公共房屋计划，包含了针对住房不足或住房地址服务有误的计划以及工作人员的住房计划，只满足了部分人的需求。私营部门和非正规行业供应超过全国90的城市住房。由于房屋原材料的稀缺和政府控制的溃乏，以及这类资源成本和市民的负担能力间的鸿沟日益扩大，房屋原材料价格不断飙升，所以房屋供应量是受到限制的。改善财政负担能力的重要性直到最近才被认可，攻克这个问题的很多步骤还没有被考虑。此外，一方面，缺乏有效控制有增无减的移民，城市化以及土地管理的机构和立法；另一方面，没有创造一个有利于发展经济适用住房，方便私人机构参与以及开发可进入资金和其他资源的环境。孟加拉国（采空区）政府不能单独应付房屋的所有需求。然而，直到90年代末，这些机构在参与研究酝酿提供房屋资源的一些政策时，政府才拥护非政府组织和社区组织（非政府组织和社区组织）在本部门的参与。但这还没有发展成为一个重大实践，因为采空区继续发挥着主要提供者的传统角色。在明确承诺私人机构参与管理人类居住区的“居住地二”中强调了两国政府，国际金融机构（独立理财顾问）和非政府组织合作的重要性。而孟加拉国非政府组织在城市住房部门的参与是有限的，尽管他们有能力通过满足住房需求的方案，顺应环境的行动计划，以及外地一级互动和参与式技巧的创新办法来缓解贫困家庭的住房问题。本文探讨为什么孟加拉国非政府组织没有让穷人得到很多参与城镇住房的机会，以及他们如何可以做得更好。它调查了这些组织在影响现有住房问题解决方案的潜力，他们目前面临的问题，以及将要采取以增加他们在城市住房方案的参与的措施。公众和非政府组织在孟加拉国住房都集中在达卡，该国所有经济，政治，社会和文化活动的枢纽。尽管最大的资源和机会可以利用，主要大约一万贫困家庭存在最严重的环境和居住问题。因此，研究的重点就集中在达卡，以便更好地了解穷人的城市住房问题和非政府组织的作用。 2。 孟加拉国城市住房中的非政府组织该国政府和其他组织不能加快发展，效率低下，腐败和政府的不稳定，和自我毁灭的政治局势已使得非政府组织发起和分享在孟加拉国的发展努力（乔杜里的新的实体， 1989年，拉赫曼和穆斯塔法，1995;亚行及采空区，1996年）。据估计，16000孟加拉国非政府组织一直在帮助50,000村庄约4万个家庭的贫困，教育，卫生和计划生育，妇女及环境。活动的资金已显著上升，而25-30大型非政府组织吸收这些资金的80。比起其他农村地区，唯一非政府组织发起的房屋计划，一直是城市基础设施和公用事业服务的有限参与。调查显示，大约50个非政府组织在达卡的住房没有直接提供住房，除承接以下类型的活动。提供服务：公用事业机构的服务与规划审批，虽然穷人，住在非正式定居点的居多，许多人有能力并愿意支付他们的服务。非政府组织和社区组织为中介，通过本标准通过分离土地所有权和规划审批服务的权利，主张通过改变穷人获得这些实用程序，并推出一些成本效益的方法来生产和提供规模有限的服务。非政府组织是社区培训，促进受益人在起价需要鉴定的操作，监控和维护参与的许多阶段，并提供安装，操作和维护服务（案例1）技术和组织的援助。一些非政府组织和社区组织在推动逐户上门收集垃圾，并正在采取一般清洁及在本市有穷人服务（案例2）社区负责清扫街道。一个以小社区为基础的，为城市边缘农民生活的堆肥等可回收材料采用简单的技术，加工和销售为一体的，并提供组织和福利服废物采摘的非政府组织厂运行了。有证据表明，卫生条件和排水系统，食水供应，以及由非政府组织和社区定期清理垃圾的改善都有助于改善达卡。（Majumder，1998年住宅领域中的一般卫生;晨报1998 ）金融中介机构：在少数情况下，非政府组织给予的资金来修复或兴建后的受益者是由自然灾害或驱逐无家可归的房屋。然而，它只考虑这种行动阻碍了无家可归的创收活动（IGAs）由非政府组织提供资金，而不是对任何正在进行的房屋计划部分。一个非政府组织激励私人所有者，和银行谈判商业贷款并着手升级项目，其中包括服务和有形建筑（案例研究3）的改善。一些银行可能为拥有土地的穷人扩大信贷，但穷人自己的土地很少，也很少有机会获得银行和规划许可。一些非政府组织寻求资金以建立自己的低成本住宅单位的项目受益人，并分期偿还费用。他们中的一些成员，通过生成的储蓄和IGAs（案例研究3和4）住房公积金。在吸引资金和经营信贷计划中的经历贫困的家庭，大型非政府组织正在考虑为他们的扶贫项目的受益人融资。然而，他们需要可行的方法来克服城市贫民的少的土地所有权问题，因此由他们资助的活动接踵而至。特殊住房：几个非政府组织在住房需求特殊照顾的经济和社会群体，如服装工人，贫困或犯罪的妇女和青少年，流浪儿童和孤儿，身心智障人士和单亲家庭。他们主要是在提供租赁的住宅，居民经常参加维护和场所和活动的管理型宿舍住宿。这些活动通常是由权力和康复知识和技能培训，法律，社会和企业家的支持，医疗保健，母亲和儿童保育设施的方案的一部分。一些非政府组织寻求资金建造的（案例研究5）自己的大厦。Bastee发展：原位bastee升级常常被主张作为一个具有成本效益和合理的步骤减少而不是摧毁这个住房质量差或驱逐的居民在穷人的住房中发现的问题，该计划利用'贫困家庭的意愿和能力为自己建造，由非政府组织经常涉及。一些非政府组织和社区组织，包括人道主义组织，青年俱乐部和社会福利的社会，从事小规模bastee处理改善元件有限，往往一个项目而已，与来自独立财务顾问和当地慈善机构赠款。Bastee发展提高可见区域，例如创收，卫生和计划生育，教育，基础设施和基本公用服务设施。这些后续作为model.7贫民窟改进计划（SIP）的。房屋权利：适当的住房的收购变得容易当穷人的住房权利得到承认。非政府组织扶贫活动，并加强非正规部门提供基础设施和服务。他们可以调解暂时未利用土地由穷人占领长期使用。这使穷人社会越来越清楚和不容易，并减少驱逐threats.8无组织的法律保护穷人是由于她们是文盲和缺乏知识剥夺。一些非政府组织提供的法律艾滋病的居民反对强行驱逐，提供与国家住房政策，没有备用重新安置。在一些bastees的居民已被动员和组织由非政府组织，使他们能够保护自己不被驱逐的尝试。一些非盈利性研究组织和非政府组织和民间社会成员之间的联盟已承诺的利益相关者的宣传计划，以减少住房的权利受到侵犯的事件。管理支持：政府机构是不正确导向和设备来进行运作和社区基础设施和公用设施的维护，运行租金计划，helpthe贫困户解决银行和机构，并收集技术人员和管理人员的工资。各机构和开发人员可以从事非政府组织和社区组织地方委员会准备进行这种活动，以创造收入，增加社区归属感，降低成本，增加成本回收，并确保其服务的问责性和可持续性。他们可以从邻近的性能审查的实际使用者，并通过他们解决与穷人关系管理问题。一些非政府组织的家具作为条件与项目funds.9重视结果的管理服务等Problems of the NGOs in housing the urban poor inBangladeshMohammed Mahbubur Rahman*College of Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, P.O. Box 33, Al-Khod, OmanReceived 5 March 2001; accepted 6 February 2002AbstractMany non-government organisations (NGOs) are involved in the socio-economic and environmental development programmes in Bangladesh, supplementing the governments effort in these areas. The majority of their target groups, the urban poor, lack proper housing. Though an improved housing situation would have positive effects on other programmes as in income generation and health, the NGOs have not been widely involved in urban housing. Their involvement in the housing programmes was recommended in the recent policy papers, as the government realises the absurdity of solving the enormous、 housing problem on its own. This paper is based on the authors research on the Bangladeshi NGOs titledRole of the NGOs in Urban Housing for the Poor in Bangladesh, funded by The World Banks Economic Development Institute under the Robert McNamara Fellowship Program, 1998. It discusses the possible forms of involvement by the NGOs in housing for the urban poor in Bangladesh, and the obstacles and limitations of such an involvement. r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.Keywords: NGO; Urban housing; Poor; Participation; Land; Service; Credit; Eviction1. IntroductionUrban housing problems in Bangladesh are associated with a fast rate of urbanisation since Independence in 1971. The destitute rural migrants are the largest victims of this process, as their socio-economic and infrastructure needs were not met with due to their inability to gain entry into the formal sectors. A majority of the urban poor are forced to resort to substandard housing in the bastees (slums and squatter areas), the growth of which has not slowed down despite efforts by*Tel.: +968-515-331; fax: +968-513-416.E-mail address: mmrahmansqu.edu.om (M.M. Rahman).0197-3975/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S 0 1 9 7 - 3 9 7 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 1 7 - 6the government and other bodies.1 The government, with meagre resources and many constraints,admitted in the mid-1980s that the housing needs of the majority have not been properly addressed while the high-income groups received some benefits (MOP, 1985). The public housing programmes, which meet a minute part of the demand, consist of inadequate and misdirected sites-and-services schemes and staff houses.2The private and the informal sectors supply more than 90% of urban housing in the country.Their capacity also has been restricted by an uncontrolled rise in the price of housing resources as a result of their scarcity and lack of government control, and the widening gapbetween the cost of such resources and the affordability of the people. The importance of finance in enhancing affordability has been recognised only recently, yet not many steps to overcome this problem have been considered. In addition, there is a lack of institutions and legislation to control unabatedmigration, urbanisation and land management on the one hand, and create an environment favouring the development of affordable housing, participation of private organisations and generation of easily accessible funds and other resources on the other hand.The Government of Bangladesh (GOB) cannot cater for the housing needs of all on its own.Yet it did not espouse the participation of the non-government and community-basedorganisations (NGOs and CBOs) in this sector until the late 1990s, when the involvement of these bodies in delivering housing resources was mooted in some policy studies. This has yet to develop into a significant practice, as the GOB continued to play largely the traditional role of a provider. The unequivocal commitment at Habitat II to the involvement of private bodies in the management of human settlements underlines the importance of collaboration between thegovernments, the international finance agencies (IFAs) and the NGOs. Involvement of the Bangladeshi NGOs in the urban housing sector is limited, though they have the capacity to alleviate the housing problems of the poor households through programmes and action plans that are responsive to the need and context, through innovative approaches, field-level interaction and participatory techniques.This paper examines why the Bangladeshi NGOs did not get much involved in the urbanhousing for the poor and how they could do more. It investigates the potential of these1 Three quarters of the migrants come to Dhaka, the capital city, with 9.97 million people. Dhaka had an annualpopulation growth rate of 7.1% in 198191 and 5% in the last decade (BBS, 2001). Its population is expected to rise50% in the next 15 years (BCL et al., 1996). Nearly 47% of the 33 million urban people in Bangladesh live below thepoverty line (BBS, 2001). Most of them depend on the informal sector for employment, typified by low wages, longworking hours and insecurity (Paul-Majumder & Chowdhury-Zahir, 1994), and cannot meet the basic needs. Onemillion bastee dwellers in 2156 clusters (10 shelters or more) within the metropolitan Dhaka in 1990 increased 150% tomore than 2800 clusters by 1996 (BCL et al., 1996). The bastees are characterised by high-density living, unhygienicenvironment, lack of basic services and amenities, low literacy, high unemployment and crime, environmental andsocial degradation, and precarious health situation (BIDS, 1988; Paul-Majumder & Chowdhury-Zahir, 1994). About55% of the bastee dwellers get tapwater mainly from illegal sources; some depend on water hydrants outside theirsettlements. About 40% of the poor use wells, each serving up to 200 families. Around 55% of them cannot use sanitarytoilets; o20% of the bastees are served with proper sanitation systems; another 60% have temporary shared latrines.Though many private bastees have electricity, all but 59% of the households are served; 26% have illegal connections.2The annual urban housing requirement in the country in the mid-1990s was above 600,000 units, more than a thirdof it was required in Dhaka. During the boom period of public housing (the 1970s), this could meet only 4% of therequirement in Dhaka. Housing for the government employees, who form o10% of the workforce, occupies only 7%of the stock; 25% of government employees are provided with staff housing and the rest with allowances.434 M.M. Rahman / Habitat International 26 (2002) 433451organisations to effect solutions to the existing housing problems, the issues they are currently facing, and the steps to be taken to increase their involvement in the urban housing programmes.Public housing in Bangladesh and the NGOs are concentrated in Dhaka, the hub of all economic, political, social and cultural activities of the country. Despite the availability of the maximumresources and opportunities, the worst environmental and housing problems exist there, mainly for about a million poor households. Therefore, the study focuses on Dhaka in order to better understand the issues of urban housing for the poor and the role and problems of the NGOs.2. The NGOs in urban housing in BangladeshThe inability of the government and other organisations to accelerate development, the effects of inefficiency, corruption and instability of the government, and a self-destructive political situation has made the NGOs the new entities in initiating and sharing the development efforts in Bangladesh (Chowdhury, 1989; Rahman & Mustafa, 1995; ADB & GOB, 1996). An estimated 16,000 NGOs in Bangladesh have been working in 50,000 villages helping about 4 million families focussing on poverty, education, health and family planning, women and environment(Association of Development Agencies in Bangladesh, 1998).3 The funds for their activities have risen significantly though 2530 large NGOs absorb 80% of these funds (Sakhawat & Hussain,1991). The only housing programmes initiated by the NGOs, other than in the rural areas, have been the limited involvement in urban infrastructure and utility services. Investigations showed that none of about 50 housing NGOs in Dhaka provide shelter directly, except for undertakingthe following types of activities.Service Provision: The utility agencies serve only the buildings with planning approval, though many of the poor, who live mostly in the informal settlements, are capable and willing to pay for their services.4 The NGOs and the CBOs are mediating access by the poor to these utilities through arguing for a change in this criterion by separating the right to services from land titles and planning approvals, and have introduced some cost-effective methods to produce and deliver services on a limited scale in the bastees. The NGOs are training the community, promoting beneficiaries participation in many stages starting from need identification to involvement inoperation, monitoring and maintenance, and providing technical and organisational assistance in installing, operating and maintaining services (Case Study 1).Some NGOs and CBOs are promoting door-to-door garbage collection, and are taking charge of the general cleanliness and street sweeping in the neighbourhoods having poor municipality services (Case Study 2). An NGO runs a small community-based plant using simple technology, processing and marketing recyclable materials into compost for the farmers living on the city3 In 199097, 857 new NGOs have sought foreign grants, others too expanded their activities showing a remarkablegrowth. The Food for Work Program got the largest grant (US$ 62 million from WFP and US$ 19 million fromUSAID) during the 1990s. There are 20 major bilateral and multi-lateral donors in Bangladesh; 13 of them give morethan US$ 1 million annually to the NGOs (Rahman, 1999).4 Scarce resources and recurring conflict in the bastees provided a power base for the maastans who dictate termsunder which the socially excluded bastee dwellers have to live. They link the poor to basic needs like employment,shelter, and services through a process of adverse incorporation integrated into the pervasive system of clienteles anddependence (Matin, 1998; p. 1). The poor often pay much more for these than the government rates for basic services.M.M. Rahman / Habitat International 26 (2002) 433451 435fringe, and providing organisations and welfare support to the waste-pickers. There is evidence that the improvements of sanitary conditions and the drainage system, supply of potable water, and regular garbage clearance by the NGOs and the communities have contributed to improving the general hygiene of the residential areas of Dhaka (Majumder, 1998; Matin, 1998).Financial Intermediary: In a few cases, the NGOs have granted funds to repair or constructhouses after the beneficiaries were made homeless by natural disasters or eviction. However, rather than being parts of any on-going housing scheme, such actions were only considered as homelessness hampered the income generating activities (IGAs) financed by the NGOs. One NGO motivated a private bastee-owner, negotiated commercial loans from a bank and initiated an upgrading project, which included improvement of services and physical construction (Case Study