Silver city or participatory city.
A case study
Name: Gabrielle Konijn (5884055)
Course: Master Thesis Human geography
735410200Y
Lecture: Y.P.B. van Leynseele
Adres: Commelinstraat 13 1093TE Amsterdam Tel: 0629359380
2 Abstract: There are many participatory planning processes happening in the world, especially in the so-called global South. This research focus on how in habitants of neighbourhood in Nairobi are involved in the planning processes of this neighbourhood. Through fieldwork of seven weeks in the neighbourhood, data has been collected. This data has been analysed in order to find out if the inhabitants have been involved and how they aim for a liveable city.
Keyword: Nairobi, Kaloleni, Participatory planning, citizen participation, planning processes, liveable city.
3 Foreword:
This thesis wouldn’t be possible without a few people. First and foremost, Yves van Lyenseele, without his supervision it wouldn’t be possible . My local supervision Lydia, who was more like a mother to me. The four boys, Charles, Joseph, Max and Geoffrey who showed me around Kaloleni. Pauline Bezemer for the occasional kick in the butt and the other Nairobi girls, Ellen, Laura and Eline, who I have shared many things with.
4
Content
1: Introduction. ... 6
1.2 Choice for Kaloleni, Eastlands. ... 7
1.3 Problem statement. ... 8
1.4 Relevance. ... 8
2. Theoretical Framework. ... 9
2.1 The neo-liberal city. ... 9
2.2 Participatory planning: an alternative for the neoliberal framework? ... 11
2.3 Governance: is it important for urban development? ... 15
2.4 Some other forms of planning processes and the role of the planner. ... 17
2. 5 The liveable city. ... 20
3. Methods and Data analyses. ... 23
3.1 Epistemology. ... 23
3.2 Research design. ... 24
3.3 Research question and sub questions. ... 25
3. 4 Unit of Analysis. ... 26
3.5 Methods of Data Collection. ... 27
Semi-structured interviews. ... 27 Transect walk. ... 28 Observation. ... 28 Survey. ... 28 Field notes. ... 29 3.6 Modes of Analysis. ... 29 3. 7 Limitations. ... 31 3.8 Ethics. ... 31
4. Nairobi, Eastlands and Kaloleni. ... 33
4.1 Nairobi. ... 33
4.2 The Eastlands. ... 37
4.3 Kaloleni. ... 38
5. Kaloleni: whishes, visions and needs. ... 46
5.1 Kaloleni is the place to be, or is it? ... 48
5. 2 The development plans. ... 56
6. Participatory planning in Kaloleni. ... 63
5
6.2 The government. ... 68
Conclusion. ... 70
References. ... 72
Appendix. ... 75
Topic list Inhabitants/ community based organisations. ... 75
Topic list professionals. ... 75
6
1: Introduction.
In the last decades, more people live in cities than in rural areas. In the coming years this
urbanization process will especially happen in the “ global South”, thus in so-called development countries. These countries have different problems then countries in the “global North”. The division between rich and poor is even more noticeable than in developed countries. Cities in the “global South” are often segregated, this segregation can be income based or can be based on race (Mitullah,2003). This segregation is often finds its roots in the colonial period, which most of these countries have known. Within this colonial period many cities were developed and planned, this is also the case of Nairobi. These planned cities are still there today, but often cannot cope with the new dimensions of this modern area, like the quick urbanisation process that is happening within these cities. Many of these cities known certain problems, such as informal settlements and lack of sanitary (Mabin et al, 2013).
With the rapid urbanization happening in Africa, cities like Nairobi are growing and
neighbourhoods expand. The local government, planners and other organisations in Nairobi, try to cope with this urbanization with redevelopment plans. Thus the city county have decided that the old city should be redeveloped and therefore the city county have appointed the area of the
Eastlands as the area for redevelopment (interview Rose Muema). The focus on this thesis will be on one of the estates in Eastlands, Kaloleni, but also on these redevelopment plans and the involvement of citizens in these plans.
In the new constitution , that was adapted in 2010, is stated that inhabitants must be informed and get involved in the development process of the city( Ministry of Devolution and
Planning). Although the constitution is adapted, the city is still implementing phase (Interview UON) . Therefore it is important to understand if attempts for this participatory planning or citizens
participation have been made and if this type of planning includes every inhabitant of the community.
This type of planning, participatory planning, is based on an idea that there is some kind of civil society. This lead to several questions concerning the community, communication between government and citizen, perceptions on the plans and involvement All these aspects will be discussed in this study. Within this research several kinds of planning theories will be explained, thereby the focus will be primarily on participatory planning and citizens participation. Participatory planning is based on strengthening the community in order to make them active in the planning and decision process (Schattan et al, 2011).
This study tries to establish if the planners of Nairobi include and involve inhabitants of Kaloleni in the planning process.
The main research question of this study is as followed:
“To what extent do the current inhabitants of Kaloleni feel they are involved in the planning
process of Kaloleni and in which way are they aiming for an urban liveable city?”
This main research question focus primarily on the inhabitants of Kaloleni, because most of the data collected is from this group of respondents. Another point that can be made, to focus on this group in particularly, is if research is conducted to analyse participatory processes or citizens participation and to find out if such processes are happening, the focus should be on the group that is suppose to
7 benefit from these processes, the inhabitants. The second part of the research question focus on the concept of the liveable city, which is a type of city one might aim for with planning processes. In order to answer this main research question, field work is conducted in Kaloleni. The choice for Kaloleni will be explained further in this chapter. This fieldwork consists mostly of semi-structured interviews, with inhabitants of Kaloleni and officials. The interviews will be the main data that will be used in this thesis. However questionnaires will be also used, as well as field notes of transect walks and photos made in Kaloleni. The main theories discussed in this research will primarily focus on types of planning and the liveable city.
This research consist several chapters. The first chapter will be the theoretical framework. The second chapter focus on the methodology used in this research. This chapter will also focus on the limitations of this research. The third chapter will portrayed the background on the research area. Chapter four and five will be an analytical chapters. After the descriptive chapters and the analytical chapters a conclusion will be made.
The next paragraph will focus on the choice for Kaloleni, Eastlands.
1.2 Choice for Kaloleni, Eastlands.
As stated above, the city county have appointed Eastlands as an area for redevelopment.
Eastlands is characterized by a lot of estates that have been built in the colonial period and often those houses were given to the inhabitants as a token of appreciation by the government (Standard on Saturday, 2010). According to Muema, the deputy director of the city planning, the new plans can accommodate 60.000 households, within these estates. Nowadays these estates
accommodate 9,557 households (Sangira, 2012).
One of the estates located in the Eastlands is Kaloleni. Kaloleni is the pilot project for the redevelopment plans for the whole of Eastlands (Meeting notes, Kaloleni, 3 April 2014). Kaloleni is originally based on the garden city model (Mackachia,2011). This type of model is based on multifunctional neighbourhoods (Mackachia, 2011). The garden city model will be discussed in the chapter concerning the background of the research area. This model will be discussed in light of how the estate has been planned, in order to understand how it is been structured and still is structured. Due to the location of Kaloleni, namely near the city centre, the estate is very attractive for
newcomers. This is one of the reasons why in Kaloleni, many informal settlements originate. In the new plans for Kaloleni, the city county is obliged to communicate with the inhabitants of Kaloleni. The fact that Kaloleni is a pilot project for the redevelopment of the Eastlands and that the city county has to involve and communicate with the inhabitants of Kaloleni, makes Kaloleni an perfect case study.
8
1.3 Problem statement.
Most of the planning process are based on an neo-liberal framework, which focus on the upper-segment of society. The new plans of Kaloleni are no difference (Rose Muema). This plans want to incorporate mixed use and several income levels. According to Watson certain groups are left out of the planning processes. These groups are mostly the low-middle or the low income groups within society (Watson, 2009) and these groups usually live in estates like Kaloleni (Makachia,2011).The fact that many of these citizens are left out of the plans is, according to some scholars, problematic and therefore other types of planning should occur within these areas. The exclusion of certain groups in the plans, ignores the “problem” of and these citizens. The fact that the new constitution states that the city county must include and involve the citizens in the planning process, makes this problem more interesting. Participatory planning or citizens participation can be a option of a more inclusiveness type of planning.
1.4 Relevance.
Master planning is quit a new phenomena within the global South, although many cities and countries have been planned within the colonial period, there is little information about these master plans. A trend of master planning, based on the neo-liberal framework is happening within these countries (Gaffikin & Perry, 2012). These master plans are adopted by these countries, although they are based at models of the “Global North”. Therefore these models might not be the best option for countries within the “Global South” (Gaffikin & Perry, 2012) .
Other models like communicative planning the just city and participatory planning can be a better option within these countries, however the research on participatory planning in the “Global South” and especially Kaloleni is scarce. The focus is often on rural planning processes instead of urban processes. This research can contribute to the research done on participatory planning within these countries and especially at the Kaloleni area.
According to Watson (2002), models like the just city ,communicative planning and
participatory planning are also based on a “western” point of view, but can be implemented within the planning in the “Global South”. Watson argues that these normative planning models are based on a strong civil society and that therefore it is hard to implement within the “Global South”, because according to her many of the countries in the “Global South” have not a strong civil society. But it is argued by Watson and by Baud et al, that forms of participative planning can be a solution towards planning for inclusiveness and a better form of democracy (Baud et al, 2011; Watson, 2002).
Planning is often top down, but nowadays a more bottom-up (participatory planning for example) approach is becoming more and more popular and therefore it can be an important step, to analyse if participatory planning occurs or can be implemted within the Kaloleni area, because this area has potential. Within planning it is also of importance to know for whom you are planning (Murgante et al, 2011) and therefore participatory planning can be a tool. If participatory planning can become a new form of planning within Nairobi, future neighbourhoods can be better planned.
9
2. Theoretical Framework.
As stated in the introduction cities like Nairobi are expanding , this leads to certain problems concerning the planning processes. In this chapter certain planning forms will be elaborated. Cities have always been important to a country. With more of half of the population living in cities, the way the city develops become more and more important.
This section primarily focus on the literature that illustrates the main aspects of this thesis. First there will be a brief summary of the term liberal city. Second an alternative to the neo-liberal city, participatory planning, will be discussed. After participatory planning has been elaborated, the concept of governance will be explained. Fourth other forms of planning as an alternative for participatory planning or the neo-liberal theory will be displayed. Finally a description of the liveable city will be given, since this one of the main concepts in the main research question.
2.1 The neo-liberal city.
“The ‘neoliberal framework’ assumes that the global spread of neoliberalism (or neoliberalization) is one of the driving forces behind the main forms of urban
transformations worldwide, although it operates unevenly, subject to local interpretations and contestations”. ( Bénit-Gbaffou et al.,2012,p877)
This quotation from Bénit-Gbaffou et al (2012) illustrates how the ‘neoliberal framework” works. The authors argue that due to the strong emphasis on the market and the changing of certain
institutions, other aspects of society are left behind. The neo-liberal framework is often seen as a one- size fits all model. The neo-liberal framework is based on the idea that a city can be planned, although many cities are fragmented (Balbo, 1993).
The strong focus on the economical expansion of planning and the assumption of a trickledown effect in this kind of framework, leave certain vulnerable groups in society often displaced. In some low and middle income countries neoliberal reforms have been implemented, according to Beall and Fox (2009). These reforms were implemented to get a better integrated and more competitive market and it was believed that it would attract private investments. According to Beall and Fox (2009) it became clear that certain groups were vulnerable to such a type of
mechanism (Beall and Fox, 2009). What became clear is that within this neoliberal framework private investors play an important role. A strong empathise on the public-private partnership is noticeable in this kind of framework. Often cities are based on a model of economic expansion. This idea of “getting the prices right” instead of “getting the policies right” by eliminating the state-created market decisions, became popular in the 1980s (Beall and Fox, 2009). These types of neo-liberal cities are often the “standard” in urban policies. Some authors like Watson, argues that planning of cities based on neo-liberal aspects do not pay intention to include the “poor” people in their plans. She believes that other forms of planning practices might. MacLeod and Jones (2011) agree with this, they argue that interest of the business elite were more important than interest of the common people. They opt for a new form of urban politics, however it is not clear what this form of new urban politics will be. The main critic about the neo-liberal framework is that it focus on the city as
10 one and high-light certain prime spaces for investments, not considering the people who live in those areas (Bénit-Gbaffou et al, 2012). This framework overlooks that the city is not one thing, but exist of different areas, with their own characteristics and therefore the idea of the planable city is not feasible and other forms of planning are needed.
Were the neo-liberal framework is often focused on the city as a whole ,some authors argue that the neighbourhood or the community is an important aspect of society. The neoliberal
framework is often examined on the national or international scale, however according to Ghose not much is known on the neighbourhood or community level. She argues that within the neoliberal system, cities have become more and more important. Cities have become a more and more market based arena. Within this neoliberal framework of a city, she argues that citizenship has become more and more important. Especially citizenship that is more involved within politics and decision making, rather than just be part of a state (Ghose, 2005).
The ideas of Ghose fits well in the beliefs of David Harvey. Where Ghose advocates a stronger form of citizenship within city politics , Harvey favours more influence of inhabitants in the planning of cities. According to him the freedom to make and remake our cities and ourselves, is one of the most precious but also one of the neglected human rights (Harvey, 2008). With this statement Harvey argues that citizens should take back the right to the city, instead of losing it to private or semi-private companies (Harvey, 2008). In a way Harvey opt for a more democratic city, based on a broad society.
This part of the theoretical framework gave a short overview of the neoliberal framework used in many cities. The main problem with the framework of the neo-liberal planning, is that the framework does not take into consideration the different aspects of the city and the different groups within the city. Planning processes like participatory planning or citizen participation can be a tool, to plan cities more equal.
11
2.2 Participatory planning: an alternative for the neoliberal framework?
“The idea of citizen participation is like eating spinach: no one is against it in principle because it is good for you.” (Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007, p234)
With this quotation Arstein, makes it clear that no one can be against the idea of citizens
participation or forms of participatory planning, but the difference according to her is the kind of citizens participation that has been implemented . She views citizens participation as a categorical term for citizens power. Therefore it can be stated that citizen participation can be seen as a tool to strengthen citizenship. In her opinion participation should lead to change. She argues that
participation without redistribution of power is an empty and frustrating process for the powerless (Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007). She also makes a distinction between the citizens and the people in power, like the planners. Citizens are called the have-nots and people in power are called the power holders. It has been argued that there are roughly eight types of citizens participation. In practice there are far more types, but these eight types are the basis of citizen participation. Figure 1: Eight rungs on the ladder of citizen participation.
12 Figure one shows eight levels of participation and the type of participation it actually is. There are some limits to this categorization of citizens participation. This ladder has a simplistic view on the world, namely it views both groups who have to engage in the participatory process as homogenous. This is often not the case. This typology also does not take certain “roadblocks” for achieving genuine levels of participation into account and as stated above it only focus on eight levels of participation, while there might be many more levels of participation (Arnstein in LeGastes and Stout, 2007). Another limit, which is not mentioned in the book, is that this typology is based on the American situation and therefore might not be applicable to the African context. However in my opinion these levels are generally excepted and therefore can be somehow applicable in the African context.
The first rung on the ladder is called manipulation. Manipulation is characterized by the idea that citizens have something to say and they are listen too, but actually the power holders are calling the shots. In the case of manipulation, the power holders make the have-nots believe they wanted the plans to happen. Often when the plans are realised, the citizens realise that these plans do not contribute to their well-being in the community. A positive side-effect of this level of participation might be that that some of them might start demanding genuine levels of participation in order for this to never happen again (Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007).
The second level of participation is a little bit strange type of participation. Therapy is based on the idea that the powerlessness equals mental illness. In other words the have-nots think they are contributing to a solution of some sort of problem, but in fact they are being the subject of a clinical group therapy (Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007). Frankly I find this a weird level of participation. Both levels are linked to nonparticipation, which means that citizens are actually not participated at all, even though they think they might are. Levels three, four and five are categorized in tokenism, which means the officials often view participation as a one-sided thing.
A great example of viewing participation as a one-sided thing can be the level of participation which is called informing. Informing is one of the most important aspects towards legitimate citizen participation. However, often this informing of certain plans is a one-way flow, in which officials inform the inhabitants on the plans, but these inhabitants cannot give feedback or negotiate
(Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007). Another form of tokenism can be consultation. Consulting the citizens opinions might be a good step towards participation, but if consulting is not combined with other forms of participation, this level of participation will be hollow. Consultation will only work if the residents wishes and concerns will be taken into account. Placation is the last level which can be categorized within tokenism. In this rung of participation the have-nots actually are on the board of some kind of organisation, but they still have an minority within this board. Another example of placation is for instance that the inhabitants plan or advise something, but the power-holders still have the right to judge the legitimacy or feasibility of the advice or the plan. According to Arnstein placation can work for citizens, if they get good technical assistance in articulating their priorities and how the community has been organized to press their priorities (Arnstein in LeGates and Stout, 2007). All these levels of participation had potential to involve people in citizens participation, but it had to be more elaborated on. The last three levels of participation actually involve people in planning processes.
One of these levels of legitimate participation is partnership. Partnership is based on negotiation between citizens and power-holders. Often this shared power between citizens and power-holders was taken by the citizens instead of given by the city. Another form of legitimate participation is the level of delegated power. In this level citizens and officials not only negotiate with each other, but the citizens are accountable for certain aspects of the program. This means that in
13 order to resolve difference not the citizens have to bargaining but the power-holders have to.
Another form of delegated power is based on the fact the citizens can veto a plan if this difference cannot be resolved through negotiation. The final level of participation is citizen control. Within this level of participation, citizens are demanding a degree of power (or control) in order to govern a program or an institution. They also wants to be able to negotiate the conditions under which ‘’outsiders” may change them (Arnstein in LeGaste and Stout, 2007).
In the analysing part of this thesis I will look upon which kind of citizen participation might be visible in the area of Kaloleni or that it will be some kind of form of participatory planning.
It is believed by many scholars that participatory processes or approaches, will strengthen the democracy and will make citizens more involved within the decision processes (Boulding and Wampler, 2009). Boulding and Wampler stated that participatory democracy is often based on the hope that it will improve the quality of people’s lives. While this is often stated by governments and researchers, there is actually little proof that it have changed the quality of people’s lives (Boulding and Wampler, 2009). They argue that the most common form of participatory approaches,
participatory budgeting, claims to improve people’s lives, especially from the poor. This type of participatory planning is quite common in many Latin American countries where leftwing leaders are in charg.The idea behind this type of participation is that the community is given a part of the budget in order to make decisions about where the money has to go to. It is also believed that participatory budgeting will produce better outcomes since resources were targeted with greater efficiency (Boulding and Wampler, 2009). However, research done by Boulding and Wampler (2009), did not show that the lives of the poor were getting better and there was an unequal division happening. According to Mohan and Stokke, participatory development can lead to all kinds of social capital and citizenship. However participatory programmes tend to focus much on the local aspect on society and according to Mohan and Stokke, this might blur the greater picture. They argue that politics should overcome binary opposites such as local/global and state/civil in order to be or importance (Mohan and Stokkke, 2000). According to Hickey and Mohan, critics view participation approaches interfering with policy making a way of undermining representative democracy. However it is also, as stated above, argued that participation programmes can strengthen forms of democracy.
Mitlin and Thompson (1995) stated that some forms of participatory processes were made in order to strengthen civic society and come up with new mechanisms through which state institutions can be held accountable for their actions. It is also believed that if community-based approaches are funded and their control is increasing , the whole society will benefit. Linked to this idea is the principle of allowing citizen associations to influence the policy making process (Mitlin and Thompson, 1995).
It becomes clear that participatory processes are more dynamic than neo-liberal processes, meaning that more parties have to be actively involved.
Brownill (2009) argues that there might become some tension between the traditional hierarchy and these new forms of dynamic governance. This tension can cause a certain “hybridity” which can shift terrain of participation, because of the interaction of these contrasting models (Brownill, 2009). According to her, this both limits and opens new spaces for participation. According to Brownill (2009) these type of planning systems are based on the strengthening of all stakeholders involved in the process , a broad network system and active citizens. She also mentioned because it is such dynamic process, different modes of governance is needed (Brownill,2009).
14 Not only Brownill emphasis on the importance of urban governance, also Beall and Fox state that governance is an import aspect of all types of urban planning. In the next paragraph the concept of governance and related issues will be discussed.
In this paragraph all types of citizen participation and participatory programmes were discussed and although it has many pitfalls, it is a more democratic way of planning instead of the neoliberal way. I think participatory planning, is mostly about given the citizen the feeling they are heard.
Participatory budgeting is a good example of this principle, the inhabitants get a say in what will happen in their village, they actually get a part of the budget to do so. However according to
Boulding and Wampler the well-being of these people does not change drastically. Therefore it is my belief, that participatory processes can be useful in certain circumstances, but might not be the solution for all circumstances. In paragraph four I explore more alternative planning approaches and in my analytical chapters I will focus on the stages of citizen participation mentioned by Arnstein in Kaloleni.
15
2.3 Governance: is it important for urban development?
“Governance can be seen as the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises the mechanisms, processes and
institutions trough which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences”. (UNDP, 1997 in Beall and Fox, 2009,p 209).
Beall and Fox argue that the term governance as illustrated above has two dimensions that have to be further explained, in order to get an idea of the term governance. The first dimension relates to the management of country’s affairs at all levels. This dimension gives the impression that there are a wide range of actors within a country. The second dimension relates to the non-governmental actors, like citizens and groups, these actors according to the definition has to be engaged with the other actors. In short governance is about the relationship between the civil society and the state, between the rulers and the ruled, between the government and the governed (Beall and Fox, 2009).
Nowadays the phrase good governance is often mentioned in development of countries in the global south. Good governance focus primarily on the need to build stronger, more accountable relationships between different actors in order to ensure that a society’s resources are managed fairly and efficiently over time (Beall and Fox, 2009). Often to make governance work, governments decentralise some of their tasks to local governments. This is supposed to be more democratic and bring the government closer to the people (Rakodi, 2001). Rakodi believes that in order for urban planning to work in the global south, there should be governance but within strict definitions of who is in charge and who can make decisions. She believes that decentralisation might help in achieving more governance, but only if this decentralisation comes with a set of rules and power. Another important aspect of decentralisation is communicative action, which means that the rulers should communicate with other stakeholders in order to achieve an understanding(Rakodi,2001). This aspect of what Radoki calls governance can be linked to some kind of participatory approaches.
Above is illustrated that governance is somewhat a vague term. In the next part a division will be made between governance as a structure and governance as a process.
Governance as a structure is divided into four categories as well. First you have governance as hierarchies. This type of structural governance is based on vertical integrated state structure. Thus based on a typical hierarchical order, with the state in the highest order. However it has been stated that this type of governance will not work nowadays, because it has been argued that the state does not have the same power or needs that it used to have (Pierre and Peters, 2000). It is also argued that the hierarchical governance mode will not succeed, because these days cities and regions get more autonomy. However this kind of governance one cannot overlook for several reasons. First the shift to a more horizontal type of governance has been spontaneous and therefore it has to be changed in legal and constitutional documents. Secondly, if hierarchical governance should be changed into a different form of governance, one must examine hierarchical governance more closely. Finally this type of governance is still very much in place in certain areas (Pierre and Peters, 2000).
The second category is: governance as markets. This type of governance has different
meanings. One meaning of governance as markets is that of a resource-allocating mechanism. In this type of governance, decisions are not made by elected people or managers, instead decisions are
16 made by an over-arching form of politics (Pierre and Peters, 2000). The other meaning of
governance of markets is that of arenas for economic actors. Governance here means that the economic actors can solve problems without influencing the market space (Pierre and Peters, 2000). Thus one can argue that this form of governance is focused on the economical side of society.
Governance as networks is the third form of a structural governance. Within this type of governance certain networks influencing each other and also the government. According to Pierre and Peters this is one of the most known forms of government.
The last type of structural governance is called: governance as communities. This type of governance is based on the idea that communities can and should solve their problems without the state interfering. Communitarian governance believes that communities can be a powerful tool in collective matters (Pierre and Peters, 2000).The assumption behind these governance as structures, is when you want to get the governance right you need to alter the structures (Pierre and Peters, 2000) Thus this approach is more focused on the areas these governance systems take place.
Seeing governance more as a process and not so much as a structure, is based on the fact that governance is more about the interaction between groups and within certain structures.What has to be noticed in the definitions given by Pierre and Peters about governance, is that they use a state-centric model. In these definitions the state is still the most important actor and makes most of the decisions . However they argue the role of the state is transforming .
According to Kooiman and Bavinck(2013) governance is also determine by the role the state. They propose another form of governance, which has some overlap with the good governance of Beall and Fox, interactive governance. Interactive governance is based on the assumption that there are more governing actors that can interact with each other in order to solve societal problems. Through this process of interactive governance certain values, principles and goals are being made and exchanged. They also introduce another term, namely governability. Governability is the overall capacity for governance of any societal entity or system ( Kooiman and Bavinck,2013). Governability is based on three aspects: object ( the system to be governed), subject (governing system) and the relationship ( interactive governance). Governability also has made clear that a lot of layers of society and agencies are connected with each other and cannot function if they do not interact (Kooiman and Bavinck, 2013).
In this paragraph it became clear that governance is not a straightforward term. There are lot of definitions and therefore it is important for actors not get lost in ideas of good governance (Beall and Fox, 2009). Governance is also closely linked with forms of participatory planning, however there might be other forms of planning processes that might prove a better solution to certain problems. In the next chapter these alternative planning processes will be displayed. In my analysis there will be no attention towards governance, because none of my questions related to this topic. However forms of governance are closely linked to forms of planning and that is why I adapted this chapter in this theoretical framework.
17
2.4 Some other forms of planning processes and the role of the planner.
“planning is seen as a strategic activity , focussing on an intervention that ‘really make a difference to the futures of an area over time”.
( Todes,2011,p 120)
Todes believes that planners should always be aware of: sustainability, social justice,
responsiveness to the markets, integrated development and seeing planning and implementation as a linked processes (Todes,2011). She argues that there should be a shift in urban planning, from top down towards a more inclusiveness type of planning.
Some of these new forms of planning are presented by Fainstein (2000). The new forms that shortly will be discussed in this paragraph, beside the above participatory planning process, are: the new urbanism, the just city and the communicative model.
The new urbanism is a model of planning based on a design-oriented approach to plan urban development. The difference with the master plans made by planners and developers is the fact that new urbanism is primarily developed by architects and journalists. The new urbanists wants an urban design with a lot of mixed functions. They are in favour of mixed housing , mixed use and mixed income-groups. New urbanists believe that the basic needs should be in reach of two-minute walk. They see the neighbourhood as the basic unit of planning. New urbanism accept plans but does not see these plans as a method to achieve these planned cities, like in the neo-liberal framework. However this is a new approach within the planning theory, it is still primarily based on the elite and private investments. Therefore it is seen as a type of planning, that not take social justice into account (Fainstein,2000).
Where the new urbanism is still based on a form of top-down planning, the idea of the just city is based on collective action. The just city approach is closely linked with participatory planning processes. Within the just city idea, there are two groups namely : radical democrats and political economists. The radical democrats belief that in order to make the planning process work, there should be more interaction between all the layers of society and the planners. The political economists are more concerned with the distribution of social benefits within the city. Where the just city idea is based on collective action in order to make some voices heard, the communicative model wants to make the planner the centre of attention. They believe that the planner has to act as a communicator and explain his plans and debate with the citizens effected by his or her plans (Fainstein,2000). These new forms of planning need different kind of planners.
18 According to Brooks planners can practice planning in certain ways, namely : rational or nonrational and centralized or decentralized. The next figure shows the type of planners which occurs with these terms.
Figure 2: Typology of planning strategies.
Locus of Planning Modus of
Planning
Source; Brooks, 2002 In this scheme different types of planning strategies are portrayed.
In this paragraph the focus will be mainly on the planner as communicator, thus
communicative action. Within this strategy the planners are not seen as a top-down plan maker but as facilitators of a community-based design process. The idea behind communicative action is that communication is not important but the very essence of the planning process (Brooks, 2002). In order for communicative planning to work planners need to be comprehensible, sincere , legitimate and true (Brook, 2000; Todes,2011). However the approach have some negative aspects. First only some of the aspects of planning can be communicate to others. Second the approach aspect citizens and other stakeholders to be fully aware of what is happening within society and how planning processes work. The approach seemed to assume that all the stakeholders are involved and
empowered. That the communication with these stakeholders is optimal and lastly that stakeholders are fully informed of their possibilities and therefore a good decision will be made in which all participants feel heard. The fact that there are so many stakeholders evolved within this approach makes it hard to dived the important values within a community. Communicative action is based on the idea that there is a type of structured, polite, reasonable, manageable- even rational-set of political process, this assumption is not always true. A fourth “negative” aspect of this approach is the fact that this approach does not guarantee success, because due to political or societal changes the goals in the planning process might change. Fifth even if a compromise or consensus can be reached, it can effect certain groups more than other groups within the community. Sixth it is been argued that communicative planning is more focused on the process than on the outcome. Finally communicative planning offers still a vast array of research opportunities (Brooks, 2009).
Huxley also had some limitations towards communicative planning. Communicative planning is based on the clarity of all the speakers, that allows them to understand themselves and others in complete transparency. Huxley argues that this may not be the case. She also argues that there always be some power relations within the participation process. The oppressed might not be able to voice their opinion and thoughts. One of the main critics on communicative planning, according to Huxley, is the assumption it makes that understanding is also a form of agreement. This is often not the case (Huxley,2000). According to Brooks communicative planning theory provide good insights, values and methods for the planning profession, however not many planners have embraced the communicative action theory as a practical tool towards planning (Brooks,2009). This is strange, because according to other scholars like Watson(2009) ,communicative planning might be the
Centralized Decentralized
Rational The planner as applied scientist: Comprehensive rationality
The planner as political activist: Advocacy
nonrational The planner confronts politics: Incrementalism
The planner as communicator: Communicative action
19 solution in the “global South” and it will be easier to realize an urban liveable city. Although many scholars , like Watson, belief communicative planning can be a solution for Nairobi. The government of Nairobi does not promote initiatives of communicative or participation activities within the city (UN- Habitat, 2006).
In this short overview of other alternative planning processes, it became clear that no process is without limitations or is a one-size fits all model. With this short overview of other types of planning processes, which are alternatives for the neo-liberal top down approach, the next paragraph will be about something completely different, namely the liveable city. This might be a type of city that people aim for. This concept could be also placed directly after the neo-liberal paragraph, because it illustrates a kind of city which is based on a rights approach. However it is my belief that the chapters concerning planning processes should be clustered together.
20
2. 5 The liveable city.
The liveable city can be defined in many ways (Lawanson et al, 2013). According to partners for liveable Communities (2002) a definition of liveability is the sum of the factors that add up to a community’s quality of life including the built and natural environments, economic prosperity, social stability and equity, educational opportunity, and cultural, entertainment and recreation possibilities (Lawanson et al, 2013). As stated above there are many definitions of a urban liveable city, but almost all definitions highlighted the importance that the liveable approach should improve the quality of live within the city. Often linked with the term liveability is sustainability. Liveability and sustainability are often linked, but are not the same (Evans & Girardet in Lawanson et al, 2013). According to Douglass et al. (2004) a liveable city focuses on the quality of life, where the sustainable city focuses on the quality of the environment (Douglass et al. In Lawanson et al, 2013).
According to some scholars one can see the city as a living organism. The way these scholars see the city is like a human, the brain and the nervous system refer to the governance structures, the heart refers to the city spirit and place identifiers, the different organs are the residential, industrial, open spaces and other hubs while the circulatory systems refer to the transportation (Lawanson et al, 2013). The scheme of a city as a organism can be found below.
Figure 3: the city as an organism.
Liveable city Metaphor Components Description
The brain and nervous system Governance and Participation, monitoring, measuring, learning
A liveable city engages the active involvement of a
diversity of citizens in visioning, planning, implementing and monitoring regional plans and place-based solutions to challenges. The monitoring capability of a liveable city is equivalent to the nervous system in a living organism. A liveable city develops the capability to measure progress towards its goals, to encourage experimentation and test new ideas, to learn from experience, to adapt strategies in order to take into account dynamic circumstances and shifting priorities, and to quickly respond to opportunities and challenges.
The Heart Common values, a sense of identity and place.
A liveable city contains an active public realm for
reflecting the essence of itself, for creating and reinforcing a common identity, for dialogue
21 about common values, for remembering history, for celebration and festivals and for socialization of children and young people.
The organs Complete Communities, Vital Downtown core, Industrial clusters, Green space
A liveable city contains complete communities with mixed-use and affordable housing close to shopping, employment, cultural centres and pedestrian friendly
transportation networks; a vital downtown core with public spaces and economic activity ; industrial clusters with shared infrastructure; and green space including agricultural land and parks.
The circulatory system Natural resource flows, Green Corridors, Energy grids,
communication, transportation
A liveable city is connected through the flow of resources that sustain its activities including water, materials, sewage and waste ; through access to energy resources; through green corridors for biodiversity habitat and recreation; through access to the communication system including information and communication technologies, through a transportation network that prioritizes walking, public transportation and efficient movement of goods.
(Source : Timmer & Seymoar, 2006) Southworth argues that a liveable city varies from neighbourhood to neighbourhood, city to city, depending on place and local values (Southworth,2003). According to him a liveable city is a city where all the factors are balanced, thus the economical, social and physical.
These basic principles are made by H. Lennard in his article: principles for the liveable city (Timmer & Seymoar, 2006). According to Lennard the first thing that is important in a liveable city, is the fact that every citizen can hear and see each other. The city is not segregated and certain groups are not isolated. Second dialogue is an important aspect of the liveable city. Third the public realm should offer festivals, activities and celebrations in order to bring all the citizens together as human beings and not as the role they have in society. A fourth aspect of a liveable city according to Lennard is that the city is based on trust and not on fear. A liveable city should offer the public realm as a place where children and youngsters can undergo a social learning process, thus all citizens should be teachers or role models. The sixth principle of the liveable city is that the city should meet many
22 functions, economical as well as social. In a liveable city all citizens should confirm and value each other. Another aspect of the liveable city is the fact that the physical environment should have a high priority within the city, Lennard beliefs that an ugly and hostile city does not improve the social and civic live within the city. Finally all knowledge and wisdom of all the citizens are appreciated and these citizens are not intimidated by experts such as planners and architects and should be cautious and distrust the experts who are making decisions about their lives (Timmer& Seymoar, 2006).
These principles of Lennard are based on the western idea of the liveable city, Lawanson et al (2013) did research to the liveable city in the African context and come up with some principles people value in the African context. According to Lawanson(2013) the African respondents think of a liveable city as a city that allows a citizen to thrive in all incomes, has equitable access to education, healthcare and housing as well as understand and utilize cultural differences to improve the quality of life for all citizens (Lawanson et al, 2013). Second a liveable city is a city which
combines good infrastructure, good governance system, and feelings of oneness, standard security, job opportunities and a sense of belonging to an individual (Lawanson et al, 2013). Within a liveable city a reasonably easy access to all daily requirements is required and this access has to happen without forfeiting of your freedom of security. Fourth a liveable city is a safe place run by a relatively fair and just government with primary aim of people’s welfare in mind. The last principle made by the African respondents is that there should be good governance through participation, economic vibrancy and cultural and social diversity as well as equality (Lawanson et al, 2013).
The principle of the liveable city will be used in this thesis, however not all aspect will be threaten the same way. All the aspects of “seeing the city as an organism” will be touched upon. However some aspects of this metaphor will be used more often than others.
This chapter touched upon the literature where this research is based on. First the neo-liberal framework was briefly elaborated. The fact that this frame-work did not take certain vulnerable groups into account in the planning process lead to another type of planning participatory planning. First the focus was on citizen participation and the eight rungs of participation. Then the focus shifted towards participatory planning and what it entails. One of the forms of participatory planning, participatory budgeting, was high-lighted. After that the term governance was explained and how it is linked to certain planning theories. In the paragraph about other forms of planning and the role of the planner. The focus was mainly on three alternative forms of planning, the new urbanism, the just city and communicative planning. Lastly the principle of the liveable city has been explained.
23
3. Methods and Data analyses.
After the theoretical framework the focus will be now the methods and the data analyses, in order to get a clear understanding of how I came to the findings of my analytical chapters. In this chapter certain aspects of my methods and data analyses will be discussed, this varies between epistemology and the selection of interviewed.
3.1 Epistemology.
The epistemology used in this research is based on critical realism philosophy. Where realism is based on “general laws”. Critical realism focuses more on all the layers in the natural and social world, meaning that critical realism views the world more like an dynamic stage instead of a static stage (Gorski, 2013). Critical realism is based on two concepts. First critical realism implies that the world is composed not only of events, states of affairs, experiences, impressions and discourses, but also of underlying structures, powers, and tendencies that exist and these underlying processes might not be noticeable trough experience and/or discourse (Patomāki & Wight, 2000). Within critical realism it is believed that this underlying reality provides the conditions for the phenomena that is believed to be true (Patomāki & Wight, 2000). The second concept on which critical realism is based is the fact that these underlying “realities” mentioned above may not be obvious in the
experiences or the matter realized(Patomāki & Wight, 2000). According to Bryman critical realism is a form realism that looks at the structures that make certain events happens. In other words critical realism views reality, the thing what you see, not as the “real” reality. This type of epistemology implies that there is more to what science see (Bryman, 2008).
The choice to base this research on this type of epistemology, is because these underlying structures can influence the planning processes in Kaloleni and also because critical realist see science as a practice that is always evolving in order to understand the world more adequate Patomāki & Wight, 2000). This research tries to contribute to get a better understanding of how planning processes can be more inclusiveness and the perspective of the critical realism on research and science fit well with this point of view.
24
3.2 Research design.
This research is based on an exploratory case study. This type of case study is based on the fact that the researcher wants to understand why things happen within a certain case, by looking beyond the descriptive features and studying the surrounding context (Capam, 2010). According to Yin an exploratory case study is used when it is not clear what the outcome of certain interventions will be in the particular case (Yin in Baxter and Jack, 2008).
The choice for a case study is based on several things, most of my research question are how and why questions, I do not need a control group to verify my outcomes and lastly my research is focussing on events that are happening now. I have chosen for a single embedded case study, because there is only one case where I look at, namely Kaloneni. However there are different unit of analysis and therefore it is an embedded single case study (Yin, 1994). This is also a so-called field case study, which means that most of my data is collect in the field. Therefore my research is primarily based on qualitative data and just like quantitative data there are certain aspects you have to keep in mind when analysing these kind of data.
As stated above this research is primarily based on qualitative data, that can give the research some depth, however it also comes with some restrictions, especially compared to quantitative research.
Where an quantitative research often can be replicated, qualitative research often cannot be replicated, because of certain social aspects of society (Bryman,2008). Quantitative research is based on a few principles like external reliability, internal reliability, internal validity, external validity and objectivity.
In a qualitative research there are two main criteria on which this kind of research is based, trustworthiness and authenticity (Bryman, 2008). Trustworthiness is made out of four main criteria, credibility, transferability, dependability, conformability. These criteria are somehow similar to internal validity, external validity, reliability and objectivity.
Credibility of findings means that the research is done with the intention to do good research and that the findings of the results are verified with the interviewed (Bryman, 2008). In my thesis the last aspect of credibility is an difficult aspect, because I cannot verify my results with my
respondents. Therefore during the data collection I would try and verify my findings with the respondent.
Transferability is linked to the fact if the findings can be applicable to other cases. The findings are personally and context based, therefore it is hard to apply it to other cases.
Dependability focus on the records that were made, should be accessible to others. Thus in short it means that the researcher makes sure that the data collected during fieldwork is kept as it was.
Confirmability is concerned that the researcher is as objective as she/he can be, thus while interviewing his or her own opinion is not shown (Bryman, 2008).
Authenticity is based on a several criteria as well. The first criterion is fairness, this criterion focus on the fact if the researcher is representing the viewpoints among the members fairly, so not alter them to fit his/her conclusion. In this research all data will be displayed as it was said, thus there will be no alteration of the data.
The second criterion is ontological authenticity, which is concerned with the question if the research is helping the members of society to get a better understanding of their community or social surroundings, in my case Kaloleni.
25 Educative authenticity is the third criterion and it is based on the fact if the research helps the respondent to underostaon other ones opinions and visions on the situation.
Catalytic authenticity is concerned with the question if because of the research actions were taken by the respondents to change their situation.
The last criterion is tactical authenticity, this criterion is closely linked with the last criterion. This criterion is concerned about the necessary steps responds had to be made to lead to certain actions that would change their situation (Bryman, 2008). These criteria all focus on the
empowerment of the members which are been interviewed. My research is not about empowering the respondent, so I will not focus much on these aspects. In this research the focus will be more on the stories of the interviewed instead of the empowerment of the members.
In this part the type of research design is explained and some characteristics of qualitative research have been displayed. Above it is stated that there are more than one unit of analysis, but before I take closer look at the unit of analysis , I will display my research questions.
3.3 Research question and sub questions.
Before my field research in Nairobi I had the following main research question:
To what extent do the stakeholders linked to the planning process in Kaloleni include and involve the current inhabitants of the Kaloleni area in the planning process and in which way are they aiming for an urban liveable city?
However it became clear while in Nairobi, that I could not get a clear picture of all the stakeholders involved in the planning process of Kaloleni, and my focus shifted from all the stakeholders to the inhabitants of Kaloleni. One of my main focus was participatory planning, as can be seen in my theoretical framework. Based on the idea that participatory planning focus on the engagement of inhabitants in planning processes, I changed my main research question. The new main research question is as followed:
To what extent do the current inhabitants of Kaloleni feel they are involved in the planning process of Kaloleni and in which way are they aiming for an urban liveable city?
This main research question has shifted the focus away from all the stakeholders towards the inhabitants of Kaloleni. However that does not mean that only that none of the other stakeholders were interviewed during my fieldwork in Nairobi, but the focus in this thesis is more on the visions and opinions of the current inhabitants of Kaloleni. This leads to my sub questions.
How do the current inhabitants of Kaloleni view their estate?
How are the current inhabitants informed about the urban development plans for Kaloleni? How are the citizens of Kaloleni involved in the planning process?
How do residents of Kaloleni voice their opinion about these plans? Are there community based groups in Kaloleni?
How are these community based groups involved in the planning process. How do these community based groups communicate with the inhabitants.
26 How do these community based groups voice their opinion about the urban development
plans for Kaloleni?
What does the planning process of Kaloleni tell us about the mode of participatory planning happening within Kaloleni?
As noticeable in the sub questions, the main focus of my thesis on the inhabitations of Kaloleni and how they have experienced certain aspects of the planning process that is going to happen in Kaloleni. However some sub question also relates to certain community based organisations, these questions will be answered by some of the members of these community based organisations, but also by the inhabitants of Kaloleni.
In the next part the units of analysis will be elaborated.
3. 4 Unit of Analysis.
The focus of this research was originally the planning process of Kaloleni. Therefore it was important to study official documents like maps and plans, however while in Nairobi, during my fieldwork, it became clear that these maps and especially the plans were hard to get. Thus the focus has shifted more towards the stakeholders in the planning process of Kaloleni. However as stated above it was hard to get a clear picture of the involving stakeholders and above all it was hard to arrange a meeting with certain stakeholders. Hence the focus shifted again away from the stakeholders to the inhabitants of Kaloleni and some of the community based organisation as will be mentioned in the background chapter. Originally my interest was primarily on the way the inhabitants were involved in the planning processes and how they were heard. The process of participatory planning was and is still one of my unit of analysis.
While in Nairobi, it became clear that due to the short time period it was hard to get in contact, with the “real” inhabitants of Kaloleni. So first I focused on the two community groups, advised by a PhD student in Nairobi, who lived in Kaloleni. However being in an African context meetings were hard to arrange. Through Sarah Achieng, a member of one of the community based groups, I met Geoffrey Ogalla Otieno, who introduced me to other inhabitants of Kaloleni. The persons varied from age, sex and where they lived. The unit of analysis therefore are, the inhabitants of Kaloleni, the people from the community based organisations and some officials.
In this part I explained what the unit of analysis in my research are and how I come to these unit of analysis, in the next I will focus on my methods of data collection.
27
3.5 Methods of Data Collection.
Before my fieldwork in Kenya, I was planning to do five types of data planning, namely analysing maps and planning documents, semi- structured interviews, mental mapping, observations and a focus group. My data collection after my fieldwork in Kenya exists of twenty semi-structured interviews, of which some were with multiple respondents. A transect walk on which photographs were taken, to illustrate aspects of people’s stories. During this transect walk conversation were held about the estate and their view upon the estate and the urban development plans. However I have decided to use that information as supporting information instead of primary information. The third form of data collection is closely linked with the transect walk, namely observations. The last method was a survey held, in total eight surveys were held. The next part of this paragraph will focus more in depth on these forms of data collection. The first method that will be discussed is that of the semi-structured interview, because this was the main source of my data collection.
Semi-structured interviews.
According to Bryman a semi-structured interview is an interview in which the interviewer wants to hit certain topics or questions but it does not matter how the interviewer gets these answers. Thus there is some freedom in the interview for the interviewer and the interviewee to explore other aspects of the situation concerning the interview (Bryman, 2008).
During my semi-structured interviews with the inhabitants, the representatives of
community based organisations and some officials, there were some topics that I wanted to address, but sometimes I just let them talk and new aspect concerning the matter came to light. Topics concerning interviews with inhabitants of Kaloleni, were for instance, values of the estate,
representation and so on. With the community based organisation some of the same topics as with the inhabitants were discussed, but here topics also focus on visions of the estate and involvement in the planning process. While interviewing the officials, the main topics were about forms of
participatory planning and how they vision the estate in the future.
As I stated before all interviews touch upon these topics, but sometimes other paths were also explored during the interviews, because it is my belief that such information can give you a more overall picture of the situation and certain structures behind that situation.
Some of the interviews, especially with the inhabitants of Kaloleni, were not clear interviews. This had to do with fact, that people might be sceptic towards interviews with outsiders, therefore you must be careful while conducting interviews (Dasuda, 2014). The topic list of both
inhabitants/community based organisations and officials can be found in the appendix of this thesis. The second method that will be discussed is the transect walk.
28
Transect walk.
A transect walk is walk with one of the inhabitants of the community in order to get a better understanding of the community. Or as Hoyle et al (2007) put it: a transect walk is an information-gathering exercise and tool for describing and showing the location and distribution of resources, features, main land uses and landscape along a given transect (Hoyle et al, 2007).
During this walk the inhabitant of the community show certain places which are important or in my case which are places they think should change. I held more transect walks, but this was mainly because there was collaboration between students who were doing an internship at DASUDA and me. Those students, Bo and Bram were more focused on the spatial features of Kaloleni, because they are urban architects. We did one walk with the leaders of the residents association called KERA, two walks with citizens appointed by the chief and one walk with the oldest man living within Kaloleni. During this walks Bo and Bram and on occasion Pauline (she joined on the last walk) took photographs, I wasn’t able to take pictures because I needed to focus on my walking due to my disability. Fortunately Bo, Bram and Pauline shared their pictures with me and sometimes they would ask if there was something I wanted photographed.
During these walks not only photographs were taken, but there were also some little “interviews” held with certain people. As I mentioned above, these conversations are used as supporting information.
Another type of method closely linked to transect walk, is that of observation. That method will be explained next.
Observation.
How Bryman sees observation is more like an anthropological method. In his opinion the researcher interacts and even sometimes live within a community in order to understand the community better. He/she also ask, while injecting themselves into the community, certain question to understand the structures (Bryman, 2008).
However the observation I meant, was just absorb things you see while being in Kaloleni and write things down. This is not a type of “scientific” observation method, but I have used it to get a broader an clearer picture of the community for myself. Observation will therefore not play a big role in the analytical chapters, but it is my belief that a good research should get a “feeling” of their research area in order to understand an interact with the respondents better.
The last method used in this thesis will be discussed below.
Survey.
According to Bryman surveys are an quantitative approach. The surveys held in my thesis, in total eight, were more a mix between a survey and a questionnaire. According to Bryman this are both quantitative types of methods (Bryman, 2008). This would give another dimension to my thesis and I would use a mixed methods, instead of only qualitative method. However, because it are only eight questionnaires, I decided that was too little to make real assumptions based on that data. The
29 questionnaires will also been seen as supporting information in this thesis. Based on the many open questions in the questionnaire this will be possible.
Therefore it can be stated that my thesis will be based only on qualitative methods. However some secondary sources like a article in a newspaper and scientific articles about Kaloleni will also be used within this thesis.
Before the modes of analysis will be discussed, I will briefly focus on field notes. This is not really a method in my thesis, however I find it useful to mentioned it, mainly because I used it for some background information.
Field notes.
Field notes are basically your scratches you write in your notebook, when you are on the site. According to Russel you should take a few hours after your fieldwork to write your notes down, so you can make sense of them. According to Bryman field notes can help the researcher jog their memory. Field notes are not just the notes you take while observing, or in my case doing a transect walk, field notes are also the notes you take while interviewing a respondent (Bryman, 2008). In my case there were little field notes, because I can’t write very neat under time pressure, however the notes taken are written out.
Above it is demonstrated how I conducted my data. The next paragraph will explain how I analysed the data.
3.6 Modes of Analysis.
As stated above most of the data I use came from structured interviews. In total 21 semi-structured interviews were held. Four of these interviews were not recorded and therefore they were already categorized in certain groups by my local research assistant Charles or by Pauline, who occasionally joined me in interviews and because it was not recorded and I cannot write that fast I ask them to write it for me. So these four interviews were not transcribed. The other interviews I transcribed word for word, only when there was no meaningful information for my research I wrote this down in my transcripts. However this was only the case in two or three interviews and I did this at the very end of my transcribing period.
After transcribing these interviews, I coded them in a programme called Dedoose. I used a form of open coding, which means that I went through all the interviews again to see which phrases can be linked to which kind of codes (Bryman, 2008). In practice it was clear I used some of the same codes as topics at my topic list. Some codes I divided in sub-codes and some of these sub-codes I divided again. The coding tree and explanation of some codes can be found in the appendix.
In order for the codes to have any meaning, some characteristics of the respondents had to be filled in. I have chosen for the characteristics: name, type of interviewee, kind of housing, sex and age. Some characteristics speak for themselves, like name, age and sex. However type of interviewee and kind of housing might need some explaining.
Type of interviewee, was made because I put all the respondents in the same coding system. This means that officials and inhabitants are coded by the same system. This was because I spoke to two officials from which the transcription could be coded, namely the city county officer of the planning department of Nairobi and the chairman and a member of Kera. The two planners I have
30 spoken two were not recorded and therefore Pauline already categorised their answers in built-points. I have also spoken to a few Elders and members/ chairman of the youth organisation.
However one of the Elders, Sarah, was not recorded and therefore not coded within this programme, because Pauline already coded it in bullet-points for me. And the other members of community based organisation, I didn’t know they were an elder or a member until they said during the interview and therefore I characterised them as inhabitant of Kaloleni.
Type of housing was made because during my fieldwork I noticed some difference between how people in brick houses and how people in iron sheet houses (informal settlements) saw the plans and how they viewed the world. That is why I made that category, to figure out if my feelings were right.
The other data I collected, like the small chats, the photographs of the transect walks and the eight questionnaires will also be used in this thesis. However they will not be my prime data. The photos are used in the background chapter. And the notes and questionnaires will be used for supportive information.
Now the modes of analysis has been explained, I will focus on the last two paragraphs of this chapter: Limitations and ethics.
