ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF HOUSING PROGRAMS IN ETHIOPIA: 1976--1986
Doctor of Architecture
It has been over twelve years since the 1974 Ethiopian Revolution took place. Having inherited a housing system which did not serve the majority of Ethiopians, the new government adopted five approaches to alleviate the housing crises: namely, Government Sponsored Low-Cost Housing, Cooperative Housing, Self-Help Housing, Resettlement, and Upgrading of Housing. For the purpose of comprehensive planning and implementation, the central government created new institutions, restructured existing ones and established a structure of urban units on the neighborhood level, hierarchically organized on the basis of size and type. The government took these steps more than ten years ago. However, housing needs of urban poor are still not being met or, even, adequately addressed. Today, there is a severe housing shortage in urban areas with a large and growing population living in sub-standard housing. To what extent these steps, taken to alleviate the housing shortage, represent a radical change in governmental attitude or just a token response, are examined. The impact that they had on the housing circumstances of the poor, are evaluated. Finally, an analysis is made of the specific objectives and means of implementation that had been adopted in the housing programs. While there was a clear understanding of the dynamics involved in the housing programs, what emerged was that the principal 'actors' (the central government, the various enabling institutions, and people at the level of the neighborhoods) had not succeeded in establishing a working system of management and inter-communication. This has resulted in the mis-match of intentions and results. Furthermore, while the objectives of the programs and the responsibilities of the institutions are clearly stated, the resources and management needed for reaching those objectives and for the efficient function of the institutions, are inadequate. The findings question the decision-making style of the central government and, particularly, of the institutions which see the housing programs with narrow and specifically defined objectives and with rational application of ideal means required to reach those objectives. This decision-making style is inappropriate for situations constrained by limited resources in material and technology. This is because the availability of the resources were not considered as a factor of the implementation process when the objectives were established.