NATURE AND CAUSES OF HOUSING PROBLEMS AMONG LOW INCOME EARNERS IN KAMPALA CITY BY KIBUGO ALLAN

You don't have the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.

Please update your flash player.

Please login or register to make a comment!

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES SCHOOL OF STATISTICS AND PLANNING (REGIONAL PROJECT) NATURE AND CAUSES OF HOUSING PROBLEMS AMONG LOW INCOME EARNERS IN KAMPALA CITY CASE STUDY: KAWEMPE MUNICIPALITY BY MR KIBUGO ALLAN BACHERLOR OF SCIENCE IN BUSINESS STATISTICS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF A DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN BUSINESS STATISTICS, SCHOOL OF STATISTICS AND APPLIED ECONOMICS, MAKERERE UNIVERSITY, KAMPALA, UGANDA JUNE 2012 CONTACT All4196@yahoo.com Call +256784200455 DEDICATION I basically dedicate my research report to my dear brother Mr. Nyombi Kenneth for all his unconditional sacrifices that made it a success. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I take this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to all the parties that have ensured that I finally compile the information presented herein.

As part of my warm acknowledgement, I would like to confirm how much I will continue to value you ... more. less.

for your contribution towards my achievement. Admittedly, I wish to acknowledge the help and guidance that was portrayed by my supervisor, Mr. JB Asiimwe, am very grateful for the regular support that led to this research report completion. Furthermore I wish to thank my fellow colleagues; Mr. James Kiarie Ngonye, Miss. Nalubega Oliver and Miss Mutonyi Doris for their advice whenever need arose. Finally I can 9t forget God the almighty, for he keeps us alive. May all your efforts and works be blessed as we build for the future v ACRONYMS C.B.O Community Based Organizations G.P.O Government Printing Office G.D.P Gross Domestic Product K.C.C Kampala City Council K.C.C.A Kampala Capital City Authority M.D.G Millennium Development Goal N.G.O Non governmental Organization N.R.M National Resistance Movement Shs Shillings SPSS Statistical Package for Social Scientists U.B.O.S Uganda Bureau of Statistics UG Uganda U.N United Nations W.H.O World Health Organization vi ABSTRACT This research was carried out to examine nature and causes of housing problems among low income earners and the existing strategies and programs deemed appropriate for alleviating the poor housing conditions among low income earners in Kawempe division. Three (3) parishes from Kawempe division participated in the study and these were Makerere2, Bwaise2 and Wandegeya. The main research instrument used was a semi structured questionnaire which was issued to 60 respondents in the division. The exercise involved coding, editing and tabulating of the collected information. The data was then entered into the computer and analyzed using SPSS and Microsoft excel software packages. A test of independence using the chi-square test was used to assess whether paired observations on two variables, expressed in a contingency table, were independent of each other. The division was mainly affected by unplanned structures, lack of enough sanitation officials to inspect the division, poor sewerage network, poor drainage system and lack of an adequate road access. Although income generating opportunities from garbage for the community existed, the sewerage system served less than 10% of the population. There was also a positive correlation between the income levels and the housing conditions since 46% of the respondents spent their largest portion on their rent. However, at least 70% of the respondents had a cemented latrine. Environmental education to the communities should be taken seriously and there must be an improvement in income levels as well as access to mortgage facilities. Finally, international organizations, with the full participation of NGOs and local authorities, should support the creation of a regional network, which promotes good housing conditions. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................ i DEDICATION ........................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................... iv ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................. v ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER ONE ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Background of the study. ..................................................................................................... 4 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................................. 5 1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................... 5 1.4 SIGNIFICANCY OF THE STUDY .................................................................................... 6 1.5 MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................... 6 1.6 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY ...................................................................... 6 1.7 HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................... 6 1.9 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................... 7 2.0 CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................. 8 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1 Who are the Kampala urban poor? ................................................................................... 8 2.1.2 Public Housing ................................................................................................................. 9 2.1.3 Rental Subsidies ............................................................................................................. 10 3.1.1 Research design .............................................................................................................. 13 3.1.2 Study Area. ..................................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Sample .............................................................................................................................. . 14 3.3 Data collection methods .................................................................................................... 14 3.4 Data analysis ...................................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Test of hypothesis .............................................................................................................. 15 CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................... 17 4.0 RESULTS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION .................................................... 17 4.0 Introduction. ...................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Population .......................................................................................................................... 17 4.2.1 Number employed. ......................................................................................................... 18 4.2.2 Percentage expenditure of total income on rent ............................................................. 19 2 4.3 Sanitation and health. ........................................................................................................ 20 4.3.1 Water for domestic use. .................................................................................................. 20 4.3.2 Latrine and toilet information ......................................................................................... 21 4.3.3 Floods ............................................................................................................................. 24 4.3.4 Waste disposal ................................................................................................................ 24 4.4 Social welfare .................................................................................................................... 26 4.4.1 Structure of the house. .................................................................................................... 27 4.4.2 Inadequate road access ................................................................................................... 28 4.5 Evictions ............................................................................................................................ 2 9 CHAPTER FIVE ..................................................................................................................... 35 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 35 5.1 CONCLUSIONS. .............................................................................................................. 35 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 38 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 40 Appendix1; Questionnaire for housing problems among low income earners in Kawempe Division .............................................................................................................................. ..... 41 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Settlement history ......................................................................................... 18 Figure 2: Number that spends biggest portion on rent. ................................................ 19 Figure 3: Domestic water sources and water borne diseases. ...................................... 21 Figure 4: Floods in Kawempe division ........................................................................ 24 Figure 5: Disposal of solid waste ................................................................................. 25 Figure 6: Number of tenants. ....................................................................................... 27 Figure 7: House wall structure. .................................................................................... 27 Figure 8: Evaluation on road access ............................................................................ 28 Figure 9: Evictions in Kawempe. ................................................................................. 29 LIST OF TABLES Table 0:Social- demographic characteristics of the respondents&&. ......................... 17 Table 2: Number of people employed. .................................................................................... 19 Table 3: Nature of employment ............................................................................................... 20 Table 4: Water borne diseases. ................................................................................................ 21 Table 7: Nature of latrine floor material .................................................................................. 23 Table 8: kitchen information ................................................................................................... 23 Table 7: Authorities 9 evaluation on sanitation ........................................................................ 26 Table 8: Access to mortgage facilities ..................................................................................... 30 Table 11: Safety of the parish and location ............................................................................. 33 4 CHAPTER ONE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the study. The World Bank reports that in 2001 per capita household consumption (in constant 1995 US Dollars) was $312. Household consumption includes expenditures of individuals and households and NGOs on goods and services excluding purchase of dwellings. It was estimated that in 2001 about 35% of the population had incomes below the poverty line. (Encyclopedia of nations, Africa, Uganda, 2006), Although housing in form of shelters a basic need required for humans to live a minimum standard of living, for low incomes earners this becomes a menace since a reasonable portion of their income is parted to cater for shelter. The general appearance of the environment doesn 9t encourage comfortable life for the low income earners. Very often garbage is littered all over the place, sewerage disposal and sanitation are in poor state and most times many households share latrines, bath rooms and water sources thus making it difficult to monitor regular cleaning. The due result is that the household face health hazards resulting from the unfriendly environment. Since many households in Kawempe division are of smaller size, the rented houses are too small to have enough living space which makes them uncomfortable. The households in the area worry too much about the security of their lives and property. Low income earners not only care about the shelter but also its compatibility with the family needs and size. In Uganda requirements that make this are security, environmental standards, location and many others. A housing problem arises if some or all these requirements are not met. The low income earners are most affected since they can 9t afford the expenses of putting up suitable structure for the shelter or rent them. As a result this has forced many to seek refuge in slum areas where it is cheap to rent though the quality of living standards is low. There have been no new housing units put up for the increasing population. The majority of the poorly housed workers are low income earners creating uneven distribution of housing facilities. Most of the inhabitants live in thatched huts with mud and wattle walls, but styles of building vary from group to group. Even in suburbs, however corrugated iron is used extensively as a roofing material. In urban 5 centers, sun baked mud bricks, concrete blocks, and even fired bricks were encouraged by the government which was responsible for a number of housing schemes prior to the Amin era. The national housing and construction corporation, a government founded agency in 1964 builds residential housing and has sponsored a number of developments in recent years. One of its projects was called the growing house. 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT The 1992 national shelter strategy with an aim of helping low income earners by improving their housing conditions by the year 2000 was established. In this the government encouraged and facilitated individuals and households as well as the private organized sector of housing developers to contribute to supply of good quality housing to the low income earning population. While these policies and their progressive refinements have improved housing delivery in Uganda overtime the housing problems among low income earners are not yet eliminated. Challenges remain in the areas of land tenure (involving as it does a complex multiplicity a mixture of tenure), infrastructure inadequacy and shortage of requisite professional and technical skills like architects with consequent prohibitive costs of the services of the available professional skills. Inadequate availability of housing/mortgage finance is also a continuing challenge. Despite housing being a basic need for all, the government of Uganda still remains unable to meet the housing needs of all the people and cannot afford to build and maintain pool houses thereby failing to fight the poor housing conditions. 1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY The study will pay more attention on finding out weather low income earners in Kawempe division face housing problems and to what extent. The target population consists of low income earners earning below $45 per month. It includes low income earners who face housing problems and low income earners who don 9t face th em. 6 1.4 SIGNIFICANCY OF THE STUDY The study will examine the strategies on adopting of effective and cheap approaches against housing problems among low income earners in Kampala and the extent to which they have gained confidence to fight the problems. The study will also encourage further studies in the field of housing mostly to the low income earners which will facilitate policies to minimize the housing problems in the area. 1.5 MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY To examine the nature and causes of housing problems among low income earners in Kawempe division. 1.6 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY To examine the probable factors influencing housing conditions among low income earners. To examine whether the authorities 9 strategies and programmes are deemed appropriate for alleviating the poor housing conditions among low income earners. 1.7 HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY Ho: Evictions are dependant on the authority 9s weakness to control them . Ho: Authorities have done enough to promote good housing in Kawempe. Ho: Most of the low income earners in Kawempe division face housing problems. Ho: There is a relationship between safety and location. Ho: The quality of housing depends on sanitation and health conditions. Ho: Monthly earning influences structure of the house. Ho: Floods are dependent on rubbish disposal methods. 7 1.9 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 1. Inadequate funds to be used for fulfillment of requirements 2. Uneasy access to the respondents. 3. Limited availability of data on housing. 8 2.0 CHAPTER TWO 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter brings from the already existing literature about the housing problems. The section reveals all that has been done so far with regard to nature and causes of housing problems among the low income earners. 2.1.1 Who are the Kampala urban poor? The majority (70%) of Kampala 9s poor households are tenants. Only 30% of the households own a house and property they live on. The median monthly income of a tenant household is (US$39 per month), however 73% of tenant households live in one room with an average of four household members, paying a monthly rent of US$42. In contrast, house owners usually have much more living space, with only 15% residing in a house with one room (but on average with five members). About half of the tenants fear eviction from the house they live in, while only 6%of house owners expressed this worry. Depending on rental status the time household occupants spend in the same house also differs significantly, the median time for tenants is two years compared to ten years for house owners. Moreover, tenants are almost six times more likely to have moving plans within the next six months than owners. This discourages any long term investments in sanitation or home improvements. (Günther, I. et al 2011) From Franklin Roosevelt to Lyndon Johnson, Harry Truman to Bill Clinton, American presidents and their housing administrators have cut the ribbons on new versions of subsidized housing projects. Their theory has been consistent: private markets fail to provide housing for people with low incomes, and thus government subsidies are needed to fill the gap. Even presidents such as Richard Nixon and George W. Bush, who did not promote the construction of new public housing, accepted the idea that housing markets fail the poor and backed housing vouchers for rent in private dwellings. Public housing projects erected to replace slums soon became "severely distressed," in the phrase used by one congressional study. Housing 9 vouchers meant to end "concentrated poverty" instead moved it around. The low income housing tax credit program provides large subsidies to developers and few, if any, benefits to low-income families. They have failed not because of poor architecture or design, nor minor management problems, but because of much more fundamental factors. They also rest on the false premise that the private sector cannot provide housing for those of modest means. In 2009, the federal government spent about $25 billion on rental aid for low-income households and about $8 billion on public housing projects. (US budget 2010). 2.1.2 Public Housing The 1937 housing act encouraged the construction of public housing projects with the creation of a federal housing authority to purchase local construction bonds, but local authorities were to build and manage the projects. Public housing was supposed to be supported through rents and local funding. However, the exodus of working-class families from public housing, along with a rent cap imposed by Congress in 1969, made local housing authorities dependent on federal operating and repair subsidies. The turning point was legislation that limited rents to 25 percent of tenant income, which had the unintended consequence of sharply cutting the revenues of housing authorities. Federal operating subsidies rose from $6.5 million in 1969 to $4.4 billion by 2009. The federal economic stimulus bill in early 2009 kicked in an additional one-time infusion of $4 billion for capital spending. (U.S. G.P.O 2010) According to Glaeser L. et al. (2008), most people agree that big public housing projects can be noxious environments for their tenants. They are disproportionately home to extremely poor, single-parent households, along with the crime, social problems, and poor academic performance associated with that demography. Ironically, public housing was originally meant to serve lower middle class working families. But as the economy boomed after World War II, those families found private homes in the growing suburbs, and by the 1960s they had abandoned public housing. Left behind were poor, nonworking families, almost all of them headed by single women. Public housing became a key component of the vast welfare network that gave young women their own income and apartment if they gave birth to illegitimate kids. As the fatherless children of those women grew up and went astray, many 10 projects became lawless places, overrun with gang activities. Public housing projects have also damaged the city neighborhoods that surround them. They have radiated dysfunction and social problems outward, damaging local businesses and hurting nearby property values. They have also harmed surrounding cities by inhibiting rundown areas from coming back to life by attracting higher-income homeowners and new business investment. Fear of those who live in housing projects has driven away striving; upwardly mobile people who are the ones that make neighborhoods flourish. City policies have often made matters worse by ensuring the permanence of public housing. Since public housing cannot be bought and sold on the market, it has disrupted the healthy recycling of property that helps dynamic cities grow and that spawns opportunities for rich and poor alike. Unlike privately owned buildings, public housing has almost always become property permanently fixed in a particular, low- value use, even as surrounding cities and metropolitan areas have changed. In recent decades, hundreds of thousands of public housing units have been demolished after falling into disrepair and being overtaken by crime and disorder. Such projects are predicated on the theory that if higher-income families live in the same complexes as poor families, the successful tenants will set a good example for the less successful tenants. Perhaps so, but so far there is no evidence of this. It might be just as likely that the children of the dysfunctional families set bad examples for the children of the more successful families.( Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2010) According to Glaeser L. et al. (2008), another response to the failure of traditional public housing has been the creation of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit in 1986, which currently subsidizes construction or rehabilitation of roughly 70,000 units of low-income housing each year. This is another failed attempt to manipulate markets, and it has a variety of negative effects. For one thing, the structure of the tax credit program encourages the location of projects in particularly low-income areas, thus exacerbating the concentration of poverty in cities, just as traditional public housing did. 2.1.3 Rental Subsidies The Budget of the U.S. Government, (Fiscal Year 2010) notes that though crime- ridden public housing projects are the most infamous symbol of federal housing 11 policy, much more funding today goes toward rental subsidies for low-income families in private dwellings. About 2 million households received federal tenant- based aid, at a taxpayer cost of $16 billion in 2009. According to Barry R. (2010), the most common explanation for the great surge in prices of housing is the availability of easy credit, which took the form of low interest rates, high loan-to-value ratios and permissive approval of mortgages. These variables certainly affect housing prices, but they don 9t seem to have moved nearly enough to explain the great price fluctuations of the past decade. dToo many people are looking for a single explanation for a highly complex set of circumstances. There were myriad causes of the Boom & Bust, and it is far more complex and nuanced than the over- simplifications we typically see. While low interest rates were the initial factor that began the spiral. According to Bonn and Copenhagen, (2011), inadequate housing accounts for over 100 000 deaths per year in the WHO European Region and causes or contributes to many preventable diseases and injuries, including respiratory, nervous system and cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Inadequate housing conditions represent a serious environmental health threat that is preventative, there are many risk factors associated with housing 3 such as noise, damp, indoor air quality, cold and home safety. The lack of home safety measures such as smoke detectors was associated with 0.9 deaths per 100000 population annually, equivalent to more than 7000 entirely preventable deaths each year across the Region. People died of cold at home: low indoor temperatures caused 12.8 deaths per 100000 population per year; and exposure to radon caused 2 3 3 deaths per 100000 population for selected countries. Exposure to second-hand smoke caused 7.3 deaths; and the use of solid fuels as a household energy source without proper ventilation was associated with 16.7 deaths per 100 000 children and 1.1 deaths per 100 000 adults annually. Poor housing was also strongly linked with ill health, including disease. In the whole WHO European Region, using solid fuels as a household energy source resulted in the loss of 577 annual disability- adjusted life-years, per 100 000 children younger than five years. Data for 45 countries indicated that mould in homes results in the loss of 40 DALYs per 100 000 children each year. . Lack of smoke detectors caused an annual loss of 22 DALYs per 100 000 population in the whole European Region. In most societies in the European Region, people spent about 90% of their time in built and artificial environments. 12 However, the reality is that much of the housing stock in the European Union still had many health hazards in 2009, such as excessive noise exposure (22%), dampness (16%), overcrowding (18%), problems keeping the dwelling warm in winter (9%) and a lack of hygiene equipment such as an indoor flush toilet (3%) or a bath or shower (3%). According to Zelalem Y. (2012), In Ethiopia, the last couple of decades evidenced the presence of scarcity of urban land which resulted from rapid urbanization. Needless to mention, this gradual increase in the level of urbanization has been accompanied by corresponding increases in the absolute number of urban residents, resulting in an ever increasing demand for rental housing. The demand for houses in urban areas has also increased due to the fact that most of fresh college graduates, the majority of whom move out o f their parent 9s houses, want to get job in urban areas. Contrary to the escalating demand for rental houses, the market adjustment process of housing demand is to slow due to the length of time it takes to finance, design, and construct new supply. Because of these lags there is a great potential for disequilibrium in the short run. In competitive market, however, in the long run houses developers may be able to keep up with this heightened demand and may force prices down ward to equilibrium. In a country like Ethiopia where home ownership costs are particularly high, there are many more renters than owners. Despite the fact that government has promised to enable the people to have secured land access, the majority of the urban residents have no financial capacity to build their dwelling to fulfill the standard of the regulation, provided that the estimation of construction cost of the units remain unchanged. However, this is beyond the current reality as the price of construction materials is rising rapidly. Consequently, all the aforementioned factors resulted in rapidly increasing demand for rental houses. In Ethiopia, the practice also indicates that government hasn 9t taken rental housing for the poor and middle income very seriously. 13 3.0 CHAPTER THREE 3.1 METHODOLOGY This chapter explains the methodology to be used to collect data about the study 3.1.1 Research design The quantitative methods were used to establish the degree of magnitude of the poor housing conditions. Descriptive design assisted to get the people 9s attitudes, opinions, and expenditure patterns about housing. Correlation design helped to establish the level by which low incomes affected housing conditions. Only 3 parishes participated in the study and these were; Bwaise2, Makerere2 and Wandegeya. Purposive Sampling was used to select two of these parishes one to represent, the more urbanized and the other to represent the semi-urbanized while the third parish was selected randomly and it turned out to be urbanized. Only three parishes were selected for the study because of the limitations on resources. From each of these parishes one zone (LC1) was selected for the study. The observation design consisted of the selected households making careful observation of their houses and the surroundings leading to the analysis of the situation in their community. The Statistical design involved participants rating the problems of housing. In addition, they also ranked the safety and hygiene of the community. This data was later analyzed and interpreted by the Researcher using SPSS. 3.1.2 Study Area. The study area was Kawempe Division. Kawempe Division is one of the five divisions that make up Kampala Capital City Authority (Kampala District). Kawempe covers an area of 25 square kilometers. It has 22 parishes and 126 villages (Kyaddondo & Nakazzi, 2001). . 14 3.2 Sample The study included residents of 3 zones in Kawempe division. Only household heads irrespective of sex were selected. To guard against the risk of high no response rate, the relatives, visitors did not constitute the target population. The sampling design selected 3 parishes that participated in the study. The questionnaire survey in the three zones comprised 20 local residents (household representatives) from each zone, The 20 households were selected randomly from each zone. Therefore the sample size was 60 respondents. The urban parish was Wandegeya parish and the LC1 zone was Kimwanyi Zone and the semi urbanized parish was Bwaise2 parish. The LC1 zone from Bwaise2 was Lufula zone. The randomly selected parish was Makerere2 parish from which the LC1 zone was zone C. 3.3 Data collection methods The methods included both primary and secondary sources. 3.3.1 Primary data: The primary data information was directly collected from the respondents using a questionnaire. Questionnaires This involved a questionnaire, which included a form and questions that were used to collect in-depth household information. The questionnaire was used to collect the following data: demographic factors, economic welfare, sanitation and health and social welfare They involved both open and close ended questions. 3.3. 2 Secondary data This included information from already existing sources like the Internet, newspapers, journals and publications. Document Review Some documents related to the topic were studied to give more information on the issues under investigation 15 3.4 Data analysis Quantitative data analysis This involved preparing data into some useful, clear and understandable pattern. The exercise involved coding editing and tabulating of the collected information. The data was then entered into the computer using the SPSS and Microsoft excel software. Data was edited thoroughly and checked to eliminate errors, coded, tallied and ranked. Next, the computations were done to determine percentages Data was analyzed for purposes of extracting useful information and developing conclusions. 3.5 Test of hypothesis The Pearson chi-square test was used for testing the hypothesis at 5% level of significance. Chi-square is a statistical test commonly used to compare observed data with data we would expect to obtain according to a specific hypothesis. The chi- square test is always testing the null hypothesis, which states that there is no significant difference between the expected and observed result. The Chi- Square (Ç²) test is undoubtedly the most important and most used member of the nonparametric family of statistical tests and was used to test differences between two actual samples. The test was applied on two categorical variables from a single population and it tested a null hypothesis stating that the frequency distribution of certain events observed in a sample was consistent with a particular theoretical distribution. A test of independence using the chi-square test assessed whether paired observations on two variables, expressed in a contingency table, were independent of each other. 16 The formula for calculating chi-square is Where = Pearson's cumulative test statistic, which asymptotically approaches a distribution. = an observed frequency; = an expected (theoretical) frequency, asserted by the null hypothesis; = the number of cells in the table. That is, chi-square is the sum of the squared difference between observed ( o ) and the expected ( e ) data, divided by the expected data in all possible categories. It is used to test dependency or independency between two variables where the hypothesis are; Ho: Two variables are dependent on each other Ha: Two variables are independent of each other 17 CHAPTER FOUR 4.0 RESULTS, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION 4.0 Introduction. This chapter attempts to establish the existence of a relationship between the two variables, i.e. housing problems and low incomes, using diagrammatical and numerical methods. The numerical method will be used for testing the statistical hypothesis and the diagrammatical method will be visual. 4.1 Population From the data collected using questionnaires, the analysis shows that 60% of the respondents where natives. The rest had just migrated into the area. These contribute to 46% of the total respondents with the majority having migrated over 1 year ago. It was noted that the majority of the people who were non-natives had come from the nearby Kampala suburbs. Table 0: Social-demographic characteristics of the respondents Characteristic Frequency Percent Born in Kawempe Yes No 36 24 60.0 40.0 Sex Male Female 31 29 51.7 48.3 Employed Yes No 30 30 50.0 50.0 Monthly earning Below 25$ Between 25$ and 35$ Between 35$ and 50$ Over 50$ 4 6 26 24 6.7 10.0 43.3 40.0 18 Furthermore, the percentage number of people who were intending to stay in Kawempe was 37%. This was due to the fact that Kawempe division has a reasonable number of university students especially in the areas of Wandegeya and Makerere2 parishes who shift after completion of their studies. This shift in trend causes a decline in economic activities resulting into other forms of migrations as shown in the graph, Bwaise2 had the biggest number of people intending to stay in Kawempe for at least the next 6 months, the reason given was that the cost of housing in this area was cheaper compared to the rest of the places with rent ranging from as low as 8$ per month. Wandegeya parish had the least number of people willing to stay which could be possibly be brought about by the high cost of housing, being the urbanized parish. Overcrowding was observed by the researcher mainly in the areas of Lufula zone and Makerere2 zone C with several cases of over 4 people sharing one room. Figure 1: Settlement history 4.2.1 Number employed. From the questionnaires, it was discovered that the number of people employed constituted half of the total sample and rest being unemployed. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 1MONTH 6MONTHS 12MONTHS OVER 1 YEAR NATIVES F r e q u e n c y Time spent in Kawempe SETTLEMENT HISTORY WANDEGEYA BWAISE2 MAKERERE2 19 Table 1: Number of people employed. 4.2.2 Percentage expenditure of total income on rent It was further revealed that 46% of the people in Kawempe spend the biggest potion their income on rent.Bwaise2 parish had the biggest number of respondents whose biggest portion of income was sacrificed for rent. This contributed to 47% of the people who were employed, Makerere2 was rated the second and lastly Wandegeya parish with 29% and 26% respectively. Of the portion that was employed, the majority was at least employed by someone(paid employment) with Wandegeya dominating with 53%, Bwaise2 and Makerere2 parishes had 20% and 27% respectively. There were a few cases of people who depended on pensions, grants and other sources as sources of employment, all these contributing to 17% only. Figure 2: Number that spends biggest portion on rent. Many households 9 members in the city are predominantly employed in the informal sector, mostly engaged in small businesses on a subsistence basis. Home-based 35% 31% 34% BIGGEST PORTION OF INCOME SPENT ON RENT PER PARISH WANDEGEYA BWAISE2 MAKERERE2 Employment status Frequency Percentage Employed 30 50 Unemployed 30 50 Total 60 100 20 enterprises in this case play an important role in contributing to households 9 incomes, and providing some level of social protection. Incomes in the informal settlements of the city are low, intermittent and uncertain, with 80% being in the low-income category. Such conditions hamper possibilities of accessing decent housing for the households in Kampala. Major sources of housing finance are informal, mainly arising out of households 9 savings and from rental incomes by having tenants pay 3 -6 months 9 rent in advance. Such sources of finance hardly provide enough funds to meet the demands of decent housing (Mukiibi, 2008). Table 2: Nature of employment Type of employment Frequency Percentage Paid 15 25.0 Self 10 16.7 Pension 3 5.0 Grants/social benefits 2 3.3 Total 30 50.0 4.3 Sanitation and health. 4.3.1 Water for domestic use. The main source of water was revealed to be piped water. 72% of the total sample size happened to be using piped water. None were using a borehole, as these are typical to rural areas. 23% had their major source of water as a well. Wells are common in semi-urbanized communities since they sometimes tend to have springs. Almost all the water sources were observed to be within a short range from households. The chart below shows water sources and the number who had contracted water borne disease in the past one month at parish level. A few cases of water collected from springs were noted in Bwaise2 and Makerere2 parishes leading to the majority reported cases of water borne diseases in the noted areas as shown in the table below. 21 Figure 3: Domestic water sources and water borne diseases. 70% of the total sample size believed that the water borne diseases were caused by poor housing conditions which included among others; poor drainage system, unsafe water for domestic use and collecting water from unprotected sources say those shared by animals like wells. Table 3: Water borne diseases. Water borne diseases in the past one month. Frequency Percentage Infected 12 20.0 Not infected 48 80.0 Total 60 100.0 4.3.2 Latrine and toilet information Only two cases of households without latrines were reported and all these were in Bwaise2 parish. These were reported to be using public toilets built by the division council. The rest of the households had either a latrine or a toilet. Though the majority of the households in the semi urbanized Bwaise2 had at least a latrine, the largest percentage had latrines that were in poor conditions and temporarily built with mud moreover some even over water channels. 0 5 10 15 20 piped borehole well other waterborne disease F R E Q U E N C Y WATER SOURCES/ DISEASES WATER WANDEGEYA BWAISE2 MAKERERE2 22 Figure 4: Latrine/Toilet ownership The majority of the people had their latrines outside their houses reason being that inside toilets require piped water and they are costly. In Wandegeya 26% had their latrines outside while Bwaise2 and Makerere2 both had 31% with Bwaise2 having all their latrines/toilets outside the house. It was discovered by the researcher that most of the households had shared latrines, majority being tenants. In Wandegeya and Makerere2 the households having shared latrines constituted 19% in each parish and in Bwaise2 it was 31% shared latrines are not easy to clean since every one seems to ignore the responsibility, as some people may not care. Table 4.1: Location and latrine ownership Latrine ownership Total Number with latrines Number without latrines Bwaise2 parish 18 2 20 Makerere2 parish 20 0 20 Wandegeya parish 20 0 20 Total 58 2 60 Chi- square, Ç² = 4.138 P-value is = 0.126 degrees of freedom= 2 The p-value is 0.126 greater than 0.05 at 5% level of significance. This means that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that latrine ownership is influenced by location of the parish. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% WANDEGEYA BWAISE2 MAKERERE2 P E R C E N T A G E S PARISH LATRINE/TOILET 23 Table 4: Nature of latrine floor material Latrine floor material Frequency Percentage Cemented 42 70.0 Wooden 8 13.3 Other 10 16.7 Total 60 100.0 However, the only deficiencies in owning a bathroom where found in Bwaise2 parish as all the respondents in Wandegeya and Makerere2 all had bathrooms. In Bwaise2 parish only 45% had a bathroom. Table 5: kitchen information Kitchen Frequency Percent Respondents with a kitchen 23 38.3 Respondents without a kitchen 37 61.7 Total 60 100 Results of a representative survey conducted with 1 9500 poor households in Uganda 9s capital during November 2010 show that the majority of Kampala 9s urban poor have access to on-site sanitation facilities. Despite the widespread accessibility to sanitation, the conditions of many facilities are unsatisfactory due to the generally large number of users per stance. This leads to low hygienic standards and waiting times for toilet users. As a result, cflying toilets d is (at least occasionally) still a common practice among the urban poor, and many toilets are abandoned after a relatively short time - thus questioning the true level of sanitation access in Kampala 9s low-income areas. Household investment in good-quality on-site facilities is discouraged by the lack of property rights and high prices, often exceeding the average annual per capita income in Kampala 9s poor settlements.(UN -HABITAT, Nairobi, 2007) 24 4.3.3 Floods The figure below shows respondents status of flooding. The people in Wandegeya and Makerere2 are not much affected by floods as believed by those in Bwaise2 who suffer during the rainy season. Figure 4: floods in Kawempe division 4.3.4 Waste disposal It was discovered that one of the minimal housing problem faced by people living in Kawempe division is that of rubbish. This is because the majority being 48% of the respondents in the three parishes said that their rubbish was collected by the KCCA rubbish collectors. 28% burnt their rubbish waste and 16% disposed anyhow where some said they dispose into the water streams especially during periods of too much rainfall. The chart below shows the disposal methods of rubbish by the three parishes. 0 10 20 30 Strongly agree agree disagree strongly diagree Frequency R a t i n g FLOODS OCCURENCE makerere2 bwaise2 wandegeya 25 Figure 5: disposal of solid waste However there seemed to be more problems with the sewerage disposal. This was common to all the parishes. The researcher observed that in some areas of Wandegeya, that sewerage pipes had faults and sewerage was all over some roads. In Bwaise2 there was a similar problem. The respondents claimed that the uphill residents released their sewerage into the water streams during rainy seasons. These streams having waste rubbish especially water bottles and plastics this caused some water becoming stagnant. Mosquitoes harbor in the stagnant water and malaria is the cause. Makerere2 had few cases of faulty sewerage pipes as was observed by the researcher. Liquid waste disposal The sewerage system serves less than 10% of the population; other wealthy and middle-income households use septic tanks. ADB (2010) describes sanitation conditions in informal settlements as appalling: cLand -tenure system and inappropriate technologies have led to the construction of very poor latrines (or no latrines at all) d. UN -Habitat (2010) reports access data for two informal settlements. Over 90% of people use unimproved pit latrines, and some residents resort to open defecation and plastic bags. Some informal settlements are also reported to be contaminated by the outflow from the communal septic tanks of large buildings, 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 burn it authorities collect it dispose anyhow other F r e q u e n c y Method of disposal SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS wandegeya bwaise2 makerere2 26 notably student hostels (ADB 2010). Public toilets are also reported to be fairly widespread. Cholera outbreaks occur regularly (Water Wiki 2010) A few respondents here and there believed that the government had done enough to raise housing standards in Kawempe division as shown in the table below. 33.3% strongly disagreed that the authorities had done enough, highlighting the division council 9s weakness. The respondents gave reasons such as unplanned structures, lack of enough sanitation officials to inspect the division, poor sewerage network, poor drainage system and lack of an adequate road access Table 6 : Authorities 9 evaluation on s anitation Have the authorities done enough to promote good sanitation Frequency Percent Strongly agree 3 5.0 Agree 18 30.0 Disagree 19 31.7 Strongly disagree 20 33.3 Total 60 100.0 4.4 Social welfare The chart below shows the respondents who were tenants. Tenants occurred more frequently indicating that the majority never owned a piece of land. Of the 60 respondents, 63% were tenants. And the rest were non-tenants. Makerere2 had the biggest number of tenants these making 36% of the total number of tenants followed by Wandegeya and Bwaise2 both with 30%. Private owners and NGOs owned the majority of the houses. There were no cases of government owned housing units implying that the government had not done much to improve the housing conditions in the area. Although the largest number of the total sample had a one-roomed house, a reasonable number of the respondents in the areas of Wandegeya and Makerere2 had at least a 3(three) roomed house or rental. 27 Figure 6: Number of tenants. 4.4.1 Structure of the house. Fired bricks built 42% of the houses. This constituted the largest percentage of house wall structure materials. Concrete bricks constituting 25% followed these. Figure 7: House wall structure. Studies show that Housing is one of the major issues often faced by cities in the developing countries. The 2002 census showed that Country wide, only 17% of dwelling units were made of permanent roof, floor and wall materials. About 59% of dwelling units in urban areas were permanent compared 10% in rural areas. The most common type of materials used for construction of the dwelling units are mud and pole for the wall (50%), iron sheets (54%) or thatch (44%) for the roof and rammed earth (77%) for the floor (24). housing stock stood at 3.8 million housing units with 30% 36% 34% TENANTS wandegeya bwaise2 makerere2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 concrete bricks sun baked fired bricks mud other F r e q u e n c y housewall material HOUSE WALL MATERIAL wandegeya bwaise2 makerere2 28 an average person size of 4.0 persons in the Urban and 4.9 in the rural areas. 71% occupy rooms rather than freestanding houses. This shows low housing standards and housing conditions because the quality of housing has not been controlled in Kampala, neither have standards been enforced. This is mainly because of the absence of a statute on building and laxity in the enforcement of building guidelines by KCCA. The laxity is mainly due to political pressure and tendencies of negligence arising from bribery or corruption in the enforcement establishments or mechanisms. The upgrading initiative will have to design in-built safe-guards to avoid the effects of politics and corruption. (UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, 2007) 4.4.2 Inadequate road access Other problems that were noted concerned lack of adequate road access. In area like Bwaise2 were there was a lot of observed congestion it was too easy to get lost from within different people 9s yards, that is if you are not used. Some respondents said that they cross dangerous temporary bridges over streams to the near by areas and this happened more often in the rainy season. Road access in the areas of Wandegeya and Makerere was quite satisfactory as shown in the chart below. Figure 8: Evaluation on road access 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Strongly agree agree diagree strongly diagree F r e q u e n c y Rating RESPONDENTS RATING OF AUHORITIES EFFORTS ON ROAD IMPROVEMENT wandegeya bwaise2 makerere2 29 4.5 Evictions It was further noted that evictions occur in the 3 parishes. The chart below shows evictions that occurred where the largest number of evictions occurred in Bwaise2, which constituted 42%. It was further noted in addition to the evictions; few people had access to mortgage facilities say from banks or the loan schemes from the government. Details are as shown in the table below. Figure 9: Evictions in Kawempe. Despite decades of work by housing and human rights organizations, NGOs, multilateral institutions and community organizations, the eviction of poor households and poor communities is increasing in African cities, causing displacement, misery and impoverishment for millions of urban citizens. The causes of these evictions are varied, but the underlying theme which links them is the increasing role market forces are playing in determining how urban land is used. In 2002, approximately 1500 people living on the Naguru and Nakawa estates in Kampala, Uganda, were threatened with eviction by KCCA the then Kampala City Council which intended to use the land for the construction of retail and middle- income housing. However, simply halting an eviction is not sufficient. Further work would be required to gain security of tenure for the residents, and also to initiate processes to realize all dimensions of their right to adequate housing. Since 2003 UN-HABITAT has engaged with the Government of Uganda and other stakeholders, including community organizations, in a Secure Tenure Campaign that has brought together all the parties. The aim of the campaign was to ensure that the urban poor 9s right to the city is recognized and protected and that no forced evictions were take place in Kampala or any other Ugandan city or town. The campaign was supported by a 28% 43% 29% Evictions wandegeya bwaise2 makerere2 30 cCities without Slums d program in Kampala to translate the outputs of the campaign into concrete actions, including the revision of the existing land and tenure systems, and capacity building of all partners to engage in city-wide, participatory slum upgrading programs. In December 2008 the Government of Uganda published its National Slum Upgrading Strategy and Action Plan, which included strategies for tenure regularization and affordable land, supply of affordable housing, urban infrastructure and basic services, a slum-sensitive urban planning framework, financing slum upgrading, inclusion and participation of slum residents, cost allocation, cost recovery and affordability, and stakeholder actors 9 participation and coordination. In the Plan, the Government states that cthis National Slum Upgrading Strategy is about taking key steps to manage and guide the process of urbanization so that so many people do not unjustly suffer from inadequacies in the most basic of human requirements 3 such as water, sanitation, shelter, health and education. The key to reaping from the proposals contained in the strategy is political will to recognize the nature and scale of the challenge, and to firmly commit to justly dealing with the needs of slum residents and this requires a sincere and long-term commitment. Table 7: Access to mortgage facilities MORTGAGES Frequency percentage Access mortgages 16 26.7 No access to mortgages 44 73.3 Total 60 100 31 4.6 Test of hypothesis Ho: The authority has n 9t done enough to promote good housing in Kawempe division Ha: The authority has done enough to promote good housing in Kawempe division Table 9: Access to mortgage facilities and whether the authorities have done enough to promote good housing conditions in Kawempe division Do you have access to Mortgages? Total Options Yes No Have the authorities done enough to promote good housing in Kawempe? Strongly agree 4 2 6 Agree 3 2 5 Disagree 9 11 20 Strongly disagree 0 29 29 Totals 16 44 60 P-value is 0.00 chi- square, Ç² = 21.733 degrees of freedom= 3 The p-value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05, the 5% significance level. The null hypothesis Ho should therefore be rejected and that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that the authority has done enough to lay strategies that promote good housing in Kawempe division. Ho: Evictions are independent of the authority 9s weakness to control them Ha: Evictions are dependent on the authority 9s weak ness to control them Table 10: Evictions in Kawempe and what the authorities have done to fight it Evictions occur in Kawempe Total Options Yes No Have the authorities done enough to promote good housing in Kawempe? Strongly agree 6 0 6 Agree 5 0 5 Disagree 15 5 20 Strongly disagree 2 27 29 Totals 28 32 60 Chi- square, Ç² = 37.452 P-value is 0.00 degrees of freedom= 3 32 The p-value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05, the 5% significance level. The null hypothesis Ho should therefore be rejected and conclude that evictions are dependent on the authority 9s weakness to control them . Ho: sanitation and health doesn 9t influence housing conditions Ha: sanitation and health influences housing conditions Table 11: Waterborne diseases and latrine Latrine Total Options Have a latrine No latrine Have you contracted a water borne disease in the past one month? Yes 12 0 12 No 46 2 48 Totals 58 2 60 P-value is 0.472 chi- square, Ç² = 0.517 degrees of freedom= 1 The p-value is 0.472 much greater than the 0.05 level of significance; therefore we accept Ho implying that at 5% significance level, sanitation and health doesn 9t influence the housing conditions in Kawempe division. 33 Ho: safety is independent of location. Ha: safety depends on location. Table 18: Safety of the parish and location Parish Total Options Bwaise2 Makerere2 Wandegeya Safety of the parish Very unsafe 14 2 1 17 Unsafe 3 6 3 12 Safe 3 10 12 25 Very safe 0 2 4 6 Totals 20 20 20 60 P-value is 0.00 chi- square, Ç² = 29.331 degrees of freedom= 6 At 5% level of significance, we reject the null hypothesis. The p-value is lower than 0.05. Therefore safety depends on location. Ho: monthly earnings do not influence structure of the house. Ha: structure of the house depends on monthly earnings. Table 13: Monthly earnings and structure of the house House wall structure Total Options Concrete bricks Sun baked Fired bricks Mud Other Monthly earning Below 25$ 1 2 1 0 0 17 Between 25$ and 35$ 2 1 3 0 0 12 Between 35$ and 50$ 6 2 9 6 3 25 Over 50$ 6 0 12 1 5 6 Totals 15 5 25 7 8 60 P-value is 0.72 chi- square, Ç² = 19.762 degrees of freedom= 12 34 The p-value is 0.072 much greater than the 0.05 level of significance, therefore we accept Ho implying that at 5% significance level, monthly earnings do not influence the structure of the house. Ho: Floods are independent of rubbish disposal methods Ha: Floods are caused by rubbish disposal methods Table 14: Floods and rubbish disposal Rubbish disposal methods Total Options Burning Collected by KCCA Dispose anyhow Other Does it flood during rainy season? Strongly agree 14 6 8 2 30 Agree 1 4 0 0 5 Disagree 2 5 0 0 7 Strongly agree 0 14 2 2 18 Totals 17 29 10 4 60 P-value is 0.003 chi- square, Ç² = 29.603 degrees of freedom= 9 The p-value is 0.003 lower than the 0.05 level of significance, therefore we reject Ho implying that at 5% significance level, Floods are caused by poor rubbish disposal. 35 CHAPTER FIVE 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter contains an overall summary of the findings of the study in relation to the objectives and hypothesis and it gives some recommendations to aid in further research in this area and policy making by concerned stakeholders. 5.1 CONCLUSIONS. Income levels and housing An average number of Kawempe division residents are employed with the majority earning between 35$ and 50$ a month . 47% of these spend their biggest portion on rent. This is due to the fact that many households 9 members in the city are predominantly employed in the informal sector, mostly engaged in small businesses. There is a positive correlation between the income levels and the housing conditions. The probability that monthly earnings influenced the structure of the house was 0.072, therefore at 5% significance level; monthly earnings didn 9t influence the structure of the house in Kawempe division. Sanitation and health Though 72% of had adequate access to safe water sources, they still lacked enough sanitation facilities say the latrines and kitchen per each household. Despite the widespread accessibility to sanitation, the conditions of many facilities are unsatisfactory due to the generally large number of users in the ratio of 10:1 per stance on average. This leads to low hygienic standards and high waiting times for toilet users. In Kampala, the price of an improved sanitation facility is high compared to other developing country cities. Reasons might be the high cost of construction materials, particularly cement, and the monopolistic market structure of building material providers. 36 The probability that water borne disease was caused by lack of latrines was 0.472, therefore at 5% significance level, sanitation and health did not influence the housing conditions in Kawempe division. Waste disposal Income generating opportunities from garbage for the community exist. However, they are not adequately exploited to raise incomes that can improve their housing conditions. One reason is that, in Kawempe, the process is still informal. This is because the people are not yet organized. Organizing them would probably link them to established formal buyers of recyclable materials. Therefore, in is noted that the potential for poor communities to generate income from waste cannot be fully realized unless these communities are well organized and mobilized. Communities have the potential and ideas to contribute to reducing the garbage problem. This is evidenced by the informal small-scale efforts to collect peelings in all the zones studied. Here sensitization and environmental education will play a crucial role. A convincing 48.3% of the respondents admitted that KCCA collected the rubbish at least once in a week. The probability that floods were caused by poor rubbish disposal methods was 0.003 implying that at 5% significance level, floods were caused by poor rubbish disposal methods. However there are still sewerage problems generated by unplanned structures, poor sewerage network and a poor drainage system. Social welfare 63% of Kawempe division residents are tenants occupying mostly houses with fired bricks. This shows low housing standards and housing conditions because the quality of housing has not been controlled in Kampala, neither have standards been enforced. This is mainly because of the absence of a statute on building and laxity in the enforcement of

less