Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ins tute for Research on Labor and Employment
Research & Policy Brief
Number 15– October 2013
Mobilizing informal workers for urban resilience: Linking poverty allevia on and disaster preparedness
Bradley Cleveland, Master's in Urban and Regional Planning, UCLA
I. Introduc on
Coopera ves and associa ons of informal sector workers could become key play-ers in global efforts to alleviate extreme poverty and enhance disaster resilience in urban slums and informal se lements. By engaging these worker-led organiza ons in community-based efforts to reduce disaster risk, the urban poor who live in in-formal se lements and work informal jobs can exert their collec ve power to over-come their social and economic marginaliza on. Such a strategy can build safer communi es and lead to the extension of worker rights and social protec ons to those toiling in the informal economy. Two landmark global ini a ves—the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to alleviate extreme poverty and the Hyogo Framework for Ac on (HFA) to reduce the risk of disasters—expire in 2015. The United Na ons is working with its mem-ber countries and interna onal non-governmental organiza ons to cra a new de-velopment agenda and disaster resilience framework to succeed these global efforts. While the original MDGs and HFA ini a ves developed independently, the successor ini a ves to reduce poverty and disaster losses are linked. As the world has learned, in a ma er of seconds, a disaster can reduce to rubble the develop-ment achievements built over decades.
Development assistance and disaster response in the 21st century face three relat-ed challenges that require an integrated approach. First, as the world con nues to urbanize, more people and assets are loca ng in disaster-prone ci es. Second, dis-asters and extreme weather events are increasing in the severity and frequency, owing to climate change. Finally, the majority of the new city-dwellers are living in slums and informal se lements and working in the informal economy, crea ng a double exposure in which both their lives and livelihoods are at risk. In its report, Plan of Ac on on Disaster Risk Reduc on for Resilience, the United Na ons has concluded the founda on of sustainable development is community resilience that “integrates poverty reduc on, disaster risk reduc on, sustainable livelihoods and climate change adapta on.” (UN, 2013, p.7) The UN’s global ini a ves recognize the nature of poverty is changing as the world con nues to urbanize. Poor city residents live in hazardous informal se lements because of the low costs of housing and proximity to informal sector work. To ply their trade, informal workers must navigate an urban environment where fines,
The UCLA Ins tute for Research on
Labor and Employment supports
faculty and graduate student re-
search on employment and labor
topics in a variety of academic disci-
plines.
The Ins tute also sponsors colloquia,
conferences and other public pro-
gramming, is home to the undergrad-
uate minor in Labor and Workplace
Studies at UCLA, and carries out
educa onal outreach on workplace
issues to cons tuencies outside the
university.
The views expressed in this paper are
not the views of The Regents of the
University of California or any of its
facili es, including UCLA, the UCLA
College of Le ers and Science, and
the IRLE, and represent the views of
the authors only. University affilia-
ons of the authors are for iden fi-
ca on purposes only, and should
not be construed as University
endorsement or approval.
10945 Le Conte Ave. Ste. 2107
Los Angeles CA 90095
Tel: (310) 794-5957
Fax: (310) 794-6403
www.irle.ucla.edu
1
2
eviction and harassment are a daily threat, only to receive poverty‐level wages. Governments frequently refuse to recognize informal employment or informal settlements, and withhold a social safety net that would allow them to ride out a shock. In addition, local authorities often fail to provide basic services and infrastructure that could protect their homes, assets and livelihoods. This policy brief builds on the UN’s call for community‐based disaster risk reduction, arguing the urban poor who live in informal settlements and work informal jobs can become key actors in the development of disaster resilient communities. This strategy relies upon the agency of the slum dwellers and informal workers themselves to overcome the political marginalization that contributes to their vulnerability to disasters. By engaging membership‐based organizations of informal workers in efforts to reduce disaster risk, local government can scale up efforts to enhance community resilience. More importantly, workers in the informal economy become agents of change, not recipients of development aid, transforming their precarious jobs into what the International Labour Organization defines as “decent work,” that provides a fair income, job security and social protection, and promotes social dialogue. (ILO, 2007) This Policy Brief is divided into five sections:
Section II reviews the challenges facing rapidly urbanizing cities in the developing world; Section III describes the United Nation’s efforts to develop the Post‐2015 development agenda and framework for disaster resilience; Section IV examines how worker‐led membership‐based organizations can lead community‐based efforts to reduce disaster risk; and Section V is the conclusion.
II. Double Exposure of Informal Workers Living in Informal Settlements The world is urbanizing, as rural residents move in unprecedented numbers to cities that are ill‐prepared to accommodate the rapid growth. Many of these cities have failed to develop land use policies and plans to accommodate the population growth. Shlomo Angel, author of Planet of Cities, argues that city authorities are failing to make the investments to accommodate the developing world’s urban expansion, which “requires the acquisition of substantial amounts of land for public use. It also requires expensive new infrastructure—the extension of roads and streets and the construction of sewer lines, sewage treatment plants, water reservoirs, and water mains.” (Angel, 2012, p.13) People are drawn to cities to pursue the kinds of opportunities only available in urban settings —education and jobs, better health care—and they settle on whatever unoccupied urban and peri‐urban land that is available and affordable. The newly urbanized poor become the “pioneer settlers of the swamps, floodplains, volcano slopes, unstable hillsides, rubbish mountains, chemical dumps, railroad sidings and desert fringes,” writes author Mike Davis. Precisely because these sites are so hazardous, he argues, slum residents have a modicum of “security from rising land values and eviction. . . The very poor have little choice but to live with disaster.” (Davis, 2006, p.120) Compounding the problems of urban poverty and failure to plan is the geography of the world’s cities. According to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR)’s report, Disaster Risk Reduction: An Instrument for Achieving the Millennium Development Goals, eight of the ten largest cities are at risk of earthquakes. The world’s fastest growing cities are located along coastlines that are vulnerable to sea level rise, storm surges, and flooding. While the world’s population has grown 87% since the 1980s, coastal cities have increased by almost 200%. Weather‐related events—storms, cyclones, and droughts—account for 90 percent of all natural disasters, and the vast majority of people
Informal settlack basic citylandslides. ©
exposed tthe 1980sweather. According(UNISDR),poor infracurrently The UNISD“low intenfocuses ois the “reland long‐tshocks ancrisis and
Slum dweinformal jand as‐neanthroposcale and The informthe 1970scountries
tlements lining Mey services, and are
©Bradley Cleveland
to these hazas to 1,000 per(UNISDR, 201
g to the Unite, “Cities conceastructure. Prlive, a numbe
DR differentiansity, high fren major disasentless attritterm stressesnd stresses intpoverty.” (Ox
ellers are not jobs—as conseeded industrlogist Keith Hunregistered
mal economys, to the point. The World B
edellín’s steep moe vulnerable to flod, 2011
rds live in ther year, and cli13, p.8)
ed Nations Seentrate risk troblems are per that is proj
ates betweenequency” evesters—the Haion of smalles like climate to a rising tidxFam, 2013, p
just living in pstruction laborial workers—Hart coined thd economic ac
y and its self‐et that these wBank in its Wo
untain slopes oding and
e developing mate change
cretariat of thhrough high pparticularly acected to dou
n “high intensnts, such as faitian earthqur recurring shchange and ee of avoidablp.3)
precarious, inorers and stre—because therhe term “inforctivities amon
employed andworkers comporld Developm
3
world. The nue will continue
he Internatiopopulation decute in slums,ble by 2030.”
sity, low frequflooding and luake and 2004hocks,” such aenvironmentae suffering, a
Localized floohillside can dinformal settinfrastructurenatural floodthe flood chamodest weatsupplies, resuresidents do insurance to
A hazardous vulnerable coassets, knowtake measurIntergovernm“High exposuoutcome of sthose associaand unplannof governancthe poor.” (I
nformal settleeet merchantsre are few oprmal economng rural migra
d contingentprise the majoment Report 2
umber of maje to trigger m
nal Strategy fensities, inad, in which aro” (UNISDR, 20
uency” eventland degrada4 tsunami—Oas food price al degradatioand drives mil
oding in a sludestroy hometlements havee—the trees d protection—annels and sether events. Sulting in publnot have accprotect their
event becomommunity wiwledge, and skres in responsmental Panel ure and vulneskewed deveated with envned urbanizatce, and the scPCC, 2012, p.
ements, they s, waste pickepportunities iny” in 1971, toants in Accra,
workforce haority of the w2013: Jobs est
jor disasters more frequent
for Disaster Requate urbanound one billi011, p.20)
s such as earttion. While wOxFam argueshikes and nan that “turnsllions of peop
m built in a fes and family e neither the and vegetatio
—nor the greyewer systemsSewage pollutic health emecess to affordar homes and l
mes a disasterithout the capkills—that ense to the evenon Climate Cerability are glopment procvironmental dion in hazardcarcity of live.8)
are working ers and domen the formal o describe the, Ghana. (WIE
ave continuedworkforce in lotimates there
has double sit and severe
Reduction n planning anon people
thquakes, andworld attentios more damagtural disasters risk from theple deeper int
loodplain or sassets. Thesegreen on that proviy infrastructu—to manage tes water ergencies. Sluable flood livelihoods.
r when it strikpacity—the able residentnt. The Change warnsgenerally the cesses such adegradation, ous areas, falihood option
in precariousestics, taxi drieconomy. Brie range of smEGO, 2012)
d to grow sincow‐income e are over 1 b
nce
nd
d on ging rs, ese to
steep e
de re— even
um
kes a
ts to
s,
as rapid ilures ns for
, ivers itish mall‐
ce
billion
people whpoverty. W
“Theaar20
If low payjob securinot enougharassmewill confisvendors aevict day they solicIndian strwrites, “Tvendors aon public unsightly Informal wsettlemenResidentshomes ansecurity oresilient tp.224) ThFramewo III. A Post Just montAction, a people anframeworwarning sfactors—texacerbat The HFA sto preparAchievingresult of d
ho work in thWorld Bank P
The problem ours of work;arning enougre working in012, p.xiii)
y, unsafe condity and social gh, informal went from localscate the gooand fine wastelaborers fromit work. In a Weet vendors, The authoritieas illegal entitspace, and a nuisance.” (K
workers livingnts face a dous of these settnd assets, are or social proteo recovery” be consensus trk to reduce d
t‐2015 Agend
ths before leamagnitude 9.nd devastatedrk, which sousystems, strenthe land‐use te the losses a
successfully ce for and pre
g the Millenniudevelopment
“Manyearthq
e informal ecresident Jim
for most poo; many hold mgh to secure a unsafe cond
ditions and laprotection wworkers face authorities. ds of street e pickers; them corners wheWIEGO study Randhir Kumes treated streties, encroachsource of
Kumar, 2012,
g in informal uble exposuretlements, thevulnerable toections, makinbecause they to link the sudisaster risk p
da
aders of 168 n.0 earthquaked the region fght to build cngthening dispatterns and associated w
hanged the invent disasterum Developmpractices:
y hazards are quakes. . . A ‘d
Bogatábarrio.
conomy, but mYong Kim wri
or people in [dmore than ona better futureitions and wit
ck of were
Police
ey ere of
mar eet hers
p.4)
e. eir o hazards. Thng them finanpossess “limccessors to thprovides an o
nations gathee in the Indianrom Indonesicommunity reaster preparethe social, ecith hazardous
nternational drs. According tment Goals, “d
natural and udisaster’ occu
4
á’s recyclers sell itePhotographer: Ge
most of theseites in the 20
developing] ce job and woe for themselthout the pro
ey work inforncially vulnerited coping cahe Millenniumopportunity to
ered in Japann Ocean triggia to India. Thesilience by asedness at all lconomic, ands events. (UN
dialogue fromto the reportdisasters are
usually ineviturs when a ha
ems they have salvelver Barreto © S
e workers are13 report:
countries is noork long hourslves and theirotection of th
rmal jobs thaable. When capacity.” (O’Bm Developmeo address this
in 2005 to adgered a tsunahe tragedy gassessing disaslevels, and add environmenISDR, 2005)
m how best tot Disaster Riskneither inevit
table, like cycazard results i
vaged along the siintana Vergara, 20
e condemned
ot the lack of s. Yet, too oftr children, anheir basic righ
t lack decentcrises strike thBrien and Leicent Goals ands double expo
dopt the Hyogmi that killedave new urgenster risks andddressing thetal condition
o respond to k Reduction: Atable nor ‘nat
lones, floodsin devastatio
idewalks of el Cart011
d to a life of
a job or too ften, they are d at times thts.” (World B
wages, job hey are the “lchenko 2000,d the Hyogo osure.
go Frameword over 220,00ncy to the enhancing e underlying rs—that
disasters to hAn Instrumentural,’” but ar
, droughts ann that leaves
tuchito
few not ey Bank,
least ,
rk for 0
arly isk
how nt for re the
nd
The UNISDformula: D
Just as deassess andinvolves npopulatio The IPCC Advance Cand the qcommunittheir capa The UN solaunchingcommuniturges locaorganizatenhance eto invest ifamilies aassessmevulnerabirisk and remitigate f Many inteadopted tprovides vand disast(IRW) desapproach
experiencIRW initiaand socia
commstruck
DR expressesDisaster Risk
Disaster ricommunit
Hazard = peruptions,
Vulnerabilsusceptible
Capacity =protect ag
Resilienceevent in a improvem
evelopment pd mitigate hanot only undeon, and the ca
concurs, obseClimate Chanuality of theities can loweacity. (IPCC, 2
ought to addrg its “Making Cty‐based appal governmenions to engagemergency rein risk mitigatnd communitnts and mainlities; to mainestores ecosyfloods and oth
ernational nothis approachvaluable lessoter resilience scribes its comthat “incorpo
ce” into the foates various “l strength of t
unities or eveHaiti.” (UNIS
the relations= Hazard x Vu
sk = potentiay;
potentially ha epidemics;
lity = the set e to the dama
= the assets, kainst and/or
= the ability otimely and efent of basic s
ractices havezards througerstanding theapacities avail
erving in its rege Adaptatior dwellings—er their disast012, p.8)
ress the undeCities Resilienroach to disants and non‐gge citizen grouesponse capation efforts thties; to prepatain data on ntain critical iystems and naher hazards. (
n‐governmenh over the pasons for the Poagendas. Isla
mprehensive orates indige
ormation of cinterventionsthe communi
en whole natSDR, 2013, p.7
ship betweenulnerability /
al loss of life, a
armful events
of characterisaging effects
knowledge, skrespond to th
of a system tofficient mannstructures and
e increased dih planning ane hazard itsellable to preve
eport, “Manan,” that the mnot the hazarer risk by red
erlying risk facnt” campaignaster risk reduovernmentalups and civil sbilities; to prohat target loware communithazards and nfrastructureatural buffers(UNISDR, 201
ntal organizatst decade, anost‐2015 deveamic Relief Wand collaboranous knowled
community nes to enhance tity,” including
5
ions unable t7)
n hazard and tCapacity, wh
assets, livelih
such as drou
stics of a persof hazards;
kills that enabhe hazard; an
o anticipate aner, through ed functions. (
saster risk, lond preparatiof, “but also thent or respon
aging the Riskmain determird itself. Sinceucing their vu
ctors by . The uction (DRR) society and ovide fundingw‐income ty risk
e that reducess that 12)
tions have d their work elopment
Worldwide ative dge and local
etworks. the capacity g:
Residents of and city servlocated on Ma trash‐filled ©Bradley Cle
o cope, such
the potentialhere:
hoods that co
ughts, floods,
son, househo
ble relevant mnd
and recover frensuring the pNGO Voice, 2
ocal communion. According he level of vund to the disas
ks of Extreme nant of risk ise hazardous eulnerability a
g
s
l
Monrovia organizices be provided t
Medellín’s closed d lot as part of the eveland, 2011
as in recently
danger or ris
uld occur to a
earthquakes
old, or commu
measures to b
rom the effecpreservation,2012, p.2)
ities can adop to the NGO Vulnerability ofster.” (NGO V
Events and Ds exposure—events are inend exposure,
zed to demand thato this informal setdump site. City woformalization pro
y earthquake
sk it poses as
a particular
s, volcanic
unity that ma
be taken to
cts of a hazard, restoration o
pt measures tVoice, this f the concerneVoice, 2012, p
Disasters to where peopleevitable, , and increasi
at utilities ttlement orkers survey cess.
‐
a
ake it
dous or
to
ed p.1)
e live
ng
Trash dumpepublic health©Sintana Ve
While IRWgeographNor does equal oppimplemen At the Mafocused ohunger, ddisplacemill‐plannedinfrastrucdisasters.disaster re The UN isDevelopminclusive pand linkinOverseas the post‐2incomes athe pover The Post‐achieve thAgenda p
ed in the streets ath of city residents. rgara, 2011
CommunitEmergencyand stockpTraining fotechniques
W’s approach ic hazards, ththe IRW addrportunity to pntation.” (Ma
ay, 2013 meeton how to addisease, confli
ment, forced md urban growcture—water In addition, tesilience in vu
conducting ament Goals, wprocess, consng developmeDevelopmen2015 agenda and people’s rty line.” (ODI
2015 develophis goal, the Rroposes to fo
ttracts rodents thaPhotographer: Gu
ty mapping exy response trpiling of equipor architects as. (IRW 2012,
depends on the group’s apress what Proparticipate in y 1999, p.217
ting of the Gldress the undct, violence amigration andwth through lasupply, sanitathe UNISDR idulnerable, ma
a parallel procwhich also expsulting with ment goals to dt Institute, a should seek taccess to servI Working Pap
pment agendaReport to Higocus on inclus
at can spread diseuillermo Zambrano
xercises that aining to prepment for useand engineers, p.17)
the active paproach does ofessor Peter the political a7)
obal Platformerlying risk faand inadequad discriminatiand use policiation, electricdentifies povearginalized co
cess to draft apire in 2015. Tmember stateisaster resiliedevelopmentto eradicate evices, but of rper #2, 2013,
a will put alleh‐Level Panelsive urban dev
6
ase, threatening to
engage commpare first respe in an emergs, and those i
rticipation oflittle to tackleMay calls “soarena as subje
m for Disasteractors that drte health servon.” Among ties and planncity, and tranerty reductioommunities. (
a developmeThis time arous, internationence and climt think tank bextreme povereducing the p.5)
eviation of extl of Eminent Pvelopment. T
the
munity membponders in segency; and in the constru
f community me a communitocial sustainaects of public
r Risk Reductirive disaster rvices, educatthe proposalsning; and to dsportation—n as an essen(UNISDR, Cha
nt agenda to und, the UN hnal NGOs, andate change mbased in Englaerty. “Doing srisks that thr
treme povertPersons on thThe report ad
“pro‐poo“contribupoverty adwellersdwellerslivelihooenumeraworkers as establentitlemformaliziregulatiomicro‐cr2013, p.1 The SyntMay 201
bers in urban earch and res
uction trades
members to aty’s economicbility,” whichc policy desig
ion, much of risk, “includintion . . . land ds are efforts tevelop resiliethat mitigatential strategy air’s Summary
succeed the has established private sectmitigation. Acand, there is aso is not just areaten to push
ty and inequahe Post‐2015 vocates for thor,” policies tute to endingand improvins,” by providins with “accessods.” The Highates strategiein the informlishing a systeents and a soing informal jon, and providedit. (Aromar14‐18)
thesis Report 13 UNISDR me
risk assessmcue techniqu
on safer buil
address c vulnerabilith he defines an and
the debate ng poverty, degradation, to curb rapid ent urban e the risk of to develop
y, 2013, p.1)
Millennium ed a more tor organizaticording to tha consensus ta matter of rah people belo
ality at the forDevelopmenhe adoption ohat can g extreme urbng the lives ofng all urban s to sustainabh‐Level Panel es to assist mal economy, em of urban ocial safety nejobs through ding access tor and Rosenzw
presented ateeting in Gen
ent; es,
ding
y. as “an
and
ons, e that aising ow
re. To nt of
ban f slum
ble
such
et,
o weig,
t the eva
7
notes that not only are slums vulnerable to disasters, but “badly planned and managed urban developments can generate flooding.” For example, slums can magnify hazard levels by encroaching on natural areas, which leads to the decline of ecosystems that can mitigate flood damage. (UNISDR Synthesis Report, 2013, p.6) An integrated approach to development and disaster resilience must take into account the informal economy and informal settlements, it must provide universal infrastructure and environmental restoration, and it must address good governance and inclusive, social dialogue. The successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action must focus on a “bottom up” approach, engaging the marginalized residents of vulnerable informal settlements, if it is to address the underlying risk factors. It must build on successful community‐based programs to increase disaster resilience. These programs have demonstrated that:
Disaster prevention and preparedness is largely a local task that must involve community stakeholders who can identify specific hazards and develop plans to reduce the vulnerability of specific populations.
It is most successful when communities adopt a “no regrets” strategy that seeks to address vulnerability to future disasters, while offering immediate improvements in lives and livelihoods of marginalized populations.
It must enhance neighborhood cohesion, build social capital, and give voice to marginal communities to be sustainable. (Rottach, 2011, p.101)
The Inter‐Governmental Panel on Climate Change suggests that cities can manage disaster risk and prepare for extreme weather by adopting “low regrets strategies” that produce co‐benefits. These measures—including early warning systems and improved communication with local citizens; sustainable land management and ecosystem restoration; and improved stormwater management and sanitation systems—“help address other development goals, such as improvements in livelihoods, human well‐being, and biodiversity conservation.” (IPCC, 2012, p.14) The Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction, an alliance of UN agencies, NGOs and research institutes, agrees with the IPCC, emphasizing the ability of urban ecosystems “to influence three dimensions of disaster risk equation:
1. By preventing, mitigation or regulating hazards (flooding, landslides, heat waves); 2. By acting as a natural buffer and reducing people's exposure to hazards, and 3. By reducing vulnerability to hazard impacts through supporting livelihoods and basic needs
(food, water, shelter, fuel) before, during and after disasters.” (PEDRR, 2103, p.2) Both the Post‐2015 development agenda and the new disaster framework will highlight the importance of governance and social inclusion. As the Overseas Development Institution concluded in its working paper on the Post‐2015 development agenda, “Poverty is determined, and poverty alleviation or resilience‐building capacity circumscribed by governance. . . [A]ccess to security of tenure, where people live, access to insurance, microcredit, local support networks and so forth all hinge on governance .” (ODI Indicators, 2013, p.60) To address inequality and social exclusion, OxFam promotes a “people‐centered approach” that puts those most at risk at the center of the discussion of poverty alleviation and community resilience. OxFam argues, “Organizations that represent the disadvantaged should be strengthened. Civil society has a key role in mobilizing and building social demand for strong government policies that will enhance resilience, thus putting a political price on government inaction.” (Hillier and Castillo, 2013, p.24)
8
IV. Organizing Community Resilience The growing consensus to link the development agenda to a new disaster framework includes the following elements:
A focus on improving the livelihoods of poor urban residents, especially jobs in the informal economy, in order to lift workers and their families out of poverty;
A focus on reducing the vulnerability of informal settlements by assessing and mitigating the exposure to hazardous events by implementing “no‐regrets” measures; and
Develop an inclusive participatory process that ensures social dialogue and builds social cohesion among residents of marginalized communities and informal workers.
In addition, the UNISDR’s emphasis on resilience requires a collaborative approach that involves community stakeholders in all levels of planning and implementation. Authors Fikret Berkes and Helen Ross argue that community resilience must focus on “identifying and building on a community’s strengths, rather than focusing primarily on identifying and overcoming deficits.” The most important community assets are leadership and social networks because these build communications, social support, and social capital.
“Communities do not control all of the conditions that affect them, but they have the ability to change many of the conditions that can increase their resilience. They can . . . actively develop resilience through capacity building and social learning. . .” (Berkes and Ross, 2013, p.13)
Membership‐based organizations (MBOs) of workers in the informal economy may prove to be an effective vehicle to address both the development agenda goal to alleviate poverty and the Hyogo Framework goal to increase disaster resilience. Worker cooperatives and associations deploy both economic and political strategies to protect and enhance members’ livelihoods. These organizations mobilize their members to engage in collective action and to advocate for pro‐poor public policies. (Carré 2010, p. 9) Employing informal workers in community‐based DRR can enhance urban resilience and alleviate poverty at three scales – household, neighborhood, and city‐wide. At the household scale, such a strategy can increase economic security by providing additional revenue sources, while reducing the vulnerability and exposure of the family home and assets. At the community level, working with MBOs will increase the capacity of slum residents to reduce disaster risk and increase social capital, while amplifying the workers’ political voice and bargaining power. At the city scale, community‐based DRR initiatives that restore degraded landscapes and urban ecosystems can reduce flooding and disease vectors, which will improve the public health of all city residents, while creating job opportunities in the field of disaster risk management and related activities such as urban agriculture and land conservation. MBOs of informal workers have grown in size and effectiveness since the 1972 formation of the Self‐Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in India. Recognized as one of the oldest and most successful MBOs, SEWA has leveraged its organizing prowess to establish tri‐partite bargaining between workers, government and businesses in order to secure some of the social benefits, training, and security traditionally provided through formal employment structures. Rina Agarwala, Sociology Professor and author of Dignifying Discontent: Informal Workers’ Organization and the State of India, writes, “Informal workers are ironically pulling the state into playing an even more central role than it did in formal workers’ movements.” (Agarwala, unpublished memo, 2012)
Waste picenhance ttheir capathe integrprovides csustainabcommunit WIEGO haBogatá, Crecicladorpickers frosanitary lastreets toviewed thauthoritieunregulatReciclado1990 to dpursue th2,500 of t(WIEGO, 2 The ARB mstrategic aIn the midto privatizprivate coCourt casemanagem At the samTetra Pakby the AR“middle mimportant
WIEGO reneeded toinsufficienRecicladoreciclador Engaging
cker MBOs arthe livelihoodacity to exert ration of the ico‐benefits thility. Their skty‐based DRR
as studied orgolombia’s wares. City authoom dumpsiteandfills, forcin ply their tradhese workers es persecutedted activity. Tres de Bogotáefend the rigeir livelihoodthe city’s 12,02012, p.23)
mobilized its alliances to ad‐1990s, Bogaze waste manompany. The e, requiring t
ment system. (
me time, ARB. The four traRB. By purchasmen,” therebytly, the progr
1. The reassocia
2. Membthe he
3. Bogatáits sust
esearcher Cano be the legalnt if informal res de Bogotáres. (Martinez
membership
e ideally suiteds of their mepolitical powinformal secthat contributeill set, tools aR priorities.
ganizing efforaste pickers, oorities evictedes in the 1960ng waste pickde. Many cityas beggars, ad them for theThe Asociacióná (ARB) was eht of recicladd, and now re000 waste pic
members andchieve two keatá city authonagement serasociación suhe city to inte(WEIGO, 2012
B established ansnational cosing recycled y reduced theam improved
ecicladores seation was ablbers were traiealth and safeá increased ittainability go
ndace Martine framework tworkers werá, says the foz, 2012, p 23)
‐based organ
ed to engageembers and thwer to improveor into the foe to a commund equipmen
rts among or d waste 0s, to create kers into the y residents and city eir n de established indores to presents kers.
d formed ey victories. orities decidedrvices, signinguccessfully bloegrate the inf2, p.23)
a partnershiporporations fumaterial direeir costs and ed sustainabilitcured steadyle to address ined to identiety of the worts recycling raals regarding
ez identifies tthat recognizee not organizrmation of th)
izations in ac
9
Recicladoresthey can sell.
in communitheir commune wages, prodormal waste munity’s econont, and daily a
n
d g an exclusiveocked the conformal worke
p with Carrefounded a recycectly from theensured a stety at three sca work, and reunsafe workiify and safely rkers and theates, extending solid waste m
two prerequised the rights zed. Nohra Pahe MBO laid t
ctivities to enh
use a hand cart to © Sintana Verga
ty‐based DRRities. Waste pductivity, andmanagement omic, social, aactivities lend
e, 10‐year, USntract, and mers into the cit
our, Grupo Facling center te recicladoreseady supply oales: eceived higheing conditiony removed hazir communiting the life of imanagement
sites for the Bof informal wadilla, presidethe foundatio
hance the res
o go door‐to‐door ra, 2011
R to protect thpickers have dd working consystem. This nd environmd themselves
S $1.7 billion cmost recently wty’s formal so
amilia, Naturathat was owns, the companof recycled ma
er wages and s for their mezardous matees; and its landfills ant. (Martinez, 2
Bogatá recyclworkers, but tent of the Asoon for the soc
silience of inf
collecting trash to
he lives and demonstratenditions throuintegration ental to many
contract withwon a Supremolid waste
a Cosméticos ed and operanies cut out thaterial. But m
benefits; theembers; erials, improv
nd contributin2012, p 17)
ling project. Tthe laws wereociación de cial inclusion o
formal settlem
o find materials
d ugh
h a me
and ated he
more
ving
ng to
There e
of
ments
The Asociaccarts and eqPhotograph
would alloprecariouSuch coopco‐benefievent of a OxFam‐Usignificantposition ethe aftermand offer
Reducing flood hazaneighborhidentify p Food wasagriculturecosystemhazard imhazard im(Estrella a V. Conclu The Unitecommunitsettlemenimplemenorganizatthat integ
ción de Recicladorequipment is repairher: Miguel Archan
ow cities to scs workers, anperative agret by enhancina disaster, MB
K Research Dt sources of semergency sumath of a disamicro‐loans t
garbage fromard, remove dhoods, collectotential haza
te can be comre projects. Ecms can reducempacts. Seconmpacts by provand Saalismaa
sion
ed Nation’s efty resilience cnts and workinted at the loions can provgrate margina
es de Bogota has ered, improving thengel Quiñoz © Sint
cale up commnd integrate iements betwng social coheBOs can provi
irector Duncasupport than upplies in neigaster, leadingto see familie
m streets, stredisease vectoting cast‐off mrds or locate
mposted, beccosystems proe physical expd, ecosystemviding essenta, 2011, p.9)
ffort to link thcan address tng in the infocal level by civide the politialized commu
established a maine productivity of thtana Vergara, 201
munity‐based nformal settl
ween the localesion and buiide a local saf
an Green saysthe state,” inghborhood shg search and res through the
eams, and draors, and impromaterial, wastoxic contam
oming fertilizovide two imposure to natms lessen disasial goods suc
he Post‐2015 the double exormal economity authoritieical leverage tunities and inf
10
ntenance yard whehe city's waste pick1
disaster risk ements into tl authorities alding social cafety net.
s these inform times of crishelters and acrescue operate crisis.
ainage channove public hete pickers can
mination for sa
zer for use in portant conttural hazards ster risk by reh as food, fib
developmentxposure facingmy. However,s. The engageto ensure theformal worke
ere kers.
managementthe economicand worker‐leapital within
mal networksses. (Green, 2ct as communtions; and the
In the integrasectorssolid wextendSalvagresold,demolpickersfor pubconstradditiowaste
els of informalth. As they n engage in cafe removal.
ecosystem reributions to uby acting as neducing sociaber, medicines
t agenda andg city residen these globalement of wore adoption ofers into the fa
t, enhance thc and social faed MBOs can informal sett
s “are in gene012) These nnity‐based firsey can lead re
case of wasteating the forms can improvewaste manageding the life oed items can , or recycled.ition debris cs can becomeblic infrastrucuction projeconal source opickers.
al settlementmove througcommunity m
estoration anurban resiliennatural barriel‐economic vs and constru
d the Hyogo Fnts who are liv initiatives mrker‐led memf inclusive polabric of the cit
he livelihoodsabric of the cprovide anottlements. In t
eral more etworks can st respondersecovery effort
e pickers, mal and infore the commuement systemof landfills. be fixed and Constructioncollected by we valuable inpcture and privcts, and an f revenue for
ts can reducegh various mapping effort
d urban nce. First, ers that mitigulnerability tuction materi
ramework toving in informust be
mbership‐baseicies and practy.
s of ity. ther he
pre‐s in ts
mal unity’s m,
n and waste puts vate
r
e
ts to
ate o als.
o build mal
ed ctices
11
City investments in infrastructure and services for informal settlements represent a “no regrets” strategy that can improve the public health and safety of residents, reducing costs over the long‐term. Improved trash collection and sanitation can reduce disease vectors; developing and maintaining green and grey infrastructure can reduce flooding and landslides. Restored ecosystems can serve as natural buffers against hazards, while become the source of healthy, locally grown food as fruit‐bearing trees and gardens replace denuded hillsides and landscapes. Employing workers in the informal economy in community‐based efforts to reduce disaster risk offers co‐benefits that address the Post‐2015 development agenda to reduce extreme poverty by improving their wages and job security, and reducing their vulnerability to disasters and shocks. Such a strategy can meet the International Labour Organization’s goal to create “decent work,” through job creation, the extension of worker rights and social protections, and the establishment of a social dialogue between informal sector workers and local authorities. Finally, this strategy promises to be financially sustainable as the informal workers become more productive, as new markets are developed, and local governments achieve savings from their investments in resilience through lower costs of disaster response and recovery.
Bradley Cleveland is an urban planning and health policy consultant based in Oakland, CA. He studied Medellín’s urban planning initiatives in 2011, and received his Master's Degree in Urban and Regional Planning from UCLA in 2012.
Sintana Vergara received a Fulbright Fellowship to Colombia in 2010‐2011 to research the environmental benefits of informal recycling in Bogota. As part of her research, she organized a photo project, "Reciclando Bogota," in which recyclers used disposable cameras to document their lives and work.
12
References
Agarwala, R. (2013). Informal Labor, Formal Politics, and Dignified Discontent in India. Cambridge, England: University Press.
Angel, S. (2012). Planet of Cities. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Aromar, R., & Rosenzweig, C. (2013). The Urban Opportunity: Enabling Transformative and Sustainable Development. Report to the High‐Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post‐2015 Development Agenda.
Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). “Community Resilience: Toward an Integrated Approach.” Society and Natural Resources, New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
Boojh, R. (2012). “Ecological Approach for Post‐Disaster Recovery and Mitigating Future Risk.” In Ecosystem Approach to Disaster Risk Reduction, Gupta, A. K. and Nair, S. S., eds. New Delhi, India: National Institute of Disaster Management, pp. 197‐195.
Carré, F. (2010). An Approach to Organizations of Informal Workers. Women in Informal Employment, Organizing and Globalizing, unpublished manuscript.
Chen, M., Bonner C., Chetty, M., Fernandez L., Pape, K., Parra, F., Singh, A., & Skinner C. (2012). Urban Informal Workers: Representative Voice and Economic Rights. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. London, England: Verso Books.
Estrella, M., & Saalismaa, N. (2012). “Ecosystem Management for Disaster Risk Reduction.” In Ecosystem Approach to Disaster Risk Reduction, Gupta, A. and Nair, S., eds. New Delhi, India: National Institute of Disaster Management, pp. 5‐44.
Green, D. (2012). How poor people get through crises: some excellent ‘rapid social anthropolgy’
from IDS and the World Bank. [Web log post]. Retrieved from www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=9711.
Hillier, D., & Castillo, G. (2013). No Accident: Resilience and the Inequality of Risk. Oxford, United Kingdom: OxFam International.
International Labour Organization. (2007). Decent Work Agenda. Retrieved fromwww.ilo.org/global/about‐the‐ilo/decent‐work‐agenda/lang‐‐en/index.htm.
Inter‐Governmental Panel on Climate Change. (2012). Summary for Policymakers: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change. New York, NY.
Islamic Relief Worldwide–Bangladesh. (2012). Collective Actions for Resilient Urban Areas. Retrieved from www.islamicrelief.com.
Kumar, R. (2012). The Regularization of Street Vending in Bhubaneshwar, India: A Policy Model. Cambridge, MA: Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO).
Martinez, C. (2012). “Climate Change and Informal Recycling: An NGO and a Private Sector Partnership in Bogotá.” In Managing Climate Change Business Risks and Consequences: Leadership for Global Sustainability, Stoner, J., and Wankel, C., eds. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
May, P. (1999). Natural Resource Valuation and Policy in Brazil. NY, NY: Columbia University Press.
13
Mitchell, T., Jones, L., Lovell, E., & Comba, E. (2013). Disaster risk management in post‐2015 development goals: Potential targets and indicators. London: Overseas Development Institute.
NGO Voice. (2012). Disaster Risk Reduction: Understanding Risk. NGO Voluntary Organisations in Cooperation in Emergencies. Retrieved from www.ngovoice.org.
O’Brien, K. L., & Leichenko, R. M. (2000). “Double Exposure: Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change within the Context of Economic Globalization.” NY, NY: Global Environmental Change, pp. 221‐ 232.
Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (2013). PEDRR Input into Post‐2015 Global Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/publications/v.php?id=33534.
Rottach, P. (2011). Background and Components of Disaster Risk Reduction. Diakonie Katastrophenhilfe & ActAlliance. Retrieved from preventionweb.net/go/2412.
Samman, E., Ravallion, M., Pritchett, L., Klasen, S., Alkire, S., Lenhardt, A., & Letouzé, E. (2013). Eradicating global poverty: a noble goal, but how do we measure it? (No. 2). Overseas Development Institute (ODI) Working Paper. Retrieved from www.odi.org.uk/publications/7534‐eradicating‐ global‐poverty‐noble‐goal‐but‐measure.
United Nations. (2013). Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience. Retrieved from reliefweb.int/report/world/plan‐action‐disaster‐risk‐reduction‐resilience.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action. Retrieved from www.unisdr.org/we/coordinate/hfa.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2011). 2011 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/19846.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2012). Making Cities Resilient. Retrieved from www.unisdr.org/campaign/resilientcities.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2013). Chair’s Summary, Fourth Session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from www.preventionweb.net/files/33306_finalchairssummaryoffourthsessionof.pdf.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2013). Disaster Risk Reduction: An Instrument for Achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Retrieved from www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/15711.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2013). Synthesis Report: Consultations on a Post‐2015 Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/publications/v.php?id=32535.
Women in Informal Employment, Organizing and Globalizing. (2013) Informal Economy: History and Debates. Retrieved from www.wiego.org/informal‐economy/history‐debates.
World Bank. (2012). World Development Report 2013: Jobs. Washington, DC. Retrieved from openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11843.