01

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Overview of the project’s components

Research Goals:

Localizing Urban Upgrading 

  • Producing a publication which elaborates on  localizing urban development on the local neighborhood level in the Egyptian urban context.
  • delocalization of existing urban efforts locally not only on the central and national level

   The scientific goal of the project is to introduce the concept of Berlin’s Neighborhood Management into the Egyptian academic and practice context by introducing an urban management unit. By intervening practically into the neighborhood and by accompanying it by research

  • to gain the most experience rather than just researching about it,
  • to use the local knowledge rather than protocolling it,
  • to try to directly implement the agreed issues with the people rather than making mere promises. Besides action, research on the topic will be done twofold:
  1. All the investigations to stakeholders and the urban analysis are directly part of the research and are understood as an accompanying research on the implementation and practical approaches in the sense as it is done by the German BBSR in the ExWoSt Program or by DIFU for the Social City Program (wissenschaftlich-analytische Begleitforschung).
  2. Research is done on national and international regeneration approaches and tools and their adaptation to the Egyptian setting. In the project, we seek answers to the following research questions:

Research questions:

COOPERATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD REGENERATION EFFORTS

  • Are there best practice solutions regarding coordinated and cooperative regeneration projects in Egypt with a strong local presence/ office?
  • Where are the most convincing international examples fitting into the Egyptian context?
  • To which extent does the German integrated, and multi-sectorial neighborhood management approach give ideas/ can be a model for urban regeneration in Egypt? What needs to be modified from the very beginning?

Research Problem and  limitations

Urban management of urban poor areas in Egypt, which are mainly the informal settlements, needs to be studied and analysed. The central system that governs the Egyptian model of urban management need to be revisited in order to provide a better understanding to the situation and propose a more local management on the neighbourhood level.

The tasks that were supposed to be carried by the Egyptian partner were not fulfilled. The TU Berlin team had to modify the work plan, and instead of implementing the idea of the local NM office, interviews and experts workshop

Methodology 

The research started by exploring the concept and its implementation in the international context. Examples from the Netherlands and Germany, with a special detailed analysis for the case of NM in Berlin.

The Egyptian context is analysed, and a case study was selected in the city of Hurghada – Red sea governorate.

This is followed by an experts online workshop, through which all the related issues were presented, discussed and recommendations towards enhancing the situation were presented.

Local Urban Management: Definition, goals and advantages 

Each area within a city has its own characteristics, special features, its mixture of residents, users, and stakeholders. It also has its own problems and potentials. In order to deal with all this, a high level of understanding and coordination is needed on that level, which has to be linked and coordinated on the city and governorate, and  national level as well. This has a history in Egypt that was initiated by the GTZ, and we can argue that this was an attempt to resemble the German model that has started almost in the same period of time.

Background – Local Upgrading Unit: Egyptian experience

The problem of managing neighborhood development on the local level was observed by the GTZ while working in Egypt in the urban development sector of informal settlements in the Greater Cairo region. They established two local offices in cairo and Giza.

Local offices: Manshyiet Nasser & Boulaq El Dakrour (GTZ),

Part of the operations of the GTZ in Egypt in the years (1998-2009), was planned to have local representation offices in the local areas for following up the GTZ pilot projects at a district level. This policy entailed the establishment of local GTZ offices at the two districts of Boulaq EL Dakrour and Manshiet Nasser. With a highly qualified team, these offices were dynamic and were very involved in the local affairs of the districts.

Other than following up GTZ’s interventions in the areas, they also established strong connections with the local CBO’s and natural leaders of the areas. These networks of local stakeholders allowed the GTZ team to solidify their presence and gain the community’s trust. Moreover, the GTZ team followed a very strict rule of no intervention or influence when it came to the local elections of the parliamentary members, however, due to the trust established, the local leaders were encouraged to exchange with the GTZ team about the local politics of the areas and how things were developing.

In 2003, I joined the project as member of Integrated Development Group (IDG); the project urban consultant to elaborate on the Local Area Action Plan (LAAP) for four areas in Manshiat Nasser (MN) in Cairo, in cooperation with social consultant; Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA). The project’s aim was improving the living condition in MN through participatory urban development

GIZ local Office was based at MN district premises.

Local Area Action Plan (LAAP)

There was a lack of accurate, detailed and updated maps for the area, so a cooperation between the consultant (IDG) and GIZ have be done through creation of a GIS database based on recent satellite images. GIZ MN office supported this through cooperation with some community members (most were students) to conduct urban surveys for the targeted areas. The GIZ trained these participants on how to read maps and collect the data in hardcopy maps and forms. Parallel to this, the GIZ team and IDG prepared the required maps for the urban survey zones, and they conducted field verification to double check the collected data. ICA also worked on social study through Participatory Rapid Appraisal (PRA)

Then different strategic planning sessions in cooperation between GIZ, IDG, ICA and community representatives, community members, NGOs were conducted to agree on a vision for the area. The main outcomes were LAAP for the four targeted areas and detailed plans as well to support the land titling process afterwards.

GIZ Local office

It was coordinating different activities, which LAAP is one of this as well as the detailed plan creation and approval by Cairo governorate. GIZ office supported the local initiatives fund through upgrading of different schools in the area as a fast measure as a part of knowing the local community tool and to build the trust with the community. It supported the  establishment of a stakeholders committee to facilitate and support the LAAP.

Support and conduct a socio-economic study for MN district in cooperation with local community (youth), and capacity building for them to be able to collect the required data and data entry afterwards in digital format to be used afterwards by the socio-economic expert who was supporting the project. The data entry phase was accommodated at the GIZ office.

  • Supported the conduction of hazardous areas study which are risk area due to rock slide of the cliffs/mountain, this was done for the district in cooperation with geological expert.
  • Supported and cooperated with Entwicklungsbank (KFW ) in some infrastructure projects for the district.
  • Cooperate with Cairo governorate urban planning department regarding detailed plans.
  • Implementation of different projects such as upgrading of MN entrance, and MN Autostrad faced.
  • Support cultural activities for the community in MN youth center and cultural center
  • Upgrading of youth center

The Office had a good relation with district chief, natural leaders and community youth. Having such an office inside or close to the project targeted area is supporting and facilitating the project activities as well as supporting trust building with the community, and it would also work without the office and the coordination mechanism will be different but it may take longer time.

This kind of projects of GIZ has specific tasks and duration and when it is over, the project office should be closed and handed over back to the government. For the office, it should be handed over to MN District, and after establishment of ISDF, the related work to MN as one of the informal settlements, was supported by Cairo Urban Upgrading Unit (UUU).

However, in 2008, due to the rockslide of El Deweqa area and its consequences, the GTZ offices were quickly   and a smooth handover took place to the counterparts both at district and at governorate level.

 

  • Other parts (GIZ)
  • pros and cons
  • institutional structural (supporting determined entities)
  • human capacities
  • financial resources

 

 STAKEHOLDERS

  • What are the main stakeholders in the central, regional and local government and in the informal settlements and what are their interests?
  • How can proper communication and flow of information be accomplished between them?
  • Who can be involved? Which stakeholders aren’t willing to be involved and why?

NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE/ PROPOSALS OF THE GOVERNORATE 

  • What are the real needs of the people of the informal settlements regarding regeneration?
  • What kind of proposals regarding neighborhood development does the governorate have?
  • Do both ideas (of the governorate and of the people) fit each other or are they contradictory to each other??

Fig. Stakeholders distribution Figure (source: DEVEPER 2018)

METHODOS

    • Which intervention methods/ tools are appropriate and successful (local office, neighborhood juries, strategic plan, urban planner as mediator)?

    INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION

    • What are the existing public services?
    • Who provides these services?
    • What leads to the absence of public services in Hurghada’s informal settlements?
    • Which infrastructure issues do the inhabitants manage by themselves?