Cities, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.

291299, 1998
Pergamon PII: S0264-2751(98)00020-1 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0264-2751/98 $19.00 + 0.00

Viewpoint
Structural adjustment,
urban systems, and
disaster vulnerability in
developing countries
Mohamed Hamza and Roger Zetter
School of Planning, Oxford Brookes University, Gipsy Lane Campus,
Headington, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK

Structural adjustment (SA) or macroeconomic reform has become a dominant characteristic especially
in developing countries, where national economies are being reshaped to a common discipline regardless
of local circumstances. Within this context, the paper examines the impact of structural adjustment on
disaster vulnerability in the urban sector, through examining some structural considerations which underpin
forms of technical guidance to mitigate disasters. The paper argues that urban areas are not disaster prone
by nature; rather that the structural processes which accelerate rapid urbanisation, population movement
and population concentrations substantially increase the disaster vulnerability of the mass of low-income
urban dwellers. Migrants settle on areas either originally unsafe (flood plains, land slides, etc), or create
the potential of man made disaster (environmental degradation, slum fires, health hazards). This problem
derives from three interrelated factors. First, structural adjustment policies are the driving force generating
new coalitions of urban interests responsible for decision making at the national and on the city levels. A
potential implication is the trade-off between production, competition and efficiency and adverse environ-
mental consequences in terms of potentially disaster-vulnerable settlements. Such trade-offs, it is argued,
cannot be afforded by most developing countries. Second, reinforcing this, is the shift in viewing the city
economy in an international context. The future of the city, in a globalising economy, depends on economic
imperatives and a new division of labour in which Third World cities provide highly competitive labour
markets. This questions whether technical and environmental safety concerns, which land use planning
might try to address, have been overtaken by the political, and economic forces in a global context. Third,
the transformation in urban systems has led to review of planning processes and methodologies, ie the
form and nature of urban planning. This questions how the new tools and mechanisms of planning inter-
vention and urban management can respond to issues such as disaster mitigation. In other words, who will
be responsible? The effect of these structural factors influencing urbanisation processes, the paper argues,
exacerbates disaster vulnerability in Third World cities. The paper concludes with guidelines as to how
negative impacts of SA policies vis-a`-vis disaster vulnerability could be minimised. 1998 Elsevier
Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Introduction technical intervention focused on pre- Normality of the developing world

To concentrate on preparedness and
mitigation of hazards without consider-
ing the underlying economic and social
systems within which they occur can
lead to poorly conceived strategies for
intervention. Much disaster policy still
puts emphasis on the impact of nature,
and this has led to the dominance of
dicting the hazard or modifying its
impact. The intent of this kind of inter-
vention has always aimed at, according
to Anderson (1985), getting things
back to normal as soon as possible.
Our starting point in this paper is that
normality could be the condition of
vulnerability which allowed the crisis
to become a disaster in the first place.
nowadays is structural adjustment
(SA) or macroeconomic reform a
dominant characteristic in this decade,
where national economies are being
reshaped to a common discipline
regardless of local circumstances. The
World Bank and the IMF are now
pushing the tigers model as a solution
to the economic problems of the

291

developing world. The complex nature
of the linkages between environmental
degradation associated with policies
aiming at rapid economic growth and
hazards in urban areas is gaining recog-
nition. This in turn, has led to increased
awareness of the less obvious human
connections between natural hazards
and disastrous outcomes. Understand-
ing of such linkages requires a cross
sectoral and interdisciplinary approach.
This paper argues that urban areas
are not necessarily disaster prone by
nature, but become disaster prone
because of structural processes creating
rapid urbanisation, population move-
ment and concentration. The conflict of
economic interests is, we contend, one
of the biggest barriers to the mitigation
of disasters (Cannon, 1994). This mani-
fests itself in the marginalisation of
people. Migrants settle on areas either
originally unsafe (flood plains, land
slides, etc), or create the potential of
man made disaster (environmental
degradation, slum fires, health hazards).
Within this context, the paper exam-
ines the impact of structural adjustment
on disaster vulnerability in the urban
sector, through addressing some struc-
tural considerations which underpin
forms of technical guidance to miti-
gate disasters.
The purpose of this paper is not to
elicit remedies for specific problems,
but rather to explore urban disaster vul-
nerability with a novel conceptual
framework. The heart of this exercise
is defining vulnerability in unconven-
tional terms in relation to changes tak-
ing place in urban systems and socio-
spatial patterns. Two main themes,
underpinning SA, will be investigated
to establish the link between increased
vulnerability as we see it and
structural factors in urban areas. The
context of the changing world economy
and its impact on the division of labour,
defining new roles for cities and
determining new forms of governance,
is the first one. The second and inter-
related issue, is the changing nature and
role of planning in the context of mar-
ket enablement. The effect of both fac-
tors, as the paper argues, influences
urbanisation processes and exacerbate
disaster effects. The paper concludes
with guidelines as to how negative
impacts of SA policies vis-a`-vis disas-
ter vulnerability could be minimised.
292
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
Concepts and definitions
Vulnerability as we see it
Vulnerability assessment requires con-
textual analysis of complex and multi-
faceted factors. Attention should be
given to expanding definition of risk
and vulnerability to allow for the
identification of differential effects on
various categories of the population
(Kelly, 1995). In this paper we argue
for a more people-centred approach
rather than a hazard-centred one, which
is adopted just to reduce the intensity
or impact of hazards. In other words, it
is important to understand how systems
place different people in different
degrees of vulnerability.
The vulnerability that we are con-
cerned with has to do with choices (or
the lack of them) due to economic,
social, and political constraints. In
reviewing previous attempts to define
vulnerability in structural terms, Can-
non (1994), for example, draws the
attention to inequalities in risk and
opportunity. He views the inequalities
as a function of the systems of power
operating in societies which are ana-
lysed in terms of class, gender and
ethnicity. We aim to take this a step
further in terms of structural and
macro-level considerations. Choices in
the context of structural adjustment
have more to do with national and
international economic and political
systems. The definition of vulner-
ability, therefore, starts from the point
of being able to make a choice of
where to live, and the implications
for safety and security. The interaction
between economic and political factors
which deprive some from this choice is
what determines who will be vulner-
able and when.
Vulnerability in urban areas has gen-
erally been equated with poverty.
Whilst direct causal relationship may
be true, it is the underlying processes
which create poverty which contribute
to determining the degree of vulner-
ability. It is the processes that we are
concerned with.
On the other hand, and as far as
urban areas are concerned, Anderson
(1992) explains vulnerability of metro-
politan areas in terms of three charac-
teristics: those which result from the
concentrations of people and activities
in defined and limited space; those
which result from the sheer numbers of
people and activities; and those which
result from proximity to human-made
hazards.
We argue that this is an explanation
of the symptoms, rather than the root
causes. Whether it is the vulnerability
of individuals, or the collective vulner-
ability of urban areas, it is the structural
process which creates these character-
istics, rather than the characteristics per
se. For example, concentrations of
people and activities on safe sites is not
a source of vulnerability. But, the
unequal distribution of resources, the
marginalisation of segments of the
population and informal activities, and
their exclusion from planned and ser-
viced areas, is what forces people on
unsafe sites; and then vulnerability is a
consequence. There is a necessity,
therefore, to look at the changes in
urban systems which create such
characteristics, before we start to estab-
lish any correlation with vulnerability.
Urban systems and socio-spatial
patterns
The processes of accelerated growth,
exacerbated by import substitution stra-
tegies, in developing countries have led
to rapid urbanisation. Such processes
involved redistribution of the labour
force between sectors, and conse-
quently a redistribution in space
(Harris, 1983). Population mobility is
continuously being redefined
depending largely on the outcome of
such processes. Skeldon (1990) argues
that: patterns of population mobility
are intimately related to the overall pro-
cess of development and any expla-
nation of mobility becomes in a sense
an explanation of development. The
logic of uneven development causes
migration.
Accepting this notion, it also seems
that receiving areas in developing
countries (ie the cities), although they
benefit from increased labour and
attract businesses and investment, are
rarely prepared to meet the costs
involved. This was reflected in the
change in population distribution in
metropolitan areas. Urban population
and urban land uses relocate and
reformulate largely by decentralisation.
The common tendency was for popu-
lation to decline in the central areas and
to grow fast on the periphery. The

direct consequence for such pattern is
an intensified competition for land
which priced low-income groups out of
the legal market in many cities of the
Third World.
Such deconcentration patterns of
industrial and residential development
have emerged extensively around
major cities such as Buenos Aires,
Mexico City, Sao Paulo, Seoul and
Kuala Lampur (Gilbert, 1993). With
spatial growth in some areas comes
densification and centralisation in
others, which increases the risk asso-
ciated with disasters (Cohen, 1991). In
Rio, for example, about 1.6 million
people have settled rapidly on unsafe
land. Unplanned favelas have located
on hillsides, in and around garbage
dumps, and in flood-prone lowland
areas along river banks (Munasinghe et
al., 1991). In Sao Paulo, 400 areas have
been identified as being at risk from
flooding, and an estimated 75 000
people are periodically affected, while
25 000 run at a high risk from land
slides (Leitmann, 1991). One third of
greater Sao Paulo dwellers live in areas
without any services to collect solid
waste, and only about half have access
to sewage systems (Preece, 1992).
These changes in urban systems, if
viewed from a disaster vulnerability
perspective, create polarisation and
spatial segregation of groups which in
turn determine different degrees of vul-
nerability. The challenge in this
respect, as UNDRO (1977) states in its
monograph on land-use aspects of dis-
aster prevention and mitigation, is the
difficulty to alter socio-spatial patterns
once they are established and consoli-
dated. Spontaneous growth has been
the norm in many developing countries,
and spatial policies have a very poor
record in achieving their purposes.
Consequently there is the need to
investigate the factors contributing to
both intensified polarisation and segre-
gation, as well as the failure of spatial
policies in the developing world. The
following section is an attempt to
approach these issue in a way, that we
feel have been relatively overlooked.
We argue that structural adjustment,
the processes that it creates, and devel-
opment strategies associated with its
policies contribute largely, on one hand
to changes in urban systems, and, on
the other hand, to shaping planning
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
intervention efforts. Both, play a major
role in the vulnerability question.
Why structural adjustment?
Evidence on the overall effects of SA
is mixed. In general, it seems the objec-
tives have not been met. Liberalised
market forces have failed to provide
low-income groups with higher
incomes as a result of high pro-
ductivity, savings, investment and
exports (Burgess et al., 1994). On the
contrary, evidence suggests that SA
policies have led to a serious deterio-
ration in living standards. Nor has SA
promoted sustainable use of a coun-
trys resources.
The urban poor have been the hard-
est hit and constitute the most vulner-
able group in the process of macro-
economic reform and structural adjust-
ment. Currency devaluation, agricul-
tural price liberalisation, cuts in basic
subsidies for water, energy, fuel, trans-
port and shelter, and cuts in public
social expenditure, are just a few of the
austerity measures associated with SA
policies. The impact which extended
beyond low-income groups to include
even middle-income, took the form of
threatening job security, and wages
failed to keep pace with inflation
(Rakodi, 1993). The net result has been
a severe erosion of living standards in
urban areas. We argue that this is an
underlying factor in increased vulner-
ability as we previously defined it.
Second, if the scope is widened to
view SA processes in a global context,
the link with vulnerability could be
further clarified. Because of the decline
in the comparative advantage of
developed countries in key sectors in
manufacturing, manufacturers continue
to search for off-shore opportunities to
survive the high competition. They
locate where there are low-cost labour,
less restrictive regulations of pro-
duction, low land and facility costs, tax
advantages etc. Developing countries
provided exactly what MNCs where
looking for and in some cases even
more. Motivated and driven by rapid
growth strategies, and an inevitable SA
and reform agenda, the developing
countries realised that they had a com-
parative advantage in energy-intensive
manufactured exports (Harris, 1996).
However, this form of production
imposes a maximum strain on the natu-
ral environment. A potential impli-
cation is the trade-off between pro-
duction, competition and efficiency and
negative environmental consequences
with the creation of potentially disaster-
vulnerable settlements. Such trade-offs,
it is argued, cannot be afforded by most
developing countries.
The combined pressure of growth
and economic development, and eroded
living standards on the other hand
pushed cities into an environment of
greater social and economic turbulence
(Pugh, 1995). In other words SA is
having a direct impact on cities. Cities
are now changing faster than their
physical fabric can respond, as argued
by Townroe (1996), and Harris and
Fabricus (1996). The result is urban
systems and land use patterns ill suited
for the scale of growth and dynamic
restructuring of economic activity.
The problem is underpined by the
reformulation of the role of the city
economy in an international context.
The future of the city, in a globalising
economy, depends on economic
imperatives and a new division of lab-
our in which Third World cities pro-
vide highly competitive labour markets.
This questions whether technical and
environmental safety concerns have
been overtaken by the political, and
economic forces in a global context.
These transformations in urban systems
have, in turn, led to review of planning
processes and methodologies in line
with market enablement policies, ie the
form and nature of urban planning.
This questions how the new tools and
mechanisms of planning intervention
and urban management can respond to
issues such as disaster mitigation. In
other words, who will be responsible,
and what are the appropriate land use
and land allocation strategies from the
point of view of mitigating disaster vul-
nerability?
The impact of all these pressures is
creating a form of organisational vul-
nerability at city and the national lev-
els. This in turn is resulting in increased
vulnerability of urban areas to disas-
ters. Forces, coalitions of interests, and
implications of SA policies seem to be
the driving force generating and
exacerbating this type of vulnerability.
It is only by examining the dynamics
outlined above that we can begin to
293

understand some of the structural fac-
tors underlying metropolitan vulner-
ability to disaster.
The context of the world
economy from a disaster
vulnerability perspective
The old order was characterised by
semi-closed national economies, with a
dominant and directing role by national
governments, employing a public sec-
tor, and adopting master plans for cities
with emphasis on mandatory controls
embodied in what was thought to be a
physical order which changed only
slowly and in ways which could be pre-
dicted (Harris, 1994). This conven-
tional perspective was already redun-
dant before SA policies became the
norm (Zetter, 1996).
Structural adjustment is radically
reinforcing the reshaping of the dom-
estic economies to fit increasingly
demanding and changing external cir-
cumstances, which in turn further
reinforces changes in the urban sys-
tems.
Changing division of labour
The shift from import-substituting
industrialisation to export orientation
has had a profound effect. Manufactur-
ing processes have been disaggregated
in order that different parts of the final
product could be made in different
countries. With the comparative advan-
tage demonstrated in the developing
world, of cheap labour and production
incentives, there appears to be a long-
term trend of redistributing the worlds
labour-intensive manufacturing to the
developing countries.
This has had an effect on spatial
form, and in shifting activities among
sectors. The example of Bombay pro-
vides evidence. Harris (1995) indicates
that medium and large scale industries
in the city have been shifting along the
main highways beyond the boundaries
of the city. What is of concern to us
is that population rapidly followed this
relocation. The 1991 census shows that
while Greater Bombays population
increased by a fifth in the preceding
decade (and the islands population
declined absolutely, from 3.3 to 3.2
million), some of the peripheral areas
increased rapidly. Areas such as
294
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
Kalyan increased by 645%, Mira Bhay-
anda by 584% and Thane by 157%.
The ramification of such growth on
already inadequate infrastructure, now
tested to the limit, leaves one major
question. Although industrial activities
may have located on safe sites, evi-
dence suggests that the mass exodus of
labour was accommodated not on pre-
planned settlements but vulnerable
unplanned areas.
On the other hand, as manufacturing
moved out of the cities, new services
moved in and in full force. Manufactur-
ing moved out leaving non-industrial-
ised activities which were the more
skill intensive and the more innovatory,
thus creating another wave of in-
migration. The sheer volume of move-
ment makes urban in-migration one of
the most evident problems of
developing countries. It has been esti-
mated that, for example, between 1970
and 1980 net migration added about
300 000 to greater Sao Paulo each year
from cities and villages throughout
Brazil (Martine, 1989, cited in Rob-
erts, 1995).
The problem was exacerbated by the
fact that such services were equally lab-
our intensive. One striking example is
data loading and processing, serving
the developed world, and relocating in
areas where it can exploit computer
technology and the availability of low-
cost literate workers. This, of course,
favoured the developing countries. To
mention a few, British police records
are currently being loaded in the Philip-
pines (under contract to a specialised
Australian firm); the loading of Canad-
ian medical records and some US air
lines ticketing services have been relo-
cated to the Caribbean; one of the larg-
est Japanese real estate companies is
now processing its land records and
transactions in Shenzhen in southern
China. Swiss Airlines is transferring its
accounts department to Bombay, and
Singapore Airlines is considering trans-
ferring its accounting department to
India.
We argue here that the unbundling
of manufacturing activities and services
could be considered as a prime source
of urban labour vulnerability. The rea-
son is the rapid informalisation of agenda for urban development, chang-
economies which reduces risks and
increases profits for the formal sector
of the economy. On the other hand, and
as a consequence of SA and economic
reform there is also a growth in infor-
mal sector employment due to the
increasing limited capacity of the for-
mal sector to generate employment.
The informal sector too, needs to cut
costs and provide highly competitive
services, is only achieved by an inten-
sive exploitation of labour. According
to Roberts (1995) the prevailing
characteristic of the labour market is
more and more workers who have little
job security, fluctuating incomes, and
little access to services and facilities
provided by the states formal appar-
atus.
With Sen (1986, 1988, 1989)s con-
clusion that structural change leads to
redefining the opportunities in
entitlements, we can argue that the
repercussions flow all the way down
from changes induced by the trans-
formation of the world economy to the
conditions of employment of the labour
force in Third World cities. Increased
informalisation increases vulnerability
(as previously defined) as far as opport-
unity and access to resources such as
housing land and locations. The impli-
cations on the living environment and
disaster vulnerability will be sub-
sequently discussed.
Changing roles of cities
In the new international economic con-
text at the end of the 20th century new
economic roles for cities emerge trans-
form, and fragment. A combination of
new technologies and new global pol-
icy regimes add pressures for these new
roles to be expanded.
Two major new roles, as Townroe
(1996) indicates, have implications as
far as disaster vulnerability is con-
cerned. The first new role is the defence
of the gains made. This requires invest-
ment and improved labour skills to
secure rising labour productivity and
falling labour costs. Cities will, there-
fore, have to facilitate access to capital
(both domestic and foreign) and to new
technologies. The second role is fos-
tering new lines of economic activity,
in the externally traded sectors in
manufacturing and services.
This process of reshaping sets the
ing the economic composition of output
and inducing further rapid growth. In
looking at cities, we are thus concerned

not just with the scale of threat posed
by changes in the economic environ-
ment, but, fundamentally, why cities, in
the developing world, cannot cope with
growth and change processes.
Two factors are relevant here. First,
city managers are now seeking to
assess more closely the comparative
advantages of their city in a new global
frame (Harris, 1994). We argue that
this sets up different priorities, and
questions to what extent, when econ-
omic survival is the main aim, safety
measures, risk assessment, environ-
mental considerations are significant
elements in the decision making and
planning processes.
Second, economic fragmentation and
restructuring increases the complexity
of city governance and management. In
many cities new coalitions of urban
interests have emerged to assume
responsibility for the future of the city,
including, as well as the city auth-
orities, the chambers of commerce and
other business associations, craft
associations, and trade unions, univer-
sities, NGOs, political parties. It is
within this context that groups that are
not adequately represented in these
coalitions will tend to be more vulner-
able. The marginalised and the poor are
often not actors in policy making which
affects their lives. Indeed, either spatial
and urban policies will most likely be
irrelevant to the poor and marginalised,
since they live outside the formal sys-
tem and legal framework (Parker,
1995), or the interests of elite and capi-
tal are best served by planning policies
and machinery that are as deregulated
as possible. These outcomes already
have dramatic impacts on the vulner-
ability of low-income groups in relation
to where they settle and the form of
these settlements.
Beyond the vulnerability of individ-
uals or groups in the society, cities as a
whole engender their own vulnerability
(Kreimer and Munasinghe, 1992). The
physical characteristics of the mega-cit-
ies themselves are a consequence of
changing roles. Taking the example of
the uncontrolled spatial expansion of
Mexico City over the last 20 years,
areas that used to be on the periphery
of the city and less at risk if urban
systems broke down are now incor-
porated in the city. The enormous size
and speed of growth creates city wide
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
vulnerability of urban pollution, major
breakdowns in overburdened infra-
structure, and a variety of widely dis-
tributed health hazards arising from
poor living conditions and inadequate
services.
The question of land use planning
underlies vulnerability in this context
since the pace of growth has surpassed
any possible attempt at control or man-
agement. This raises our third element
of who is responsible for setting up
codes, based on what criteria, and to
fulfil which aims and objectives?
Changing forms of governance
What are the challenges that cities in
the developing world face as they
explore new forms of governance?
What are they likely to face in the
future? Would these challenges mean
that the roles of the various stake hold-
ers will change? How will this relate to
issues such as vulnerability to disas-
ters? Perhaps implicit in all these ques-
tions is who plans and manages cities?
There are several reasons as to why
governance in general is a key issue
and new forms are problematic. The
first reason, as outlined above, is that
cities are disaggregating and presenting
a more complex formula of manage-
ment. The second reason is the over-
whelming shift that decentralisation is
supposed to create from central to local
government. There is a consensus
among observers, such as Samaniego
(1996); Burgess et al. (1994); Cohen
(1991), that there is a decentralisation
in expenditure responsibilities, partly as
response to central government star-
vation of local government revenues,
autonomy and technical capabilities.
However, decentralisation is not neces-
sarily being accompanied by a fiscal
revolution, or granting fiscal powers to
local government. There is a growing
concern that responsibilities have been
transferred but not the resources to
exercise them. The direct implication
on disaster related issues is that
environmental policies, for example on
the local level, are being tackled
through inadequate planning and regu-
latory tools by understaffed and finan-
cially impoverished municipal agenc-
ies.
In the context of the changing role
and new challenges facing cities, Harris
and Fabricus (1996)s examination of
the impact of SA on cities highlights
the tension which cities in the
developing world face. The difficult
challenge for governance is how to
secure economic transformation in the
face of the new international compe-
tition while managing the continuing
extensive pressure for growth imposed
by rising population (World Bank,
1991a, 1992; Pugh, 1995). In other
words, the dilemma is how can city
managers support the producers inter-
ests and seek to facilitate change to
meet opportunity and to raise the pro-
ductivity of land, labour and capital;
while at the same time defending the
consumers interests in the face of
declining incomes, less access to ser-
vices, an overall degradation of the
natural environment, and specifically
reduced investment for disaster miti-
gation and planning responses.
The shift from centralised regulatory
planning to the more flexible market
oriented development planning, leaves
open the question of how disaster
related issues will fit into this paradigm
while there is tension between pro-
ducers and consumers interests. The
reform of local government finances,
from increased privatisation of services
to increased local taxes, and in some
cases increased local authorities debts,
have implications on the type of plan-
ning practised in this context.
Mitchell (1995)s optimism that the
most promising circumstances for
achieving improvements in hazards
reduction appears to be when hazards
issues overlap with other urban issues,
and that in such cases joint constitu-
encies help to keep hazard-reduction
high on the public agenda, is countered
by the argument that urban governance
technologies, resources and capabilities
are under enormous pressure. Given the
new agenda of producer priorities, will
any group accept an implicit obligation
to deal with disasters as they effect
urban consumers the mass of the
urban poor. In other words who will
be responsible?
Nevertheless, while market forces
are pushing more towards the tensions
and challenges outlined above, Harris
(1994) still thinks that many local
governments continue to see them-
selves as guardians of civilisation
against forces of anarchy. In this con-
text there may be some hope that disas-
295

ter mitigation agendas remain current
in a climate of urban vulnerability.
What is left to be examined now is the
combined impact of market forces and
dynamics created by SA on urbanis-
ation and how this highlights the link
with increased disaster vulnerability.
Urbanisation, planning and
increased vulnerability
There is little evidence to suggest that
rapid rates of urbanisation are slowing
down in the developing world. Urban-
isation rates are both a cause and effect
to the changes discussed in the pre-
vious section. We turn the attention
now to the impact of the phenomenon
itself, and how with the changes in
international economy, cities, in the
developing world, are reacting differ-
ently in terms of planning intervention.
As urbanisation continues, the num-
ber of mega-cities continues to grow.
By the year 2000, cities of over 8
million in population will be mainly in
the developing world about 28,
Steedman (1995). Rates and levels of
urbanisation vary. Population of Latin
American are 70% urban, between 25
27% of low-income Africa and Asia,
and 37% of East Asia as well. Within
countries, the range of variation is also
considerable. Two countries China
and India have a combined rela-
tively low urban proportion (33%), but
in absolute terms they have between
616 and 620 million urban dwellers
(Harris, 1991).
Much of this growth is rapid and
unplanned. Our aim in this part is to
clarify how this growth, which is par-
tially driven by SA processes, contrib-
utes to an increase in the vulnerability
of cities to disasters. Urban growth on
such a large scales cannot avoid having
a major environmental impact.
Environmental degradation increases
disaster vulnerability, and every disas-
ter has an additional negative environ-
mental impact.
At a general level, Parker (1995)
provides a long list of rapid urbanisa-
tions impact on the natural environ-
ment. Rapid growth raises levels of
urban air pollution, degrades surface
bodies of fresh water, destroys delicate
coastal areas, upsets the ecological bal-
ance of the surrounding seas, depletes
and destroys drinking water resources,
296
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
contaminates areas through the
improper disposal of hazardous wastes,
overloads soil filtration capacity and
most significant of all degrades physi-
cal security as once-stable building
lands become dangerous because of
overcrowding and areas which were
dangerous to begin with are occupied
by squatters. To some extent all these
components are potentially disaster
prone, more in incremental terms.
However, it is this last aspect that we
are mainly concerned with, since it has
more to do with structural factors that
we are attempting to unravel.
Some examples of the extent of the
problem serves to draw the attention to
the severity of the problem. Mustaf
Erdik, in Parker, et al. (1995), indicates
that about 43% of the total land, 51%
of the population, 75% of the industry,
and 31% of the dams in Turkey are
located in the two most hazardous
zones on the official earthquake hazard
zoning map of the country. Mulwanda
(1989)s study of squatters in Zambia
reveals that a large area of Lusaka is
built on limestone and dolomite which
can dissolve in water. Brazil is another
example of how rapid growth of low-
income slums and squatter settlements
around major urban agglomerations is
high enough to have become the major
risk factor in areas exposed to the most
serious natural hazards in the country.
The mudslides and floods in Rio de
Janeiro in 1988, and the 1985 floods in
the Northeast illustrates the devastating
effects of natural events when com-
bined with mismanagement, faulty con-
struction, and absence of basic infra-
structure (Kreimer and Munasinghe,
1992). The question here is why such
settlements are permitted on these sites
in the first place, and why do govern-
ments and donor agencies finance
potentially dangerous infrastructure
projects in high-risk areas?
The answer or argument that we pro-
pose is that these outcomes derive not
so much from uncontrolled growth,
which is a proxy, but from structural
factors creating marginalisation and
depriving large segments of the popu-
lation from opportunities of choice thus
turning them into residents of physi-
cally vulnerable settlements.
Vulnerability comes from the new
division of the population as a result of
rapid growth into winners and
losers. The winners are predomi-
nantly the young, skilled, landed, and
educated. These will take advantage
and take part in the newly emerging
coalitions of interests. On the other
hand, the old, poorly or semi-skilled,
and landless are likely to fall behind.
For these people there will be little or
no choice since they are not a part of
any coalition and are excluded from the
decision making process. Settlers
pulled to the cities by deteriorating liv-
ing standards in rural areas, as a result
of SA deregulation of agricultural
prices, arrive to find that they are alien-
ated from formal systems of land,
employment and services (Westgate,
1981). They will be driven to inhabit
vulnerable areas as the only option
available which has not attracted the
attention of developers. Such areas pro-
vide a necessary source to sustain
their lives.
If this structural explanation is put
alongside the rates of urbanisation out-
lined above, then we can begin to
appreciate the size of population that
annually enters the vulnerable group.
Systems of governance and planning
far from redefining the outcome of
these forces and limiting such conse-
quences exacerbate the problem rather
than containing it, as a servant of the
changing division of labour and roles
of cities.
Chakravorty and Gupta (1996) argue
that the tension generated by this rise in
inequality, in the economic and social
spheres, should be mitigated by the
state. However, the state, as a concept
and as a practical entity, is undergoing
a process of redefinition in line with SA
processes which contributes further
damage on the increased vulnerability
of low-income groups. Thus Burgess et
al. (1994) note that the concept of the
state embodied in market enablement
has diminished the equity, welfare and
social goals embodied in state inter-
ventions and that the market is not gen-
erating socially acceptable patterns of
welfare distribution. Mistargeting is a
direct outcome of the unbalanced
environment created by SA and the
shift to market-oriented state. For
example, Brazils total social expendi-
ture in 1986 was around 25% of its
GDP. However, 41% of the population
received as little as 20% of social
expenditure (World Bank, 1991b). This

is occurring at the time when low-
income groups living conditions are
moving from bad to worse, thus con-
tributing to increased economic vulner-
ability.
The redefinition of the state and its
role, in turn, has implications on the
planning process. The notion that by
altering the structure and spatial
arrangements of existing patterns or by
careful management of new develop-
ment, risk from future disaster events
can be reduced, is countered by two
main problems associated with urban
planning in the developing world.
These problems persist while the defi-
nition and role of planning is moving
away from regulatory to enablement
strategies.
The first is that the general planning
process continues to remain open to
political manipulation and patronage.
In addition the assumptions of choice,
participation, democracy and access to
information and knowledge, all essen-
tial for the effective operation of plan-
ning, are in fact missing in most parts
of the developing world. This creates
vulnerability through exacerbating
inequality. This manifests itself in the
inner cities, where the contradiction
between enablement policies and con-
flicts of interest is the underlying factor
in inner city dereliction and squatter
settlements. Squatter settlements in
Zambia were recognised for upgrading,
instead of being demolished, in the
second and third national development
plans. However, dislocation is still the
norm (Mulwanda, 1989). The net effect
is continuing squatting on other sites,
and the further these residents are
driven off sites suitable for develop-
ment, the more the chances of settling
them on unsafe sites.
Other examples of the limited
efficiency of planning processes are the
Mega City Programme and the New
Calcutta Projects in India. Equity goals,
once served primarily through slums
upgrading and public goods provision,
are now being diluted through invest-
ment in the upper end of the housing
market. The Mega City Programme
document of the Calcutta Metropolitan
Development Authority indicates that
equity is notable by its absence in the
new state intervention efforts. Of the
100 000 dwelling units to be created in
New Calcutta, 7000 are to be in the so
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
called service villages to house advocacy that housing should not be
some displaced people and develop permitted on steep slopes, and that land
fringe village areas 15 000 more which is subject to flooding should not
will be made available to economically be opened up to new settlements, these
weaker sections and low-income settlement patterns remain and will
groups, while 78 000 will be built for continue to be the predominant necess-
the middle- and high-income groups. ity for the urban poor. The human fac-
This distribution will be made in a situ- tor in creating or increasing vulner-
ation where 71% of the population ability through structural processes is
belongs to the low-income and econ- no less decisive than natural phenom-
omically weaker categories ena themselves. In the next section we
(Chakravorty and Gupta, 1996). shall attempt to provide a summary of
The second problem is that the main ideas raised in this paper, as
approaches to the analysis of vulner- well as some guidelines as to how they
ability and risk, upon which much of could be minimised.
the application of planning for the pre-
vention of disaster is based, are narrow,
simplistic and take no consideration of Concluding accounts
the economic and social status of low-
The discussion outlined some of the
income dwellers. The case of Bom-
trends and causes of SA, economic
bays Second Development Plan offers
reform and globalisation of capital, and
some clues to the limited relevance of
increasing vulnerability of urban areas
urban planning policies, in so far as dis-
to disaster. The discussion covered the
aster issues are concerned. The metro-
current characteristics and problems
politan development plan an unrealist-
specific to urban systems in an effort
ically low population target which left
to understand the dynamics of todays
them indifferent to the needs of the
rapid change and its impact on vulner-
citys economy. The plan prescribed
ability, and distinguish it from the
built-up area to plot area ratios (Floor
effects of natural phenomenon. We also
Space Indices, FSIs), and maximum
attempted to highlight the role of
densities which took most of the hous-
societal factors and establish the link
ing built in the city out of the reach of
between areas in macro-economic
lower income groups. As DSouza
reform and an issue such as disasters.
(1991) indicates, the strategy has failed
The aim was to draw attention to the
to recognise employment patterns upon
crucial structural factors which are gen-
which low-income groups base their
erally overlooked when it comes to pol-
livelihood, such as cottage or house-
icy making concerning disaster miti-
hold industries and the utility of mixed
gation. The main conclusion in this
land-use in that situation. Plans failing
respect is that cities can both contribute
to cater for the needs of the unorgan-
to and reduce their risk and vulner-
ised sector, contributed largely to their
ability depending largely on methods
exclusion from formally planned and
and approaches adopted in develop-
serviced production sites. Excluded
ment.
from the strategic plans land allocation
Since it is beyond the scope of the
for housing, then from economic pro-
paper to outline specific solutions to the
duction activities, there is very little
problems outlined above, what we
point in questioning choices left, or
present is a number of issues to be
where to locate?
taken in consideration in future
In this context we can now enforce
research and policy making. The fol-
the key point: disasters, particularly in
lowing is not an agenda, by any means,
urban areas, are not only an act of nat-
but rather a few pointers that emerge
ure. Natural phenomenon would not, by
from the above discussion.
and large, constitute disasters if human
settlements did not exist where they
strike, if people had equal opportunities Sustainable cities
to settle in safe sites and in ways that Recognition of the trends outlined
create healthy and hygienic conditions. above has focused attention on the
The magnitude of disasters reflects the negative and, in most cases, irreversi-
level of inequality, exclusion and mar- bly negative impacts of the changing
ginalisation. Despite the widespread world economic order. Indeed, what
297

could be concluded is that when it
comes to the global ecosystem some of
the effects have reached a stage of
being neither controlled nor contained.
In as far as the definition of urban
vulnerability that we started with is
concerned, the situation is, however,
different. Inequality and limited access
to resources which create vulnerability
of certain segments of the urban popu-
lation are not irreversible. Sustainable
development has been advocated for a
long time as a way out of this trap.
Although environmentalists are grow-
ing sceptical about the concept and its
validity, arguing that it has been
overused, misused, and abused by pol-
icy makers, politicians and business
corporations, and that it has become
more of a slogan to camouflage econ-
omic interests than real commitment
(Casagrande, 1996), we still argue for
its validity but from a different per-
spective.
The kind of sustainable development
that we argue for derives from a devel-
opment model that takes in consider-
ation the local and regional structure of
every society. So far, the drive for rapid
growth has overlooked local circum-
stances through the implementation of
a global reform agenda. Anderson
(1995)s argument supports this
suggestion by indicating that sus-
tainable development is not possible
without an explicit component that
reduces vulnerability, and vulnerability
will never truly be reduced until
approaches to development are altered
to meet the sustainability criteria. This
simply means that each case should be
assessed for its own merits, and univer-
sal blue prints for economic develop-
ment are not valid when the issue of
vulnerability to disasters enters the equ-
ation.
Emergency plans and
comprehensive planning
Parker (1995) identifies the need for,
and urges all major cities to have a
comprehensive emergency action
plan that not only deals with all of the
hazards which currently threaten the
urban areas but also anticipate new
threats. We argue not for a separate
emergency plan but rather a plan
which incorporates disaster/emergency
parameters as integral components of a
citys future comprehensive develop-
298
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
ment plan. Urban plans must incorpor-
ate pre-disaster prevention
approaches in terms of land use allo-
cations, scanning out vulnerable sites
or reducing their vulnerability in
advance of settlement. This approach
would alter the balance away from
post- disaster emergency mech-
anisms which are still required but are
a secondary priority. We also argue that
the kind of disasters that we have dealt
with in this paper may need very little
anticipation if development policies are
geared to reduce vulnerability or to
eliminate it. Parkers approach appears
valid, determined by the occurrence or
vulnerability to natural disasters which
have no societal or policy induced
component. It is the latter which
characterises urban areas.
Survival strategies of the poor
and macro-economic factors
Combining this approach with, as pre-
viously discussed, a more people-
centred approach to disaster mitigation,
the starting point could be an attempt
to fully understand how people survive
at the lower end of the economic scale.
How do they minimise risk? How can
these strategies be mediated and sup-
ported? This will largely contribute to
understanding of sources of inequality
and how these could be reduced. This
could be taken one step further into
looking at regional inequalities within
the national economy. Our argument
does not contradict the need for
assessing disaster potentials at this
scale, but at the same time it empha-
sises the need to focus on constraints
to hazard/disaster mitigation at a local
level. It is of utmost importance, how-
ever, that the design of macroeconomic
and sectoral policies should incorporate
the potential implications of disaster
vulnerability on the urban environment.
Structural adjustment,
environmental needs and hazard
mitigation
Devising models and applications,
however, is one thing, implementing
them is another. Guidelines and poli-
cies aiming at sustainable and equitable
development are of no use if not sup-
ported by national and local strategies
aimed at enhancing the financial and
managerial capacity of local insti-
tutions. There is, therefore, a need to
review the World Banks local
empowerment programme since the
outcome so far has not been very prom-
ising. It seems that the forces created
by the internationalisation of capital are
stronger than the Banks attempts to
counter them.
The contradictory forces emphasise
rapid growth and create the assumption
among decision makers in developing
countries that environmental control
measures cannot be afforded if a coun-
try seeks to achieve sound economic
development in a short period. There is
a need therefore to advocate the long
term consequences of such approaches
and emphasise how detrimental it will
be in the context of hazards and disas-
ters in the urban setting. There is also
a need to devise more cost-effective
regulations and policies which can cre-
ate an economic environment con-
ducive to production but not detrimen-
tal to the natural urban environmental
systems and settlement strategies.
Land policies
A key point in almost all developing
countries is land policy. Land price
inflation is a decisive factor in the
exclusion of certain income groups
from housing and services, therefore
starting the vulnerability cycle which
always potentially leads to disaster vul-
nerable settlement patterns. Land pol-
icy reform should be on the top of pri-
ority lists in the developing world.
Reform in land policy would help to
reduce rampant price inflation in devel-
opment land, thereby achieving com-
petitiveness and improving the price
access to housing among low-income
groups.
The overall guiding principle, there-
fore, should be fully integrating and
incorporating policies for disaster miti-
gation into the planning process in the
urban environment.
Anderson, M B (1995) Vulnerability
to Disaster and Sustainable Develop-
ment: A General Framework for
Assessing Vulnerability. In: Disaster
Prevention for Sustainable Develop-
ment: Economic and Policy Issues,
ed. M. Munasinghe and C. Clarke. A
paper for the Yokohama World Con-
ference on Natural Disaster
Reduction, May 2327. The Inter-
national Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction (IDNDR) and the World
Bank.

Anderson, M B (1992) Metropolitan
Areas and Disaster Vulnerability: A
Consideration for Developing Coun-
tries. In: Environmental Management
and Urban Vulnerability, ed. A. Kre-
imer, and M. Munasinghe. World
Bank Discussion Paper No. 168.
World Bank, Washington DC.
Anderson, M B (1985) A Recon-
cenptualisation of the Linkages
Between Disasters and Develop-
ment. Disasters 9(Supplement),
4651.
Burgess, R, Carmona, M and
Kolstee, Th. (1994) Contemporary
Urban Strategies and Urban Design
in Developing Countries. A Critical
Review. Position paper prepared for
the International Seminar The Hid-
den Assignment. Rotterdam, 57
October.
Cannon, T (1994) Vulnerability
Analysis and the Explanation of
Natural Disasters. In: Disaster,
Development and the Environment,
ed. A. Varley. John Wiley and Sons.
Casagrande, E F (1996) Sustainable
Development in the New Economic
(Dis)Order: The Relationship
Between Free Trade, Transnational
Corporations, International Financial
Institutions and Economic Mir-
acles. Sustainable Development 4,
121129.
Chakravorty, S and Gupta, G (1996)
Let a Hundred Projects Bloom.
Structural Reform and Urban Devel-
opment in Calcutta. Third World
Planning Review 18, 415431.
Cohen, M (1991) Urban Growth and
National Hazards. In: Managing
Natural Disasters and the Environ-
ment, ed, M. Munasinghe. World
Bank, Washington DC.
DSouza, J B (1991) Will Bombay
Have a Plan? Irrelevance of Planners
and their Plans. Economic and Polit-
ical Weekly, May 18.
Gilbert, A (1993) Third World Cit-
ies: The Changing National Settle-
ment System. Urban Studies 30,
721740.
Harris, N and Fabricus, J (eds.)
(1996) Cities and Structural Adjust-
ment. Development Planning Unit.
University College London.
Harris, N (1996) Introduction. In:
Cities and Structural Adjustment, ed.
N Harris, and J Fabricus. Develop-
ment Planning Unit, University Col-
lege London.
Harris, N (1995) Bombay in a Global
Economy. Structural Adjustment and
the Role of Cities. Cities 12, 175
184.
Harris, N (1994) Structural Adjust-
ment and Cities: Three Papers.
Viewpoint: M Hamza and R Zetter
Development Planning Unit. Work-
ing Paper No. (63). University Col-
lege London.
Harris, N (1991) City, Class and
Trade. Social and Economic Change
in the Third World. Development
Planning Unit and I. B. Tauris and
Co. Ltd.
Harris, N (1983) Economic Growth
and Spatial Change. Development
Planning Unit. Occasional Papers
No. (1). University College London.
Kelly, C (1995) Assessing Disaster
Needs in Megacities: Perspectives
form Developing Countries. Geo-
journal 37, 381385.
Kreimer, A and Munasinghe, M
(1992) Editors Overview. In:
Environmental Management and
Urban Vulnerability, ed. A Kreimer,
and M Munasinghe. World Bank
Discussion Paper No. 168. World
Bank, Washington DC.
Leitmann, J (1991) Environmental
Profile of Sao Paulo: Case Study. In:
Urban Management and the
Environment. World Bank, Washnig-
ton DC.
Mitchell, J K (1995) Coping with
Natural Hazards and Disaster in
Megacities: Perspectives on the
Twenty-First Century. Geojournal
37, 303311.
Mulwanda, M P (1989) Squatters
Nightmare: The Political Economy
of Disaster and Disaster response in
Zambia. Disaster 13, 345350.
Munasinghe, M, Menezes, B and
Preece, M (1991) Rio Reconstruction
and Flood Prevention in Brazil. Land
Use Policy 8(4), October.
Parker, R S (1995) Disaster Vulner-
ability: Lessons from Four Turkish
Urban Areas. In: Informal Settle-
ments, Environmental Degradation,
and Disaster Vulnerability, ed. R S
Parker, A Kreimer, and M Munas-
inghe. IDNDR and the World Bank,
Washington DC.
Preece, M (1992) Urbanisation and
Vulnerability in Brazil: The Current
Challenges. In: Environmental Man-
agement and Urban Vulnerability,
ed. A Kreimer, and M Munasinghe.
World Bank Discussion Paper No.
168. World Bank, Washington DC.
Pugh, C (1995) International Struc-
tural Adjustment and its Secteral and
Spatial Impacts. Urban Studies 32,
261285.
Rakodi, C (1993) Planning for
Whom? In: Managing Fast Growing
Cities. New Approaches to Urban
Planning and Management in the
Developing World, ed. N Devas, and
C Rakodi. Longman.
Roberts, B R (1995) The Making of
Cities. Cities of Peasants Revisited.
Arnold.
Samaniego, R (1996) Finance and
Governance. In: Cities and Struc-
tural Adjustment, ed. N Harris, and
J. Fabricus. Development Planning
Unit. University College London.
Sen, A (1989) Food and Freedom.
World Development Report No. (17),
p 769-781. World Bank, Wash-
ington DC.
Sen, A (1988) The Concept of Devel-
opment. In: Handbook of Develop-
ment Economics, ed. H Chenery, and
T Srinivasan. Elsevier.
Sen, A (1986) The Concept of Well-
being. In: Essays on Economic Pro-
gress and Welfare in Honour of IG
Patel, ed. S Guhan, and M Schroff.
Oxford University Press.
Skeldon, R (1990) Population
Mobility in Developing Countries.
Belhaven Press.
Steedman, S (1995) Megacities: The
Unacceptable Risk of Natural Disas-
ter. Built Environment 21, 8993.
Townroe, P M (1996) New Econ-
omic Roles. The Changing Structure
of the City. In: Cities and Structural
Adjustment, ed. N Harris, and J Fab-
ricus. Development Planning Unit.
University College London.
UNDRO (1977) Disaster Prevention
and Mitigation: A Compendium of
Current Knowledge Land Use
Aspects. United Nations Office of the
Disaster Relief Coordinator. Vol. (5),
New York.
Westgate, K (1981) Land-Use Plan-
ning, Vulnerability and the Low-
Income Dwelling. In: Disaster and
the Small Dwelling, ed. I Davis. Per-
gamon Press.
World Bank (1992) Governance and
Development. World Bank, Wash-
ington DC.
World Bank (1991a) Urban Policy
and Economic Development: An
Agenda for the 1990s. World Bank,
Washington DC.
World Bank (1991b) Brazil Econ-
omic Stabilisation with Structural
Reform. World Bank, Washington
DC.
Zetter, R (1996) What Kind of
Plans? What Kind of Planner?
Rethinking Planning Education in the
Developing World. In: Educating for
Real; The Training of Professionals
for Development Work, ed. N Hamdi,
and A El-Sherif. ITG.
299