Search results for: equity

Authors: Enwin Anthony Dornubari, Visigah Kpobari Peter

Abstract:

This research has developed a framework for the provision of sustainable and affordable housing to accommodate the low-income population of Greater Port Harcourt City. The objectives of this study among others, were to: examine UN-Habitat guidelines for acceptable and sustainable social housing provision, describe past efforts of the Rivers State Government and the Federal Government of Nigeria to provide housing for the poor in the Greater Port Harcourt City area; obtain a profile of prospective beneficiaries of the social housing proposed by this research as well as perceptions of their present living conditions, and living in the proposed self-sustaining social housing development, based on the initial simulation of the proposal; describe the nature of the framework, guideline and management of the proposed social housing development and explain the modalities for its implementation. The study utilized the mixed methods research approach, aimed at triangulating findings from the quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Opinions of professional of the built environment; Director, Development Control, Greater Port Harcourt City Development Authority; Directors of Ministry of Urban Development and Physical Planning; Housing and Property Development Authority and managers of selected Primary Mortgage Institutions were sought and analyzed. There were four target populations for the study, namely: members of occupational sub-groups for FGDs (Focused Group Discussions); development professionals for KIIs (Key Informant Interviews), household heads in selected communities of GPHC; and relevant public officials for IDI (Individual Depth Interview). Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held with members of occupational sub-groups in each of the eight selected communities (Fisherfolk). The table shows that there were forty (40) members across all occupational sub-groups in each selected community, yielding a total of 320 in the eight (8) communities of Mgbundukwu (Mile 2 Diobu), Rumuodomaya, Abara (Etche), Igwuruta-Ali(Ikwerre), Wakama(Ogu-Bolo), Okujagu (Okrika), Akpajo (Eleme), and Okoloma (Oyigbo). For key informant interviews, two (2) members were judgmentally selected from each of the following development professions: urban and regional planners; architects; estate surveyors; land surveyors; quantity surveyors; and engineers. Concerning Population 3-Household Heads in Selected Communities of GPHC, a stratified multi-stage sampling procedure was adopted: Stage 1-Obtaining a 10% (a priori decision) sample of the component communities of GPHC in each stratum. The number in each stratum was rounded to one whole number to ensure representation of each stratum. Stage 2-Obtaining the number of households to be studied after applying the Taro Yamane formula, which aided in determining the appropriate number of cases to be studied at the precision level of 5%. Findings revealed, amongst others, that poor implementation of the UN-Habitat global shelter strategy, lack of stakeholder engagement, inappropriate locations, undue bureaucracy, lack of housing fairness and equity and high cost of land and building materials were the reasons for the failure of past efforts towards social housing provision in the Greater Port Harcourt City area. The study recommended a public-private partnership approach for the implementation and management of the framework. It also recommended a robust and sustained relationship between the management of the framework and the UN-Habitat office and other relevant government agencies responsible for housing development and all investment partners to create trust and efficiency.

Keywords: development, framework, low-income, sustainable, social housing

Procedia PDF Downloads 221

Authors: Tim Crocker-Buque, Sandra Mounier-Jack, Natasha Howard

Abstract:

Background: Due to both the increasing scale and speed of urbanisation, urban areas in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) host increasingly large populations of under-immunized children, with the additional associated risks of rapid disease transmission in high-density living environments. Multiple interdependent factors are associated with these coverage disparities in urban areas and most evidence comes from relatively few countries, e.g., predominantly India, Kenya, Nigeria, and some from Pakistan, Iran, and Brazil. This study aimed to identify, describe, and assess the main tools used to measure or improve coverage of immunisation services in poor urban areas. Methods: Authors used a qualitative review design, including academic and non-academic literature, to identify tools used to improve coverage of public health interventions in urban areas. Authors selected and extracted sources that provided good examples of specific tools, or categories of tools, used in a context relevant to urban immunization. Diagnostic (e.g., for data collection, analysis, and insight generation) and programme tools (e.g., for investigating or improving ongoing programmes) and interventions (e.g., multi-component or stand-alone with evidence) were selected for inclusion to provide a range of type and availability of relevant tools. These were then prioritised using a decision-analysis framework and a tool selection guide for programme managers developed. Results: Authors reviewed tools used in urban immunisation contexts and tools designed for (i) non-immunization and/or non-health interventions in urban areas, and (ii) immunisation in rural contexts that had relevance for urban areas (e.g., Reaching every District/Child/ Zone). Many approaches combined several tools and methods, which authors categorised as diagnostic, programme, and intervention. The most common diagnostic tools were cross-sectional surveys, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, secondary analysis of routine data, and geographical mapping of outcomes, resources, and services. Programme tools involved multiple stages of data collection, analysis, insight generation, and intervention planning and included guidance documents from WHO (World Health Organisation), UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund), USAID (United States Agency for International Development), and governments, and articles reporting on diagnostics, interventions, and/or evaluations to improve urban immunisation. Interventions involved service improvement, education, reminder/recall, incentives, outreach, mass-media, or were multi-component. The main gaps in existing tools were an assessment of macro/policy-level factors, exploration of effective immunization communication channels, and measuring in/out-migration. The proposed framework uses a problem tree approach to suggest tools to address five common challenges (i.e. identifying populations, understanding communities, issues with service access and use, improving services, improving coverage) based on context and available data. Conclusion: This study identified many tools relevant to evaluating urban LMIC immunisation programmes, including significant crossover between tools. This was encouraging in terms of supporting the identification of common areas, but problematic as data volumes, instructions, and activities could overwhelm managers and tools are not always suitably applied to suitable contexts. Further research is needed on how best to combine tools and methods to suit local contexts. Authors’ initial framework can be tested and developed further.

Keywords: health equity, immunisation, low and middle-income countries, poverty, urban health

Procedia PDF Downloads 130