4.3. Standardized Kits for Shelter

And also, this is a kind of partial upgrade with reclaimed materials they have developed with the kind of whatever, they have been able to procure from the past site or with their feasibilities, they have made some modifications to their shelters. And within a month, 53% of the house owners have started to upgrade their shelters and this is very quick, within a month if this kind of change is 53%.

This chunk discusses the rapid improvements homeowners are making to their shelters using reclaimed materials. Within just one month, more than half (53%) of homeowners took steps to upgrade their living spaces. This indicates a proactive approach to improving their shelters, showing that people are willing to use materials they've got access to in order to enhance their living conditions.

Imagine a community that suffered from a disaster. After receiving assistance, many families start using old wood from their previous homes or any materials they can find to rebuild. Just like when someone fixes up a used bicycle instead of buying a new one, these homeowners are improving their shelters based on what they have, showing resourcefulness and the desire to make their living conditions better.

The priorities were first doors, second walls, and the third is windows, so the ventilation aspect. And some beneficiaries bought their own timber for walls, doors and windows as we have seen in this complete set is in a timber. For the outset and used the plastic sheeting provided to the line of the walls, so they covered with a kind of partial covering with a plastic sheet.

In this section, the priorities for upgrading shelters are outlined. The most urgent needs identified were doors, followed by walls, and then windows, addressing basic safety and ventilation. Many beneficiaries chose to purchase timber for these upgrades, while others opted for partial coverage using plastic sheeting provided to them, highlighting different strategies homeowners are undertaking based on their resources and needs.

Consider a student upgrading a dorm room. They start with the essentials: a solid door for privacy, sturdy walls to define their space, and a window for fresh air. If budget is tight, they might use a curtain (like plastic sheeting) to partially separate areas or add comfort. Similarly, homeowners are making choices based on immediate needs and resources available to them.

Others sold a plastic sheeting and hired the local artisans to build adobe walls. So, they have given it back and they sold it in the market and they could able to get some money and they could able to put some more money and built the adobe walls and so this whole process you know, it’s all showing up an incremental process depending on each household what kind of economic feasibility they had, what kind of infill they are responding to their needs and demands.

Some families have taken a unique approach by selling their plastic sheeting and utilizing the funds to hire local artisans to build more durable adobe walls. This practice highlights how upgrades are not just funded but are part of an economic cycle where communities help each other. Households are making adjustments based on what they can afford, demonstrating a tailored response to their specific circumstances.

Think of a local market where a vendor sells fruits from their garden. With the money earned, they hire someone to help improve their stall. Similarly, these families are selling materials they don’t need in order to invest in stronger structures, illustrating how community resourcefulness can create a positive feedback loop.

And some paid for the labour in kind using the tools they were given in the shelter kit and some sold their tools once shelters were complete to buy household furnishings. So, once the tools have been sold, they even bought some more household furnishings and fittings.

This chunk reveals how tools provided in shelter kits are utilized in the building process. Some people used these tools to pay for labor, while others sold them after completing their shelters to purchase furniture or decorations. This choice reflects how individuals are prioritizing their spending and re-investing in their homes based on immediate needs.

Imagine someone who receives a toolbox when they move into a new apartment. Using those tools, they fix things around the house, and once everything is in order, they sell the toolbox and buy a nice piece of furniture. This shows how the initial investment in tools can lead to further improvements in living space.

So, with this, the government has understood that yes there is a possibility that to scale up this process. So, now what they did was they developed from 18 square meters to 20 square meters and the permanent walls of adobe and timber and they launched the project to build about 40,000 low-cost houses. So, by the end of March 2009, it is about 16,240 were built mainly with the partnership of UNHCR and MoSSP.

In this section, we see government recognition of the effective community-led housing upgrades as a sign that similar projects can be expanded. By increasing the size of houses and committing to building thousands of low-cost homes, the government, alongside NGOs, aims to improve living conditions on a larger scale.

Picture a successful local community garden. Seeing its success, local officials decide to replicate the idea across the city with larger gardens and more resources. Just as the garden grows, the project aims to support more families by increasing housing capacity and improving quality.

So, when you talk about the theoretical understanding of it, you know as I said you in the beginning transition shelter is not a noun, it is a verb, it is a process. So, as Christopher Alexander describes a house is an activity which is ‘created gradually, as a direct result of living which is happening in it and around it’ by people who spend only what they can afford.

This chunk emphasizes that transitional shelter is not a static concept but an ongoing process where individuals continuously adapt their living spaces based on their experiences and needs. Christopher Alexander’s definition highlights the importance of personal involvement in shaping a house, suggesting that as people live and interact in their homes, they naturally create a space that reflects their lives.

Think of a garden that evolves over time. At first, it might just be a patch of dirt, but as the gardener plants, tends, and observes what works, it becomes a beautiful space filled with flowers and vegetables. Similarly, a home undergoes transformation through everyday living and personal choices, making it unique to its inhabitants.

When you start living in it, you realize that you know, what you need and accordingly people start amending that, not only within the house, around the house. And this is the similar observations made from John F.C. Turner on his work in Mexico, housing by people. So, that is where he talks about the use value derived from this approach was more significant than the market value.

This section reflects on how individuals adjust their homes based on their needs rather than purely on market trends. John F.C. Turner’s research suggests that what matters most is how the shelter serves the occupants rather than how much it costs or its perceived market value. This distinction encourages a focus on practical usability and personal significance over monetary worth.

Consider someone who buys a new phone. For some, the latest model is important for prestige, while for others, having a device that meets their needs for calls and texts is what truly matters. The house, much like the phone, serves its purpose based on how well it fits the user's lifestyle rather than its price tag.

Similarly, John Habraken supports on 3 levels of decision making; one is the tissue and the support which is the base building. The tissue refers to the urban fabric and the support refers to the base building and the fitout refers to the infill, what the people have done in their houses...

This section highlights John Habraken's framework of three decision-making levels in housing: the 'tissue' represents the surrounding urban environment, the 'support' refers to the essential structure of a building, and 'fitout' encompasses what residents add to personalize their spaces. This framework clarifies how different stakeholders - from individuals to municipalities - interact with these levels to create housing solutions that meet community needs.

Imagine a pizza: the crust is the 'support' - it needs to be strong for the pizza to hold together; the sauce and cheese are the 'fitout' - they change depending on taste. The environment around the pizza shop (like other restaurants, diners, and shops) creates the 'tissue.' Similarly, a home is shaped by its broader context and how individuals choose to personalize it.

And similarly, buildings are also essentially made of 6 time bound layers. This is space time phenomenon which Ian Bentley also talks about it. One is a site, which generally does not change...

This section introduces the concept of six layers that make up a building, each with a different rate of change. The 'site' is the land where the building sits, which tends to remain stable over time. Other layers include the structure, services, space plan, and furniture, each with their corresponding lifespans and frequencies of change. Understanding these layers helps in planning and managing building maintenance, as different components require varying levels of attention at different times.

Think of a car. The chassis (site) doesn’t change, while the engine (structure) may last a long time. The tires (services) wear out faster and need replacing regularly; the interior decor (space plan) might change based on current trends. Just like cars, buildings have layers that change at different rates, impacting how we maintain or upgrade them.

Once a kit is developed, if a standard structure is acceptable in an owner-driven process and this kind of intervention is upgradeable temporary shelter then budgeting, procurement and distribution of standardized kits is a relatively small, simple operation...

This section highlights the efficiency of using standardized kits for shelter construction. Once these kits are established, managing budgets and logistics for procurement and distribution becomes straightforward, allowing for easier implementation of owner-driven shelter improvements. This process can significantly streamline efforts to provide housing, making it accessible and easier for communities to upgrade their living conditions.

Imagine a craft kit for kids - once the kit is prepared, it can be easily distributed to schools. Similarly, standardized shelter kits can be quickly provided to those in need, facilitating a straightforward path to home improvements without complex logistics.

And we have to understand when we are dealing with this kind of poor communities, one has to look at the livelihoods framework... on one hand, they are already subjected the vulnerability context, they are already in the context, which will have some influence on their access to the abilities...

This chunk emphasizes the importance of looking at the economic conditions of vulnerable communities when implementing housing solutions. A livelihood framework considers the capabilities and resources individuals or communities have to access essential needs. Understanding these contexts is crucial for supporting effective and sustainable solutions to housing and other basic necessities.

Imagine a garden that requires water, soil, and sunlight. If you want it to thrive, you must consider these resources before planting. Similarly, housing solutions must be informed by the specific resources and challenges of a community to be effective and sustainable.

The enabling approach, how we can enable this process and one is the finance you know because this is one the enabling approach recognizes the bottleneck to housing created limited access to finance...

In this section, the concept of enabling approaches to housing provision is discussed. It recognizes financial limitations as a significant barrier to housing. Solutions must address access to financing, land tenure security, material costs, labor availability, and community participation in order to create effective housing strategies. By focusing on these enabling factors, communities can be empowered to improve their living conditions sustainably.

Think of a community trying to build a playground. If they have the funds (finance) but cannot find a suitable location (land tenure), or if parents cannot take time off work (labor), the project will stall. Enabling housing involves ensuring all necessary elements are accessible so communities can build together.

--