Planning Models for Small Towns in Tanzania
53
settlements in different growth periods focusing on density changes, availability of
common spaces and infrastructure way-leaves and influence of trunk infrastructure
services on land use organization. On the governance side, the research explored
interests, capacities and influences of different actors and stakeholders in planning
process and management of land and activities in these emerging and growing small
urban centres. These actors included landowners, local governments, local politicians
and utilities service providers, business communities and civil society organizations.
The research which employed action research not only focused on exploring maladies
in the growth of the small towns and understanding prerequisites for integrating
informal powers in land governance and improving services, but also piloted on
ideas of re-configuration of the idea of proactive interventions in order to cope with
informality, which is beneficial in emergency situations such as COVID-19. From
this four-year engagement with communities in small towns, lessons were drawn that
could improve the health and wellbeing of small towns and communities in the face
of this and similar pandemics in the future.
3 Insights and Findings
It was observed that there is ambiguity and institutional discourse on what constitutes
small towns, particularly between the concerned Ministries such as that dealing with
Lands, Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD), and that of Regional Administration and Local Governments (PO-RALG) and National Bureau of Statistics (NBS)
dealing with population and hierarchy of settlements within Tanzania. To exemplify,
all three institutions use only population criteria in defining small towns but they
differ in the applicable thresholds. Reference was made to the National Human
Settlement Policy, statistical standards and World Bank definition of small towns
(Muzzini and Lindeboom 2008). This affects their declaration, institutionalization
(allocating responsible offices) planning and resourcing for development. Therefore,
these observed ambiguities are also felt in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic,
where centralized decisions fail or are delayed in filtering into communities and data
on the diseases spread and containment become unreliable.
From over 100 urban centres existing in Tanzania, less than 20% have General
Planning Schemes/Master Plans and most of those which have them are urban centres
which are Municipalities or cities. Among over 100 urban centres with a population between 50,000 and 150,000, less than 10 have Master Plans. Studies have
further established that even for those with valid Master Plans, the implementation
level in terms of spatial conformity between the plan and actual use is less than
30%. However, the implementation of the approved and surveyed detailed planning schemes seems to be higher (over 50%). General Planning Schemes seems to
be affected by a lack of realistic consideration of land ownership and use claims,
disconformity with interest of utility agencies and developers as well as challenges
in legitimacy in the planning process; particularly the fact that the institutional structure doesn’t make it mandatory for landowners, utility agencies and economic actors,
53
settlements in different growth periods focusing on density changes, availability of
common spaces and infrastructure way-leaves and influence of trunk infrastructure
services on land use organization. On the governance side, the research explored
interests, capacities and influences of different actors and stakeholders in planning
process and management of land and activities in these emerging and growing small
urban centres. These actors included landowners, local governments, local politicians
and utilities service providers, business communities and civil society organizations.
The research which employed action research not only focused on exploring maladies
in the growth of the small towns and understanding prerequisites for integrating
informal powers in land governance and improving services, but also piloted on
ideas of re-configuration of the idea of proactive interventions in order to cope with
informality, which is beneficial in emergency situations such as COVID-19. From
this four-year engagement with communities in small towns, lessons were drawn that
could improve the health and wellbeing of small towns and communities in the face
of this and similar pandemics in the future.
3 Insights and Findings
It was observed that there is ambiguity and institutional discourse on what constitutes
small towns, particularly between the concerned Ministries such as that dealing with
Lands, Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD), and that of Regional Administration and Local Governments (PO-RALG) and National Bureau of Statistics (NBS)
dealing with population and hierarchy of settlements within Tanzania. To exemplify,
all three institutions use only population criteria in defining small towns but they
differ in the applicable thresholds. Reference was made to the National Human
Settlement Policy, statistical standards and World Bank definition of small towns
(Muzzini and Lindeboom 2008). This affects their declaration, institutionalization
(allocating responsible offices) planning and resourcing for development. Therefore,
these observed ambiguities are also felt in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic,
where centralized decisions fail or are delayed in filtering into communities and data
on the diseases spread and containment become unreliable.
From over 100 urban centres existing in Tanzania, less than 20% have General
Planning Schemes/Master Plans and most of those which have them are urban centres
which are Municipalities or cities. Among over 100 urban centres with a population between 50,000 and 150,000, less than 10 have Master Plans. Studies have
further established that even for those with valid Master Plans, the implementation
level in terms of spatial conformity between the plan and actual use is less than
30%. However, the implementation of the approved and surveyed detailed planning schemes seems to be higher (over 50%). General Planning Schemes seems to
be affected by a lack of realistic consideration of land ownership and use claims,
disconformity with interest of utility agencies and developers as well as challenges
in legitimacy in the planning process; particularly the fact that the institutional structure doesn’t make it mandatory for landowners, utility agencies and economic actors,