The trends are troubling. They happen not just because
of natural causes but because of wrong leadership and
commitments. In the face of complexity, our society’s
leaders and followers still prefer bureaucratic and militaristic
approaches. Here are major historical and geographical
examples of such approaches, and they make up a meme:
When the issue is poverty, the usual response is to
relocate slums. The relocation is usually to far-flung areas
where there is a huge lack of water, power, transport
and jobs. The (un)intended consequence of this is that
the people’s socioeconomic vulnerability is increased.
Then, people return to high-risk locations in the city
center that are closer to opportunities. In contrast, the
unpopular alternative is to address why people are escaping
landlessness and conflict in the countryside.
When the issue is blight, the usual response is new
private development, and to relocate more slums. In
these popular projects in the city, people are evicted, and
houses and heritage sites are demolished. After the new
development is gentrification, which is another wave of
displacement as older residents and businesses cannot cope
with the rising rents. In contrast, the unpopular alternative
is to promote mixed-use and mixed-income development at
the scales of the district, neighborhood, block and building.
When the issue is disaster, the usual response is hazard
avoidance or impact reduction, and to relocate more
slums. The centerpiece here is the blanket no-build zone,
extensive seawall and flood control project. This happened
in Tacloban. But going against the flow of water and
merely speeding it up may intensify other hazards, such
as erosion. Also, there are no completely safe places in
the Philippines—there are only places of varying risks.
Hence, quickly relocating people, usually slum families, to
other waterless, powerless and jobless areas merely exposes
them, especially children, to other hazards, and increases
their socioeconomic vulnerability. In contrast, unpopular
alternative is to work with nature and people through mix
of natural buffers and hard infrastructure; performing a
managed retreat from high-risk areas; preparing for usual
evacuations; and by testing intra-urban relocation projects.
93