Check out the episode:

You can find the shownotes through this link.

---

Are you interested in long term planning for better neighbourhoods?

---

Our summary today works with the article titled Planning ahead for better neighborhoods: Long run evidence from Tanzania from 2017, by Guy Michaels, Dzhamilya Nigmatulina, Ferdinand Rauch, Tanner Regan, Neeraj Baruah, and Amanda Dahlstrand-Rudin, published by the Institute of Labor Economics.

This is a great preparation to our next interview with Fin Moorhouse in episode 324 talking about the need for long term planning and this specific research.

Since we are investigating the future of cities, I thought it would be interesting to see long-term effects of earlier urban programs and what we can learn from them. This research proves that proactive urban planning and infrastructure development can have lasting positive effects.

[intro music]

---

Welcome to today’s What is The Future For Cities podcast and its Research episode; my name is Fanni, and today we will introduce a research by summarising it. The episode really is just a short summary of the original investigation, and, in case it is interesting enough, I would encourage everyone to check out the whole documentation. This conversation was produced and generated with Notebook LM as two hosts dissecting the whole research.

---

[music]

Speaker 1: Urban development in Africa.

Speaker 2: Fascinating stuff.

Speaker 1: Specifically, a study on the long term effects of this program in Tanzania called Sites and Services.

Speaker 2: It’s a really interesting approach because they’re not actually building houses for people, but there’s giving them the tools and space to build better homes themselves.

Speaker 1: Okay, back in the 70s and 80s, Tanzania rolled out these projects, right? Providing the basic infrastructure in certain areas. So we’re talking like roads, drainage, sometimes water mains, the essentials. Yeah, the

Speaker 2: basics.

Speaker 1: But here’s the thing. Residents were responsible for actually building their own homes on these plots.

Speaker 2: So the question is, does it work?

Speaker 1: So did giving folks this initial boost actually lead to better housing and neighbourhoods over time?

Speaker 2: That’s the million dollar question. And the findings at 30 plus years later are pretty dramatic.

Speaker 1: Yeah,

Speaker 2: some good, some not so good. Definitely not what you might expect.

Speaker 1: And the scale of this is impressive. This wasn’t just like a little experiment, right?

Speaker 2: No, it wasn’t.

Speaker 1: We’re talking 24 neighbourhoods across seven Tanzanian cities, and they used satellite imagery and surveys, all that, to track how these neighbourhoods actually evolved over time.

Speaker 2: And they compared them to similar areas that didn’t get this intervention. A control group. Yeah, so they wanted hard data, not just anecdotes.

Speaker 1: Love it. So let’s start with Denovo, where they built infrastructure on basically empty land.

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 1: What happened there?

Speaker 2: All right. So the satellite images tell a pretty compelling story. Yeah. Decades later, De Novo neighbourhoods have way better housing compared to similar areas that also started out empty.

Speaker 1: So paint me a picture. What is better housing actually look like in this context?

Speaker 2: So think bigger, multi story buildings, more homes with electricity. Working toilets, proper roads. Got it. A much more developed scene compared to the areas without that early infrastructure.

Speaker 1: So these de novo spots basically leapfrogged ahead. But was it just because wealthier folks moved in? That’s a good question. And could afford fancier homes right off the bat?

Speaker 2: Yeah. And while de novo areas did see more educated residents, about two years, more schooling on average, that alone doesn’t explain the huge difference in housing quality.

Speaker 1: So even if you weren’t like a high roller moving in, you still might have benefited.

Speaker 2: Exactly. Think about it. If you owned a plot in one of these de novo areas, even if you build a modest home initially. The value of that land probably skyrocketed, and if you sold later on, that’s a nice little nest egg.

Speaker 1: Ah, so it’s not just about who moves in, but how that whole neighbourhood becomes more desirable over time. Everyone wins in a way.

Speaker 2: That’s the idea. Okay. That initial infrastructure investment was like priming the pump. I like it. It attracted private investment. Yeah. People built better homes. Uh huh. And suddenly you have this thriving neighbourhood. Okay. They call it a complementarity effect.

Speaker 1: Complimentary. Had to love a good jargon work. Seriously, you’re telling me those early investments actually paid off years down the line?

Speaker 2: Okay, let me put it this way.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Speaker 2: In Dar es Salaam, land in de novo neighbourhoods is worth five times more than in upgraded areas. Whoa. Yeah, we’re talking 160 to 220 per square meter.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Speaker 2: Versus just 30 to 40.

Speaker 1: Wow, that’s a massive difference.

Speaker 2: If you had bought land there back then, you’d be sitting pretty.

Speaker 1: Okay, but what about those upgrading neighbourhoods where they tried to improve existing settlements? Did that strategy work its magic too? Well,

Speaker 2: that’s where things get a little, a little tricky. Okay. Sadly, the findings for upgrading aren’t as rosy. Okay. These neighbourhoods just didn’t fare as well. Hmm. Often ending up with similar or sometimes even worse housing quality compared to areas that were basically left alone. Hold

Speaker 1: on, worse?

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 1: That’s surprising. You’d think adding infrastructure would automatically make things better, right?

Speaker 2: It seems logical, but no. Remember those de novo areas we talked about? Even the ones that got less investment in the second round still ended up better off than upgraded areas from the first round. Oh, wow. Yeah.

Speaker 1: So it’s not just what you do, but when you do it.

Speaker 2: Yeah. Timing seems to be pretty key here.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Speaker 2: This build it from scratch approach, even with fewer resources later on. Had a bigger impact than trying to fix what was already there.

Speaker 1: If you’re building a Lego tower, it’s way easier to start with a solid base than try to jam in more bricks when it’s already wobbly and five feet tall. So why did the upgrading approach struggle? What went wrong?

Speaker 2: One theory is that the new infrastructure in those upgraded areas just couldn’t keep up. More people were attracted to the improvements, right? Things got more crowded.

Speaker 1: Makes sense.

Speaker 2: And that added strain might have actually led to faster deterioration.

Speaker 1: So it’s like a popularity contest gone wrong. Everyone wants to be in the cool neighbourhood.

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 1: But then it gets overcrowded and loses its charm.

Speaker 2: Exactly. And that overcrowding can lead to a downward spiral, the infrastructure breaks down, people can’t maintain their homes as well, and then the neighbourhood starts to decline a little bit of a vicious cycle.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. I see what you’re saying. Yeah. But it also highlights the limitations of just focusing on the physical stuff. You can add roads and pipes and all that, but if you don’t address the social and economic factors, it might not be enough.

Speaker 2: Yeah, I completely agree. It’s about understanding the unique dynamics of each community. Not just assuming that a one size fits all approach is going to do the trick.

Speaker 1: While upgrading might be tougher, it’s still super important. Oh, absolutely. Millions of people live in these informal settlements.

Speaker 2: Yeah, we can’t ignore them.

Speaker 1: We can’t just ignore them.

Speaker 2: But this research challenges us to think differently about upgrading. How do we make those investments more sustainable? How do we involve residents in the process? How do we prevent those negative feedback loops?

Speaker 1: Big questions. It feels like we need to move beyond just reacting to problems and start thinking more strategically about, like, Shaping urban growth.

Speaker 2: Exactly. And that’s where this whole DeNovo thing really shines. I think it’s not just about fixing what’s broken. It’s about creating new possibilities, a blueprint for better neighbourhoods from the ground up.

Speaker 1: I like that. Speaking of DeNovo, let’s go back to those success stories for a minute.

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 1: What made them work so well?

Speaker 2: Remember that complementarity concept we talked about?

Speaker 1: I do.

Speaker 2: It’s all about creating a ripple effect. The government provides that initial spark, the basic infrastructure, and then private investment kicks in.

Speaker 1: It’s like those domino rallies where one tiny push sets off this amazing chain reaction.

Speaker 2: Exactly. People see the potential, they can invest in their homes, businesses pop up, and suddenly you’ve got this thriving, self sustaining ecosystem.

Speaker 1: So it’s about setting the stage for organic growth, not just dictating what should happen.

Speaker 2: Precisely. And the data backs this up. Remember those larger building, more amenities, better roads we talked about in de novo areas?

Speaker 1: Yes.

Speaker 2: Those are all signs of those complementary investments at work.

Speaker 1: It’s almost like building a house.

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 1: If you start with a solid foundation, you can add on, you can expand, get creative. But if your foundation’s shaky, even the fanciest additions won’t make it stable.

Speaker 2: And this has huge implications for how we spend money on urban development.

Speaker 1: So instead of spreading ourselves thin, trying to fix every problem everywhere, maybe we should focus on creating fewer but really well planned de novo neighbourhoods.

Speaker 2: That’s one way to look at it.

Speaker 1: Like putting our eggs in fewer, sturdier baskets.

Speaker 2: Yeah, of course every city is different. But this research definitely makes a strong case for focusing on those early strategic investments.

Speaker 1: It’s about thinking long term, not just like putting out fires. Exactly. But let’s be real, de novo development isn’t just about economics. Yeah. Right. It’s about people’s lives.

Speaker 2: Absolutely. Imagine living in a neighbourhood where you don’t have to worry about flooding every time it rains, where you have reliable electricity, where your kids can walk to school safely. That’s a game changer for people’s health being.

Speaker 1: And it’s not just like the practical stuff either. A well planned neighbourhood can build a sense of community.

Speaker 2: Absolutely. A place

Speaker 1: where people feel connected and proud to call home.

Speaker 2: You’re so right. Yeah. Those social and environmental factors are just as important as the physical infrastructure.

Speaker 1: I agree.

Speaker 2: It’s about creating spaces that are not just functional, but truly liveable and enjoyable.

Speaker 1: So it’s about shifting our mindset from just managing urban growth to actively shaping it. We’re not just reacting, we’re designing a better future.

Speaker 2: Exactly, and this research from Tanzania gives us like a glimpse of what that future could look like. Yes. A future where cities are designed for people, not just profits.

Speaker 1: Okay, before we get too carried away with all this de novo excitement.

Speaker 2: Right.

Speaker 1: Let’s not forget about the challenges. No approach is perfect.

Speaker 2: Right. Right. What are some of the potential downsides?

Speaker 1: Yeah, what are some of the things that we need to watch out for?

Speaker 2: For starters, de novo development needs a lot of land, and in cities that are already packed pretty tight, finding those big, empty spaces can be next to impossible.

Speaker 1: So it’s not a magic bullet that can work everywhere, especially in those, like, mega cities that are already, like, bursting at the seams.

Speaker 2: Exactly, and that brings up another crucial point. Location. You can’t just build a de novo neighbourhood anywhere and expect it to flourish.

Speaker 1: You’re not going to just like plunk down this shiny new neighbourhood in the middle of nowhere and expect people to magically show up.

Speaker 2: Exactly. You need to think about things like transportation access, proximity to jobs, environmental impact, even the existing social fabric of the surrounding area. Finding the right fit.

Speaker 1: It’s like a matchmaking service for neighbourhoods. Yeah. You’re trying to find that perfect match between a piece of land and a community, taking into account all these different factors.

Speaker 2: It shows how complex urban planning really is. Yeah. It’s not just about drawing lines on a map. It’s about understanding the needs, desires, and connections that make a city tick.

Speaker 1: DeNovo might be a powerful tool.

Speaker 2: It is.

Speaker 1: But it’s not a magic wand.

Speaker 2: No.

Speaker 1: It takes thoughtful planning, a long term vision, and a deep understanding of the context.

Speaker 2: I couldn’t have said it better myself. This research from Tanzania is really an eye opener, showing us both the incredible potential of Denovo and the things we need to be careful about.

Speaker 1: I’m feeling inspired, but before we get too carried away, there’s one more big piece of this research we need to unpack, and that’s the issue of who gets to live in these new neighbourhoods and what happens to those who don’t. Are there any unintended consequences?

Speaker 2: That’s a really important question. We’ve touched on how de novo areas tend to attract more educated, higher income residents, but good chunk of the folks there, they still only have primary school education. But what about those who just can’t afford to be part of this whole upgrade?

Speaker 1: It’s like you build this amazing new school, but only kids from certain neighbourhoods can afford the bus fare to get there.

Speaker 2: That’s a great way to put it. We have to be very careful that the de novo developments don’t end up widening the gap between the haves and the have nots.

Speaker 1: The last thing we want is to like, solve one problem but accidentally make another one worse.

Speaker 2: Exactly, but there is a glimmer of hope here, I think. Remember how the research found that even Less educated residents in de novo areas likely benefited from those increased land values.

Speaker 1: Yeah, even if they couldn’t build a fancy home right away, they could still sell their plot later on and make a profit, maybe improve their lives somewhere else.

Speaker 2: That’s a crucial point. It suggests that de novo development, when done right, might actually create A more equitable spread of benefits compared to upgrading existing settlements, which can lead to that overcrowding and even displacement. We talked

Speaker 1: so it’s not just about putting roofs over people’s heads. It’s about giving them a chance to climb the ladder, prove their situation.

Speaker 2: And that’s where that care planning is key. Okay. We can’t just plop down these de novo neighbourhoods and hope for the best. We need to think strategically about how they connect to the rest of the city.

Speaker 1: So are we talking transportation links, job centres, making sure people have access to the things they need to thrive, the

Speaker 2: things they need to thrive. Yes. And it also means being mindful of the ripple effects on surrounding communities.

Speaker 1: Okay. Explain that one to me.

Speaker 2: Okay. So imagine a new de novo development pops up and all of a sudden. Land values in the surrounding area skyrocket. That could be great for some people, but it could also price out long time residents who just can’t afford to stay anymore.

Speaker 1: It’s like that gentrification. The neighbourhood gets fancier, but the original people, the original folks get pushed out.

Speaker 2: Exactly. So it’s this delicate balancing act. Yeah. We want to create opportunities. But we also have to protect those who are most vulnerable to being displaced.

Speaker 1: That makes sense. It sounds like involving the community is crucial here.

Speaker 2: Absolutely. You

Speaker 1: can’t just impose solutions from the top down. You

Speaker 2: can’t impose solutions. Yeah. Community engagement is key.

Speaker 1: Okay.

Speaker 2: We need to listen to residents, understand their concerns and work together to find solutions that benefit everyone.

Speaker 1: It’s like that old saying, nothing about us without us. People need a seat at the table when decisions are being made.

Speaker 2: Absolutely. Of course, community engagement can be messy. Yeah. And time consuming, but it’s essential.

Speaker 1: It’s about building trust, fostering relationships, creating a shared vision. Yes. It’s not just about bricks and mortar.

Speaker 2: It’s not just about bricks and mortar.

Speaker 1: You’re right. It’s about building a better future together.

Speaker 2: Beautifully said. And I think this research from Tanzania really drives home that point that even the best intentioned ideas can backfire.

Speaker 1: It’s a call to action for all of us planners, policymakers, researchers, even regular folks.

Speaker 2: It is.

Speaker 1: We need to be thoughtful, proactive, collaborative in how we approach urban development. Yeah. Making sure we’re creating opportunities for everyone.

---

[music]

What is the future for cities podcast?

---

Episode and transcript generated with ⁠⁠Descript⁠⁠ assistance (⁠⁠affiliate link⁠⁠).