Fire hazard in informal settlements: should I stay or should I go?

All over the world, more people are moving to urban areas - an ongoing process that drives the need for housing. However, many cities in the Global South lack the capacity to accommodate the influx of newcomers.

As a result, many people end up in informal settlements, often expansions of urban land adjoining wildland. When these urban lands meet wildland, they form the wildland-urban interface (WUI), an area frequently associated with fire risk.

Due to climate change, wildfires have been increasing in intensity and frequency, posing a threat to both wildland and informal settlements.

Moreover, fires starting from within an informal settlement tend to spread extremely fast and affect many people due to flammable building materials and high-density homes.

To make matters worse, poor road conditions often reduce the ability of firefighters to reach the affected areas.

Why, then, do people still choose to live in those high wildfire or settlement fire-risk informal areas? And why do others choose to leave?

In an attempt to gain more insight into these questions, researchers conducted a study in an area where fire-dependent and fire-prone vegetation meets an informal urban settlement named Imizamo Yethu (IY) in Cape Town, South Africa.

IY was established in the early 1990s as a settlement for local black workers in the white Houtbay area. The settlement has experienced multiple fire events in recent years.

Imizamo Yethu (IY) with wildland urban interface (WUI) in South Africa. Christ et al. (2023).

The PMT framework as a basis

The study was based on the protection motivation theory (PMT), a framework developed in social psychology to understand people's decisions under risk. The PMT has since been used in environmental risk studies, including wildfire risk studies at the WUI.

According to the PMT, individuals will protect themselves against a hazard if they perceive the threat is high enough (threat appraisal) and their ability to cope with it is also high (coping appraisal).

The researchers decided to contextualise the PMT by showing that there are different types of residents within an informal settlement, with different interests and values that influence their perceptions and, thus, residential choices. To this end, the PMT was enriched with two other theories: a theory on settlement patterns developed by British architect and urban planner John Turner, and the place attachment theory, which explores the emotional bonds between individuals and specific places.

Turner's theory

Turner investigated the values that residents in informal settlements put on various aspects of the settlements they choose. He identified three types of residents.

(1) Bridgeheaders: Very low-income individuals who prioritise access to jobs and basic services and are willing to take most risks for it.

(2) Consolidators: Low-income individuals seeking stability and tenure security.

(3) Status-seekers: Middle-income individuals looking for symbols of new wealth and higher-quality amenities, like paved roads and sanitation.

Turner noted that bridgeheaders and consolidators find access to the city and money more important than social status.

Place attachment

Place attachment can affect how residents perceive risks and respond to them. For instance, research on wildfire risk mitigation shows that while strong place attachment increases the likelihood of taking precautions at home, it can also decrease the chances of temporary evacuation during a crisis.

Enriched PMT model applied to fire risk-related location decisions. Christ et al. (2023).

Research questions

The researchers set five research questions:

1. Which of Turner's resident types can be found in a South African informal settlement?

2. What levels of place attachment do the resident types have?

3. How do the resident types perceive the threat of fire?

4. How do the resident types perceive their coping capacity?

5. How to investigate the decision to stay or leave an area using an enriched PMT model?

Research method

To answer their questions, the researchers employed a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative interviews with four local leaders and structured questionnaires with a sample of residents.

The interviews with local leaders were used to understand how free residents are to make their location decisions within IY and to tailor the questionnaire design and administration method for IY residents. The questionnaire featured questions modified for the context from existing works for PMT, Turner's theory, and place attachment.

Results

The study identified five types of residents. The classic bridgeheader and the classic consolidator were in line with Turner's theory.

In addition, two subtypes of bridgeheader were identified – the dependent bridgeheader and the unattached bridgeheader – as well as a subtype of the consolidator, the potential consolidator.

No status seekers were found in IY. Dependent bridgeheaders were dependent on help from other residents to maintain their living status in IY and were mostly unemployed.

Unattached bridgeheaders, while still very low income, did not have their source of income linked to IY. Finally, potential consolidators were residents that were almost secure enough to become classic consolidators but still lacked some features thereof.

In terms of place attachment, all resident types showed some level of attachment to IY. Dependent bridgeheaders had the lowest place attachment, likely due to not fully utilising local employment opportunities.

Classic bridgeheaders exhibited the highest attachment, with IY serving as a valuable income source despite fire hazards.

Classic consolidators displayed lower attachment, potentially indicating a shift toward status-seeking, as they might be seeking better living conditions and amenities elsewhere. Overall, the attachment levels varied significantly among different resident types based on their circumstances and aspirations.

As to residents' awareness and perception of fire hazards, nearly half of the residents were aware of fire risks before moving in, but many believed the benefits of living in IY outweighed these risks.

Different resident types had varying thresholds for acceptable risk regarding fire hazards, with classic consolidators generally perceiving a lower threat than bridgeheaders.

When asked about their coping capacity, dependent bridgeheaders perceived fire risk as low but felt ineffective in being able to implement coping strategies.

In contrast, classic bridgeheaders, unattached bridgeheaders, and potential consolidators believed they could reduce fire risk but feared the cost this would entail.

Classic consolidators rated their coping strategies as ineffective and felt less capable of implementing them, yet did not view costs as a major obstacle.

Researchers found that the enriched PMT framework enabled the researchers to identify the key factors leading to residents' decision to stay or leave an area.

As it turned out, the level of place attachment is an important variable for the decision to stay, with individual threat appraisal and the financial rewards of staying also being key for this decision. The decision to move is influenced by the perceived ability of residents to do so.

Further research and implications

The researchers note that since different types of residents have different motivations for remaining in place, one theory alone cannot describe the complex reasoning behind residential decisions under risk.

The enriched PMT framework was found to provide a novel way to investigate the issue.

To evaluate its wider applicability, the researchers suggest that their approach be used in further studies with larger samples, in different contexts, and with different hazards.

For policymakers, the study indicates that when there is no other option but relocating residents from informal settlements, a tailor-made approach is advised that considers the needs of the different groups that live in an area.

Header image: Diriye Amey from Locarno, Switzerland, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

This story is an adaptation of a journal article: Christ, S., Schwarz, N., & Sliuzas, R. (2023). Understanding residential choice under risk: A case study of settlement fire and wildfire risk. Habitat International, 136, 102815. It has been adapted in accordance with the license CC BY 4.0

To read the original article, follow the link below: