Social Housing in Fiji. Is Social Housing applicable for the poor and low-income only or does it include other levels of income earners?
Full text
Social Housing in Fiji Is Social Housing applicable for the poor and low-income only or does it include other levels of income earners? Kesaia Likulivaliva Vunicagi Dissertação realizada no âmbito do Mestrado em Riscos, Cidades e Ordenamento do Território, orientada pela Professora Doutora Fátima Loureiro de Matos Membros do Júri Professora Doutora Ana Maria Rodrigues Monteiro Sousa Faculdade de Letras - Universidade do Porto Professora Doutora Carmen do Céu Gonçalves Ferreira Faculdade de Letras - Universidade do Porto Professora Doutora Fátima Loureiro de Matos Faculdade de Letras - Universidade do Porto Classificação obtida: 18 valores
To my Father
i Table of Contents Acknowledgement ....................................................................................... iii Resumo ....................................................................................................... iv Abstract .........................................................................................................v List of Figure ................................................................................................ vi List of Tables .............................................................................................. vii 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Rationale and Objective of Research Area ............................................. 3 1.2 Research Methodology and Tools ........................................................... 4 Qualitative Data ................................................................................ 5 Quantitative Data .............................................................................. 5 Literature Review .............................................................................. 6 Case Study ....................................................................................... 6 Tools and Software ........................................................................... 6 1.3 Conceptual Framework ........................................................................... 6 1.4 Case Study Area ..................................................................................... 8 1.5 Thesis Structure ...................................................................................... 9 2. Literature Review ......................................................................................... 10 2.1 Definition of Social Housing .................................................................. 11 2.2 Conception of Social Housing ............................................................... 12 2.3 Trend of Social Housing ........................................................................ 14 2.4 Social Housing Mode ............................................................................ 16 2.5 Benefits of Social Housing .................................................................... 17 3. The Study Area ............................................................................................ 20 3.1 Overview of Fiji ...................................................................................... 20 Geography ...................................................................................... 20 Administrative Boundaries of Fiji .................................................... 21 Governing Structure in Fiji .............................................................. 22 Land Tenure ................................................................................... 23 Land Management and Development in Fiji ................................... 24 Social and Economic Profile of Fiji ................................................. 25 Income, Employment & Poverty Incidence ..................................... 30 3.2 Urbanization .......................................................................................... 32
ii 3.3 Urban Housing in Fiji ............................................................................. 34 Housing System ............................................................................. 35 Housing Legal Framework and Institutional Agencies .................... 39 Housing Stock in Fiji ....................................................................... 43 Housing Finance ............................................................................. 44 3.4 Urban Environment ............................................................................... 44 3.5 General Overview of the Study Area – Suva City .................................. 45 Governance in the Suva City Council ............................................. 47 Demography and Urban Trends of Suva City ................................. 48 Social Structure in Suva City .......................................................... 49 Economic Characteristic of Suva City ............................................. 51 Land Tenure in Suva City ............................................................... 51 Housing Provision in Suva City ....................................................... 52 4. Analysis and Discussion .............................................................................. 54 4.1 Social Factor ......................................................................................... 54 Demography of Suva City ............................................................... 54 Household Characteristic of Suva City ........................................... 55 Employment Status in Suva City .................................................... 56 4.2 Economic Factor ................................................................................... 58 Land Use and Spatial patterns of Suva City ................................... 58 Income Distribution ......................................................................... 61 Housing Cost .................................................................................. 64 Housing Supply and Demand ......................................................... 67 4.3 Governance ........................................................................................... 69 Social Housing Institution and Legislation ...................................... 70 Social Housing Policy ..................................................................... 71 4.4 Environment .......................................................................................... 72 4.5 Summary of Discussion and Analysis ................................................... 74 5. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 79 Reference .................................................................................................... 83
iii Acknowledgement I lift my eyes to the hills – From whence comes my help. Acknowledgements and sincere thanks are due to numerous people for their help and support to the completion of this research. So many are not named or missed who deserve thanks and those included I am forever grateful. First, I would like to thank my supervisor Professora Doutora Fátima Loureiro de Matos for the unwavering support and assistance – it has been an encouragement and inspiration that has contributed to the culmination of this research. My sincere gratitude goes out to the following people: At the University of Porto; to the entire members of the teaching staff of the Department of Geography, Faculty of Letras; the international office staff; and the faculty administrative staff. The European Union through the Erasmus Mundus Scholarship Programme, for funding the two years academic period. In Fiji, to the Director of Town and Country Planning and Staff, Ms Farzana Khan of the Valuation Division your assistance is a blessing. My colleagues from the first and second academic year; especially Ana Ferreira thank you for all the needed assistance; Maluseu, William and Epeli thank you for making life easy in Porto. To the Riverside Church (Porto) family, you have been my family away from home; I am truly blessed; thank you for all your prayers. To my husband, Tuiwailevu, children, Merewalesi, Mosese, Josefa and Glorya; thank you for your understanding and forbearance during my two year absence from home. I would also like to state, that few ideas in this work are entirely original and I acknowledge the work of many researchers and scholars. Muito Obrigado, Thank you, and Vinaka vakalevu KLV
iv Resumo A necessidade de uma habitação adequada é reconhecida em todo o mundo, sendo demostrado pelos diferentes países o esforço para satisfazer essa necessidade básica. A importância da habitação como um direito fundamental é reconhecida pelas Nações Unidas na Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos de 1948. No entanto, a habitação é um bem caro, que não é acessível a todos, portanto, a habitação social tornou-se uma estratégia comum para resolver este problema. Nas Fiji, o processo de urbanização é notável e está patente na proliferação de bairros de lata nas áreas urbanas do país. Este fenômeno continuará a existir se não for implementado um planeamento adequado. Os planos de desenvolvimento dos governos anteriores e do atual governo refletem os esforços desenvolvidos para resolver este problema, mas a necessidade de habitação continua a crescer nas Fiji. A habitação social tem sido reconhecida como uma estratégia comum para resolver este problema, embora ela possa ser definida e praticada de diversas formas. Existe, também, uma noção comum de que a provisão de habitação social é apenas para os mais pobres e para os grupos sociais com rendimentos baixos. É esta mútua convicção que esta investigação pretende pesquisar e discutir a necessidade de habitação social nas Fiji. Assim, este estudo tem como objetivo compreender se a habitação social é apenas para os mais pobres e para os grupos sociais com menor rendimento, ou também deve incluir outros grupos sociais que não têm acessibilidade ao mercado habitacional. Os resultados desta investigação poderiam ser utilizados para promover mais estudos sobre o problema habitacional das Fiji. Alguns dos resultados mais relevantes seria o apoio ao governo e às instituições ligadas à habitação na formulação de uma estratégia e política habitacional, para além de, uma melhor gestão da habitação para os fijianos. Palavras-chave: Habitação; Habitação Social; Urbanização; Bairros de lata; Estratégia; Política; Suva; Viti Levu; Fiji.
v Abstract The need for better housing is recognised throughout the world with tremendous effort shown by countries to provide this basic necessity. Its relevance is highlighted and endorsed as a fundamental right by the United Nation, in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, housing is an expensive good that is not accessible and affordable to everyone thus social housing has become a common strategy to address this issue. In Fiji, the urbanisation process is notable and is portrayed by the proliferating of squatter settlements throughout the urban areas in the country. This phenomena is expected to continue if appropriate planning is not implemented. Past development plans of the previous governments and the current government reflect efforts made to address this problem but the growing housing need in Fiji seems to be continuous. Social housing has been recognized as a common strategy to address this issue even though it is defined and practiced in various ways. It has also become a common notion that social housing provision is only for the poor and low-income earners. It is this mutual belief that this research is directed to investigate and discuss the need of social housing in Fiji. This study aims to understand if social housing is only for the poor and low-income earners, or should also include other social groups that have no affordability to access the housing market.The result of this research could be used to promote further studies on housing problems in Fiji. Relevant outcome would be of assistance to the government and housing institutions in the formulation of housing strategy and policy and a better housing management to the Fijians. Key Words: Housing; Social Housing; Urbanisation; Squatter settlements; Strategy; Policy; Suva City; Viti Levu; Fiji
vi List of Figure Figure 1: Conceptual Framework...............................................................................................7 Figure 2: Case Study Area - Suva City......................................................................................8 Figure 3: Segmentation of housing stock in EU member states..........................................15 Figure 4: Map of Fiji....................................................................................................................21 Figure 5: Administrative Boundaries in Fiji..............................................................................22 Figure 6: Governing Structure in Fiji.........................................................................................23 Figure 7: An example of Development Process.....................................................................24 Figure 8: Population size and annual average growth in Fiji: 1881-2007..........................26 Figure 9: Population Age Structure for Fiji in 1996 and 2007 Population Census............27 Figure 10: Sectorial contribution to GDP for the review year 2010-2014...........................28 Figure 11: Fiji Economic Performance 1970-2013.................................................................29 Figure 12: Percentage of age group working for money.......................................................31 Figure 13: Cities and Towns in Fiji...........................................................................................32 Figure 14: Site Dimensional requirements..............................................................................36 Figure 15: Formal housing development.................................................................................37 Figure 16: Squatter settlements in Fiji.....................................................................................39 Figure 17: Map of Suva City boundary and wards.................................................................46 Figure 18: Structure of Governance in Suva City Council....................................................47 Figure 19: Social Structure and role of Fijian community.....................................................50 Figure 20: Informal Settlements in Suva City.........................................................................53 Figure 21: Suva City Scheme Plan...........................................................................................59 Figure 22: Residential Development Distribution by Category............................................61 Figure 23: Residential Property Sales 2001-2005 in Fiji.......................................................65 Figure 24: Comparison of permits and completion certificate issued.................................68 Figure 25: Squatter settlements on vulnerable areas............................................................73 Figure 26: Comparison between house price and average salary in Suva City................75
vii List of Tables Table 1: Paradigm, Policy, Programmes and Projects, 1950-1970....................................14 Table 2: Social housing waiting list in large metropolitan area............................................15 Table 3: Social housing based on allocation...........................................................................16 Table 4: Benefits of social and affordable housing................................................................18 Table 5: Population Doubling Time in Fiji................................................................................26 Table 6: Change in the rural urban population composition of Fiji between 1996 and 2007 and projected population composition between 2007 and 2030................................28 Table 7: Average Household Income ($F)..............................................................................30 Table 8: Comparison of distribution of income using the Gini Coefficient of 2002-2003 and 2008-2009.............................................................................................................................31 Table 9: Housing Legal Framework for Fiji.............................................................................40 Table 10: Distribution and Quality of Housing Stock in Fiji...................................................43 Table 11: Population projection of Suva City..........................................................................49 Table 12: Major Occupational Group in urban society of Fiji................................................50 Table 13: Household Income Distribution...............................................................................51 Table 14: Land tenure distribution in Suva City......................................................................52 Table 15: Population Distribution of Suva City.......................................................................55 Table 16: Size and type of household in Suva City...............................................................56 Table 17: Employment statistics of Suva City.........................................................................57 Table 18: Land use distribution of Suva City..........................................................................60 Table 19: Distribution of Residential zone by Category........................................................60 Table 20: Distribution of average wages and salary in Suva City.......................................63 Table 21: Tabulated format of figures from figure 23............................................................65 Table 22: House price in Suva City 2016................................................................................66 Table 23: Number of Permits and Completion Certificate issued for Residential Development for 2013-2015 for Suva City..............................................................................68
7 regard a house as a place of comfort, security and above all it has central importance to everyone’s quality of life and health. Inevitably in the urban world, economic welfare is an important component to realise the ultimate development of human’s social welfare. The development and improvement of society reflects the viability of its economy. A growth in economy is leverage in accessing basic needs, reducing poverty and improving well-being. Moreover, society needs directions and guidelines to set the platform for development coherently and cohesively. Therefore, the importance of governance to provide and make legislation and policy to guide development. The environment is part and parcel of human existence and needs to be considered as part of holistic approach to development. In many parts of the developing worlds, slums are mostly located in vulnerable environments that pose risk not only to individual well-being but also to the natural environment. Figure 1: Conceptual Framework
8 In figure 1, the diagram illustrates the important elements in the components of housing. Based on this important factors this research, will attempt to analyse and highlight important findings that will contribute in solving housing issues in Fiji. 1.4 Case Study Area The study area is shown as Figure 2. Suva City is the capital of the Fiji islands and represents the most urbanised area in Fiji. It is located on the Southeast coast of the island of Viti Levu within the Rewa Province in the Central Division. Being the capital of Fiji, it accommodates the national government, headquarters of government ministries, the banking and financial institutions, and the headquarters of a number of regional and global organisations. Within the small island regions of the South Pacific, Suva City is the largest and the most diverse and has become an important regional centre. It is also known to be the economic centre of the South Pacific that has been the centre of attraction to the Fijian population who hopes to seek employment, education, better health and well-being. Figure 2: Case Study Area - Suva City Source: Adapted from Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP 2016)
9 1.5 Thesis Structure The thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 being and introduction section, noting the enthusiast behind the topic being researched as well as letting the reader discern the subsequent four chapters in presenting the research aims and objectives, the methodology used and the framework on how the study will be carried out. Chapter two presents the literature review. The chapter gives an overview of studies that have been carried out by scholars and researcher on the research topic. A more international viewpoint is taken rather than from the local perspective. Chapter three outlines the study area. This chapter reviews important factors relating to the subject of study. In chapter four the analysis and discussion section; it presents and discuss data gathered from secondary sources such as the Fiji Bureau of Statistics, Suva City Council and Department of Lands. The chapter allows the reader to understand the extent of issues and problems relating to housing which points to the need of social housing. Chapter five gives the concluding remarks which sums up the objective of this study.
10 2. Literature Review Many studies and researches have been carried out in the field of social housing with authors and researchers having various views on the subject. Whilst being a new term it is also with critics. Reeves (2006), understood the subject of social housing as an essential to the maintenance of the fabric of society. The provision of social housing by social housing organisation may offset the demand of housing thus increasing the supply of housing in areas of high demand which may in turn decrease the price of the product rendering it more affordable. Social housing is not down played but knowledge is offered to captivate those that shows interest in this field so they could become better managers or policy writers in the field of housing. Moreover, the writer contends that social housing exists because not every household can afford to satisfy their housing requirements through the market due to supply-demand imbalances and unfavourable earnings/house price ratios and because society deems it just to provide housing for those who cannot compete effectively to secure their own home. In the analysis of social housing the main themes are highlighted and are being referred to it as “big picture” themes of social housing. The factors underlying social housing are housing supply and demand, housing management, the finance of housing and the political and economic realities that drives it equalities and diversity issues which runs through the entire field, and ways of developing new housing. Having a better understanding of these factors will draw an increase and effectiveness of housing management and the quality of life of those who depend on the sector for a roof. While Reeves (2006) in his book enlightens his readers to understand social housing, King (2006), on the other hand draws critics to the subject putting up and idea of ending social housing as the title of his article states. Suggesting that social housing does not provide as many choices to those that rely on it for a roof but gives a restriction thus does not really contribute to the well-being of a person. In this regard, housing subsidy should be given directly to the recipient so it enables him/her to make a choice to the type of housing preferred. King further discusses that understanding the intention of housing policy is being confused by incomprehensible language and adds that in the future housing support for those in need should be provided by a straightforward means-tested subsidy that varies only with local rent levels and according to whether the recipient is a single person or part of a couple or a family with children. The writer recommends that housing policy would be effective if
11 implemented along with more wide-ranging of social security. In the long term it may be desirable to phase out specific subsidies to individuals for housing and replace them with cash social security benefits. The importance of social housing in China is noted by Wang (2004), as an important part of social protection system by the central government that agrees with studies carried out by Reeves 2006. Nevertheless, Wang’s criticism is on the development policies that ignore the plight of the poor. The housing and real estate policy overlooks the serious consequences of social segregation and has created a very uneven social structure. Moreover, redevelopment in some places has destroyed homes and informal job opportunities for low-income families and removed affordable housing for the future urban poor and rural migrants. Housing policy as suggested by Wang should be changed to promote the pro-poor strategy of which several areas could be considered such as reconsidering urban development strategies and putting a brake on the current trend of urban sprawl by developing new high class housing estates. In addition, a diversification of housing styles, size and ownership should be promoted, and more affordable housing for the poor should be developed or protected (Wang, 2004). Collectively around the world, social housing has served different purposes; from balancing the supply and demand mechanism of housing markets, to providing social protection for individual and families. Social housing has also been used to upgrade the livelihoods of squatter dwellers in the case of developing countries. In Fiji, the passing of a legislations namely the Housing Authority Act (1955), and the establishment of the Housing Authority of Fiji is a culmination of housing strategies of the time to address informal settlements and the disadvantages. 2.1 Definition of Social Housing The term social housing is a recent phrase (Reeves, 2006), with various researchers and scholars having different views. More so views are divided between the developed and the developing countries. The developed world perceives social housing in a manner that is reflected by the housing policies of each country. In the United Kingdom, social housing is defined as housing that has been constructed from public funds and so rents are subsidised so that it can be provided at a price that is not principally determined by the profit motive, but is rather allocated according to some
12 concept of need and where political decision making has an important influence in terms of the quantity, quality and terms of provision. The provision of social housing is therefore, predicated on the basis that decision making is taken away from the households, (King, 2006). This definition is derived after analysing and discussing the policies of housing in the United Kingdom of which the author concluded with a definitions with Oxley and Smith 1996 (King, 2006). Generally, there are three common elements that hold social housing in Europe which are; a mission of general interest, the objective of increasing the supply of affordable housing and specific targets defined in terms of socio-economic status or the presence of vulnerability (Braga & Palvarini, 2013). The United States uses a different term to refer to Social Housing. Most researchers and authors in this country refer to public housing or community housing when referring to social housing. However, similar social housing concept is applied as in other developed countries depending on the government of the day and their housing policies drawn to guide them with its development. Social Housing in Fiji has no definitive definition. The passing of the Housing Authority Act, however was a government strategy to alleviate the housing needs in Fiji especially for the low income urban workers (Hassan, 2007). Further, discussion on the housing authority role is discussed in point 3.3.2. To sum up these various definitions of social housing the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) defines the term as follows; “Social housing” has no one definitions, it is in essence a key word used to enable governments and interested stakeholders to exchange knowledge about the part of their housing system that is aimed to satisfy the housing need, that is supported by the state and distributed through administrative process distinct to their local contexts” (UN, 2015b, p. 14). 2.2 Conception of Social Housing The establishment of social housing varies around the globe and most account indicates that its formation is entrenched with different national and local tradition. The beginning of social housing is deeply rooted with urbanisation and industrialisation. In Europe for instance, scholarly articles and literature indicates that social housing was conceived during the mass process of urbanisation and industrialisation in the mid18th centuries and in the 19th centuries. Housing conditions during that era was often
13 recorded as appalling for the capitalist priorities was only focused on capital gains and not on the livelihoods of the workers. The precarious conditions of housing of the time often drew criticism by Marxist such as Engels as well as conservatives like Abbé Lemire and even Napoléon III (Lévy-Vroelant, 2014). At the time, housing improvements was initiated and reshaped by Utopia, philanthropy and industry on the recognition that housing is the core sustenance of life (LévyVroelant, 2014). State and the municipal intervention came much later. The supply of housing was barely sufficient and majority of working class continue to live in extremely poor housing conditions. Political consciousness and the realisation of once responsibility for social incentive in terms of social justice, economic profit, health and the fear of uprising allowed the inception of the Housing Acts in most of the economically advanced European countries around the 1900’s (Lévy-Vroelant, 2014). Mass production of social housing, came after government housing policies and planning arrived on the stage during the 1960s (Lévy-Vroelant, 2014). Housing sector development in developing countries takes on a different dimension. In the earlier stage of development, housing in developing countries has accorded greater internationalisation than was the case of housing in developed regions at the similar stages of development (Pugh, 2001). The author notes that there are four main factors that significantly impacted housing development in developing countries. First is demographic and development factors. High rates of population growth is attributed to earlier ages of marriages and improved health compared with developed countries (Pugh, 2001). The second factor is economic growth which is serviced driven and the rate of saving and investment is inadequate to absorb current volumes of labour supply which accounts to 35 million each year in formal economic sectors (Pugh, 2001). The third factor is attributed to rural urban migration that has a direct link to the first and second factors. According to Pugh (2001), millions have been economically pushed into the urban informal sectors where incomes are low, intermittent and uncertain. The subsequent factor of the above mentioned issues is rapid urbanisation which is the fourth factor. The resultant element is said to be mass squatter settlement or informal housing development in urban areas. In an account by Wakely (2014), the period from 1950 to 1970 saw many political independence of many former European colonies; in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean.
14 It also follows a significant rate of urbanisation with obvious scene of informal settlement that was further acknowledged by the 1951 and 1961 rounds of national census (Wakely, 2014). Apparently, social housing ideas were implemented through the construction of public housing, to address the growth of informal settlements. Generally housing policies for developing countries during this period was perceived as outlined in table 1, unfortunately it failed to materialise in most countries of the developing worlds. Table 1: Paradigm, Policy, Programmes and Projects, 1950-1970 Source: Adopted from Wakely 2014 2.3 Trend of Social Housing Since, the start of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) the number of households registered for social housing has risen (UN, 2015b). Recent study in the United Nation Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) regions shows that, the social housing waiting lists in the United Kingdom are at 1.8million, 1.7million in France and 1.17million in Ukraine (UN, 2015b). The United States is experiencing a shortage of 5.3million of social housing units and in Russian Federation the waiting period for social housing is 20 years. The study further notes that social housing needs Paradigm To enable the lower income households to access appropriately located housing and domestic services of officially acceptable standards of space and construction. To ensure the appropriate use of urban land and the aesthetic quality of the urban environment, government must enter the housing market by constructing, maintaining and managing housing of an acceptable quality with security of tenure at affordable (subsidised) price and costs, for the exclusive use of low-income households. Policy To establish and legislate on politically acceptable levels of subsidy to be devoted to urban housing; to formulate processes and procedures for the design, financing/budgeting, construction and allocation of social housing in the establishment and maintenance of public housing authorities (Ministry, Department, Quasi-governmental Organisation – Quango) responsible for the design, construction, allocation and management of public social housing. In many countries, housing has been perceived as principally the construction of buildings and infrastructure engineering, consequently many public housing agencies and authorities have grown out of, or been attached to Ministries or Department of Public Works, generally at national government level rather than at the level of municipal or local government. Programmes To identify housing deficits (ratio of supply: demand) and compute needs for subsidised public housing and domestic services by house type and cost in specific locations and over defined periods of time, and the resources required to meeting them. Public housing construction programmes have often been linked to slum clearance programmes in order to re-house those made homeless as a result of the demolition of illegal informal settlements and or overcrowded, unhealthy and dangerous central city slums. Projects To design and build public housing on specific sites to satisfy programme requirements (cost limits, statutory standards of space, construction and servicing etc.) and topographic/urban characteristics of the project sites and if relevant those (cultural demands) that pertain to the particular target occupant groups. Many public social housing projects have been the construction of large apartment blocks, others have entailed the design and construction of relatively lowdensity housing estates of small individual housing units set in the (usually peri-urban) landscape.
15 intensifies in large metropolitan area where housing markets is robust and prices are high (table 2). Table 2: Social housing waiting list in large metropolitan area Source: UN, 2015b p. 45 In the European region, according to a study carried out by Houard (2012), social housing is greatly diversified (Figure 3). Figure 3: Segmentation of housing stock in EU member states Source: Houard 2012 p. 2 Figure 3 represents the ratio of social housing stock to the total housing of each country. Accordingly it shows that the Netherlands has the highest proportion of social housing (34%), followed by the United Kingdom (21%) and France 20% (Houard, 2012). Seemingly as shown on the figure, Luxembourg and countries in the Southern and Eastern Europe have very small stocks of social housing of less than 5%. Interestingly Greece has no social housing stock at all (Houard, 2012). Whilst there is a wide differences in the proportion of social housing observed in the European region,a common overall trend of those accessing social housing is
16 concentrated amongst the vulnerable population (Lévy-Vroelant, 2014). This changes could be based on decision made on a national level, or at a local level but could also reflect the impact of economic crisis on each country. Social housing trend in developing countries takes on a different mode. Each government is encouraged to provide for their poor and needy according to the availability of resources and the extent of housing issues encountered. As noted by Wakely (2014), public housing construction was a familiar means of providing housing for the poor and low income immediately after independence of many colonialized countries. This was marred by different problems but the most common issue is the accessibility of financial resources. Keivania and Werna (2001), notes that public housing provision in developing countries makes up only 10% of the total housing stock ( Keivani & Werna, 2001; Okpala, 1992). 2.4 Social Housing Mode The UN 2015 notes that social housing in the UNECE region, is categorised using allocation model as depicted in table 3. Table 3: Social housing based on allocation Source: UN 2015b p. 21 The UNECE study on social housing further notes that residual social housing model is the most common model that majority of the UNECE member states uses and the demand for social housing continues to grow (UN, 2015b). Since the global financial crisis (GFC), many UNECE member countries are reviewing their social housing policies and funding mechanism (UN, 2015b) to alleviate the housing needs of each country.
23 Figure 6: Governing Structure in Fiji Land Tenure Land has been an important resource in Fiji due its limitedness and scarcity. Economic development is natural resource based, mostly depending on the land. This scarce resource is a crucial elements in maintaining a robust and healthy economy. The availability of land contributes in supporting the performance of housing industry as well as other economic activity such as commercial and other industry. In Fiji there are three types of land tenure. The State land which is managed by the Director of Lands and Surveyor General under the Crown Lands Act (Cap 132), the iTaukei land; managed by the iTaukei Land Trust Board under the iTaukei Land Trust Act (Cap 134) and freehold land. Freehold land even though managed by private property owner it is subject to the Property Land Act and Land Transfer Act of Fiji.
24 Approximately 83% of land in Fiji is iTaukei Land and is communally owned by villages or land-owning units. The State owns approximately 7% while freehold land comprises of 10%. The total land area is said to be 18,000 square kilometres, of this only 19% is arable and is suitable for agriculture development. With increase urban development encroaching to rural areas more arable land is taken up reducing the capacity for rural development such as agriculture. Land Management and Development in Fiji Land management and development in Fiji are not dealt by a single institution and is regulated by various Acts. Specifically, the Town Planning Act (Cap 139), Subdivision of Land Act (Cap 140), Public Health Act, Environment Management Act (2005), Native Land Trust Act (Cap 134), the Crown Lands Act (Cap 132) are some of the acts to name a few. However, there are channels and processes that are in place to regulate development. An example of a development processes is illustrated in figure 7. Figure 7: An example of Development Process Source: Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP, 2016) It should be noted here that in land development, the national government through the Director of Town and Country Planning is the authority that makes decision with prior consultations with relevant stakeholders. This is enshrined in the Town Planning act
25 Cap 139 of the laws of Fiji. However in urban areas within an approved town planning boundary, development are regulated with the Town Council as mandated in the Local Government Act Cap 125 through their town planning by-laws but with current limited capacity in terms of technical knowledge, the Director of Town and Country Planning provides the advisory role. Housing development whether it be a private development or a social housing development will go through a much more similar process as indicated in figure 7. Social and Economic Profile of Fiji The social and economic profile is an important resource used by planners to generate strategies and policies. This information is vital in assessing and determining the housing need of a country. It is also important to understand and interpret the message the data is indicating. As a matter of fact the information depicted here indicates the structure of a population in a country in relation to the economy as well as its social activity. Fiji’s population as stated in the last national census report of 2007, stood at 837, 271 and it has grown six and half fold over a 126 year period. From a mere 127,000 in 1881 to over 837, 000 since the last census. The average annual population growth is also noted to vary since this period. From the period 1881 to 1966 an annual growth of 3.2 percent was recorded and was noted to be fairly high but from 1966 it had decline. The inter-censal period of 1986 to 2007 recorded an average population growth of 0.7 percent for Fiji and it is the lowest since the early 1900’s (figure 8). The low population growth is said to be attributed to high external migration and low fertility rate. However, there is a remarkable mobility from the rural areas to urban areas and Fiji Bureau of Statistics notes that the overall rate of this movement stands at 1.7% with majority of people moving into the capital city of Suva. More than 50% of Fiji’s population now resides around urban centres in Fiji with majority living in the Greater Suva urban area, which includes Suva City (FBoS, 2008) 2 . 2FijiBureauofStatistics,(2008)
26 Figure 8: Population size and annual average growth in Fiji: 1881-2007 Source: Adapted from Fiji Bureau of Statistics 2008 With current growth rate, assuming that all factors remains constant the population of Fiji is calculated to double in ninety nine years’ time as depicted in table 5. Table 5: Population Doubling Time in Fiji Source: Adapted from Fiji Bureau of Statistics 2008 p. 9 Apparently the population age structure where by age and sex are structurally exhibited provides the key and central variable for demographic analysis as well as the social-economic analysis of a country. Figure 9 shows the age-sex pyramid of the total population in Fiji for the census year of 2007.
27 Figure 9: Population Age Structure for Fiji in 1996 and 2007 Population Census Source: Adapted from Fiji Bureau of Statistics 2008 p. 37 It reveals that the age sex structure has continued to narrow at the base due to continuing decline in fertility (FBoS, 2008). The population pyramid reflects the population age structure for the year 1996 in comparison to the population census of 2007. Rural to urban migration is a common occurrence in Fiji. Since the first population census, rural to urban migration has been prevalent and the trend has been increasing as noted in the table 6. By 2007 census, the urban population has surpassed the rural population. Population projection indicates that by 2010 the proportion of urban population will outpace the rural population and by 2030 majority of the total population of Fiji will live in urban areas around the country.
28 Table 6: Change in the rural urban population composition of Fiji between 1996 and 2007 and projected population composition between 2007 and 2030 Source: Adapted from FBoS 2008 p. 29 Fiji’s economy is diverse, depending on its natural resources for its economic development, and by pacific standards it is often referred as a vibrant economy. The country has forest, mineral and fish resources. However, it still remains a developing country with a large subsistence agriculture sector. Figure 10 shows the sectoral distribution of the Fijian economy. Figure 10: Sectorial contribution to GDP for the review year 2010-2014 Source: ADB Data Base Retrieved at www.adb.org/documents/fiji-countrypartnership-strategy-2014-2018 Sugar and textile has been the main export commodity for Fiji for many years. In the event of change to the preferential market access on sugar commodity and the
29 phasing out of the preferential price agreement with the European Union, this sector has experienced a dramatic declined. The textile industry also fell at the end of the quota system under the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC) and the full integration of textiles into the World Trade Organisation General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades. In recent years, Fiji has been depending on its Tourism sector for its export commodity that makes a total contribution of 13.6 percent earnings to Fijis GDP. However, the earnings from this sector is not sufficient due to large trade and current economic deficit. After gaining independence in the 1970’s up until the 1980’s Fiji’s economy enjoyed a moderate growth rate with an average of 6.5% per annum of real GDP attained from high levels of public investment and increasing exports of sugar and copra. Like every other economy, Fiji’s economic growth performance is vulnerable and has been affected by internal as well as external factors. This includes the political upheaval (4 coups since 1987), natural disasters, global oil and food price shock and global financial crisis. Figure 11 show Fiji’s economic performance since 1970 up until 2013. With the latest hurricane affecting Fiji, some downward effect on the economy will be expected. Figure 11: Fiji Economic Performance 1970-2013 Source: ADB Data Bank Retrieved at www.adb.org/documents/fiji-countrypartnership-strategy-2014-2018 Fiji’s economic performance faced extreme volatility from 2001 to 2006 of which the annual GDP growth declined to 2.7%. In 2007 to 2009 the economy further contracted at an average rate of -0.4% which also reflected in figure 11 .
30 Income, Employment & Poverty Incidence The household incomes and expenditure survey (HIES) carried out by the Fiji Bureau of Statistics for 2008-2009 indicates that average household income increased from F$12,753 in the 2002-2003 to F$17394 in the 2008-2009 survey for Fiji. This is illustrated in table 7. A major increase was noted for those in urban areas where household income increased from F$15,267 to F$23,036. This demonstrates a 51% increase compared to rural household (F$11,608 in 2008) increase of 10% higher. Table 7: Average Household Income ($F) Source: Adapted from Fiji Bureau of Statistics 2011, p. 15 The survey identifies that this may be the result of several influences that comprises the following ; (i) the increasing displacement of sugarcane farmers as a result of expiring land leases, and declining incomes resulting from the gradual reduction in sugar prices; (ii) the loss of employment in the garment industry caused by the closing of preferential access to the main export markets; (iii) rising consumer prices; and (iv) low real growth in wages. These factors have eroded the standard of living for the poorest members of the community. Regional disparities have resulted in significant urban migration; and while poverty rates are higher in rural areas, most poor people are concentrated in urban and peri-urban areas around the main centres of Suva and Nadi (FBoS, 2011) 3 . To completely gage the economic well-being of households an important factor is to determine the distribution of wealth amongst its household. Calculating the Gini Coefficient after a certain grouping is defined carries this out. Further analysis by the 3FijiBureauofStatistics,(2011)
31 FBoS using this method and grouping household according to income per adult equivalent (Income pAE), is shown in table 8. Table 8: Comparison of distribution of income using the Gini Coefficient of 2002-2003 and 2008-2009 Source: Fiji Bureaus of Statistics 2011, p. 79 Based on the 2008-2009 HIES the overall number of people working for money increased by 21% from 221,866 in 2002 to 268,850 in 2008. Notable difference exist at both ends of the age scale rural–urban dichotomy. From 15 to 19 years of age, not only are the percentages working for money higher in rural areas, but also the proportion has risen by 29% from 10% to 13% in 2002–2008. In contrast, urban areas saw a decline of 21% from 9% to 7%. At the other end of the age scale, those working for money from ages 55 to 64 increased by 15% from 39% to 45% in rural areas, and by 31% in urban areas from 31% to 41%. Both rural and urban areas saw an increase in proportions working for money in the 65+ age group. Figure 12: Percentage of age group working for money Source: Bureau of Statistics 2011, p. 9
32 Unemployment rate was calculated to be at 8.5% as per the 2007 year census report. However, there could be variation on this data considering the date of survey and the changes made by the current government in order to revamp the viability of the Fijian economy. Poverty in Fiji is still a major issue. The lack of income opportunities, can impede security on income and increase the risk of poverty. According to the 2008-2009 HIES report, households without employed heads are most vulnerable to poverty. In its analysis, the national incidence of poverty declined by 4% (i.e 35% in 2002-2003 to 31% in 2008-09). Moreover, the report notes the uneven trends of poverty between rural and urban areas revealing a reduction in poverty from 28% to 19% in urban areas while in the rural areas poverty increased from 40% in 2002-2003 to 43% in 20082009 HIES. The report further indicates that amongst the poor the highest concentration is in urban and peri-urban areas. 3.2 Urbanization Fiji is an urbanised society with more than 50% percent of its population residing in urban areas (Fiji Bureau of Statistics 2008). The urban areas comprises of two cities (Suva and Lautoka) and 11 incorporated towns, which is shown as figure 13. By 2030, it is estimated that 67% of the total population is likely to live in urban areas taking into account the current urban population growth (UN-Habitat, 2012). Urbanisation is on the rise but the urban growth rate has slowed and is estimated to be below 2% per annum. Figure 13: Cities and Towns in Fiji Source: DTCP 2016
39 Figure 16: Squatter settlements in Fiji Note: Seen here are two squatter settlements on State land. Both settlements have been subject of squatter upgrading by the national government. The upgrading of these settlement is in a hope that individual household will be provided with a land title that will have some leverage in some form of security of tenure or /and security for mortgage. Housing Legal Framework and Institutional Agencies Fiji has no specific law for housing, however there is an existing legislation that addresses this basic need but in a very general way. Under the Local Government act Cap 125 there is a provision available for municipal council to engage in such activity. Despite this provision, it is not a priority objective in their role as urban managers. Only until 2011 councils in the Greater Suva Urban Area recognised the necessity to be involved in housing provision towards the informal settlement within their own municipal boundaries. Other legislations that assist in regulating housing development do exist but are not administered by a single authority. These legislations are under the various umbrellas of different government ministries as well as government statutory bodies. A brief description of these laws is in table 9.
40 Table 9: Housing Legal Framework for Fiji Housing Legal Framework Legislation/Act Regulator/ Administrator Function/Role Local Government Act Cap 125 MLGUDH&E/DLG As explained above Town Planning Act Cap 139/ Subdivision of Land Act Cap 140 MLGUDH&E/DTCP Land use and Development Control Public Health Act Ministry of Health/Local Authority/Municipal Health and Water & Sanitation Housing Authority Act Housing Authority Housing provider and Finance Other Relevant Laws iTaukei Lands Trust Act iTLTB (iTaukei Land Trust Board) Supply of Land and management of native land Crown Lands Act Ministry of Lands Supply of Land and management of state land Roads Act Ministry of Works Provision of roads and Maintenance Land Transfer Act Ministry of Justice Land Registration Property Lands Act Ministry of Justice Land Leasing In 2011, the national government through its line ministry (MLGUDH&E) approved the first Fiji’s housing policy. The policy has been made available on the government recognition of the growing need of shelter for its population. The formulation of this policy will provide direction in the provision of housing in Fiji with the inclusive thought of the whole population of Fiji. More so, the policy hopes to resolve housing needs and accessibility by setting achievable measures with the view to allow all income groups to attain their respective housing needs.
41 Housing in Fiji is not exclusively the responsibility of the National Government but a cohesive responsibility of individuals and organisation who recognised the necessity of this basic need as well as those who have the financial ability to engage in housing development normally referred as private developers. Apart from the National Government there are few agencies that look after the housing needs for low-income earners, for example the Housing Authority and the Public Rental Board, the Fiji Government Squatter Settlement Unit, NGO’s and donor agencies and international organization. The Fiji government has gradually reduced direct intervention in public and low-income housing development since 1980. The state through the Department of Lands leases out large tract of land to other private housing developers at nominal rental for 99 years. The developers would developed the land by subdivision, build homes or sell vacant serviced lots to potential buyers at market prices (Hassan, 2007). The Housing Authority was established in 1955 under the Housing Act to provide low income housing for the people of Fiji. Their initial role was to provide housing services to families with income from $3,500 to $16,500 with the following four basic schemes; i) the Home Purchase Loan (HPL): a variety of home types constructed by the HA that is sub-leased to the tenant and later sold out if the tenant show the capability of repayment, ii) the Cash Loan Scheme: allows people to request for loan for the construction of dwelling; iii) the Rental Flat: this scheme was introduce to cater for the low income earners who were not eligible for the (HPL); iv) the Site Provision Scheme: the authority provides site service lots and subleased it for 90 years. Over the years the HA roles has been changing befitting its financial resource and capabilities. Now the function of the HA has changed from its original welfare purpose to amore commercially oriented institution that provides serviced lots, built homes and rent at market prices. The Public Rental Board (PRB) was established in 1989 under the Housing (Amendment) Decree No 12 to take over from the Housing Authority rental function
42 for low-income earners as Housing Authority had faced financial crisis. This institution primarily operate on a non-commercial basis for which the government provides subsidy to meet the shortfall in market rent. The same organization has been mandated to run as a commercial organization in 1997 under the Public Enterprise Act of 1996. The change in functions anticipate the reassessment of customer profile to determine needed capacity of payable rent. This expect the shift of designated customer from low-income to medium income level. The Squatter Settlement Unit now upgraded to Department of Housing, key function is to provide resettlements scheme, upgrading schemes for existing settlements, socio-economic settlements survey to discourage new settlement growth (Chung, 2007; Lingam, 2007). Other Agencies such as the Housing Relief Trust (HART), Rotahomes, Habitat for Humanity, Save the Children and the Ecumenical Centre for Research Education and Advocacy (ECREA) provides homes for the low-income earners. The HART organization was set up in 1970 by the Council of Churches to provide home for the destitute and the very poor. At present the organization operates 748 units and targets 50 new homes with basic facilities every year. The funding is provided by the State under the Poverty Alleviation Program. Rotahomes is a project of the Rotary Club of Lautoka and has provided 800 homes for the destitute families and low income earners since 1985. The organization is now building fully engineered community subdivisions – the first at Koroipita in Lautoka. Foreign volunteers are used in the construction of houses. Habitat for Humanity helps in the construction of dwelling and provides assistance to people earning from $500.00 to $6000.00 per annum. The potential clients must have a secure tenure of land, ability to make payment provide part of the labour and also assist in building of the house (Hassan, 2007). ECREA and Save the Children are also active in effort aimed at the low-income housing sector. The Native Land Trust Board has an important role in providing land for development purposes. The expansion of informal housing on native land has indicated that NLTB is not meeting the full range of needs in the market (Hassan, 2007)
43 Other Non-Government Organisations objective are not primarily concerned with housing development but assist the destitute, chronically sick and non-able bodied men and families with shelter. Saint Vincent de Paul assist approximately twenty families, the Fiji Muslim League helps ten families per year, Salvation Army distributes building materials to less than five families per year, Poor Relief Society assists twenty families with building material and the Rotary Club of Fiji builds home on land provided by the Government (Hassan, 2007) Housing Stock in Fiji Fiji has a total housing stock of 173,000 units. With a total population of 837, 271 and average household size of 4.75, the nation is housed better and it has no major housing back log, homelessness or over-crowding (FBoS 2008). Security of tenure when counted with the security offered in native land is quite high. Access to basic services and their coverage both in rural and urban area is satisfactory. However, major concern is the growing squatter settlement (Ministry for Local Government, 2011). The number of people that can access affordable housing in urban areas is dramatically decreasing. Table 10: Distribution and Quality of Housing Stock in Fiji TypeofStructure Urban Rural Total Percentage Concrete 46,353 21,758 68,111 39 Wood 18,307 23,458 41,765 24 TinandIron 23,203 35,250 58,453 34 BureMaterials 186 2,966 3,152 2 Makeshift Materials 279 817 1096 0.6 OtherMaterials 124 756 880 0.5 Total 88,452 83,505 173,457 100 Source: Adapted from Bureau of Statistics, Census 2007 The table 10 indicates that 39% of homes are of concrete structure, 24% are wooden structure, 34% tin and iron 2% traditional materials (Bure) 0.6% are of makeshift and other materials make up 0.5%. The Housing Policy notes that 93% of the total households in Fiji sit on secure tenure. 63% (109, 849) household resides on freehold and leasehold land while 29% makes up of village housing which is secure in relation to community status (Ministry for Local Government, 2011).
44 Housing Finance The housing needs for the majority of people in Fiji are met by the commercial banks. This private financing is complemented by significant Government support in the form of capital investment in infrastructure; planning and regulatory regimes that facilitate the efficient operation of the market; and help to households under the fiscal and income support regimes. The government of Fiji directs limited financial resources to the housing improvement making it difficult to provide housing solutions to people on the scale needed. Housing mortgage market especially the Housing Authority of Fiji needs to be further developed and its operations are made more creative in order to enhance its coverage. Private financial institutions offers high interest rates with the focus to high income earners, stringent conditions imposed on the borrowers, and the risk averse banking practices, limits the extent of services and has not been able to reach down to the poor. The irregular incomes of the poor and their inability to provide collateral also make it difficult for them to qualify for institutional finance under standard banking practices. 3.4 Urban Environment Fiji owns a diverse ecosystem including significant areas of natural forest, fresh water and coastal and marine life that is richly endowed with natural resource, but at the same time the ecosystem is delicate mainly due to its geographical location, physical characteristic and isolation. Nevertheless, these natural resources has been exploited for instant; mineral extraction, timber production, water extraction tourism and agriculture which forms the basis of economic development. Almost all urban areas in Fiji are located along the main rivers and coastal fringes that is susceptible to natural disaster such as flooding and coastal dangers like tsunami. Whilst there are pressure exerted on the natural ecosystem through extraction of natural resources for economic development, rapid occurrence of urbanisation is also a threat to the natural environment and is also a major contributing factor to the deteriorating conditions of the urban environment. A significant urban activity that contribute to poor environment is reclamation of coastal fringes to provide more land for urban development especially for industrial activity. In addition to this travesty are the removal of mangrove ecosystem, poor engineering work and monitoring results in accumulation of silts in the marine ecosystems as well
45 as built up along coastline and the continuous discharge of urban waste water from industrial activity located along streams and rivers that has been a prolonged issue for regulators to resolve. Squatting on foreshore reserves and mangrove area is an added crunch to the already fragile urban ecosystem, an on-going problem that has placed tremendous effort for relevant authorities to unravel. 3.5 General Overview of the Study Area – Suva City The development of Suva City demonstrates an important comparison to a society that is faced by the problems of urbanization. Urban poverty, societal changes and particularly housing are some of the common problems that prevails as a society transit from agrarian society into economic development or urban life style. Urbanization throughout the globe has been seen to bring about positive changes as well as challenges. As societies develops, the urban areas becomes the centre of economic development where national wealth is developed in the hope that it strengthens the viability of rural economic development by providing markets to the rural sector. In that way urbanization becomes a vehicle to generate economic wellbeing not only in the urban areas but to the rural areas as well. This question can be an illusion if urbanization and the implicit economic development is poorly planned. The negative impact of urbanization leads to pressure on urban services provision such as water and sewerage, poor road quality, collection and disposal of garbage. A more vivid occurrences is the gradual development of under serviced informal low income settlements on the periphery of urban centers as obtaining adequate housing and access to land becomes a major challenge to urban dwellers. Urban development in Suva City has grown, it has also resulted in the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Urban poverty and housing problems is a major issue and this section of the research will present information on Suva City that will highlight the causes and scale of housing poverty in Fiji. By looking at Suva City as a case study together with the information presented will also help address some important questions. How serious is urban poverty and inequality in Fiji that has deprived its citizen from affordable and sustainable housing? Who are the urban poor of Fiji? Where and how do they live?
46 It should be noted that Suva city has been the center of urban development in Fiji and Suva has been the centre of attraction where many dwellers in Fiji has sought refuge with a perception that better life will be achieved. Economic development has brought large increase in personnel and household income for some urban dwellers, while there are some who are yet to attain the dream that motivated them to move to Suva and the number has been constantly growing. This section will not be completed without a brief overview on Suva City itself to allow the readers to understand the importance of the research. Suva city, has been the capital of Fiji since 1877 after the colonial government of the time decided that the capital be relocated from Levuka due to its steep terrain and the impossibility of expanding into the sea. The city is built on a peninsula reaching out into the sea enjoying a spectacular harbour of Laucala bay on the east and Suva harbour on the west. The City is tucked on the south eastern region of Viti Levu, which is one of the two main islands in Fiji. Suva gained its municipal status in 1910. The town initially comprised one square mile until1952, the town boundary was extended to include Muanikau and Samabula areas making up the suggested ward. In October of 1952, Suva was proclaimed a city, subsequently the boundary was further extended to include the Tamavua areas. The most recent inclusion is the Cunningham area to the north of the city. It now has a total land area of 2, 489 hectares of land and is divided into 5 different wards namely, the Suva central Ward, Muanikau Ward, Samabula Ward, Tamavua Ward and the Extended boundary that is shown as figure 17. Figure 17: Map of Suva City boundary and wards Source: Suva City Council 2016
47 It is important to state here that Suva City lies in between two towns, Lami town on North western boundary and Nasinu town on the North eastern boundary therefore, development in Suva City will be restricted within the existing boundary. Further extension of Suva City boundary to the landward side is not an option unless on the seaward which will not be addressed in this study as further study will be required to determine its viability. Governance in the Suva City Council The Local Government Act provides the legal framework for the establishment of a municipal council and it is also this Act that gives the direction and procedures to manage and run a municipal council in Fiji. The Department of Local Government of the MLGHUD&E administers this act but the organisation of the municipal council is independent and is solely the prerogative of the Special Administrator who is appointed by the MLGHUD&E. Under the Local Government Act Cap 125, Suva City Council is responsible to observe, deliver and enforce laws relating to urban management in the approved municipal boundary of Suva City. A Special Administrator heads the Suva City Council with five major responsibilities as figure 18 portraits. Figure 18: Structure of Governance in Suva City Council Source: Suva City Council Data Base Retrieved at http://suvacity.org/
48 The appointment of the Special Administrator by the national government ensures that government policies imposed are effectively implemented at local level. In this instance the Special Administrator plays a major role thus having the appointee to provide report of all results achieved at ground level to the Director of Local Government of the MLGHUD&E. More so the achievement is linked to the targeted output provided in the national strategic plan of the government of the day. In this way the Suva City Council (SCC) presents a strategic plan to guide its activity on a yearly basis as well as on a five year basis. This new course of action of work responsibility and reporting has come about as part of the Local Government Reform that was mandated in 2008. Highlighting the role and responsibility of SCC establishes its link to housing development in it capacity as development control at the local scene. Moreover, in the Town Planning Act, the municipal council has a role to play in planning for its given area to holistically include housing the rich and to the very poor of its society. Demography and Urban Trends of Suva City It is estimated that 51% of Fiji’s population now live in various urban areas around Fiji (FBoS, 2012). Suva City accounts for 28.32% with a total population of 74,481person or 16,551.3 households during the census year of 2007 (FBoS, 2012). The Greater Suva Urban Profile carried out by UN Habitat noted that with the current urban population growth of 1.7% the projected population of Suva City will be 77,900 in 2016 and by 2021 the population is further projected and will account 79,470 person (UN-Habitat, 2012). This is in spite of Suva’s annual natural population growth of - 0.3%, the city will continue to pull members of the Fijian population from rural areas as well as other urban areas around Fiji resulting in population increase for towns such as Lami and Nasinu that are in close proximity to Suva City as shown in table11.
55 households in 2007. A decline of 3.7% or 2885 persons. The change in demographical status had been due to the incorporation of Nasinu as a separate Town. Suva city population distribution in 2007 by age as shown on table 15 indicates that 47.32 percent of the population of Suva falls within the age group 20-24 and below, an indication of further increases of population in future years. The age group 20-24 makes up the highest population number, which corresponds to the average marital age for the population of Fiji as well as the population group that enters the labour force every year (FBoS 2007 Population Census). Table 15: Population Distribution of Suva City Source: FBoS, 2007 Population Census Whilst the proportion of this age group is high, there is a tendency in the Fijian society that this age group will normally reside with their parents whether they are employed or still looking for employment. It is also a similar trend with married couples that are within the same age group. Nevertheless, there is a development implications for housing market that can be deduce from the information provided in table 15. Apparently, the table indicates that there will be a continuation of growth in the number of younger households in Suva City thus it is indicative of more family accommodation. Household Characteristic of Suva City Household characteristic is an important factor in poverty studies (Wang 2004) and also a better predictor in housing demand. In the 2008-2009HIES report it was noted Population Distribution by Age group -2007 Age Population % of total less than 5yrs 6716 9.02 5-9 5996 8.05 10-14 6354 8.53 15-19 7204 9.67 20-24 8975 12.05 25-29 7171 9.63 30-34 5892 7.91 35-39 5019 6.74 40-44 4789 6.43 45-49 4441 5.96 50-54 3639 4.89 55-59 2810 3.77 60-64 2079 2.79 65-69 1406 1.89 70-74 863 1.16 greater than 75yrs 1127 1.51 Total 74481 100
56 that urban household had fairly increased by 22 percent and rural population increased only by 3 percent. Average household in urban areas is 4.5 person. In Suva City average household is 4.59 (refer to table 16). The proportion of household with 3 and 4 persons makes up the majority in terms of size of family and as the number of person in household increase the percentage decreases. Table 16: Size and type of household in Suva City Source: FBoS, 2007 Population Census Family size of four persons is recorded to be the common type of household, however there is a small percentage variation noted against those with household size of 3 and 2. It is interesting to note that one person household size makes up 8.78 percent a rather unusual trend compared to traditional extended family that usually makes up the norm. Accordingly from this tabulated data, the number of person in a household of Suva City is noted to be shrinking even though the number of household will continue to grow. There is an indication that there should be a reduction in the size of residential lot and dwelling size based on this figures even though there could be a preferential difference in reality. Employment Status in Suva City Employment alleviates poverty and is also a mean of improving and accessing the necessity of life such as housing. A requirement to accessing mortgage in Fiji is secured employment; a form of assurance to the mortgagee that repayment will be made to the sum borrowed for purchasing a property. Table 17 provides the detail employment figure for the population of Suva City. It should be noted that of the total Size and Type of Household Number of person in household Number of household Percentage 1 person 1,413 8.78 2 persons 2,353 14.62 3 persons 2,602 16.17 4 persons 2,862 17.78 5 persons 2,145 13.33 6 persons 1,687 10.48 7 persons 1,065 6.62 8 persons 772 4.80 9 persons 366 2.27 >10 persons 829 5.15 Total household 16,094 100 Household Average 4.59
57 population eligible for employment only 30,402 persons are in the labour force. The numbers in table 17 also indicates that 25,443 individuals are economically active (wage/salary/or self-employment) and out of this 1,015 complements their income with subsistence. The figures also indicate that, there is a decreasing number of person relying on subsistence and are totally dependent on money income. Table 17: Employment statistics of Suva City Source: FBoS 2007 Population Census The FBoS, (2011) notes that there is a major employment reduction for the number of person with money income as well. The development is not favourable considering the present economic situation in Fiji as a whole. Home workers have remained by far the largest subcategory of the not economically active. In Fiji, the category home workers is a female dominated category. In 1996, about 98% of all home workers were females. In 2007, this has decreased to 93% (FBoS, 2011). Employment Statistic-Suva City Economic Activity Number Total 15+ yrs 56,365 In Labour Force 30,402 Money Economy 25,443 No subsistence 24,428 W/subsistence 1,015 Money & Sale (produce good for selling) 639 Money Work (purely working for money) 23,789 Unemployed 3,288 No Subsistence 3,122 W/subsistence 166 Subsistence 2,852 And money work (subsistence to earn money) 1,015 No money work (rely on subsistence for living) 1,671 Unemployed 166 Not economically active 25,963 Not looking 2,486 Homeworkers 9,207 Students 9,965 Disabled 428 Retired 2,480 Others 1,397
58 High levels of emigration after the coup have put the pressure on the country’s skill generating institution. This hampers the growth of formal sectors by shortages in managerial, professional and skilled trade occupations. The unemployment rate rose substantially and one of the major challenges of the government is securing decent jobs for these job seekers. 4.2 Economic Factor Economic growth is the key to provide the means to meet basic needs, to ease poverty and to generate employment, factors that are essential to sustainable development (Véron, 2001). On the flip side, an economy that has sluggish growth or a negative growth will have an impact on the society. Poverty is a major characteristic of a society that is suffering from a poor economy and this often reflects on the type and condition of housing it contains. The availability of resources such as land, income, housing supply and demand, and cost of housing plays a significant role in housing affordability and accessibility. The command over these resources must be given right priority while planning for housing development so it becomes obtainable to all section of the society. Economic growth does not always prevail and when this happens every other elements that makes up the housing market is affected. Land price will take a hike, cost of housing will also rise since no one will be in the housing supply business, as the cost of doing such business will probably sky rocket as well. A vicious cycle that has always impacted the poor. The economic outlook for Fiji is growing but it is not sufficient to meet the growing needs of its population especially on housing needs. This section of the study will look just at that, analysing figures and discussing the result in order to understand the extent of housing in Fiji. Land Use and Spatial patterns of Suva City The Town Planning Act cap 139, mandates all municipal town to devise a town planning scheme, a general provision and a scheme statement to direct and guide development within its municipal boundary. Suva City Council has basic planning principles that separate functional zones, living near to work, the use of public
59 transport and equal living standards and distribution of job opportunities. Figure 21 shows the land use distribution within the municipal boundary of Suva city. Figure 21: Suva City Scheme Plan Source: DTCP, 2016 The early development of Suva was promoted by the keen participation of both the Government and private individuals in land development projects to overcome physical constraints. The projects involved reclamation of land with the view of increasing flat area for development purposes. Plans for Suva Township were drawn up which included designs of streets and building development as proclamation number 28 of 19534 (Narayan, 2002). 4GazettedlegalreferencenumberwhenproclaimingSuvaatown
60 There are about 10,835 properties within the Suva City boundary, and about 90% of the properties are developed (Narayan, 2002). Table 18 shows the distribution of land use within the five different wards in Suva City. It is clear that majority of the land use is made up of residential development which are distributed within the 5 wards. The rest of the land use are made up of commercial, industry and other uses. Table 18: Land use distribution of Suva City ZONING NOOFLOTS PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BYZONING COMMERCIAL 826 7.62 RESIDENTIAL 9164 84.58 INDUSTRY 456 4.21 OTHERUSES 389 3.59 10835 100 Source: Department of Lands and Survey General, 2012 Rating Valuation By residential category, Res B zones makes up the majority as depicted in table 19. The next share is made up of Res C and D. Res A makes up the least of the residential zone. The distribution of residential development among the five wards is not even as it is solely dependent on the allocated zone shown in figure 21. The overall distribution of residential development could be described to be well distributed however, from the viewpoint of housing for low to medium income earners, this is not so. Table 19: Distribution of Residential zone by Category Source: Department of Lands and Surveyor General, 2012 Rating Valuation RES A RES B Res C RES D Total Res. in each ward EXTENSION WARD 330 768 1098 SAMABULA WARD 1636 81 356 1717 MUANIKAU WARD 230 847 883 172 1730 SUVA WARD 47 746 1 95 747 TAMAVUA WARD 255 1977 82 658 2059 Total 532 5536 1815 1281
61 The Town Planning General Provision (1999) defines Res D specifically for the development of low cost residential directed for low income earners and Res C for medium income earners. This is the result of the review initiated by the World Bank in 1995 to relax the Town Planning requirements for the benefits of the targeted low income group. In Suva City only 14% of the total residential developments is directed for low income earners, the medium income earners accounts for 20%. The rest of the residential development is for the high income earners. Figure 22 shows the distribution of residential zone by category. Figure 22: Residential Development Distribution by Category Source: Department of Lands and Surveyor General, 2012 Rating Valuation Income Distribution In this modern society, people rely on money as a mean of accessing goods for their survival. The lack of resource to obtain goods for once livelihood can be translated to poverty. Income is a means of achieving certain well-being levels, it is one of the way to measure poverty. The most reliant source of achieving basic goods such as housing in urban society is by having a secured income. This is used as one of the main criteria for assessing a loan application by every financial institution. An individual must have a secure job and an income that is sustainable in the bank’s opinion to be able to pay any mortgage required to purchase a property. This may work for some only, but for those that are 6% 60% 20% 14% RESA RESB ResC RESD
62 unable to meet this criteria will have to resort to other means of housing that is available in once country. A common perception that exists is that the poor should be the ones getting housing assistance and those that are earning (working) should be left to fend themselves with the trajectory of the open market. Individuals could be earning wages/salary (economically actively) but the purchasing ability derives from that income differs in every level of income group. Studying and analysing the income distribution of the economically active group in Suva allows a wider understanding on the proportion of the population that are able to buy a house/property with their income and those that will rely on assistance to provide shelter for the members of their household or to oneself perhaps by means of social housing. The 2008-09 HIES, in its report provides a criteria for an average income distribution for Fiji. This income distribution is a criteria set as income measure for those that are economically active in Suva City. Table 20 shows the average income distribution by occupational group. It should be noted that the income distribution cannot be seen alone to assert the capability of household/individual in the purchasing of properties but should be compared with the cost of properties as well; this will be discussed in the next subheading. Income for the economically active in Suva City are also distributed according to salary and wage earners since these are the two major means of income payment in Fiji. In addition the occupational group are place according to income level.
63 Table 20: Distribution of average wages and salary in Suva City Major Occupational Group Numberof Employees Average Wage/Salary (F$) %0f employeesby income bracket Salary earners Legislators, Senior Officials & Managers 2573 32,921.00 18.71 Professionals 3031 23,224.00 22.04 Technicians & Associate Professionals 3201 21,609.00 23.28 Clerks 2866 18,207.00 20.84 Service Workers & Shop & Market Sales Workers 651 15,708.00 4.73 Skilled Agricultural & Fishery Workers 21 16,165.00 0.15 Craft & Related Workers 441 16,517.00 3.21 Plant & Machine Operators & Assemblers 441 17,366.00 3.21 Elementary Occupations 526 13,910.00 3.83 Armed Forces Total 13751 Wage earner Legislators, Senior Officials & Managers 201 305.40 1.06 Professionals 306 188.60 1.61 Technicians & Associate Professionals 1358 187.60 7.13 Clerks 3051 169.30 16.02 Service Workers & Shop & Market Sales Workers 4647 152.60 24.40 Skilled Agricultural & Fishery Workers 78 164.60 0.41 Craft & Related Workers 2393 178.50 12.56 Plant & Machine Operators & Assemblers 2910 178.90 15.28 Elementary Occupations 4103 149.30 21.54 Armed Forces Total 19047 Source: FBoS, 2015 In terms of salary earners, table 20 indicates that the number of employees occupying the top major occupational groups comprises 18.71% of the total occupational group and with the highest average salary of F$32,921.00. Majority of income earners in Suva City has an average salary between F$18,207-$23,224.00. These groups constitute 66.16% of the economically active population of Suva City with salary earnings. The bottom five occupational groups are lesser in number, earning an average income from F$13,910- $17,366. These groups of salary earners consist of 15.13% (FBoS, 2015). By wage earners, there is a wide-ranging difference between the major occupational groups; in terms of earning as well as the number of employees. Majority of the income
64 earners are at the bottom five of the occupational group with weekly earnings ranging from F$149.30-$178.90.00. The top four occupational groups comprises of 25.82% of the total occupational group who earns income by wage (FBoS, 2015). There is a major variation when comparing incomes received by means of salary and wages. Between the two types of earning (salary/wages), majority of the salary income earners are at the top four occupational group while in the wages category the proportion tends to shrink significantly. The bottom five occupational groups also show a reverse relationship. Housing Cost Housing is an expensive good and to many the cost of housing takes up majority of their household expenses. Price of housing is not static and generally the cost of housing is composed of four basic elements and these are land price, cost of housing materials, labour cost, and the cost to develop vacant land. Different areas have different price market and it varies depending on the market cycle. The underlying reason for this variation is economic (Reeves, 2006). Changes in housing price is a major stimulus to social housing programmes (Reeves, 2006) but to other countries it is a reason for the development of informal housing. In Suva City according to Hassan (2007), housing price has experienced a sharp increase and outperformed other urban centres in Fiji. It has doubled over a very short period, deteriorating the ability of an average household to compete in the housing market (Hassan, 2007). This price hike is a course of concern to individuals and particularly to the government of Fiji renewing call for the production of new housing developments from various housing providers most particularly the private developers. A study in 2005, shows that the residential property average price has increased from $50, 590 to $102,511 an increase of 102.63 percent as depicted in figure 23. An assumption drawn from this study is that the demand for housing for Fiji has increased dramatically specifically in urban areas. High housing cost are driven by high housing demand and low supply in the market. In addition the cost of building materials are relatively high due to the cost of imported materials.
71 garbage (educating squatter dwellers in sorting their garbage) and providing spaces where squatter dwellers can sell their goods are some of the activities to name a few where the local government can offer their services. After all it is the municipal council through the Local Government Act who has been bestowed the responsibility for urban management. Those who dwells in squatter settlement in urban areas are part of the urban society therefore they should be included in the system. These very same people become targets of unfulfilled promises when election period comes around but are segregated from the urban management system. There should be fairness and justification delivered throughout the members of the society notwithstanding the capability level to accessing housing market. Social Housing Policy Policies are basic principles by which a government is guided. Housing policies determines the way a country will manage and guide its national resources in the housing sector. As a multi-faceted subject, housing policies comprise a range of aim and objectives that may relate to the economy, the environment as well as social policy. Togerson, (1987), view this as a wobbly pillar of the welfare state since it has rarely in any country been the subject of universal state provision in the way that education or health services have been in some places at sometimes (cited by Clapham, 2012). The link between housing and humanity makes it amenable to social policy approach. Many government have intervened in the market to achieve their social objectives; for instance making housing allowance available to low income households, controlling rents, or using land use planning or other mechanisms to influence the amount and type of housing construction (Clapham, 2012). In a much similar fashion discussed by Clapham, (2012) the Fiji Government in its 2016 Budget Supplement, continues to provide housing assistance under the social protection and poverty alleviation programmes. The following budgetary allocation was announces towards housing assistance of the poor and low income;
72 a) Lagilagi Housing Development Project5: The objective of this project is to provide affordable and decent housing for low income households. A sum of $F3.3 million has been budgeted for the completion of Phase 2 of this project. b) Squatter Upgrading & Resettlements: This programme alleviates poverty through the provision of housing and income generating opportunities for low income earners. Government has provided a sum of $F4 million towards this program in 2016. An allocation of $F0.3 million is provided for the Sustainable Income Generating Project. Additionally, $F1 million and $F0.4 million are provided for Town Wide Informal Settlement Programme and City Wide Squatter Upgrading Project, respectively. c) Social Housing Policy: In the 2016 Budget, a total of $F0.5 million has been allocated towards writing–off housing loans for clients who have paid more than one and half times the principal amount, have retired or can prove genuine financial difficulty based on low income or medical grounds. These housing programmes announced in the 2016 budget supplements are priority programmes that are to be undertaken by the Department of Housing. It should be stated here that the programmes cover housing development for the whole of Fiji. In the central division, this programme is targeted towards Lagilagi Housing Development, which is located in Suva city. The budgeted housing provision aims to ensure accessibility to affordable and quality housing for all its citizens; this is in line with the National Housing Policy (NHP) and Social Housing Policy (SHP) launched in 2011. The NHP outlines a concise strategic direction towards the development of the housing sector in Fiji. The SHP ensures Fiji citizens have access to decent and affordable homes. These policies were established by the Fiji government recognising the importance of housing in the development of its people and knowing the plight of majority of urban residents to obtain and retain adequate and affordable housing. 4.4 Environment It is now generally agreed that development in the low income countries must proceed in parallel with a general global application of new technologies which are both less resources intensive and less environmentally damaging (Spence & Mulligan, 1995). 5TheLagilagiHousing Project in Jittu Estate, Raiwaqaisa partnershipbetweenGovernmentand PCN. The projectinvolvesfundingfromthreesources–Government,MISEREIRaGermanbaseddonoragencyandsavings fromthesquatterfamilies.
73 In order to be sustainable, developments in economy and social changes should be able to sustain ecology and improve potential resources for future generations. One of the main Agenda 21 objective for sustainable development goal. The development of Fiji is dependent on its natural resources. As an island nation, Fiji’s tropical climate allows for the production of a wide range of foods for both local consumption and exports and provides one of the basic attractions for tourism, which to a large extent is attributed to natural resource activities (agriculture, forestry, fisheries and mining). Fiji’s generally benign climate is, however, interposed by climatic extremes in the form of hurricanes, cyclones, floods and droughts. These extremes have serious economic, social and environmental consequences that require prudent macro-economic management, proper land use planning and watershed management. With its vulnerable climatic conditions, Fiji’s population continues to grow even though at a slower pace, but more of its population are moving to urban areas. Housing supply in urban areas is insufficient to cater for this movement. This is seen with a record of 200 squatter settlements around urban areas in Fiji and a total population of 144,000 (Department of Housing, 2014). Urban areas around Fiji are located along coastal fringes and along major river bounds. Suva City, is located on the coast and is susceptible to rise in mean sea level and coastal flooding, the effect of climatic change. In addition it is exposed to other natural hazard such as earthquake and Tsunami to its low level area. Despite this environment vulnerability, squatter settlement has managed to locate themselves in such area as seen in figure 25. Figure 25: Squatter settlements on vulnerable areas Source: DTCP 2016
74 Fiji faces some serious environmental problems that are exacerbated by the ineffectiveness with which they are being treated. Fiji is too small and vulnerable to ignore such problems for any length of time. Particular problems include the degradation of land resources; climate changes, increasing risk of flooding and inundation to coastal settlements, unsustainable exploitation of marine resources, waste management problems, air and water pollution and the social ills and environmental impact of urbanization, which undermines people’s quality of life. From housing perspective environmental sustainability can be achieved by addressing resource limits of the environment through efficient consumption of non-renewable resources that is materials which will not unduly deplete the planets resources which means the maximum use of renewable resources in building (Reeves, 2006). Minimising the impact of waste materials and pollution by utilizing appropriate technologies and making use of local work forces is other ways of carrying out sustainable development goals through housing development. In low income housing development, using sustainable energy sources is appropriate. Fiji’s tropical climate makes it fitting to use renewable energy sources from wind, water and solar. This will reduce household expenses on energy consumption, contributing to saving of financial resources that can be directed to other necessary household expenses. Making available spaces for housing and having it at affordable cost is essential to provide for those who intends to move to urban areas. In Suva City land area is limited, this calls for the construction of high density housing development to provide housing space for additional housing need. 4.5 Summary of Discussion and Analysis Since its inception as a town in 1910, Suva City has undergone major changes in terms of demographical, structural and economic changes. More than half of the urban population of Fiji lives in Suva City even though, there have been a demographical shift (reduction in the number of population) by the creation of Nasinu Town (FBoS, 2008). The development in Suva City did not revolve around industrial activities as in other cities around the world. Suva City has progressively developed as a political and administrative base, with established commercial centres and service organisation.
75 These characteristics have placed Suva City as a major centre of employment that will continue to be the major drawing factor of people’s movement into the City. The neighbouring town of Lami and Nasinu acts as catchment areas of this effect due to the town’s closeness to Suva. Suva has its share of urban problems, unemployment, and squatting, which indicates major social and economic change producing population redistribution. It continues to have younger households which is an indication that further family accommodation will be required although there is a shift towards having lesser number of households. The number of household will remain to grow. Employment is an important factor in urban society as it is a means of gaining security to once household. It is also a means of obtaining goods and ability to accessing the housing market. Table 17 gives an indication of the employed population of Suva City and quite a substantial number of people are employed with significant number working for money. This is quite an optimistic indicator but should not be seen as a standalone factor. Together with income an indicative measure can be determined of once ability to access the housing market. In a simple graph model shown in figure 26, comparing the house price in Suva and the average salary, it shows that the house price is way too high and beyond the reach of those that has an average salary for the top major occupational group. Figure 26: Comparison between house price and average salary in Suva City Source: FBoS 2015; http//www.mondinion.com, (2016) 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 Priceofhouse($F) HousePrice($F) Salary($F)
76 The interpretation reflected by this comparison resonated with a comment noted by Hassan, 2007 that was echoed by the former Reserve Bank Governor which he remarked… But we are concern with the quantum of the price increases, that appears to be well in excess to the real estate growth in incomes or even expected future incomes. It appears that speculative elements are at work (Fiji Times October 30, 2005) (cited in Hassan, 2007). Should there be speculative elements in the housing market in Fiji or not? To answer this question there is a need for a profound study to be carried out which demand those in the housing institution to have a serious look at. It points out that there is a seriousness in housing affordability in Suva and at this point of time, speculation can also be made that there will be rise in squatter settlement as mentioned by Mckninnon et al. (2007). There is a serious income inequality distribution in Suva City that allows only certain elite group to access the housing market. Majority of the population of Suva will need some form of housing assistance if the income level remains the same. It is alarming to note that even those who are employed and are receiving regular incomes are unable to match their income with the house prices on the market in Suva City housing market. Least to say, the houses prices on areas that are supposedly designated by law for the low income earners. Further scenario portrayed by figure 26 shows that the poor will continue to struggle to access the housing market and will continue to find cheaper ways of providing shelter amongst them. It also includes those that are earning income by salary and wages on a regular basis. Even those that earn an income above the Basic Need Poverty Line would face difficulty and would require some form of assistance in housing. The housing market in Suva City as shown on table 19 (see point 4.2.1 above) indicates that there is an inclines towards the high income earners. Housing development for the medium and low income represent a minor component of the housing market. It shows the lack of commitment by housing providers towards this income groups.
77 Suva city has a total of 9164 residential lots. It has a total household of 16,226.8 households. Comparing the available number of residential lots and the number of household present in Suva city, it equates to a shortfall of 7062.8 household to be accommodated in a formal residential subdivision. Again the number could be speculated here as a linear comparison has been carried out, so it is necessary to hold more detailed analysis that takes into account other relevant factors such as the type of house constructed in terms of the number of flats/units in a residential building to determine the actual number of households that needs proper and legal residential allotment. The restriction on the Suva City boundary makes it impossible for further extension. This could be one of the contributing factors to the housing cost rise. Land is a scarce resource and 90% of its land mass has been developed. Lack of adequate land for urban development particularly for low income housing is the single most impediments in achieving the goal of shelter for all. The Ministry of Local Government, Urban Development, Housing and Environment, in its Housing Policy notes that increased income for the lower income groups is the real solutions as higher incomes will turn their latent demand. Moreover, the financial and technical capabilities of those agencies providing low income housing must be strengthened. Perhaps the Housing Authority and the Public Rental Board should assume its traditional role and provide for low income earners. Alternative ways of creating housing space should be taken into consideration by housing institution to provide the needed requirement. Conceivably the focus should be directed towards high density residential development. The Fiji government recognises the importance of shelter, as a basic right, embedding this issue in its constitution, however, there is no specific law to guide and regulate housing development. The current legislations that exist provides only a general guide and regulation, moreover, the legislation is administered by various government institutions; this pose a fragmented approach in housing issues. The recent housing policy may be a milestone achievement but without a legislation to enforce the policies it will be ineffective and weak. A change in government means changes in priorities and policies. There is also a tendency that housing issues is used for political mileage which is only appropriate that a housing act be legislated.
78 Urbanisation will continue to threaten Suva City’s environmental well-being if inadequate planning and mitigation measures remains. Development especially housing development should be made and design according to once country environmental condition. Modern housing development has a major impact on the ecological system. Perhaps in the initial designing of such project the natural environmental surrounding should be considered. The impact of such project to the landscapes including scenic, cultural, historical, and architectural must be minimized. The use of sustainable sound building materials should be considered. Water supply and sanitation must be designed and maintained to minimize impact on the environment. Moreover, the use of renewable energy such as solar and wind energy must be integrated to the highest extent. With an issue such as climate change, environmental sustainability is a matter to be regarded with priority and effort is needed to minimize pollution to the natural environment by maximizing the use of recycled materials and renewable resource. There is a need to monitor development on susceptible areas that are prone to squatter developments and at the same time provision of housing space should be made available to cater for those that intends to move to urban areas in the future. This demands for a proper development strategies and policies and the use of urbanisation to promote economic development instead of poverty.
79 5. Conclusion The study notes that the current housing development in Suva City has negative impacts on the poor and the low income earners. Major sections of those that generate permanent income are also affected, as they cannot come to par with rise in housing cost. The increasing housing price rate affects those in the middle and low income level, living the upper income brackets accessing the housing market to themselves. The lack of financial resources limits housing institution such as the Housing Authority and Public Rental Board to carry out their duty in providing for the medium to low income level and the poor. Moreover, the recent change of commitment by the two housing institutions to operate as a successful business and to provide profitable and efficient service comparable to the private financial institution will place another drawback to many community groups in Fiji who depends on these institutions for its housing need. Lending institutions in Fiji direct their mortgage activities to higher income earners, for the security it perceives from lending to them. There is an increasing income distribution between the have and have not as noted by the HIES 2008-09 and this will not augur well for the economic well-being of Fiji. An enormous effort is required from the Fiji government to house its citizen and to feasibly do this, a wide housing range to suit all classes including the poor should be targeted. Creation of employment is vital to alleviate poverty. Thus provision of social housing should not be seen as a social welfare development only but taken as an economic development. Housing construction can generate employment particularly in unskilled labour, which is extremely important in the developing countries’ economies. Housing developments and construction should be seen as a means for promoting and mobilizing savings, expanding employment and economic activity particularly as a tool for poverty alleviation. Income and employment opportunities generated by housing construction are amplified by multiplier effects in the economy. The unequal wealth distribution in the rural areas has prompted migration to urban areas. This trend has continued over the years, which now see more than 50% of Fiji’s population living in urban areas around Fiji. The impact of this movement has placed a lot of strain to the existing infrastructure, housing and employment. A comprehensive approach from all government agencies, private bodies and especially financial institutions to ensure all issues and problems of housing are addressed. Housing issues needs to be addressed holistically and the problems are inter-related with
80 issues on social, political and economy. Unfair treatment due to political differences is unjustifiable in determining housing needs. Urbanisation should not be perceived as the driving force to poverty even though it has both positive and negative effect on the national and local economies. It should be used as a tool to liberate poverty and to achieve economic growth, employment and increase living standards. Through strong urban economic activities, the feasibility of rural economic development will be realised through the provision of markets for agro industrial production centres and transhipment points for rural produce. The need to re-look at development policies is essential with an approach that provides a dynamic link to both the urban and rural developments. Developments strategies should not be biased towards rural development. In this way, the rural dwellers are capable to provide for themselves with the rural activities that will generate income for their livelihood and will not be pulled into the urban areas. Social housing should be perceived from a positive point view as Reeves, (2006) suggest, it is an essential element to the maintenance of human fabric. The definition of social housing does not restrict itself to the provision of house for rent as in the case of some developed countries but as crucial component to distribute housing to those that needs it and don’t have affordability to the housing market. The method and way of handing this provision to the society will depend on the policy of one’s country. In Fiji, government’s effort in addressing housing problems is recognized by the provision of housing assistance in its 2016 budget address. This action has been a continuous effort, only to be faced with increase squatter settlements. The need for proper strategic planning is merited with proper legislation to provide the backbone in assisting the implementation of such policies and plans thereof. The benefits of social housing has been realised throughout the world, many families had made it their home gaining security and empowerment. The list of benefits presented in table 4 (see point 2.5) just shows how social housing can be a supporting hand to those that needs a home. Social housing development is a process that requires the estimation of the amount and type of housing needed at various geographical levels (Reeves, 2006). Estimation would require the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the necessary data relevant to housing development. The upkeep of data is necessary thus housing institutions