So It’s Always a Chance: Community-Led Solutions to New Urban Expansion

  • Ahmed M. SolimanEmail author


President Abd Al-Fatah El Sisi declared that more than 50% of urban, and rural agglomerations in Egypt are informal (Youm 7, 2016). In addition, arbitrary urbanization, and rapid population growth of urban, and rural agglomerations have increased the demand for housing, especially for low income groups. It is estimated that Egypt’s population has rose over the past decade from 72.8 million people in 2006, to 94 million people in 2017, an increase of 21.2 million people (CAPMAS, General statistics for population and housing: population census. Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Cairo, 2017). This population inhabited around 6% of Egyptian territory. If this trend is continued, Egypt’s population will reach more than 183 million by the year 2050, by which we will need at least one-fold of the current urban, and rural agglomerations to be added for meeting future housing demand, and various social amenities. Also, if the current housing policy, and planning trends are to be continued, it is expected that more than 50% of the future urban, and rural agglomeration will be spreading informally on adjacent agricultural land on the periphery of urban areas. This brief background leads to question the future of Egyptian urbanism, and how to tackle the spreading of urban informality. It is the time to understand how the urban poor formulated urban informality in which they secured their land tenure. If the urban patterns of low-income groups are to be remodeled, and if the informal process of cooperation among the urban poor is to be formalized, it would enhance the Egyptian built environment, and meet the official planning processes.

This chapter is an attempt to shed light on hidden potential actions of urban informality, as a cooperation/participation process among the urban poor, and to understand how they formulated the informal urban expansions that met their requirements, and their needs. Potential actions of the urban poor, and their relative impact on the housing production are defined as the priorities of the participants (government, professionals, and the poor) and their ability, liability and willingness towards the production of housing being supplied. Three important themes are explored, those of preferred, effective, and actual actions. This research applies a deductive methodology to test theoretical concepts, and patterns by using new empirical data. The potential actions, among the urban poor, are examined in relation to land plots with security of tenure, and its relationship to the housing process as a use and/or an exchange value, and the way it had been created, developed, and invested.

This chapter utilizes the above arguments through two sources; first; the examination of reports of the General Strategies Urban Plan’s (GSUPs) for selected Egyptian cities. The second is information based on practical studies, previous researches, participant observation, and the exploration and understanding of complex issues of urban informality in which the author was involved. The main arguments are driven by investigating the informal new urban expansions in Benha city to explore the three themes of potential action, and to deduce the main lessons learnt from such development (Soliman 2017). The aim is to reach a practical, and applicable housing policy, and to remodel the current planning ideas to serve the immediate and future population needs for housing and various social amenities in a cooperative way in order to alleviate poverty.

The findings of the study would change concepts of the current housing policy for the advantage of the urban poor. They are diverse, and multifaceted based on the history of potential actions, and the development patterns of the informal urban expansions. Throughout Egyptian cities, informal security of land tenure has been the preferred methods for safeguarding the interests of disadvantages groups. A form of legalization among users based on collective land tenure is highlighted.


Urban informality Informal urban expansions Potential actions The urban poor Land tenure 


  1. Alexander, C. (2005). A vision of a living world: The nature of order, book 3: An essay of the art of building and the nature of the universe. Berkeley: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. AlSayyad, N., & Roy, A. (Eds.). (2004). Urban informality: Transnational perspectives from the Middle East, Latin America, and South Asia (Vol. 16, pp. 271–312). Lanham: Lexington Books and Change.Google Scholar
  3. Burgess, R. (1985). The limits of state self-help housing programmes. Development & Change, 16, 271–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CAPMAS. (2017). General statistics for population and housing: Population census. Cairo: Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics.Google Scholar
  5. Castells, M. (1997). The information age: Power of identity, Vol. 2: Economy, society and culture: Power of identity Vol. 2 (Information Age Series). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Davidson, F., & Payne, G. (Eds.). (1983). Urban project manual, Liverpool planning manual 1. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar
  7. De Soto, H. (1989). The other path: The invisible revolution in the third world. London: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  8. De Soto, H. (2000). The mystery of capital: Why capitalism triumphs in the west and fails everywhere else. London: Black Swan Books.Google Scholar
  9. Durand-Lasserve, A. (1996). Regularization and integration of irregular settlements: Lessons from experience. Working paper no. 6, World Bank, Washington.Google Scholar
  10. Eric, E. (2012). The commodification of the Ashwa’iyyat: Urban land, housing market unification, and de Soto’s interventions in Egypt. In M. Ababsa, B. Dupret, & E. Deneis (Eds.), Popular housing and urban land tenure in the Middle East. Cairo: The American University in Cairo press.Google Scholar
  11. Fernandes, E., & Varley, A. (Eds.). (1998). Illegal cities: Law and urban change in developing countries. London: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  12. Hamdi, N., & Goethert, R. (1988). Making microplans: A community based process in programming and development. London: Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kipper, R., & Fischer, M. (2009). Cairo’s informal areas: Between uban challenges and hidden potentials. Cairo: GTZ.Google Scholar
  14. McAuslan, P. (1985). Urban land and shelter for the poor. London: Erathscan.Google Scholar
  15. McAuslan, P. (2002). Tenure and law: The legality of illegality and the illegality of legality. In G. Payne (Ed.), Land, rights, and innovation: Improving tenure security for the urban poor (pp. 23–38). London: ITDG.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Payne, G. (Ed.). (1999). Making common ground: Public- private partnerships in land for housing. London: Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  17. Payne, G. (Ed.). (2002). Land, rights, and innovation: Improving tenure security for the urban poor. London: ITDG.Google Scholar
  18. Payne, G., Durand-Lasserve, A., & Rakodi, C. (2009). The limits of land titling and home ownership. Environment and Urbanization, 21(2), 443–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pickvance, C. G. (1988). Land and housing development in Middle Eastern and Northern African cities. IJURR, 12(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pugh, C. (1997). The changing role of self-help in housing and urban policies, 1950–1996. Third World Planning Review, 19, 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rapoport, A. (1982). The meaning of the built environment: A nonverbal communication approach. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  22. Roy, A. (2011). Slumdog cities: Rethinking subaltern urbanism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35(2), 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sait, S., & Lim, H. (2006). Land, law and Islam. London: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  24. Sims, D. (2010). Understanding Cairo: The logic of city out of control. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.Google Scholar
  25. Soliman, A. (1996). Legitimizing informal housing: Accommodating low-income groups in Alexandria, Egypt. Environment and Urbanization Journal, 8, 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Soliman, A. (2004). A possible way out: Formalizing housing informality in Egyptian cities. Lanham: American University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Soliman, A. (2010). Rethinking urban informality and the planning process in Egypt. IDPR Journal, 32(2), 119–143.Google Scholar
  28. Soliman, A. (2012, April). The Egyptian episode of self-build housing. Habitat International Journal, 36(2), 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Soliman, A. (2017). Land readjustment as a mechanism for New Urban Land Expansion in Egypt: Experimenting participatory inclusive processes. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 9(3), 313–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Turner, J. (1972). Housing as a verb. In J. Turner & R. Fichter (Eds.), Freedom to build: Dweller control of the housing process (pp. 148–175). New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
  31. Turner, J. (1976). Housing by people: Towards autonomy in building environments. London: Marion Boyars.Google Scholar
  32. UN-Habitat. (2015). UN-Habitat global activities report 2015: Increasing synergy for greater national ownership. United Nations Human Settlements programme (UN-Habitat), Nairobi, Kenya, p. 31.Google Scholar
  33. Youm 7. (2016). Egyptian News Paper, 24/2/2016.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of ArchitectureAlexandria UniversityAlexandriaEgypt

Personalised recommendations