SECURITY OF TENURE

The WB has constantly argued that provision of legal land title for the low-income groups should not be considered as a hand out from the rich to the poor, but a necessary process of redistribution. David Glynn said:

"Land is a private asset once it is gained, therefore it is less appropriate for subsidy being transferred to a private individual than a continuing public service. So a private individual then makes his own profits on that. "(1988)

He added that security of tenure is a process that provides the groups concerned with an opening into the system through which every body can share the social and economic available. It is, thus, not an act of charity, but an economically sound move, necessary to integrate every possible social group into the productive communal activities. Grimmes has seen it as a step towards establishment of social equity:

"..introducing an element of equity into urban land- ownership by giving squatters security of tenure is an urgent policy." (Grimes, O., 1976, p .96)

To achieve positive results in this direction needs the government's commitment to provide legal and institutional means, the WB argued. Since the majority of the low-income groups, particularly in squatter settlements, have already had access to land, legalisation o f their ownership would provide the necessary guarantees for their attraction towards the housing market and, to some level, their integration into the overall economic structure.

5.4.1. Legalisation process and the question of integration of beneficiaries

In the UDPl project, the WB's appointed body, UDD, had been empowered with direct authority to issue land titles and building licences to the beneficiaries without any need to refer them to either the Housing Corporation or the Land Survey Department. This relative freedom attracted more popular support for the UDD and enabled it to obtain further

concessions from the government that were of additional benefits for the community. An example of such beneficial changes was dealing with the so-called "non-registered" contractors, who were hitherto excluded from taking part in the government-sponsored project. Unlike "registered" contractors who were mainly well established companies with noticeable capital and political connections, the "non-registered" contractors were small firms who were ready to undertake construction of fewer dwelling units with comparatively cheaper charges. By issuing building licences to "non-registered" contractors, the UDD provided a cheaper and more flexible option for beneficiaries of its site and services project to employ.

Effectiveness of the UDD to hasten the process of legalisation provided further chances for the beneficiaries involved to use their newly acquired status to ask for other urgent community needs such as access to building materials, infrastructure, etc.^®*®^

Table 1

Role Unregistered Contractors in the UDPl Project type/

Builder type

Owner built Unreg. Contractor Reg. Contractor

Site& Services %8 %90 %2

Up-grading %5 %94 %1

Non-UDPl %15 %85 %0

Total Average %9 %89.5 %1.5

Source: Site and Services, E.Hooper, The WB, 1998, Annex

^ Compared to the municipalities in Jordan, which were politically weak and their decisions were often overlooked by the central departments (such as HC and LSD), the UDD was able to override the bureaucratic views and take its demands directly to the cabinet ministers. For instance in case of Zarqa and Ruseifa municipalities, where some of the participants o f the UDPl project were receiving no significant help from their official local leaders, the UDD took the trouble of supporting their demands.

These municipalities were outside Amman, and had little political influence or source of finance. There were also some conflicts between the local electorates over credibility o f the local mayors, leaving them in constant fear for their position. The main intention o f the mayors in this situation was primarily to strengthen their own alliances with the central government and to secure their positions even if their approach undermined the interests of the local communities. As a result, these municipalities were isolated from their host communities and were unable to play a noticeable role in representing them. The beneficiaries in these areas were also

Establishment of additional local gathering points (such as adult education and training courses) by UDD played a relatively important role in stirring the local politics and give raise to emergence of a number of locally known leaders, able enough to articulate the local demands. This was a new, though indirect, link between the local communities and the governmental departments that, to some extent, reflected their views in overall housing policies, local decision making and implementation process (Wohnan, H. & Goldsmith, M ., 1992, p. 187). Existence of such a link, has been argued, to be useful in bearing pressure to the government for adopting policy changes, and has helped the beneficiaries to gain increased access to resources at local level (Yudehnan, S.W ., 1987).

However, the ability of this institution to assume the task of community leadership and to carry out various negotiations on behalf of the beneficiaries concerning their housing needs, with the state departments diminished the possibility of creating a locally elected organisation.^®^'*

6. EXAMINING THE LEVEL OF LOCAL COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN