*4.2.1 Profile of actors interested in informal plot from peri-urban areas*

The profile of actors involved in acquiring a plot of land through the informal channel from the peri-urban areas is examined with a purpose to provide a clear structure and insight about the characteristics of actors and institutional arrangements governing informal transaction and development of land in the peri-urban areas. The actors interested in acquiring a plot of land from peri-urban areas have multifaceted and engaged in various occupations to earn income for their livelihood (see **Table 1**). Self-employed households engaged in small scale commerce and daily laborers working mainly in the construction sector account more than 75% of the informal settlers in the case study area. The role of government employees and local residents in the process of new built-up property is significant as well [23]. Again, from the income perspective, the great majority of actors interested in the informal acquisition of land and formation of new built-up property earn very low monthly income.

In this study, an attempt was also made to track where the informal settlers are coming form. The largest proportion respondents which account about 92% of informal settlers used to live in the inner-city in rental houses. They informal settlers justify why they preferred to come to the inaccessible and unplanned periurban areas to live. According to their views unregulated rising of housing rent and inability to buy a condominium flat in the inner city are the most significant pushing factors that expelled them to the peri-urban areas in search of shelter. On the other hand, availability of informally subdivided parcels in cheap prices relatively attracted them to leave their original place of residence. Some of the housing units are also constructed by local residents themselves whose prior residence is from the same locality. Local residents or local informal settlers are those actors who built muddy house either on their own farm land or on a plot received as a gift, or on a plot bought from other local peri-urban landholder. The housing units constructed by local residents account about 7% of the houses in the area. Thus, the analysis of actors involved in the formation of informal urban built-up properties (construction of informal housing units) and the nature of the houses built in the study area reveals the infancy stage of settlement and land development where the


#### **Table 1.**

*Respondents' occupation and monthly income (n = 120).*

*Land Use Change and Sustainability*

federal government.

rights is non-existent. The use right of the local peri-urban landholders supposed to be exercised for lifetime can be terminated at any time by expropriation decisions of the government. As urban boundary approaches to the peri-urban territory, local landholders at this territory are assumed to be subjects of expropriation. As a consequence, sense of land tenure insecurity is very high in the transitional periurban areas than any other places in Ethiopia and about 94% of the local peri-urban landholders in one way or the other feel insecure for their land right [11]. The local landholders in the peri-urban areas expect that their land shall be taken by the municipality at any time when the land is needed for urban expansion programs. Another deficit of the urban built-up property formation through expropriation in Ethiopia is related to the wrong interpretation and assumption that all land belongs to the state which has resulted in unjustifiable disregard of land value in the amount of compensation paid to those people expropriated form their land. In this regard, the practice shows that local peri-urban landholders can be paid compensation only for improvements on land, i.e., buildings and structures on the land [18], without taking into consideration the land value itself. The practice also shows that there is a considerable variation in the rate and amount of compensation paid to the expropriated landholders [19, 20]. For example, if the land is taken for a federal purpose, landholders would be compensated at a rate determined by the federal government; if the land is taken by regional or local authorities, the rate would be determined by regional or local authorities. Therefore, the amount of compensation paid by the federal government is much higher than local or regional government. As a result landholders in the peri-urban areas prefer their land to be taken by

Moreover, the urban land development process and a new built-up property formation process in particular is not built on participatory approaches. The stakeholders inability to make a direct involvement and negotiation due to the wrong assumption that land is the exclusive property of the state and can never be definitely negotiated by any one has created uncertainty on peri-urban landholders located adjacent to the cities [11]. Experiences show that expropriation decisions made by municipal authorities are most commonly top-down without considering the interests of the peri-urban communities including the preferences in the type of compensation. For instance, the great majority of the local landholders (91%) in the peri-urban areas prefer to have either land-to-land compensation from other areas or preserving reasonable portion of land within the urban boundary [21]. Therefore, the landholders in the area would like to preserve their land use rights and stay in farming activities. In addition they want to transfer their agricultural land to their sons and daughters as they have received it from their parents. The practice shows that reaching consensus and agreement with the affected local landholders before the final decision of land acquisition is most often non-existent. As a result objection and resistance against government's expropriation measure is a common phenomenon in the peri-urban areas of Ethiopia. The overall reflection from sample respondents and previous research results on the current urban development process in Ethiopia seems to be ignoring the land rights and livelihoods of

the local peri-urban communities and skewed to the urban people [22].

**4.2 Informal built-up property formation process in the peri-urban areas**

Informal developments and settlements mushroom in the peri-urban areas than any other geographic place. Informal acquisition and transaction is the second mechanism for new built-up property formation in the peri-urban areas The expectation of peri-urban local landholders that their land shall be taken by urban administration compulsorily, on the one hand, and the inefficiency to provide

**22**

#### *Land Use Change and Sustainability*

area is inhabited mainly by low income households. Moreover, all house structures built in the area are sub-standard and temporary shelters constructed of muddy and wooden walls and roof of iron sheet scattered on the agricultural land and inhabited by low income households. Moreover, basic amenities such as school for children and other basic facilities such as electricity, road and sanitation services are not available.
