'A successful re-blocking project is when the government works hand in hand with the community': Factors determining the longevity of re-blocking projects for fire-risk reduction.

IF 1.7 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies Pub Date : 2026-02-25 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.4102/jamba.v18i1.2017
Siyachuma S Sintu, Robyn Pharoah
{"title":"'A successful re-blocking project is when the government works hand in hand with the community': Factors determining the longevity of re-blocking projects for fire-risk reduction.","authors":"Siyachuma S Sintu, Robyn Pharoah","doi":"10.4102/jamba.v18i1.2017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Informal settlements are highly vulnerable to fires, due to housing materials, poor infrastructure, dangerous energy sources and housing densities that facilitate the spread of fires and hamper firefighting. Re-blocking aims to reduce fire risk by spatially reconfiguring and de-densifying settlements and upgrading services. However, re-blocked settlements often re-densify, potentially undermining long-term risk reduction benefits. Using case studies of two re-blocked informal settlements, this study aims to explore informal settlement dwellers' perspectives on re-blocking interventions and identify the factors influencing their long-term success, especially the dynamics leading to re-densification. A qualitative research approach was used, employing a comparative case study design. Data were collected through 10 in-depth semi-structured key-informant interviews with officials, implementers and community leaders, and six focus groups (three in each community) involving 84 participants selected based on involvement in the process. The findings suggest that the primary reason for re-densification was that the allocated housing spaces were too small for households' needs or growth. Others included opportunism and push for better housing conditions. Although participation was intended, some residents felt the process was rushed or exclusive and that decision-making neglected their needs, leading to dissatisfaction that could reduce the longevity of spatial changes. The findings suggest the long-term effectiveness hinges on addressing beneficiaries' core needs and expectations. Ultimately, deep, inclusive and unrushed community engagement is crucial to capture diverse needs, ensure sustainable outcomes and achieve intended risk reduction benefits.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>This research fills a practical gap by examining the underlying non-fire safety factors that drive re-densification and provide insight into how re-blocking interventions can be improved.</p>","PeriodicalId":51823,"journal":{"name":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"2017"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12969522/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v18i1.2017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Informal settlements are highly vulnerable to fires, due to housing materials, poor infrastructure, dangerous energy sources and housing densities that facilitate the spread of fires and hamper firefighting. Re-blocking aims to reduce fire risk by spatially reconfiguring and de-densifying settlements and upgrading services. However, re-blocked settlements often re-densify, potentially undermining long-term risk reduction benefits. Using case studies of two re-blocked informal settlements, this study aims to explore informal settlement dwellers' perspectives on re-blocking interventions and identify the factors influencing their long-term success, especially the dynamics leading to re-densification. A qualitative research approach was used, employing a comparative case study design. Data were collected through 10 in-depth semi-structured key-informant interviews with officials, implementers and community leaders, and six focus groups (three in each community) involving 84 participants selected based on involvement in the process. The findings suggest that the primary reason for re-densification was that the allocated housing spaces were too small for households' needs or growth. Others included opportunism and push for better housing conditions. Although participation was intended, some residents felt the process was rushed or exclusive and that decision-making neglected their needs, leading to dissatisfaction that could reduce the longevity of spatial changes. The findings suggest the long-term effectiveness hinges on addressing beneficiaries' core needs and expectations. Ultimately, deep, inclusive and unrushed community engagement is crucial to capture diverse needs, ensure sustainable outcomes and achieve intended risk reduction benefits.

Contribution: This research fills a practical gap by examining the underlying non-fire safety factors that drive re-densification and provide insight into how re-blocking interventions can be improved.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

“一个成功的重新封禁项目是政府与社区携手合作”:决定重新封禁项目寿命的因素,以减少火灾风险。
由于住房材料、简陋的基础设施、危险的能源和住房密度,非正式住区极易受到火灾的影响,这些因素助长了火灾的蔓延,阻碍了灭火工作。重新封锁的目的是通过空间重新配置和去密度住区和升级服务来降低火灾风险。然而,重新封锁的定居点往往会重新密集,潜在地破坏长期降低风险的效益。通过对两个再封锁非正式住区的案例研究,本研究旨在探讨非正式住区居民对再封锁干预的看法,并确定影响其长期成功的因素,特别是导致再密集化的动力。采用定性研究方法,采用比较案例研究设计。通过对官员、实施者和社区领导人进行10次深入的半结构化关键信息提供者访谈,以及6个焦点小组(每个社区3个)收集数据,这些小组涉及84名参与者,这些参与者是根据参与该过程而选择的。研究结果表明,重新密集化的主要原因是分配的住房空间太小,无法满足家庭的需求或增长。其他包括机会主义和推动改善住房条件。虽然参与是有意的,但一些居民认为这个过程过于匆忙或排他性,决策忽视了他们的需求,导致不满,这可能会减少空间变化的寿命。研究结果表明,长期有效性取决于满足受益人的核心需求和期望。最终,深入、包容和从容的社区参与对于满足多样化需求、确保可持续成果和实现预期的降低风险效益至关重要。贡献:本研究通过研究驱动再致密化的潜在非消防安全因素填补了实际空白,并为如何改进再阻塞干预提供了见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies
Jamba-Journal of Disaster Risk Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
37 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书