Infrastructure Provision for Informal Settlements: Accra and Buenos Aires

Informal settlement growth across countries has led to distinctive actions that can enhance access for low-income populations to housing and basic services. This fact indicates the need to develop studies comparing countries and cities to identify policy learning opportunities. This paper is an experimental comparison between Accra, Ghana, and Buenos Aires, Argentina, investigating how policies on informal settlements have formed in the two countries. The two cities differ in the way that informal settlements are viewed by the public. In Argentina, the public often sees informal settlements (known as villas) as areas to be avoided, despite proactive policies to support and integrate low-income groups. In Accra, informal settlements may be viewed negatively or positively, depending on the characteristics and origin of their residents; some settlements are viewed as legitimate, ordinary communities that serve as transitional places despite their underdeveloped environment. Nevertheless, Buenos Aires, Argentina, demonstrates more inclusive policies for informal dwellers than Accra, Ghana. Argentina has chosen not to follow the market model, while Ghana maintains a neoliberal path. This difference is partly the result of a severe economic depression in Argentina in the early 21st century, coupled with institutional arrangements that give the city of Buenos Aires greater autonomy and leverage at the national level than Accra. In sum, Argentina could learn from Ghana about the way in which cultural barriers affect progress, while Ghana could learn from Argentina about removing structural and institutional barriers to improving the lives of those who live in informal settlements.