Materials and Social Injustice

The existing part of the Hay El Salam neighborhood before the implementation of the sites-and-services project was composed of a majority of traditional mud constructions. In its southern part, it was also possible to find some larger ones in cement and sand blocks, fired bricks, or reinforced concrete structures. The prices of these different materials and the image they convey vary enormously. ¹ Earthen dwellings, which are very affordable, are perceived as the homes of the poorest people, while reinforced concrete buildings, which are larger and more solid and therefore more expensive, indicate a higher social status. If they could afford it, the locals avoided building in raw earth for this reason.²

In developing the project, no restrictions on the use of any of these materials were made. However, the possibility of densification was very different from one dwelling to the other. For example, a mud house could not be more than one story high.³ Inhabitants often chose the type that suited their financial means. Later, if they had been able to acquire more money, they would expand their home. Sometimes they had to destroy the existing base and rebuild it with material that allowed them to add floors.⁴

In the framework of the project study, problems with the supply of materials had already been anticipated. Some strategies were supposed to limit these issues,⁵ but few were effective, leading to higher prices for materials, as well as supply difficulties. Despite the loan system in place, some owners could no longer afford to buy their construction materials.⁶

In parallel, the governorate, which had tolerated the use of bricks and mud for years, decided to ban them in the Hay El Salam area in 1982. For them, these materials were too reminiscent of the aesthetics of the informal housing that existed in the area. Access to the most affordable material was therefore made impossible for the inhabitants of the neighborhood.⁷

The impossibility of developing their plot, as well as the likely increase in the price of living in the district, are presumably the causes of the departure of a large part of the low-income population. The demand for plots in the area from higher income earners may have also encouraged them to sell. Thus, the initial purpose of mixing different social classes was partly a failure.

Sources

1. Clifford Culpin and Partners et al. for ODA. Ismailia Demonstration Projects, Volume 1: Proposals. 1978. pp. 32-33. 

2. Matteucci, Claudio. Long-term Evaluation of an Urban Development Project: The Case of Hai El Salam. 7th N-Aerus Conference. 2006. 

3. Clifford Culpin and Partners et al. for ODA. Ismailia Demonstration Projects, Volume 2: Technical. 1978. pp. 90-91.

4. Sudra, Tomasz. “The Case of Ismailia: Can Architect and Planner Usefully Participate in the Housing Process?” In Housing: Process and Physical Form, ed. by Linda Safran. Philadelphia: Aga Khan Award for Architecture. 1980. p. 53. 

5. Culpin et al. Ismailia Demonstration Projects, Vol. 2. Op. cit. pp. 92-94.

6. Matteucci. Long-term Evaluation. Op. cit. p. 7.

7. Ibid. 

Images

1. Research in the literature on the history of materials management during the project and the injustices that resulted. Source: Own work, excerpts from:

2. Clifford Culpin and Partners et al. for ODA. Ismailia Demonstration Projects, Volume 1: Proposals. 1978.

3. Clifford Culpin and Partners et al. for ODA. Ismailia Demonstration Projects, Volume 2: Technical. 1978.

4. Silcox, Stephen. A Comparative Evaluation of Three Upgrading Projects in Egypt (Helwan, Manshiet Nasser and Ismailia): A Replicable Analysis. Ford Foundation. April 1985.

5. Sudra, Tomasz. “The Case of Ismailia: Can Architect and Planner Usefully Participate in the Housing Process?” In Housing: Process and Physical Form, ed. by Linda Safran. Philadelphia: Aga Khan Award for Architecture. 1980.

6. Matteucci, Claudio. Long-term Evaluation of an Urban Development Project: The Case of Hai El Salam. 7th N-Aerus Conference. 2006.

7. Tadamun. “‘Land & Services’ Policy: What We Need to Learn from the Experience of the al-Salām District in Ismāʿīlīya.” 2019. Link.

8. “Ismailiyya Development Projects.” In Space for Freedom, ed. by Ismaill Serageldin. London: Butterworth Architecture. 1989.