Translating Policies into Informal Settlements' Critical Services: Reframing, Anchoring and Muddling Through
| Date | 01 December 2016 |
| Author | Jaan‐Henrik Kain,María José Zapata Campos,Michael Oloko,Belinda Nyakinya,Nicholas Odhiambo,Patrik Zapata,Silas Otieno,John Omolo |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1782 |
| Published date | 01 December 2016 |
TRANSLATING POLICIES INTO INFORMAL SETTLEMENTSˈCRITICAL
SERVICES: REFRAMING, ANCHORING AND MUDDLING THROUGH
JAAN-HENRIK KAIN
1
, BELINDA NYAKINYA
2
, NICHOLAS ODHIAMBO
3
, MICHAEL OLOKO
3
,
JOHN OMOLO
4
, SILAS OTIENO
5
, PATRIK ZAPATA
6
*AND MARÍA JOSÉ ZAPATA CAMPOS
7
1
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
2
Kisumu Department of Environment, Kenya
3
Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology,Kenya
4
Maseno University, Kenya
5
Chairman SWM Sacco/Cooperative, Kenya
6
University of Gothenburg, Sweden
7
University of Gothenburg, Sweden
SUMMARY
This paper examines how policies and plans are translated into informal settlementsˈpractice. It builds on literature on policy
implementation practice and organization studies, and more particularly, it applies the concepts of reframing, anchoring and
muddling through. The paper is informed by the case of Kisumu City in Kenya and its Kisumu Integrated Solid Waste Manage-
ment Plan and its implementation on Kisumuˈs informal settlements. The plan was funded by the Swedish International Devel-
opment Agency through the United Nations Human Settlement Programme and implemented from 2007 to 2009. The study is
based on action research carried out by a multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary group of researchers, through focus groups, par-
ticipatory workshops, collaborative action, in-depth interviews, document analysis and observations. The paper examines what
original aspects of Kisumu Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan were translated, that is, which ones faded out and which
ones became stabilized into and travel as ‘best practices’to other locations. The paper shows how the generation of ‘best prac-
tices’can be loosely coupled with the practices that policy seeks to change. It concludes, in line with previous research in the
field, how successful policy implementation is based on cultural and political interpretations rather on evidence of improved
practices. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
key words—policy implementation practice; implementation gap; best practices; framing; anchoring; muddle through; waste
management; informal settlements
INTRODUCTION
Both development policy-making and research are concerned with the disparities between the ambitions of policies
and the practices they actually achieve on the ground (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1973; Mosse, 2004; Owens et al.,
2006; Zapata Campos and Zapata, 2013a; Czarniawska, 2012). Despite its importance, research on policy imple-
mentation is often limited to a linear and rational view, which excludes the role of political and informal domains
(Heeks and Stanforth, 2014). To develop a better understanding of this gap between policy and practice, this paper
examines how policies and plans are actually translated into practice by the many involved parties.
The case informing the analysis is the waste management plan [Kisumu Integrated Solid Waste Management
(SWM) Plan (KISWAMP)] in Kisumu, Kenya. KISWAMP was funded by the Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency (SIDA) through the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) and imple-
mented from 2007 to 2009 (UN-Habitat, 2007). Waste management is a suitable object of study for the analysis of
policy implementation because all cities provide such services with different levels of efficiency and resources.
Furthermore, development aid programmes have targeted waste management in Global South cities as a means
*Correspondence to: P. Zapata and M. J. Z. Campos, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. E-mail: patrik.zapata@spa.gu.se
public administration and development
Public Admin. Dev. 36, 330–346 (2016)
Published online in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/pad.1782
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
to support job creation among low-income citizens and youth, improve public health, increase recycling and reduce
citiesˈenvironmental footprints (UN-Habitat, 2010). Yet, the processes through which these global, national and
local programmes aim to achieve their goals have largely been overlooked in the literature.
The present paper builds on the literature on policy implementation practice (Long, 2001; Mosse, 2004) and or-
ganization studies (Czarniawska, 2002; 2010; 2013; Zapata Campos and Zapata, 2013a; 2014) for its analytical
framework. Ethnographic research on policy-making and project implementation practice has shown that ‘success-
ful’implementation of plans and policies depends on the stabilization of particular interpretations of a policy.
Therefore, the appropriate question is not ‘whether but how development projects work; not whether a project suc-
ceeds, but how success is produced’(Mosse, 2004, p.646). This paper contributes to develop a better understanding
of the gap between policy and practice in public administration and development studies by examining three
particular aspects of policy implementation practice: framing, anchoring and muddling through (Czarniawska,
2002; 2004).
The following section introduces the literature on waste management policies in informal urban settlements in the
Global South. Next, the theoretical framework is presented. Thereafter, the methodology section explains how the
empirical data were gathered and analysed. The results are presented as a reconstruction of KISWAMP and its trans-
lations into waste management in Kisumuˈs informal settlements. We continue by examining which aspects of
KISWAMP were stabilized into local practice, which aspects travelled further as ‘best practices’(master ideas
and norms of success that are taken for granted for a given situation) and which aspects were not translated, and
therefore faded away. Our analysis is then discussed as actions of framing/reframing, anchoring and muddling
through. The paper concludes with remarks on how policies and plans become translated, fade away, stabilize
and/or travel.
WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS
Various waste management programmes have been implemented in informal settlements of the Global South. They
have often been initiated by bulldozing the settlements, followed by a reconstruction of both housing and infra-
structure (Patel, 2013). In other cases, local entrepreneurs and their informal services have simply been substituted
by private corporations (Zapata Campos and Hall, 2013). Many programmes, typically financed by international
agencies, have been designed and implemented top-down, securing the compliance of local actors through their
high dependence on the resources provided by the donors (Sampson, 2003).
However, public officials can use donor funding in ways that better suit their cityˈs needs (Zapata Campos and
Zapata, 2013a). There are projects where the focus has been on residents and waste pickers as co-producers of basic
services in partnerships with local governments, rather than as recipients of services from aid programmes (Zapata
Campos and Zapata 2013b; Yates and Gutberlet 2011). In the absence of formal waste services, an extensive infor-
mal sector of waste pickers has become involved in collecting and recycling household waste (Gutberlet, 2012,
Katuiimeh et al., 2013, Oteng-Ababio et al., 2013). These informal waste pickers contribute significantly to carbon
footprint reduction (da Silva Carvalho et al., 2012; Mitlin, 2008; Wilson et al., 2008), resource recovery, improve-
ment of environmental conditions and health of low-income residents and job creation among the poor. However,
programmes supporting informal waste picker organizations at the micro level face many challenges. It can take
decades for innovative solutions to be scaled up to other parts of a city or to other cities (Hardoy et al., 2001),
and achievements can wither when the funding ends because ‘induced networks’and public–private partnerships
have not achieved self-management (Tirado-Soto and Zamberlan, 2013).
A common ingredient in co-produced programmes is the waste transfer point (UN-Habitat, 2010), where waste
collected from households is stored until being evacuated to landfills or recycling centres. If the city fails to evac-
uate the transfer point, then the private or community partners will obtain problems as people in the settlements see
an unevacuated transfer point as a potential new local dump site, that is, as a negative consequence of the waste
collection activity. Governmental arrangements created for co-production of waste collection services (e.g. licens-
ing and remuneration of waste pickers or regular evacuation of transfer points) therefore call for regular and long-
term relationships, where networks and partnerships are integrated in local governance structures (Joshi and Moore,
331
TRANSLATING POLICIES INTO INFORMAL SETTLEMENTSˈCRITICAL SERVICES
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Public Admin. Dev. 36, 330–346 (2016)
DOI: 10.1002/pad
To continue reading
Request your trial