Hello, everyone, and welcome here. So over the next few minutes, I'll be explain to you my research on adaptation strategies to floating in Nigeria,
specifically in Benin City, which is where my university is based.
Now, for those of us who are popular with Afro music, how many of us have heard about Ghana like his music?
Yeah. So one of his popular tracks is what know gets me right essentially means that water has no enemies.
And when we think about it in that context, I think that song was supposed to portray how important water is in every aspect of our lives.
So basically for washing, cleaning, eating, food production, practically everything you can do without water.
Although I think from Fela's context, he was probably also making a political statement with that song because essentially for him,
it was to say that with all the people, the governments can't function. So water has both a and ecological meaning is spiritual,
meaning it physical meaning and also a social political meaning, both in the context of my discussion city.
I think we need to think about Florida in the context of having no enemies as well.
So when we think about flooding a lot of the times, we think about it as a disruption, as a problem.
But that's essentially because the structures we have in place,
the social ecological structures we have in place are not suited to dealing with flooding problems.
So it then becomes a problem. But more and more, we're looking at listening to science in the area of water,
trying to capitalise on flooding and water issues as a resource rather than being a problem.
So in the context of this, my discussion is going to show how people have tried to adapt to flooding,
to cope with it and to see how these coping strategies or adaptation strategies adopted have either been successful or not successful and why,
especially in low income settings. So the presentation is essentially going to cost across five main issues a general description of
Benin City and introduction into the governance structure or governance architecture of offloading
and open management generally within the context of being in the coping strategies employed by people
and probable pathways to ensuring that these coping strategies are successful or more effective.
And then how enhanced how we can enhance adaptation strategies within that context.
Now Benin city, the capital of a two states. So it's part of the Niger Delta region for those of us who knew about the Niger Delta,
and it often experiences flash floods, especially during the rainy season.
So when it rains, it really rains. It's been raining since I got here, but it would qualify more as drizzles in the context of Edo State.
So it really rains. And when it rains, we have flash floods, and usually that's because we are drainage systems exist.
The IDA blocks or the poorly constructed, or they're just not enough to carry the enough to carry the water that comes through from the rain.
And when this happens, it disrupts activities. So you have long traffic lines.
You have people not being able to go from one part of the city to the other parts of the city, and then you have businesses being shut down.
And you also have damage to the roads, to infrastructure because of the flooding that it will cause.
Now, in terms of the governance structure of managements generally has a multilevel governance structure in the context of Nigeria.
So the Fed well, we have a federal system in Nigeria, the federal governments, and then we have the state governments and then the local governments.
Now each of these levels of governments share some responsibility for flood management or bad managements.
Generally, the federal government usually sets the tone for policy for policies and then the tone for actual interventions.
The state government often has to implement the policies within their jurisdiction and then also implement
strategies and projects that would actually ensure that your brand management's objectives are achieved.
And then the local governments also have some role to play in terms of coordination of local efforts.
Usually, the local governments has a more direct impacts in the local communities because they are closest to the local communities.
Now, in terms of the policy drive, we didn't adjusted, for instance, it was a lot of reliance has been placed on the National Mall.
So we have a national act that deals with urban management and planning, and that act is also relevant within the context of doing things.
But very recently in the House of Assembly within the state has been has been working on a new law
that would actually govern urban management policies and prospects within the state specifically,
rather than relying on the federal laws. Now this is has its merits because it would be more it would be more relevant to the local context.
This is a law that has been made by members of the community and members of the Legislature within that context in the states.
But what we find is it mirrors very closely the provisions in the Federal Act as well,
and a lot of the provisions in both the federal and the proposed state law
are usually tailored towards engineering solutions that are floating problem. So there's a lot of emphasis on getting permits for infrastructure,
and there's also a lot of emphasis on building things like stormwater drainage systems, technological solutions to the flooding problem.
And this has its merits, but it also has its demerits, as will show in the context of this conversation.
Now these three levels of governance to very large extent, there's no coherence in how the policies are implemented.
So whereas the policies look good on paper, the laws are the actual implementation.
There's a disconnect. So for instance, the fact that before you erect a building,
you need to get permits from the governments, especially within the within the jurisdiction of states.
You need to get permits from the state governments and then the state government has to
ensure that whatever structure you want to put in place is not going to cause problems.
For instance, you will be blocking drains or building in flood plains or creating more problems with the environment.
Usually in practises, we find that people erect buildings,
and if you don't get the right licences and sometimes licences are requested for retrospectively.
So you have situations where the local authority comes and puts a sign saying bring down this building because it's causing one problem or the other.
But in actual, in the actual sense of whether that building will come down or not is a different thing.
So there's a lot of underlying political issues and there's a lot of incoherence in how these policies are actually implemented on the ground.
And of course, in the context of low low income citizens,
they probably would not have the opportunities in terms of the finances to be able to actually erect
the kind of infrastructure that would be needed for technological solutions to flooding problems.
So we find that that technological solution doesn't really work in the context of Low-Income Settings.
Another another thing we find in the context of governance of governance,
architecture architecture floating in Nigeria is that there's a difference between what is in the books and what is practised locally.
So a lot of the times the community,
the households rely on local knowledge and understanding of their environments to actually come up with solutions to the floating problems.
And because the government doesn't really have a hands on approach in terms of actually managing what people do.
There's a disconnect between what's the engineering solution or the formal solutions would be and what actually can.
Zone in practise, it is then that there's a minimal interaction between those informal solutions or
informal systems and from our knowledge systems or from our governance systems.
And fourthly, we have a limited capacity for enforcement, clearly because the local government isn't really well equipped.
So at the end of the day, some of the solutions so-called solutions, which are counterproductive,
do not get nipped in the bud and go ahead and creates more problems in the long run.
And then finally, like I already mentioned, there's an emphasis on technical solutions or technology,
and this technology may not be accessible to people.
And essentially, in terms of the effectiveness of technology, we find that there are other important factors because while you may have a technology,
if people do not have the right knowledge to handle or use this technology productively, then it could cause more problems.
For instance, if you have a drainage system and people for one reason or your that start to put the waste management system which blocks it,
then the drainage system will not achieve the result, which it's supposed to achieve.
So essentially, while technology has its merits, there are also non-technical factors which are more social that needs to be taken into account.
And this would include capacity of the people to actually engage with this technology
productively and also the understanding of how technology should work and even maintenance,
for instance, because if the local people always have to rely on external people to come and maintain,
then there could be a problem, especially in the context of Low-Income Settings.
So what has happened is there's a picture, there's a picture there which shows a.
I think we have. OK, so when I showed the first slide with the map, there's a roof there, which is supposed to be the Legault's being expressed.
It's an expressway if federal road. And this is a route when it becomes flooded.
Now this flood has happened, it's a federal route.
But clearly, people using the route are everyday people and they have to find a way of dealing with the problem,
and I'll show you how to try to deal with it.
So in essence, well, it was a federal route and the rest of was the federal government to maintain this route.
The problem that result actually affects people at the level of the state and at the local level,
and they try to come up with solutions which may not always be effective and which may not always be sanctioned by the federal government.
Now what are the solutions people have tried to come up with?
I've tried to conceptualise the solutions into four main categories, and one of them is isolation.
In that case, people have a problem with flooding,
and then they decide on what would be the best solution to protect themselves or their properties from the damage that could result from flooding.
And a lot of the times when they carry out the solutions is carried out in isolation in
the sense that they do not take into consideration what their neighbours are doing,
and they also do not take into consideration what the effects of their actions would be on their neighbours.
So it's an eyesore missionary approach to addressing the flooding problem.
Now this solution is contrary. I think it's contrary because it doesn't lead to an effective solution to the problem.
And I also see that it's insignificant in insignificance, insensitive to the extent that it doesn't take into consideration a good understanding
of what the environmental impacts would be or what people's responses would be.
Now I know that another approach we usually find is alliance to the extent that people get involved at a community level.
We would find committee meetings.
Sometimes you have house when I was in the neighbourhood coming to get out to try and look for a common solutions to their problems,
so people get involved to talk about the problem and then they try to forge solutions. But sometimes you find that they agree on a solution.
But when it comes to actual implementation, some people do not get involved. Maybe because of the costs,
or maybe because they think that the benefits which do gain from that intervention
outweigh the monies that would have to spend in terms of getting the solution running.
So as a result of that, you have them aligning themselves with the preparatory processes but refusing to
get involved in the actual implementation and refusing to invest in the process.
And so I've described that as being an alliance now on the top right corner, there's competition.
In that case, people understand what the problem is. They understand the possible consequences of their actions.
But they refused to do things in connexion with other people because they probably have the
resources to be able to capture whatever solutions they are and use it for their own benefits,
irrespective of how it would affect other people in the environments or even the actual environment in itself.
Beyond the effects on humans in the environments, but the ideal situation would be one of cooperation.
And for me, cooperation is a suspicion in which people understand how their actions impact on the environment.
They also understand what the neighbours would be doing or what people in the environment would be doing to react to this problem.
And they try to see how best to reach a solution that would be a Win-Win solution in the sense that they protect themselves.
But he also did not cause harm to other people in the environment, so that would be the ideal situation, one of cooperation.
And I've described it here as being affirmative in the sense that it is positive and that it's also of significance,
intensity and the outcome which produces.
So one example of isolation would be this the story behind this picture is the Florida picture I showed you inédit had it floating.
What happened is because the what I would gather as more and more rain fell forward into people's neighbourhoods.
And this is one of the neighbourhoods that has been affected.
This picture over here used to be ruled, so it wasn't on tarred road, but at least it was possible.
But because of all the water coming in on that side as a petrol station, so the petrol station builds a barrier around themselves.
And as a result of that, the water could ensure any more forward and the water started coming back into the streets.
And that is how the street became the way it has become. Now, on the other side of the story building, there is a new complex being set up.
That person bought the property and realised that if he left it like that, the water would come into his own property.
And so he also built a barrier around his property. So on both sides, the built barriers and then what has been forced into down the streets.
And so that's an example of how people build barriers that protects themselves well,
because it does in isolation, it compounds the problem for the collective.
Now, this is an example of competition in this case, what they did is that they channel the water away from themselves.
And this is the possible what I would then see over time because of what I would think backpacks consistently, it has started to erode the road.
So the road is becoming damaged. Now this is the other side of the flooded part that I showed you before now.
So at the end of the day, you're protecting, they're protecting themselves. But because they're channelling the water in a way from themselves,
because they understand that the water can be channelled out of their own properties to the adjoining property.
They are creating more problems again for the collective.
Now, this is alliance in this case, this is when I described to you about people actually getting involved in what should be the solution,
but because maybe the cost is too much for them to be.
Or do you think the benefits do derive from that collective solution is not what they decide to do something that would benefit them directly.
So this is alliance and the effects of this is we have high rates of I mean,
they've been cases of people dying because of the flawed cases of children, for instance.
There was once a child coming back from school, was crossing the route and then got,
you know, carried away by the floodwaters as it has been morbidity,
morbidity, mortality and morbidity, loss of lives, loss of livelihoods, economic livelihoods, loss of property value.
And then there's been people moving away from the community because of the flooding problems. And there are some pictures to show.
So this used to be a shop, but then the store owner had to shut it down because of course,
no one's going through that route anymore and have also built some kind of embankments.
You can see the something they've built in front to raise the front of the building such that water doesn't come in when it rains.
And then this is a view petrol station. But I've also had to put so much sand in front of it that cars can no longer driving to buy petrol from them.
So the petrol station is more or less losing. Business is more or less shut down now.
This used to be seen by markets where people used to sell wood, but of course, because of the flooding problem is no longer in business.
And this used to be a route in front of the house, but the road is no longer passable and so they've also lost.
The property has also lost value because people can no longer come here to live as a result of this problem.
Now, in the context of all of this, I see that cooperation is a mean ideal situation we should be looking at.
But then it is not what exists on the ground without all that solutions that people are adopting,
which may not be the best, including competition, isolation and alliance.
My background is in law, but I understand that, for instance, there are people working in sustainable water management.
More from a technical aspects that try to map people's approaches to flooding and people's adaptation strategies.
So I think that it would be important for the lawyers to actually collaborate with these technical fields and
see how best we can try and convert people's actions or try and incentivise people to move from competition,
alliance or isolation to actual cooperation.
Because cooperation is the ideal situation in which we're are able to get a win win for both individuals and the collective and,
of course, the environment as well.
So here I've put down six probable pathways to cooperation, but there could be more, of course, depending on the local context.
So the ideal would be to move from competition to cooperation and to do that, for instance.
There has to be different levels of autism of learning.
So first of all, because in competition, people already have an understanding of what the environmental consequences are,
then that should be encouraged so that understanding should be encouraged. But beyond that, we have to try to change people's assumptions as well.
The assumption that protecting oneself is the most important thing, and once we protect ourselves in the short term,
then we can ensure that we do not suffer consequences in the long term.
And that's a wrong assumption because clearly even is flawed or cause even though one's property is protected,
the fact that a sort of cause and there could be some kind of disease outbreak, one cannot be protected from that, for instance.
So those assumptions need to be corrected at second order learning.
And then finally, there has to be an emphasis on also showing that there's need to move from a focus on just one's
own beliefs or one's when admissions and protection to actually ensuring the collective good.
Because at the end of the day, once the environment is protected,
the benefits are more sustainable and it's more widespread and more consistent for everybody in the environment.
So competition would then require three at least three levels of learning, and then isolation would require, for instance,
more knowledge, because at that level, the people really do not understand how their actions affect all the people.
So it would be important that we invest more in improving people's understanding of the environmental
consequences of their actions and how their actions would affect other people in the environment.
So not just the environmental consequences, but also the social consequences as well.
And at the level of alliance, it will be important to try and convince people about the need for negotiation of the benefits.
So the fact that you already understand the environmental consequences is already a good step.
But beyond that, they need to understand how to move from just focussing on what benefits them as individuals and to see how best
they can actually get involved in the actual implementation of the collective solutions that have been reached.
So does that a three or does that to six batteries that I think could be
considered in the long term in terms of adaptation strategies and in enhancing?
So that's what I've just explained a solution that needs to be more knowledge.
Competition days have negotiation and then change of assumptions and allows it to be integration between what we could do
in the individual space with what happens at a collective level and for cooperation and cooperation is the ideal system.
So we need to just try and reinforce that. But of course, as shown in the example here, we really don't have institutional cooperation just yet.
So in essence, for me, when it comes to enhancing adaptation strategies in low income settings,
we need to look beyond just the focus on technologies to also look at. The core aspects, especially capacity and their knowledge as well.
And if we think about this in the broader context of the tragedy of the Commons, for instance, the fact that once you have commons,
there will always be this tendency for people to want to just protect themselves
gets what he can without actually putting more into protecting age from damage.
So that's something that needs to be addressed, and that is something that cannot be addressed sustainably through just technology in itself.
It has to be addressed by combining both technology and soft.
Well, what we would call the softer elements, but non technical aspects like knowledge,
knowledge dissemination and chains that promotes collective the collective good and collective outcomes,
rather than focussing on just individual benefits or individual outcomes. Thank you.
Thank you so much. All right, questions.