An investigation of the factors underlying informal settlement growth: The case of Burayu City, Ethiopia

Full text

Research article
An investigation of the factors underlying informal settlement
growth: The case of Burayu City, Ethiopia
Tefera Beyera Bayuma
*
, Birhanu Girma Abebe
Ethiopian Institute of Architecture, Building Construction and City Development, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Addis Ababa
University, Ethiopia
ARTICLE INFO
Key worlds:
Actor behavior
Informal settlement
Institution
Structure-agency
Societal non-compliance
ABSTRACT
Informal settlements in developing countries’cities are becoming more and more widespread.
The city of Burayu is no exception to this trend. To address the challenges involved, it is important
to understand the reasons for the prevalence and perseverance of informal settlement. However,
there is a lack of institutional and actor perspectives to investigate the process and factors driving
the growth of informal settlement in Burayu city. This study investigates the process and
precipitating factors underlying the growth of informal settlements based on institutions, struc-
ture and agency and social non-compliance perspectives. Primary data for this study were
gathered via key informant interviews, questionnaires, and observations. Secondary data were
obtained from the empirical data. This study revealed that local informal institutions such as
social networking play a crucial role in the growth process of informal settlement by fostering an
informal written contract of sale. The study also identied rural-urban migration, speculation,
locational choice, and lack of good governance as precipitating causes for the growth of informal
settlement. In addition, actors use formal institutional loopholes to engage in informal buildings.
Therefore, along with government structure ineffectiveness, the behavior of informal actors’was
also identied as an important, albeit often neglected, factor in the growth of informal settle-
ments. Identifying the impact of various informal actors’behaviors on the proliferation of
informal settlements is vital not only for improving relationships among actors but also for
introducing relevant institutions to control informal actors to improve land governance.
1. Introduction
Rapid urban development is a hot subject in developing countries, as providing housing for a rapidly expanding urban population is
challenging. This challenge is particularly great when urban development is escorted by unplanned urban growth [1]. Developing
countries are currently facing a housing crisis because of an ineffective legal housing supply to accommodate the growing population
[2]. Because of this situation, many people have resorted to informal settlements to make a living [3]. Informal settlements often refer
to illegal land occupation, houses constructed devoid of land use authorization or planning permission from the government, or
housing development on land that does not conform with land use planning and regulation or local building codes [4,5]. Informal
settlement has become an inseparable part of the urbanization practices in developing countries [6]. It is estimated that the percentage
of the urban population in developing countries residing in informal settlements ranges from 30 to 50 % [7]. According to Bekele et al.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: teferabeyera@gmail.com (T.B. Bayuma).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39443
Received 17 December 2022; Received in revised form 7 October 2024; Accepted 14 October 2024
Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
Available online 16 October 2024
2405-8440/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).

[8] greater than 54 % of the house are recognized as informal in Burayu City.
Many people use informal housing as an alternative to formal housing [9,10] because it is affordable and construction costs are low
[11,12]. There has been an inux of new residents into informal house development, particularly in Africa, as requests for urban land
have outstripped its provision, which has led to the growth of informal settlements [13,14]. In Ethiopia, informal settlements are
marked by many difculties, such as poverty, unequal income distribution, limited means to basic infrastructure services, and tenure
insecurity [15]. The growth of informal settlements continues despite government efforts to address the problem by implementing
preventive and remedial measures [16]. These settlements are expanding largely in the peri-urban areas of cities, taking over open
spaces and agricultural land [17].
In the urban areas of Ethiopia, the difculty of getting affordable residential housing forces people to look for alternatives, such as
informal settlements. However, this is contrary to the Ethiopian constitution, which states that land is not for sale [18] and that land
acquisition should be ofcial and follow due process. This indicates that the Ethiopian legal system prohibits the informal ownership of
land and the development of urban areas. As a result, most of the time, land-related conicts are common in land administration
processes and government reactions are usually unpleasant. The current scenario in Ethiopia has shown that the government has
demolished informal settlements and left a lot of people without houses. This also exacerbates social, economic and political problems.
Conversely, public provision of land is limited and does not invite all levels of economic status.
In many African countries, such as Ethiopia, informal settlements persist to grow and contribute to the residential housing supply
for the growing population [19]. In recent decades, the gure of informal settlements in the peripheral areas has been numerous across
Ethiopia’s urban areas and has increased occasionally [20]. To tackle informal settlement proliferation the government has taken a
demolition strategy in various parts of the country. For example in Adama in 2018 3751 were demolished. Moreover, in Southern,
Nations, Nationalities and peoples’Region towns and cities between 2018 and 2022, 5823 were demolished. The demolition caused
considerable agitation and disappointment, particularly in Addis Ababa and its surroundings, like Burayu City.
The informal settlement also generates broader socio-economic challenges for the city’s development. Generally, informal land
transactions resulted in signicant income losses due to the government’s inability to collect land use charges and building permits
because land is transferred under the guise of informality. This decreases the source of income for the city administration and affects its
efforts to make available infrastructure development [21].
According to De Soto, informal land transfer is referred to as "dead capital" because land without rights is locked for potential
capital access [22]. Concerning informal property loss, the city land use administration documents indicated that in 2018 alone, 16,
636 informal houses were demolished. The speedy growth of informal settlements in the city is thus one of the challenges in imple-
menting the city plan as the government has undertaken demolition and eviction without the engagement of non-state actors.
However, informal land transactions continue to grow as they are governed by locally established rules and social practices that
regulate the rights and accountabilities of the actors. The informal actors lent and copied the formal guidelines and processes and
adjusted them to the prevailing conditions of the local urban areas [23]. The key actors in informal land dealings are not only sellers
and buyers but also mediators who enable the practice by providing information and persuading the actors to reach an consensus and
securing the implementation of the land transaction [24,25]. Mediators are relatives, land brokers, and elders who have a special
reputation in the area [26].
Although the existing scenario and literature provide insight into the problems, there is scarce research-based evidence on the
process and factors of informal settlements in Burayu City from the perspective of institution, structure and agency, and societal non-
compliance. Researchers working on informal settlements have emphasized the administrative or formal rules and the function of
economic forces that facilitate the growth of informal settlements. For example, some believe informal settlement is distinctively
connected to the non-success of government administration and the growth of urban poverty. According to Huchzermeyer [27] and
Zhu and Simarmata [28] for example, the growth of informal settlements is not only owing to urban land administration problems but
also a response to urban poverty.
Moreover, most existing studies on informal settlement in Ethiopia have focused on structural factors, such as the ineffectiveness of
formal rules. These studies neglect other aspects that can trigger informal settlements, such as institutions and actors’behavioral
factors [29–31]. For example, in Addis Ababa, which borders Burayu to the west, the roles of institutions and actors’behavior in the
growth of informal settlements have not been adequately documented and studied [31]. In the same vein, the process and actors’
behavior, and institutional factors underlying the growth of informal settlements have not been adequately studied in Burayu City.
An exclusive emphasis on administrative or formal rules and economic factors such as inefcient land delivery systems and poverty
to illuminate the growth of informal settlements is utterly defective and fails to notice the practices of legal and social arrangements
that order the behavior of the major actors and the rule-ordering processes in informal land acquisition. The processes and factors of
informal development in Burayu City are multifaceted and complex [32]. It is, therefore, wrong to regularly attribute the development
of informal settlements solely to administrative inefciency and low income. To address this one-sided perspective. This study,
therefore, looks at the factors of informal settlements from a pluralistic viewpoint, focusing on the perspective of institutions’and
actors’. This is essential to investigate the rules that govern the process and how institutions and actors’behaviors have led to the
expansion of informal settlements.
The purpose of this study is therefore to investigate the process, and factors that drive the growth of informal settlements from
institutional, structure and agency and social non-complaint perspectives. To achieve this objective the study tries to combine generic
insights from these three lines of thought into an empirical level analysis that allows us to capture the institutional and actors’behavior
around the growth of informal settlement as a guiding investigation. To achieve the general objective of the study, the following
particular objectives were pursued.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
2

1. To scrutinize the land acquisition process in informal settlement development in the study area.
2. To examine the roles of institutional and actors’behavior in driving the proliferation of informal settlements in the study area.
2. Explanation of conceptual terms and theoretical framework
2.1. Denition of informal settlement
As a result of population growth, informal settlement has evolved as a concept that is increasingly important around the world. It is
a notable phenomenon that has intrigued scholars and stakeholders from all areas and has led to conicting responses regarding the
rate of potential urban population growth [33]. The concept "informal settlements" incorporates numerous terms, including "spon-
taneous settlements," "shantytowns," " squats," and " slums " [34–36] and subnormal [37], thus, choosing a single denition is very
difcult.
In the literature on the various empirical studies, a clear distinction is made between the terms slum and informal settlement.
However, it is common to use these two terms interchangeably. The words informal settlement and slum have occasionally been used
interchangeably in prior literature [38] because most of the features of these environments, whether slums or informal, do not occur
independently and lead to multiple stages of poverty for the residents of slums. Nevertheless, some claim that slums and informal
settlements are not the same [39,40]. For instance, according to City Alliance [41] a slum is a derelict section of towns/cities where
living and housing conditions are extremely deprived. Moreover, Dovey et al. [42] found that informal settlements rapidly expanded
whereas slums did not. Therefore, to comprehend informal settlement as a prevailing form of urban expansion, we should not use it
interchangeably with the term slum. Therefore, this study adopts the view that informal settlements and slums are different. Moreover,
in the study areas, informal settlements can have good housing conditions but lack legal documents.
Informal settlements are residential areas that have been established without adhering to relevant formal rules to which the res-
idents have no legal entitlement [9]. However, the most broadly accepted denition of informal settlements are areas occupied by
residential houses where often the residents have no secure title for buildings or land; communities particularly lacking social and
economic services; housing that does not comply with the rules of development and planning and is mainly sited in geographically and
ecologically dangerous areas [19].
In Ethiopia, an informal settlement is a residential house constructed on government or private land without legal authorization or
construction approval. Whereas the rst emphasizes the lack of approved rights to the land where the house is built, the second
emphasizes the need for appropriate planning and building permits [43]. In Ethiopia, therefore, the term informal settlement refers to
an area that has been settled without the permission of the relevant organizations and residential buildings that do not abide by the
structural plan of the city [44]. In Ethiopia, informal settlements are mentioned as illegal settlements, or especially as "Moon shine
house "as individuals occupy land at night [45].
2.2. Informal settlement growth actors
The actors in the informal land market are numerous and multifaceted; they are frequently composed of government ofcials,
individual developers/private/, urban landholders, urban inhabitants, landless youth and new migrants in urban areas [25]. They can
make their own decisions. They may or may not be disorganized, well organized and well-coordinated [46].
The actors can act in a network with common goals [47]. These goals enable them to establish strong bonds with each other.
Perceptions, objectives, and resources inuence how actors interact. Perception is the ideological view of the performance and its
outcomes regarding networks, policy, and features [46]. The objective provides a roadmap for actors to follow to solve a specic
problem and achieve desired outcomes [46,48]. Resources are tools that enable actors to realize their objectives be they nancial, or
non-nancial means or network positions.
The actors’ability to inuence decisions in a network depends on their resources [49]. Resources are thus linked with power and
the capacity to govern resources is inuenced by the power of the actors. According to Hermans [46], perception inuences the
objective, and resources enable actions. Actions taken by actors, no matter how minor, affect other actor in the networks. Institutions
determine the actions of the actors and the actors in turn can often impact the institutions.
The process of informal settlements involves many steps undertaken by the actors participating in the informal settlement pro-
liferation [23]. The involvement of many actors in informal land is for housing, speculation, or for other development purpose. The
interactions among actors in the informal land transactions system are diverse, which has economic and social implications. It has
economic implications as it involves informal market transactions. It also has a social implication as it involves kinship ties and
reciprocity [23]. In this case, the institution has a bigger function in inuencing the behavior of actors in a land transaction.
2.3. Institutions, structure-agency and non-compliance theory
This study draws insight from the behavior of the numerous actors in the informal settlement and the underlying regulations and
customs that govern the interactions between the actors during the land exchange. To address these issues this paper looks at aspects of
societal non-compliance, institution and structure and agency, to uncover the process and factors underlying the expansion of informal
settlements in Burayu City.
Institution includes state-formulated restrictions as well as social norms and ethical values that properly shape the behavior and
decision-making of persons [50]. They act both as a constraint and an enabler on the actions of actors [26]. Institutions as enablers can
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
3

inuence the way judgements can be made in favor of actors and regulate their activities [51,52], while restrictors can necessitate
actors to follow recognized procedures and principles [53,54]. Institutions can create both negative and positive consequences for
actors [55]. Two different forms of institutions exist. Formal institutions refer to legal frameworks, rules, regulations, or laws
embedded in written constitutional laws, while informal institutions comprise socially constructed common norms and values that
shape actors’thoughts and behaviors and are exercised outside legal systems [55–57].
Structure and agency focus on the decision-making, actions, and power relationships of the actors and their impacts on each other
[58,59]. The term structure denotes the regular arrangements that affect or limit the opportunities and choices obtainable. This can be
a set of rules and measures that are used in the endorsement or reproduction of social practices. The term agency relates to human
capacity to act and is used to dene the function of an individual who is both active and aware within a social system. Human agency is
described as people’s capabilities as well as how they act and behave [58,59]. The focus of agency is, therefore, on the selections,
judgments, and actions of actors to achieve a desired objective within the prevailing structure.
While social non-compliance refers to actors’attempts to affect formal regulations. Most factors in informal settlement are
attributed to social non-compliance. The capacity of actors in these settlements to informally acquire land under the government
regulations often benets from inconsistencies and uncertainties in the state’s rules and implementation plans [60].
Until recently, urban land use development in Ethiopia was often assumed to coincide with formal institutions or administrative
issues. Thus, urban-based research has inclined toward urban land from the viewpoints of the government administrative rules and the
relationship between the government and actors. Nevertheless, this one-sided view in the study of urban land development implies a
single perspective. Namely, this view, emphasizes administrative rules over socially constructed rules and the behavior of actors in the
process and drivers of the growth of informal settlements. Although formal administrative rules and regulations have an important
impact in facilitating or constraining informal settlement development, they are not the only factors that affect the practice of informal
settlements [26,61].
For example, in a place where formal rules are unable to provide land for people, people look for informal means of getting land as
an alternative [31]. This means that actors use their agency (capabilities) and instructional gaps or inconsistency that allow them to
access land informally, as they would otherwise, remain homeless. In summary, the process and drivers of informal settlement growth
go beyond administrative issues and economic reasons, requiring an investigating of the socially constructed institutions and actor
behavior that drive informal settlement growth.
In general, the growth of informal settlements is a multifaceted process involving manifold factors [32]. Thus, investigating the
factors of informal settlement and its processes, therefore, requires rules that regulate the agency and behavior of actors, with regard to
how individual actors get land for housing. Institutional theory focuses on formal and informal rules, norms and conventions that
inuence human behavior. Structure-agency theory emphasizes the interplay between social structure and individual action.
Non-compliance theory is concerned with the reasons why people do not adhere to formal rules or regulations. The three perspectives
described above offer highly complementary insights into understanding the rise of informal settlements in the urban arena. The
remainder of this study will, therefore, attempt to combine general insights from these three schools of thought in an empirical analysis
that allows for the capture of the institutional and actor behaviors related to the growth of informal settlement as a guide for this study
(Fig. 1).
In Ethiopia and some East African countries, such institutions are composed of land market actors, often consisting of government
ofcials, traditional leaders, community-based organizations, private real estate developers, urban dwellers, urban land holders,
informal brokers, and new arrivals to the city [20,25] showing that the development of informal settlements in the country setting is
conditioned by the actors and institutions. Socially constructed institutions shape the behavior of actors in the informal land market
and lead to the proliferation of informal settlements.
It follows from the above that, the denition of institution in this study is understood as the system of rules and standards of
behavior according to which actors interact and the administrative or organizational body that enforces these rules and norms of
Fig. 1. Conceptual framework for the study.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
4

behavior which may be informal or formal institutions. In this context, informal institutions are understood as the system of rules/
socially constructed norms that are related to the rules and procedures by which land is made presented for informal land develop-
ment. On the other hand, actors refer to either the state structure that engages in informal land transfer in the shadow of the formal
rules or non-state who participated in the informal settlements growth and manipulate the formal rules.
3. Materials and methods
3.1. Description of the study areas
This study was undertaken in Burayu, one of a large city in the Oromia region of Ethiopia. The city was selected for this study
because it has a high prevalence of informal housing compared to its neighboring cities and may continue to grow in the future due to
its proximity to Addis Ababa [62]. According to the regional land use administration’s assessments on the growth of informal set-
tlements in Oromia special zone towns as of June 2019, as shown in Fig. 2 below, informal settlements are widespread in Burayu
compared to the other cities in the Oromia special zone.
The city has a scattered physical morphology type of urban settlement, which forms six kebeles.The name of these kebeles are
Gefersa Guje, Leku Keta, Gefersa Nono, Melka Gefersa Burayu Keta and Burayu Gefersa (Fig. 3). In this study Kebele represents the
lowest level of administrative units in Ethiopia.
Informal settlements emerge and develop rapidly in the study area. According to Bekele et al. [8] greater than 54 % of the houses
are documented as informal housing. Despite the fact that these houses are built on land owned by farmers and the government, they
are not recognized by the city administration.
3.2. Research design
This study used a case study research design as the process of informal settlement growth and its driving factors are multifaceted
and dynamic requiring a nuanced comprehension of the local situation and detailed breakdown and analysis of the informal settlement
[14]. Thus, it was analyzed, presented and understood in a real context. Moreover, the researchers utilized a mixed-method approach
which, enabled the collection of various sources of data through interviews, documents, surveys and observations [63,64]. Although a
mixed method was used in this research, it is largely a qualitative analysis, which is commonly used in grounded theory research to
show that there were questions that could not easily be identied using quantitative approaches.
The grounded theory is appropriate for the study because the researchers want to learn from the records of residents’responses as
they reect on their experiences of daily life in the informal settlement areas [65]. This theory is suitable for this study because the
researchers used a technique of data collection through interactions between residents and researchers, and the description of this
research process was based on the responses of the residents.
Both qualitative and quantitative data were gathered in tandem as the data needed for the study were cross-sectional data and
independent of each other, and both were needed to adequately address the research questions [66]. It is, therefore, deemed
appropriate to use a mixed research approach with a case study as the main strategy to achieve the study’s objective, since mixed
methods and case study research offer unique methodological benets to researchers trying to solve complex research problems and
questions [67]. A case study and a mixed research method are not isolated entities; rather, the border between them is uid, so that
both can either support or guide a research project [68].
In accordance with the mixed case study strategy, an amalgamation of descriptive and explanatory methods of research was utilized
[14,69]. The descriptive case study offers a comprehensive description of an issues in its actual situation [70], whereas the explanatory
case study be can used to show the cause-and-effect relations of an issues with the aim of nding how events happen and which events
Fig. 2. Informal settlers in cities of Oromia Special Zone Surrounding Addis Ababa/Finne
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
5

may impact certain outcomes. Therefore, the descriptive type of research was employed to comprehensively describe the course of
informal settlement growth while the explanatory type of research was used to nd out the causes for the growth of informal set-
tlements in the city under study.
3.3. Sampling design and sample size
The study was conducted using a three-stage sampling method. As a rst step, four kebeles were selected from six kebeles taking
into account the degree and trend of urban growth, as well as the incidence and practice of informal settlements in periphery areas.
After obtaining preliminary eld appraisals from the land use administration, the second step involved selecting informal settlement
areas. Consequently, seventeen areas were selected i.e. Kilo 25, Magalitu, Silki, Sarti, Sora Hamba, Tolcha, Melka rst and second,
Hidha Bishan, 105, Tabela rst and second, Ane Dima, Lole, Teche, Kusaye rst and Sangota were selected by purposive sampling for
the study with reference to the number of the informal settlements. Moreover, these places are located in the peripheral areas where a
large number of informal housing exist.
Lastly, the sample of informal households were selected at random from within the study area. The city administration secondary
data in 2018 indicated that, 27,875 households were categorized as informal settlers. However, of these informal housing, 16,636 were
destroyed. Thus, 11,239 informal households made up the study population. A simple random sample technique was employed to
guarantee that every informal settler had an equal probability of being nominated for the study.
To calculate the household sample for the analysis, the Yamane [71] sample size determination was used since it enables us to
acquire a representative sample of the population with the requisite precision. Based on the scale measurement provided, the re-
spondent’s responses were utilized to analyze the occurrences or the degree of agreement with the concerns highlighted by the
research question.
n=N
1+N(e2)N is the population size
e is the level of precision of the sampling error margin, which is ±5 %
1=constant n=N
1+N(e2)=11239/629.0975 =386
Fig. 3. Location map of the study area.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
6

The total number of informal households chosen for this study was 386. This number was then divided proportionately between the
four kebeles based on their population size. Then a sample size number was found for every kebele. For instance for Gefersa Guje, 171
households, for Gefersa Burayu 85 households, for Melka Gefersa 120 households and for Gefersa Nono 10 households were calculated.
The interviewees of the informal Key interviews were selected using a purposive sampling technique. Therefore, sampling prin-
ciples were dened for the respondents. Informal settlers who had lived there for at least ve years were selected. It was assumed that
the longer they had lived there, the better they would be able to understand and identify the process and factors underlying the growth
of informal settlement. Although informal settlers in informal settlement areas are unlawful, they have social recognition as informal
housing construction is an acknowledged social norm in Burayu City. Therefore, informal settlers had no problems labeling themselves
as informal. A total of 27 key informants were chosen, which include the city land administration ofcials, land manager, land
speculators, urban planner, land brokers, land administrator and informal households. The details are shown in Table 1.
3.4. Data sources and methods
3.4.1. Data sources
Both primary and secondary sources of data were gathered, and then combined to strengthen the arguments presented in each
source and create a cohesive picture [72]. Primary data was derived from eld observations, questionnaire surveys, and key informant
interviews. Key informant interviews and observations were utilized to gather qualitative data while the questionnaire was employed
to gather quantitative data.
3.4.2. Data collection method
Closed-ended questionnaires are a data collection tool that uses a series of structured questions to gather statistical information on
characteristics such as respondents’perceptions, attitudes, experiences or actions [73]. A questionnaire survey was prepared to gather
data from informal settlers on socio-economic characteristics, methods of land acquisition, factors contributing to informal settlement
growth, types of land markets, and types of informal settlement strategies implemented. This closed-ended structured questionnaire
with xed-responses was employed to gather data on the eld where the study participants were interviewed face-to-face. The
questionnaire took on average between 35 and 40 min to complete.
As part of the data collection instrument, a key informant interview was held with 27 chosen respondents. For the data collection,
open-ended questions were organized for the key informant interview, as they give the respondents the freedom to answer in their own
words [74]. The key informant interviews intended to collect data on the stages of the informal settlement development process and
the reasons for choosing informal settlement areas in the city administration. Key informant interviews were held with 12 experts and 2
senior ofcials in the land use administration ofce. The experts come from planning, management and legal backgrounds and have
more than ve years of experience in city land administration. In addition, key informant interviews were held with 8 informal
households, 3 land speculators and 2 land brokers. All interviewees involved in the study have resided in the city for at least ve years.
The Key informant interview was administered by the rst author. On average the KII took between 55 and 60 min to complete.
The site observation method was also used for data collection. The practice of informal settlement policy implementation was
assessed through quantitative analysis based on the practices observed in different locations in the city. Therefore, eld pictures were
used to supplement the ndings of the study. The sites visited were divided into two informal settlement sites where major demolitions
and evictions were taking place. The eld observation enabled data triangulation, which robustly supported the ndings.
The data was gathered from September 30 to November 30, 2021. The entire research questionnaire was prepared in English then
converted into Afan Oromo or Amharic for greater comprehension by the respondents. The qualitative data was gathered by the
corresponding author. The quantitative data was gathered by 7 trained data collectors using questionnaires in informal settlement
areas, where each question was asked and completed after the informed consent of each respondent.
The secondary data sources used for the study include books, legal and political documents, city administration reports, decla-
rations and regulations on land lease, articles, urban structure plans, land use regulation and the FDRE Constitution. The purpose of
utilizing these legal and policy documents was to gain a deeper comprehension of the institutional and legal structures that oversee
land transactions, as well as the methods by which informal actors inuence them.
Table 1
Groups and number of sampled respondents.
Groups of the respondents Sample size of the respondents
Informal settler households 386
Land use ofcials 2
Land speculators 3
Land brokers 2
Informal settlers household 8
Land use experts 12
Total 413
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
7

3.5. Ethical approval
This study adhered to the 2019 statute of the Addis Ababa University Senate, which deals with the regulations and guidelines
pertaining to professional ethics, research standards, norms, and duties. In accordance with, this legislation, the Ethiopian Institute of
Architecture, Building Construction, and City Development under its Directorate for Research and Technology Transfer’s ethics
committee permitted the authors to conduct a survey questionnaire and Key informant interview in Burayu city administration.
The ethical considerations were taken into account by the researchers when they conducted this investigation. Every protocol that
the institution stipulated was adhered to. The approval letter from the Ethiopian Institute of Architecture, Building Construction, and
Urban Development was obtained by the researchers and presented to the Burayu City government prior to beginning eldwork. To
protect the privacy and anonymity of all participants, the nature and goal of the study were orally explained to the respondents prior to
the start of the questionnaire survey and interviews. The responders were given the assurance by the researchers that their information
would only be utilized for study. When the information was shared, condentiality was also upheld. Therefore, informed consent was
acquired from each study participant.
3.6. Method of data analysis
The quantitative data gathered from the samples of informal households were analyzed using SPSS version 23.00. This was done
after appropriate coding and editing of the data was entered into SPSS. Descriptive statistics, such as frequency distribution tables,
percentages, and charts, were used to present the analysis’s ndings. On the other hand, content analysis was used to analyze the
qualitative data. The rst phase of the scrutiny was to reduce a large amount of data to a well-organized set of subtopics to construct
groups that reected the content of the data and the topic of the study. Through the process of content analysis, data were synthesized,
harmonized, and used in descriptive and narrative texts.
Finally, the qualitative data collected was analyzed by contrasting and comparing situations that happened and explaining the
demonstration of such a response, to validate the quantiable data and provide a complete rationale for each research question. This
means the ndings from the qualitative data were used to complement the quantitative analysis.
4. Results
4.1. Means of informal land acquisition and steps involved in the informal settlements development
The actors in the informal process use different techniques to obtain land informally from the land market. Numerous households
acquire land by the informal market system, as depicted in Table 2.
The mechanism of land acquisition in the Ethiopian legal context depends on land ownership rights. According to Ethiopian land
policy, the government owns the land and can only be transferred by the government. The empirical evidence indicates that the
landholders instead transfer their land informally in several ways. As indicated in Table 2 the majority of informal land transactions
were made by landholders/farmers. The key informant pointed out that the main source of informal land is agricultural land held by
farmers due to their fear of government expropriation with little compensation. The key informant pointed out that, the informal
purchase of land from farmers is a lower risk than claiming government land.
According to the key informants interviewed, the development of informal settlement involves the following steps: farmers
informally subdivide the land with the help of planning technicians; land acquisition by informal actors; informal subdivision of the
prepared plot and block; informal land transaction with the help of land brokers; transfer of the plot through an informal written
contract of sale; informal house construction; social networking and settlers begin forming symbolic relationships by building infra-
structure, services, and utilities as a group. This is illustrated in Fig. 4.
Table 2
Means of land acquisition in Burayu City.
Methods of obtaining land Number of the participants Percent of the participants
Buy from farmer 164 42.5
Buy from land speculators 116 30.1
Inhabiting government land 83 21.5
Inheritance 17 4.4
Government provision 6 1.6
Total 386 100.0
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
8

4.2. The factors that propel the growth of informal settlements
As mentioned in the conceptual framework, this study is conceptualized and discussed with reference to the terms “institution",
"structure-agency" and "societal non-compliance".
4.2.1. Population growth and rural-urban migration
Burayu has experienced many demographic changes. The population size of the study area was 4139 in 1984, 10,028 in 1994,
63,874 in 2007, 100,201 in 2010, and 150,010 in 2014 [75]. Established on the 2007 census population projection, the city population
was 280,000 in 2017, and the growth rate was 15.5 % per year [62].
In addition, the Burayu City Prole [62], shows that migrants in the city make up 60 % of the total population. The results of the
questionnaire survey also show that 88.9 % of the residents of the informal settlements are migrants, while only 11.1 % are from
Burayu City. This shows that most informal settlers come from other parts of the country.
Such an inow of people leads to an increase in the city’s population, which will unavoidably affect the obtainability of land for
housing. In particular, the city’s ever rising population and the inefcient allocation of land to those in need have contributed to
informal land transactions. In Burayu, land allocation through leasehold systems has come to a standstill since 2018 for unknown
reasons, but housing cooperatives to meet people’s needs, are also lagging. In 2017, for example, 1335 housing cooperatives applied
for land. Each cooperative has 24 members; this means that 32,400 people are waiting for a plot of land for their housing. Of these, only
120 cooperatives received land for housing (16,800 m
2
). This means that the city was only able to cover 8 % of its land requirements.
Therefore, migrants use their capacities (agencies) to get land for houses informally in the periphery areas of the city; otherwise, formal
land is out of reach for them.
4.2.2. Motive for speculation
In the city, both non-farmers and farmers participated in land speculation. Land speculators in the city reported that they bought
large plots of land including browneld land (land previously used for agricultural activities) from farmers and then subdivided the
land immediately after purchase or within a year. They fenced and built houses from simple local materials, and then hoarded the land
and took it off the market for a long time to make more prot from the land. For example, speculators in the city bought land at a cheap
price (US$ 3733 per m
2
) from pro-urban farmers in 2016, and after hoarding it for two years, they sold it for up to US$ 9119. This
shows that land speculators use their power to engage in informal land transactions to achieve their prot-making objectives.
Additionally, farmers in and around the city operate as land speculators, fearing the loss of their land use rights due to expropriation
and uncertainty about the future of their land rights. It is vital to recognize that farmers may have less or no land after expropriation.
Because of this, farmers consider their land as temporary dwellings. As a consequence, farmers use their agency to informally subdivide
their land and make it available for sale on the informal market, which brings in more money than the compensation they receive.
4.2.3. Locational choices
As can be seen from the results of the questionnaire survey in Fig. 5, most residents prefer to reside in informal settlement regions
due to the social network, low cost of living, and easy means to get land for housing construction, respectively.
Fig. 4. The informal settlement growth process.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
9

In terms of access to information about the informal settlements, most households (65 %) in informal settlement sites received
information from relatives, family members, local residents, and peers at work. While 35 % of respondents obtained information from a
local broker. Regarding the decision to reside in informal settlements, the results of the questionnaire survey conrmed that 77.2 % of
people opted for an informal settlement after receiving advice from relatives, family members, and peers at work, while 22.8 %
received advice from local agents. Consequently, social networks play a key function as a source of information as well as a decision-
making mechanism compared to broker roles.
The interview data collected from the household shows a remarkable similarity with the questionnaire data shown in Fig. 5. The
interviews show that living near friends and family is one of the most signicant sources of information for choosing an informal
settlement. Households living in the Guje and Bero informal settlements indicated that they belong to the same ethnic group and
community (the Gurage and Gamo ethnic groups). They chose to these informal settlement areas because many of the co-inhabitants
are from the same place of origin.
The low costs of living in the informal settlement areas was another factor that impacted the choice of location in the "Magaltu"
informal settlement sites. The respondents interviewed stated that the lower cost of living in the informal settlement areas compared to
a planned neighborhood attracted people here. Magaltu is one of the informal settlement areas in Burayu where many people reside in
informal houses and engage in informal trading activities where prices are much lower than those of formal trading activities. For
example, the rent for two rooms is US$ 61.13
1
while residents of the Diaspora areas pay US$183.38 for two rooms. Therefore
households from the planned area and Addis Ababa have moved to these areas.
The household interviewed in "Anne Dimma" informal settlement areas stated that people prefer informal settlements because it is
easier to build their own house by acquiring land for housing construction. Land acquisition for housing construction here is easier
than the government procedure. Moreover, they have full freedom to construct their house by developing different designs and using
local materials which, lowers the costs of building. Moreover, unlike formal land provision, households in the informal settlement sites
can buy a large plot of land as much as they can. In general, the above description and report show that informal settlers acted
independently and made their own free decisions (agency) to obtain land to build their house.
4.2.4. Poor urban land governance
Decision-making plays a decisive role in urban land governance. Decision-making is about governance, whether it is good or bad for
the beneciary. To ensure the smooth functioning of urban land delivery systems, good urban land governance is essential [76]. Lack
of participation, limited political will, political instability, incapability to implement planning regulations, unnecessary bureaucracy,
and poor functioning of the formal land market have been identied as the main factors for the growth of informal settlements. Besides,
insufcient housing and compensation policies are other factors, causing the spread of informal settlements.
a. Lack of participation
Ethiopian cities have the authority to develop draft, adopt, and implement their municipal plans as part of the decentralization
process [44]. Nevertheless, the regional urban planning institute has prepared the relevant plans for Burayu City. There is no
Fig. 5. Reason for choosing informal settlement areas.
1
1US$=32.7178 Birr in February 2020. Birr is the unit of currency in Ethiopia.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
10

experience of resident participation in the preparation of city planning. Therefore, the non-existence of obeying policies and regu-
lations of planning can be associated with the ignorance of the residents about the plan, even inhabitants did not have the prospect to
partake in the stages of plan preparation. Inhabitants’understanding of planning practices and rules is critical, as their involvement
promotes the execution of planning regulations and affects the extent to which they are followed by citizens.
Moreover, legal frameworks have been adopted in Burayu City at various times to control informal settlements through legalization
that meets the conditions set out in the rule for example compliance with the urban land use. Nevertheless, these rules and regulations
are not sufciently introduced to residents. This shows the absence of commitment among city ofcials and experts to facilitate
resident participation for effective policy implementation.
b. Political instability
The city’s land use ofcer mentioned that during the political instability in the country, particularly between 2014 and 2017,
informal settlers occupied 115 ha of government land. Additionally, informal transactions in the land market increased before and
after the election. The ofcial added that the high turnover of ofcials in the mayoral seat is another problem that creates a gap in the
continuous enforcement of rules for the execution of the city plan and contributes to informal settlement.
c. Lack of plan regulation enforcement
Information obtained from land use administration ofcials and experts revealed that the city structural plan was subject to illegal
behavior and absence of commitment from the city administration ofcials and experts to enforce the execution of the city plan, which
led to an informal settlement expansion. The pervasiveness of informal settlements is because of a lack of proactive planning. For
example, Guje kebele was a rural kebele in the city until it was incorporated into the city in 2012 during the preparation of the
structure plan. However, due to the delay in the transfer of administration from the rural kebele to the Burayu city administration,
many informal settlements have emerged.
d. Inappropriateness of land lease for urban major residents
Proclamation No. 272/2011 on the Urban Land Lease of Ethiopia states that urban land is public property and may only be
transferred using the lease method. The goal is to transfer urban land to various urban land users at a reasonable price. Despite this, the
reality prevailing on the ground is that lease auctions have become beyond the reach of the majority of residents. For example, ac-
cording to a lease bid document acquired from the city in 2014, the city’s minimum and highest auction bids were US$187.31
2
/m
2
,
and US$988.62/m
2
,respectively.The interviewee from the land use administration indicated that the rise in land prices was partially
due to an absence of consistent land supply, contradicting land leasing regulations, which state that land must be available through
lease continuously.
Transferring land and changing the name of the owner is another challenge for residents, as it is a time-consuming and wasteful
process. Informal settlers reported that it can take up to six months for title deeds to be nalized land purchases by donation or house
purchase. The required documents are unclear and burdensome. As a result, the majority of inhabitants choose to reside in an informal
settlement. This procedure and high lease prices, make legal land acquisition inaccessible to people of low-income classes.
e. Inadequate Housing policy
The city administration has attempted to address the housing decit by providing land for cooperative housing construction.
Nevertheless, the land demand for land for housing construction is increasing. As a result, city dwellers are forced to look for alter-
native methods of acquiring urban land, such as on the informal land market or through squatting. Moreover, while real estate
development is taking place in the city, it is not absorbing the urban poor. According to an interview with a land use administration
expert, the provision of urban land through leasehold and a city condominium is not working. As a result, many residents and gov-
ernment employees enrolled for cooperative housing.
In 2017, the number of housing cooperatives applied for housing development was 1335 (186,900 m
2
). Each cooperative has 24
individuals. Therefore, 32,400 individuals are waiting for land to construct housing. From these only, 120 cooperatives received land
for housing construction (16,800 m
2
).This means the city can only meet 8 % of the demand. The problem with the housing policy is not
only that there is no continuous supply of land for building housing, but also that the cost of providing land exceeds people’s pur-
chasing power. To get a plot of land for cooperative housing, one should have to pay US$ 1650 in 2020, which exceeds the income of
residents. As shown in Table 3, the income of most respondents’is between US$ 31 and US$ 91 which, accounts for 42.7 %.
According to the above gures, the mean monthly income of most respondents was US$ 61 and 30 % of the mean monthly income
of these respondents was US$ 18. Thus to get a plot of land for housing by cooperative housing, one would have to save 18 US$ for 91
years to pay US$ 1650.
2
1US$=19.2186 the Birr in February 2014.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
11

f. Inadequate expropriation and compensation policy
Due to land scarcity in urban areas, Ethiopian municipalities are most likely to expropriate land to address issues related to land for
different development purposes [77,78].To achieve this objective constitutional law under Article 40(8) states that the government has
the authority to take individual property for community use as long as compensation is equivalent to the property’s value paid in
advance. The law emphasizes compensation should be paid in full prior to expropriation and should be commensurate with the
property’s worth.
The survey results showed that only 3 % of respondents believed that the payment or compensation was fair and comparable, while
97 % did not. The compensation given to the farmers by the government for expropriated land is below informal market prices. This
can be illustrated as follows. The compensation paid in the city upon expropriation was US$ 2.13/m
2,
in 2017, while key informants
estimate that the average price in the informal market was US$ 35.15/m
2
. As a result, farmers are compelled to participate in informal
land transactions to avoid being paid insufcient compensation. Therefore, inadequate compensation to farmers is another recognized
factor for the proliferation of informal settlements in Burayu City.
g. Unnecessary bureaucracy in the formal land market
The acquirement and provision of land for urban development is totally under the jurisdiction of the government which assumes
that landownership in Ethiopia belongs to its people and the government [18]. In contrast, as the survey results show, most re-
spondents have purchased land through informal means for housing (88.1 %) owing to the low cost and procedures required. On the
other hand, only 11.9 % of the respondents got land through the formal market.
According to the land use ofcer, the formal land market (lease) is full of unnecessary bureaucracy. The practice of transferring land
and changing the named owner is cumbersome and inefcient. Moreover, informal settlers conrmed that it takes up to six months to
nalize title deeds for land acquisition through lease or house purchase. The required documents are unclear and burdensome.
Consequently, most inhabitants have opted to reside in an informal settlement to avoid the bureaucracy.
h. Lack of co-ordinated institution setup between rural-urban areas
In the city, land use is administered by Oromia urban land lease regulation No.182/2016 and directive No.05/2016 whereas, rural
land is governed by rural land administration proclamation No. 130/2007. This duality of administration of rural and urban land has
led to a lack of effective administration between the two institutions on land issues and has promoted illegal subdivisions and con-
struction in the peripheral urban areas. The establishment of two distinct and independent organizations for land administration as
well as an absence of clarity in the two institutions’responsibilities for peri-urban land issues, have produced a favorable environment
for informal settlement growth.
For instance, the city government adopted a new master plan in 2006 to incorporate the rural Kebele of Guje into the city center
without incorporating its administration and land into the land bank, as a result the newly formed Kebele did not fall under either
urban or rural authority. Due to the power vacuum created in the periphery, farmers are attempting to convert their farmland into
residential land use by subdividing and selling the plots without notifying the administration. This is one of the reasons for the growth
of informal settlements in Burayu city.
i. Inappropriate strategies toward informal settlement
The most common methods used to manage and improve informal settlements are laissez-faire, sites-and-services programs, slum
upgrading, tenure security, cities deprived of slums action plans, and demolition and eviction [79]. The results of the survey presented
in Table 4 show that, demolition, eviction and lassies-faire strategies are the predominant approaches in dealing with informal set-
tlements in Burayu City. Thus, informal settlement policies in the study area have wavered between destruction and
tolerance/accommodation.
In addition, the data obtained through observation and presented in Fig. 6 depicts how demolition and eviction took place in
Burayu City.
Experts in Burayu City said that the reaction of the City administration to the expansion of informal settlements was mainly to
either ignore them or demolish them. Moreover, local governments’toleration of informal housing as a self-help measure to solve
Table 3
Monthly income ranges of sampled household.
Monthly Income (ETB) Number of participants Percent of participants
<1000 131 33.9
1001–3000 165 42.7
3001–5000 68 17.6
5001–10000 15 3.9
>10000 7 1.9
Total 386 100.0
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
12

housing problems, together with their limitations in providing ofcial housing, has aided its further expansion. There is a saying
among informal settlers that an informal house that cannot be demolished seven times, cannot be called informal. This indicates that
the strategy of demolition could not prevent the construction of informal housing. Thus, one of the factors for the growth of informal
settlement in Burayu is related to the inappropriate (formal) actions taken by the state to manage and improve informal settlement.
4.2.5. Manipulation of land use policy implementation
One of the challenges with land management in the City is the way in which the actors understood the land lease regulation. The
government viewed the lease policy as a solution to control the spread of informal settlements. In contrast, the informal actors saw
some loopholes in the lease policy as an opportunity to their advantage. For example, the land lease regulation of Oromia regional state
No.155/2013 allowed informal landholdings to be converted into formal landholdings if they met two criteria or requirements namely
that the settlement should take place before the law comes into force and must comply with planning and parceling standards. If this is
not the case, they are destroyed without receiving compensation or new land.
To circumvent this rule, most informal actors in the study areas made their contractual agreements as if they had bought them
before the regulation came into force. The result of the survey shows that 95 % of the informal settlers set contracts with old dates as if
they bought before the issuance of the regulation, and only 5 % of set contracts with the current date. Moreover, the urban land leases
holding proclamation, Article 6(4), states that the legalization process is to be commenced no later than four years after the lease
proclamation’s enactment. However, according to the key informant, some informal actors still make hidden relationships with land
experts to regularize land that was informally occupied.
Furthermore, conrmation of the building with a master plan was another essential factor evaluated by the regulation for a
property claim. The rule only considered settlements that did not substantially violate the master plan. To take advantage of this,
informal actors began to explore the harmonization of informal land subdivisions with a master plan by establishing a strong link with
the experts of the city government.
5. Discussion
The discussion section of this paper is organized around two related themes: the process of informal settlement and the drivers of
informal settlement growth, focusing on institutions and actor behaviors. The results show that most of the respondents stated that
actors in the informal process use various methods to informally acquire land from the informal land market. The majority of informal
land acquirers buy land from farmers (Table 2). The farmers hire professional land surveyors to subdivide the land in compliance with
Fig. 6. Demolishing operation in Burayu city.
Table 4
Type of Informal settlement policies implemented in Burayu city.
Type of IS policy implement Number of respondents Per cent of respondents
Lassies -faire 121 31
Sites and services program 8 2
Slum upgrading program 6 2
Regularization/Tenure security 53 14
Cities without slums action plan 5 1
Demolition and eviction 193 50
Total 386 100
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
13

the city’s existing urban plan. This indicates that the functions of informal institutions in informal land acquisition are great. The
government needs to rethink how to incorporate informal institutions in urban land administration.
In Ethiopia, urban land is obtained from periphery farmers, by the re-allocation of land to private investors and others by land
leasing under the framework of either tender or allotment [80]. From the above, it is clear that the informal land acquisition processes
are not performed by informal actors alone but also by professionals from the formal government administrative body who benet
from the informal land transactions. Furthermore, this also depicts that the informal land acquisition process takes place within the
interplay between formal and informal activities. Therefore, this demands the inclusion of informal actors in urban administration to
fetch their constructive contribution to land policy design.
The development of the informal settlement in the city passes through various stages. These stages start by informally subdividing
the land with the help of planning technicians, up to establishing social networking and forming symbolic relationships in the set-
tlements (Fig. 4). This social networking enables them to create social pressure on the government to provide infrastructure like
cobblestone, water, and electricity. These informal settlements have a strong social cohesion, similar to that of planned areas. The
informal acquirement of land operates in line with established social rules that are recognized by the actors participating in the
structure. Therefore, the actors interact with each other on the basis of sets of rules called institutions.
The process of informal settlement growth outlined above also aligns with the nding of Nkurunziza [24], Adam [81] and Morger
et al. [82], who show that the informal process of obtaining land is not chaotic, but rather follows a pattern, driven by both informal
and formal institutions. In this case, informal means are the predominant mechanism for acquiring land. With regard to the importance
of social linkages in informal land transactions, we, therefore, maintain that a nuanced understanding of the development of the
process of informal settlements can not only broaden narrow perspectives but also promote networked thoughtful by urban planning
institutions.
The development of informal settlements is engineered by many factors. The results of the questionnaire survey show that 88.9 % of
the inhabitants of the informal settlements are migrants. Such an inux of people upsurge the town’s population, which is bound to
affect the availability of plots of land for housing construction. According to Hailemariam and Adugna [83] and Zewdie et al. [84]
informal purchase and development of land is an indicator of population change largely due to migration. Remarkably, ever-increasing
urban migration and inefcient allocation of land to the needy have contributed to informal land transactions as the migrants use their
capacities (agencies) to informally own houses in the outskirts of the city; otherwise, formal land is out of their reach.
In terms of agency, Gondo [85], Fekade [86] and Huchzermeyer and Karam [87] have pointed out that residents, particularly the
urban low-income earners and migrants, use their agency and other means to get land outside the formal system when formal
institution does not full everyone’s requirements. Moreover, Hailemariam and Adugna [83] and Zewdie et al. [84] noted that
informal land transactions, leading to informal settlements are an expression of demographic dynamics. This study indicates that
farmers use their agency to informally subdivide their land and offer it for sale on the informal market, which offers more money than
the compensation paid to them. Moreover, land speculators in the city bought land at a cheap price (US$ 3733.62 per m
2
) from
pro-urban farmers, and after hoarding them for two years, they sold them for up to US$ 9119. 09. This shows that both farmers and
land speculators are using their agencies to engage in informal land transactions to achieve their prot-making objectives.
In view of the problems of land speculation, the country passed a land use rule in 1993 to meet the challenge of land speculation and
reduce the occurrence of rising land prices, mainly due to speculative activities. Nonetheless, the problem of large-scale acquisitions
and land shortages persists in many urban and suburban areas of the country and seems far from being solved [88].
One of the factors that fuel the growth of informal settlement is related to the need for social connection, low cost of living and easy
access to land for building housing respectively (see Fig. 5).
This result shows that social networks have a crucial function both as a source of information and as a decision-making mechanism.
The above result also aligns with the ndings of Nakanishi [89] and Singh and Gadgil [90], who found that informal settlers rely on
community relationships as social safety nets. These social relationships can be established through blood relations, places of origin,
and workplaces. Moreover, neighbors can also help each other with child care and emergencies. The networks established through
social relationships are used to gain information about job prospects, and markets for vendors and share knowledge about the tech-
niques of constructing houses from scrap waste and how to manage the informal utility supply. This shows that informal settlers use
their network establishment capabilities to form a conducive setting for the rst residents in informal settlement areas.
The growth of informal settlement is also driven by weak urban land governance. The ndings of the study indicate that the legal
frameworks that aim to control informal settlements through legalization are not sufciently communicated to residents. This shows
that there is an absence of commitment among city ofcials and experts to facilitate resident participation for effective policy
implementation. This results in widespread social discontent with land management, which spurs informal settlement growth.
Moreover, the study shows that during the political instability, for instance, 115 ha of government land were occupied by informal
settlers. This result is consistent with UN-Habitat [91] and Niebergal et al. [92], who claim that political insecurity contributes to
informal settlements.
Due to the delay in the transfer of administration from rural Kebele to Burayu city administration, many informal housing areas
have emerged in Guje Kebele. This is mainly related to the lack of planning rules and regulatory enforcement. It has been argued that
one factor that backs the growth of informal settlements in developing countries is the lack of resources available to the city
administration to implement planning regulations [93].
The land lease proclamation states that residents in the urban areas should get land for housing construction at a reasonable price.
Despite this, the reality prevailing on the ground is that lease auctions have become beyond the reach of the majority of residents. As it
is grounded in a market-based competitive process, the highest bidder is declared the winner based on price and advance payment
[80]. Therefore, low-income residents are forced to turn to informal land markets. This nding complements the nding of Polyzos and
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
14

Minetos [94] and Marutlulle [95] who nd that high prices, poor and red tape in land administration practices have contributed to the
growth of informal settlements. From the above discussion, we can understand that because of formal institutions’ineffectiveness,
informal actors use informal means of accessing land for housing construction. Therefore, the government should learn from the
informal institution to make the formal institution more effective and adaptable for the majority of the residents.
The ndings of the study demonstrate that the housing policy is inappropriate for residents because the cost of getting land for
housing exceeds the resident’s monthly income. To obtain land for cooperative housing in the city, one should have to pay US$1650in
2020, which cannot be covered by the monthly income of the residents. The result of the survey shows that 42.7 % of the respondents’
monthly income lies between 1001 and 3000 ETB or 30–91 US$ (see Table 3).
According to the above data, the mean monthly income of the majority of the respondents was US$ 61. To get a plot of land for
housing by cooperative housing, one needs to pay US$ 1650. According to the rule of thumb, residents should not expend greater than
30 % of their monthly income on housing [96]. Since 1981, the government has considered people who expend greater than 30 % of
their monthly income on housing to be "cost-burdened". In the study area, 30 % of the household’s monthly income was US$ 18. Thus
to get a plot of land for housing, one would have to save 18 US$ for 91 years to pay US$ 1650 to obtain land through housing co-
operatives. These ndings of this study are complimentary with Marutlulle [95] and Wondimu [97], according to whom inadequate
housing policy leads to the growth of informal settlement. International consensus dictates that housing policies must embrace an
integrated strategy linking the delivery of affordable housing with social service and meeting new housing demands emerging from
economic, social and demographic dynamics. In its implementation, it is imperative to clearly clarify intents and entitlement standards
to boost the effectiveness of the adopted housing policy.
With regard to the compensation paid to the landholders, the survey revealed that 97 % believe that the compensation is not fair
and adequate. The compensation for farmers by the government in case of expropriation is below informal market prices. Therefore,
inadequate compensation to farmers is another recognized factor for the expansion of informal settlements in Burayu City. This
conclusion is in line with ndings of Baye et al. [98] and Dires et al. [99], who found that unfair compensation is one of the
contributing factors to the rise of informal settlement.
The study’s nding indicate that the majority of the respondents bought land for housing by the process of the informal land market
(88.1 %), as cost and procedures required in informal settlement are lower than for formal government allotment. This result is in
consistent with another study that discovered that ofcial land delivery entails an excessive number of procedures, making the process
of lawfully obtaining land unnecessarily lengthy and that low-income individuals frequently cannot afford the costs associated with
adjusting to this system [100,101]. Therefore, residents prefer informal land transactions. Thus, improving unresponsive land
administration and bureaucratic structures is very important.
The result of the study indicates that rural and urban land is administered by two different bodies which has led to a lack of co-
ordination between the two institutions. This in turn creates an administrative vacuum in which different informal actors maximize
their role to informally access peri-urban areas, which has promoted illegal subdivision and construction in the peripheral urban areas.
This nding also in consistent with previous studies by Dires et al. [99], Adam [81] and Li and Wu [102], who found that the
widespread practice of informal settlements is due to the dual land governance institutions in rural and urban areas. To avoid the
power vacuum between the rural and urban administrations, the two land administrative bodies have to be merged.
The survey results show that demolition, eviction and lassies-faire strategies are the predominant approaches in dealing with
informal settlements in Burayu City (see Table 4). Thus, informal settlement policies in the study uctuate between destruction and
tolerance or accommodation. The continued failure to implement appropriate informal settlement policies has, in reality, facilitated
the rise of informal settlements. This is basically due to the state’s inability to completely comprehend the requirements of informal
residents and incorporate those demands into the development of relevant policies [86]. At the international level, policies towards
informal settlement have changed from negative (forced eviction and involuntary relocation) to positive (self-help and in situ
improvement) [103]. Thus, it is imperative to revise government land policies appropriate to the states that are meant to satisfy
resident demand.
The nding of the study shows that the informal actors see some loopholes in the lease policy as an opportunity for their advantage.
The result of the survey shows that 95 % of the informal settlers have signed a contract as if they had signed a contract before the land
lease proclamation enactment in 2011. In this regard, Leduka [60] found that informal actors build operational functions around state
rules, frequently by exploiting irregularities and uncertainties in formal rules and implementation strategies. Moreover, in land
transactions informal actors are conscious about the environment in which informal land transactions take place. In most circum-
stances, informal land buyers try to reconcile ofcial planning with the existing land use planning.
This indicates in what way informal actors in the land transaction exploit formal institutions in such a way that they want to claim
ownership for themselves. The informal actors know how to manipulate the rules and regulations and exploit loopholes and irregu-
larities in the formal government regulations to have access to land by the informal land transaction process [104]. Accordingly,
informal settlement persists and exists in the ofcial shadow of inconsistencies. The government needs to identify any gaps in land lease
proclamation based on the discussion with stakeholders to stop land lease implementation manipulation by informal actors as well as
by experts in land administration.
6. Conclusions
This paper investigated the process and driving factors behind the growth of informal settlements in Burayu City, Ethiopia, from the
perspectives of institutions, structure, agency, and societal non-compliance. To see the process of informal settlement growth, the
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
15

institutional analysis framework was used. Moreover, to examine the factors driving informal settlement structure-agency and societal
non-compliance were used.
The study shows that although the country’s land lease policy limits land transactions to formal markets only, most land trans-
actions are conducted through informal channels. The informal institutional setup accelerates the informal land transaction backed by
many actors who use informal written sale contracts and social networking. Thus, the informal institution maintains an essential sense
of structure and order, which is based on local social networks and interpersonal trust interactions. Conceivably, from this thought, an
important realization of this study is that there are misunderstandings about the social legitimacy of informal land transactions in
Burayu city.
This study reveals that the factors favouring the growth of informal settlements are expressed in the structural relationships be-
tween the actors and the actors’conscious effort to exploit the formal rules to design their coping mechanisms in the shadow of the
formal rules. These actors backing informal settlement growth include rural-urban migration, speculation, locational choice, lack of
participation, lack of political will, political instability, and inability to enforce planning regulation. In addition, unnecessary bu-
reaucracy, insufcient housing, low compensation payments, inappropriate policies, and a lack of coordinated institutional set-up
between rural-urban areas were other precipitating factors in informal settlement growth. Furthermore, actors in informal land
subdivisions use the irregularities and ambiguities of urban lease rules as a basis for negotiation, contestation, and enforcement of
property claims, thus fostering the rise of informal settlements.
The study implies that the process of informal settlement growth goes beyond state legal norms that take into account existing
informal institutions, structures (social order) and the ability to act for a favor (agency) that actors frequently use to obtain land.
Effective management of informal settlement growth, therefore, requires consideration of both institutional and actors’behavior.
Informal settlement growth is a multifaceted process involving manifold factors and created because of the interaction between social
structure and individual agency. Therefore, a multi-dimensional approach that involves both institutional and actor perspectives to
understand the process and factors behind the informal settlement growth enables us to identify rules that regulate actors’agency and
behavior, in terms of how individual actors get land for housing. Thus, understating these issues helps to improve land governance by
promoting non-state actors’importance in mitigating and managing unplanned urbanization to bring sustainable development in
urban areas.
This study has added to a new growing body of knowledge globally by showing how institutional manipulations, social re-
lationships, and the actor actions, interests, and dissensions play a signicant function in the development of informal settlements.
These could provide a better framework for analyzing project development in informal settlements.
7. Limitations of this research
The study has the following limitations which need to be considered in future research.
1. The sample case study areas should increase or go beyond Burayu City to incorporate all aspects of informal settlement issues
adequately. This study was focused on non-spatial factors like institutions and actors’behaviors but to gain a comprehensive
understanding, further assessment of spatial factors is necessary. Hence, the study recommends further study on spatial factors like
nearness to large cities like Addis Ababa.
2. The study identied non-spatial factors behind informal settlement growth, the study also acknowledges the limitation of not being
able to conduct factor analysis for identifying critical determinants to fully comprehend the results and suggest solutions according
to criticality. This limitation should be addressed in future research accomplishments.
Availability of data
Data included in the article are available upon request.
Funding information
No public, commercial, or not-for-prot funding organization has provided specic money for this study.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Tefera Beyera Bayuma: Writing –review &editing, Writing –original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data
curation, Conceptualization. Birhanu Girma Abebe: Writing –review &editing, Validation, Supervision, Methodology,
Conceptualization.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing nancial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
inuence the work reported in this paper.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
16

Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the research participants who reside in the city of Burayu for their readiness to contribute information
regarding the research question.
References
[1] E.J. Keller, E. Mukudi-Omwami, Rapid urban expansion and the challenge of pro-poor housing in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Afr. Rev. 9 (2017) 173–185, https://
doi.org/10.1080/09744053.2017.1329809.
[2] UN-Habitat, State of the world’s cites 2010/2011: bridging the urban divide. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203756171, 2010.
[3] K. Dovey, M. van Oostrum, I. Chatterjee, T. Shaque, Towards a morphogenesis of informal settlements, Habitat Int. 104 (2020) 102240, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102240.
[4] M. Mohanty, Squatter Settlements and Slums and Sustainable Development, Springer Nature, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71061-7.
[5] D.M. Nassar, H.G. Elsayed, From informal settlements to sustainable communities, Alex. Eng. J. 57 (2018) 2367–2376, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aej.2017.09.004.
[6] S. Schoon, U. Altrock, Conceded informality, Scopes of informal urban restructuring in the pearl river delta, Habitat Int. 43 (2014) 214–220, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.03.007.
[7] E.A. Wegelin, Informal settlements and their upgrading: building on the lessons of three decades of experience, in: Minist. Conf. Informal Settlements South
East, Eur., 2004, pp. 237–342.
[8] M. Bekele, D, S.S.A. Jafri, Asfaw, Characteristics of squatter houses in Burayu town adjoining addis ababa, capital city of Ethiopia, J. Civ. Environ. 6 (2014).
[9] M. Collier, P, P. Manwaring, Blake, Policy options for Kabul’s informal settlements. IGC Growth Brief, International Growth Centre, London, 2018.
[10] A. Tegegne, Informal urban settlement: typology, driving forces and socio-economic features, Gondar, Ethiopia (2018).
[11] A. El Menshawy, S. Shak, Affordable housing as a method for informal settlements sustainable upgrading, Procedia-Social, Behav. Sci. 223 (2016) 126–133,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.330.
[12] R. Ahsan, J.M. Quamruzzaman, Informal Housing and Approaches towards the Low-Income Society in Developing Countries, 2009.
[13] M.Z. Mushumbusi, Formal and Informal Practices for Affordable Urban Housing: Case Study, 2011. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
[14] C.A. Mensah, Urban Green Spaces in Africa: Nature and Challenges, 2014.
[15] A. Hoeltl, R. Brandtweiner, R. Bates, T. Berger, The interactions of sustainable development goals: the case of urban informal settlements in Ethiopia, Int. J.
Sustain. Dev. Plann. 15 (2020) 287–294, https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.150304.
[16] E.B. Debela, An overview of squatter settlements in addis ababa, Ethiopia, J. Gov. Dev. 17 (2021) 77–101.
[17] M.S. Abebe, K.T. Derebew, D.O. Gemeda, Exploiting temporal-spatial patterns of informal settlements using GIS and remote sensing technique: a case study of
Jimma city, Southwestern Ethiopia, Environ. Syst. Res. 8 (2019) 6, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-019-0133-5.
[18] F.N. Gazeta, FDRE Constitution, 1995.
[19] UN-Habitat, World Urbanization Prospects: the 2014 Revision, (ST/ESA/SER.A/366), 2015.
[20] A.G. Adam, Understanding competing and conicting interests for peri-urban land in Ethiopia’s era of urbanization, Environ. Urbanization 32 (2020) 55–68.
[21] T. Goodfellow, State Effectiveness and the Politics of Urban Development in East Africa: A Puzzle of Two Cities, 2000-2010, 2012.
[22] H. De Soto, Dead Capital and the Poor in Egypt, 1997.
[23] C. Rakodi, C.R. Leduka, Informal Land Delivery Processes and Access to Land for the Poor: A Comparative Study of Six African Cities, University of
Birmingham, International Development Department Birmingham, 2004.
[24] E. Nkurunziza, Informal mechanisms for accessing and securing urban land rights: the case of Kampala, Uganda, Environ. Urbanization 19 (2007) 509–526,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247807082833.
[25] T. Yamano, F.M. Place, W. Nyangena, J. Wanjiku, K. Otsuka, in: Emerg L. Mark Africa (Ed.), Efciency and Equity Impacts of Land Markets in Kenya,
Routledge, 2010, pp. 106–124.
[26] A.G. Adam, Governing institutions of informal settlements in the peri–urban areas of Ethiopia, the case of bahir dar, in: FIG Congress, 2014.
[27] M. Huchzermeyer, Cities With’slums’: from Informal Settlement Eradication to a Right to the City in Africa, Juta and Company Ltd, 2011, https://doi.org/
10.1111/juaf.12008.
[28] J. Zhu, H.A. Simarmata, Formal land rights versus informal land rights: governance for sustainable urbanization in the Jakarta metropolitan region, Indonesia,
Land Use Pol. 43 (2015) 63–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.10.016.
[29] K.F. Gebeyehu, Causes , consequences and policy implications of squatter settlement in gondar town in the case of kebele 18, Innovare J. Soc. Sci. 4 (2016) 2–5.
[30] M. Melese, City expansion, squatter settlements and policy implications in Addis Ababa: the case of Kolfe Keranio sub-city, Ethiop. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2
(2004) 50–79.
[31] S. Mersha, S. Mulugeta, E. Gebremariam, Process of informal land transaction: a case study in the peri-urban area of Addis Ababa, Geojournal (2022) 1–14,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10353-7.
[32] E.T. Alene, Determinant factors for the expansion of informal settlement in Gondar city, Northwest Ethiopia, J. Urban Manag. (2022), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jum.2022.04.005.
[33] L.S. Davis, Growing apart: the division of labor and the breakdown of informal institutions, J. Comp. Econ. 34 (2006) 75–91.
[34] A. Gilbert, Ten myths undermining Latin American housing policy, Rev. Ing (2011) 79–87, https://doi.org/10.16924/revinge.35.12.
[35] H. Nuissl, D. Heinrichs, Slums: perspectives on the denition, the appraisal and the management of an urban phenomenon, DIE ERDE, J. Geol. B 144 (2013)
105–116, https://doi.org/10.12854/erde-144-8.
[36] K. Pfeffer, Enlisting SDI for urban planning in India: local practices in the case of slum declaration, Spat, Data Infrastructures Context (2011) 157, https://doi.
org/10.1201/b10857-12.
[37] M. Everett, Evictions and human rights: land disputes in Bogot´
a, Colombia, Habitat Int. 25 (2001) 453–471, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(01)00015-
7.
[38] UN-habitat, sustainable housing for sustainable cities, in: UN Habitat (Issue October), 2012. www.unhabitat.org.
[39] P. Hurskainen, The Informal Settlements of Voi, Taita Hills and Kenya, 2004, pp. 64–78.
[40] S.F. Rashid, Strategies to reduce exclusion among populations living in urban slum settlements in Bangladesh, J. Health Popul. Nutr. 27 (2009) 574.
[41] C. Alliance, Cities Alliance for Cities without Slums: Action Plan for Moving Slum Upgrading to Scale, World Bank, Washingt. DC, 2006.
[42] K. Dovey, T. Shaque, M. van Oostrum, I. Chatterjee, Informal settlement is not a euphemism for’slum’: what’s at stake beyond the language? Int. Dev. Plann.
Rev. 43 (2021) https://doi.org/10.3828/idpr.2020.14.
[43] D.W. Ambaye, Informal settlement in Ethiopia, the case of two kebeles in Bahir Dar City, in: FIG Work. Week, 2011, pp. 18–22.
[44] Ministry of Urban Development, State of Ethiopian Cities (SECR) Report, Ethiopian Civil Service University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2015.
[45] L. Daniel, An assessment of the development and implementation of regulations on informal settlements, the case of addis ababa city, Ethiopia, Unpubl.
Master’s Thesis, Ethiop. Civ. Serv. Univ. Ethiop. (2006).
[46] L. Hermans, Actor Analysis for Water Resources Management: Putting the Promise into Practice, Eburon Uitgeverij BV, 2005.
[47] S. Wasserman, K. Faust, Social network analysis: methods and applications. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478, 1994.
[48] L.M. Hermans, S.W. Cunningham, Actor and Strategy Models: Practical Applications and Step-wise Approaches, John Wiley &Sons, 2018.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
17

[49] M. Ratajczak-Mrozek, M. Herbe´
c, Actors-resources-activities analysis as a basis for Polish furniture network research, Drew. Pr. Nauk. Doniesienia, Komun. 56
(2013), https://doi.org/10.12841/wood.1644-3985.057.08.
[50] J.J. Wallis, What institutions are: the difference between social facts, norms, and institutions and their associated rules and enforcement. Maryl. Univ. Maryl.,
2017.
[51] S. Nuhu, Rethinking Land Access Governance in Global South Cities:Understanding the Dynamics and Contentions of Land Access Processes and Governance
Mechanisms in Peri-Urban Areas of Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, 2021.
[52] E. Ostrom, Coping with tragedies of the commons, Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2 (1999) 493–535, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.493.
[53] S. Czech, Institutions as enabling constraints, A note on social norms, social change and economic development, Ekon. i Prawo. Econ. Law. 13 (2014) 309–319,
https://doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2014.023.
[54] V. Doellgast, D. Marsden, Institutions as constraints and resources: explaining cross-national divergence in performance management, Hum. Resour. Manag. J.
29 (2019) 199–216, https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12214.
[55] A. Leftwich, K. Sen, Beyond institutions: institutions and organizations in the politics and economics of poverty reduction–Thematic synthesis of research
evidence, IPPG Res. Consort. Improv. Institutions Pro-poor Growth, Univ., Manchester, 2010.
[56] D.C. North, A transaction cost theory of politics, J. Theor. Polit. 2 (1990) 355–367.
[57] J. Winiecki, Determinants of catching up or falling behind: interaction of formal and informal institutions, Post Commun. Econ. 16 (2004) 137–152, https://
doi.org/10.1080/1463137042000223859.
[58] A. Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Univ of California Press, 1984.
[59] T. Lacroix, Designing a Structure/agency Approach to Transnationalism, 2012.
[60] R.C. Leduka, Explaining informal land delivery processes and institutions in African cities: conceptual framework and emerging evidence, South African Rev,
Sociology 37 (2006) 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1080/21528586.2006.10419143.
[61] T.G. Admasu, Urban land use dynamics, the nexus between land use pattern and its challenges: the case of Hawassa city, Southern Ethiopia, Land Use Pol. 45
(2015) 159–175, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.022.
[62] Burayu city Prole, Population Characteristics and Social Development Issues of Burayu Town, 2017.
[63] R.K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Applied Social Research Methods), Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2014, https://doi.org/
10.3138/cjpe.30.1.108.
[64] D.M. Zucker, How to do case study research, Sch. Nurs. Fac. Publ. Ser. (2009) 2. http://scholarworks.umass.edu/nursing_faculty_pubs/2.
[65] J.W. Creswell, W.E. Hanson, V.L. Clark Plano, A. Morales, Qualitative research designs: selection and implementation, Counsel. Psychol. 35 (2007) 236–264,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390.
[66] J.W. Creswell, Mapping the eld of mixed methods research, J. Mix. Methods Res. 3 (2009) 95–108, https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808330883.
[67] V.L. Plano Clark, L.A. Foote, J.B. Walton, Intersecting mixed methods and case study research: design possibilities and challenges, Int. J. Mult. Res. Approaches
10 (2018) 14–29, https://doi.org/10.29034/ijmra.v10n1a1.
[68] C.M. Carolan, L. Forbat, A. Smith, Developing the DESCARTE model: the design of case study research in health care, Qual. Health Res. 26 (2016) 626–639,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315602488.
[69] R.K. Yin, Designing case studies, Qual. Res. Methods 5 (2003) 359–386, https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.30.1.108.
[70] D.R. Hancock, B. Algozzine, A practical guide for beginning researchers doing case study research. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0003, 2006.
[71] T. Yamane, Statistics: an Introductory Analysis, 1967.
[72] L.M. Rea, R.A. Parker, Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide, John Wiley &Sons, 2014.
[73] J. Rowley, Designing and using research questionnaires, Manag. Res. Rev. 37 (2014) 308–330, https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-02-2013-0027.
[74] E.A. Hoffmann, Open-ended interviews, power, and emotional labor, J. Contemp. Ethnogr. 36 (2007) 318–346, https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241606293134.
[75] Central statistical Authority, Population and Housing Census of Ethiopia, 2007.
[76] T.N. Sungena, K.C. Serbeh-Yiadom, M. Asfaw, Strengthening good governance in urban land management in Ethiopia: a case-study of Hawassa, J. Environ.
Earth Sci. 4 (2014) 96–108.
[77] S.K. Agegnehu, H. Fuchs, G. Navratil, P. Stokowski, F. Vuolo, R. Mansberger, Spatial urban expansion and land tenure security in Ethiopia: case studies from
Bahir Dar and Debre Markos peri-urban areas, Soc. Nat. Resour. 29 (2016) 311–328, https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2015.1062947.
[78] N.H. Koroso, J.A. Zevenbergen, M. Lengoiboni, Urban land use efciency in Ethiopia: an assessment of urban land use sustainability in Addis Ababa, Land Use
Pol. 99 (2020) 105081, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105081.
[79] C. Fegue, Informal settlements ‘planning theories and policy-making in sub-Saharan Africa–from ‘site ‘to ‘people’: a critical evaluation of operations
‘murambatsvina’and ‘garikai’in Zimbabwe, Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plann. 2 (4) (2007) 445–460, https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V2-N4-445-460, 445–, Int. J.
Sustain. Dev. Plan. 2.
[80] Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia [FDRE], Urban land lease holding proclamation. Proclamation (No. 721/2011), Federal Negarit Gazetta 18 (4) (2011)
6220–6247.
[81] A.G. Adam, Informal settlements in the peri-urban areas of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia: an institutional analysis, Habitat Int. 43 (2014) 90–97, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.01.014.
[82] C. Morgner, A. Ambole, C. Anditi, D. Githira, Exploring the dynamics of social networks in urban informal settlements: the case of Mathare Valley, Kenya, in:
Urban Forum, Springer, 2020, pp. 489–512, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-020-09389-2.
[83] A. Hailemariam, A. Adugna, Migration and urbanization in Ethiopia: addressing the spatial imbalance, in: Demogr. Transit. Dev. Africa, Springer, 2011,
pp. 145–165, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8918-2_8.
[84] M. Zewdie, H. Worku, A. Bantider, Temporal dynamics of the driving factors of urban landscape change of addis ababa during the past three decades, Environ.
Manag. 61 (2018) 132–146, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0953-x.
[85] T. Gondo, Urban land and informality: an evaluation of institutional response options to land informalisation in Ethiopian cities, Dep. Urban Reg. Planning,
Univ. Venda, Limpopo Prov. South Africa (2009).
[86] W. Fekade, Decits of formal urban land management and informal responses under rapid urban growth, an international perspective, Habitat Int. 24 (2000)
127–150.
[87] M. Huchzermeyer, A. Karam, M. Maina, Informal Settlements in Johannesburg: How Much Do We Know?, 2011.
[88] B.S. Gemeda, B.G. Abebe, A. Paczoski, Y. Xie, G.T. Cirella, What motivates speculators to speculate? Entropy 22 (2020) 59, https://doi.org/10.3390/
e22010059.
[89] T. Nakanishi, Hidden community development among the urban poor: informal settlers in metro Manila, Polic. Soc. 25 (2006) 37–61, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1449-4035(06)70089-3.
[90] G. Singh, G. Gadgil, Navigating Informality: Perils and Prospects in Metro Manila’s Slums, World Bank Washingt, DC, 2017.
[91] UN-Habitat, Discussion Paper on Challenges and Integrated Policy Responses for Informal Settlements, Economic and Social Council, Geneva, 2007.
[92] S. Niebergall, A. Loew, W. Mauser, Integrative assessment of informal settlements using VHR remote sensing data—the Delhi case study, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl.
Earth Obs. Rem. Sens. 1 (2008) 193–205.
[93] S. Tsenkova, Self-made Cities: in Search of Sustainable Solutions for Informal Settlements in the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Region,
United Nations Publications, 2009.
[94] S. Polyzos, D. Minetos, Informal housing in Greece: a multinomial logistic regression analysis at the regional level, Eur. Spatial Res. Pol. 20 (2013) 57–85,
https://doi.org/10.2478/esrp-2013-0011.
[95] N. Marutlulle, Causes of informal settlements in ekurhuleni metropolitan municipality: an exploration, africa’s public serv, Deliv. Perform. Rev. 5 (2017) 1–11.
[96] M. Schwartz, E. Wilson, Who Can Afford to Live in a Home?: A Look at Data from the 2006 American Community Survey, US Census Bur, 2008.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
18

[97] H. Wondimu, The subsequent challenges of the slum and squatter settlements: in the city of addis ababa, European Journal of Research Development and
Sustainability 2 (1) (2020) 24–34, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3877007, 24–34., Eur. J. Res. Dev. Sustain. 2.
[98] F. Baye, F. Wegayehu, S. Mulugeta, Drivers of informal settlements at the peri-urban areas of Woldia: assessment on the demographic and socio-economic
trigger factors, Land Use Pol. 95 (2020) 104573, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104573.
[99] T. Dires, D. Fentie, Y. Hunie, W. Nega, M. Tenaw, S.K. Agegnehu, R. Mansberger, Assessing the impacts of expropriation and compensation on livelihood of
farmers: the case of peri-urban debre markos, Ethiopia, Land 10 (2021) 614, https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060614.
[100] E. Adinyira, P. Anokye, Illegal appendages to residential buildings in Kumasi, Ghana-a case study of North Suntreso, J. Constr. Proj. Manag. Innov. 3 (2013)
511–529, https://doi.org/10.36615/jcpmi.v3i1.40.
[101] O. Golubchikov, A. Badyina, Sustainable housing for sustainable cities. www.unhabitat.org, 2012.
[102] Z. Li, F. Wu, Residential satisfaction in China’s informal settlements: a case study of Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, Urban Geogr. 34 (2013) 923–949,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2013.778694.
[103] U.N. Habitat, Slums of the World: the Face of Urban Poverty in the New Millennium? Monitoring the Millen Nium Development Goal, Target 11–worldwide
Slum Dweller Estimation, UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya, 2003.
[104] F. Chiodelli, S. Moroni, The complex nexus between informality and the law: reconsidering unauthorised settlements in light of the concept of nomotropism,
Geoforum 51 (2014) 161–168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.11.004.
T.B. Bayuma and B.G. Abebe Heliyon 10 (2024) e39443
19