1 s2.0 S0197397503000778 Main

ARTICLE IN PRESS
Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161
Critical elements in sustaining participatory planning:

Bagamoyo strategic urban development planning
framework in Tanzania
Francos Halla*
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University College of Lands and Architectural Studies,
University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam, P.O. Box 32911, Tanzania
Received 5 August 2002; received in revised form 30 March 2003; accepted 27 June 2003
Abstract
Worldwide, generally, and in Tanzania, particularly, urban development planning has in the 1990s
become participatory and strategic and less technocratic and comprehensive. The shift has involved the
preparation and implementation of general planning schemes rather than detail planning schemes. Inability
to sustain technocratic and comprehensive urban planning, which is widely published, has prompted the
shift to participatory and strategic urban planning. This latest approach to urban development planning
also needs to be sustained. Based on the Tanzanian experience, in general, and 2001 Bagamoyo Strategic
Urban Development Planning Framework (SUDPF), in particular, there are critical elements in sustaining
the participatory and strategic urban development planning process. They include scope of and approach to
urban development planning, form of urban development planning team, resource mobilization for
SUDPF implementation, problem solving and conflict resolving by the SUDPF process, and SUDPF
implementing team and institutional arrangements. These critical elements are examined in detail basing on
lessons of experience from Bagamoyo in Tanzania. Sustaining the SUDPF process entails problem solving
and conflict resolution by executing bankable projects and operating a flexible land-use regulatory
framework. The process of citywide planning has to set a dynamic coordinating framework for executing
development decisions that are made each day by city stakeholders, as opposed to a static controlling
blueprint of development that is manifest in control planning.
r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Participatory planning; Strategic urban development planning framework; Preparation and implementation
of a general planning scheme; Bagamoyo; Tanzania
*Tel.: +255-744-596560; fax: +225-22-2775391.

E-mail address: ffhalla@uclas.ac.tz (F. Halla).
0197-3975/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0197-3975(03)00077-8
ARTICLE IN PRESS
138 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161
1. Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the critical elements in sustaining the participatory and
strategic approaches to urban development planning. The analysis is based on the case of 2001
Bagamoyo Strategic Urban Development Planning Framework (SUDPF) (BDC, 2001). In
Tanzania, pioneers of participatory and strategic planning have for the past decade attempted to
shift from technocratic and comprehensive planning on experimental basis. Dar es Salaam, which
is Tanzania’s primate city, has since 1992 engaged in the participatory and SUDPF process
(Halla, 1994). The United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS) through the United
Nations Development Programme backstopped technically and financially the SUDPF process
with respect to Dar es Salaam under the auspices of the 1992 Sustainable Dar es Salaam Project
(SDP).
SDP had initially adopted the term environmental planning and management (EPM) instead of
SUDPF. On the positive side, the SDP has culminated into several outputs related to conflict
resolution and problem solving as exposed by, for example, Halla and Majani (1997, 1999a, b).
On the negative side, the SDP has encountered hindrances related to its sustainability as argued
by, for example, Halla (2000) and Halla and Majani (1999a). Replicating ‘‘best practices’’ of SDP,
UNCHS through UNDP had in 1996 and 1997 also backstopped technically and financially ten
secondary cities in Tanzania that have since then engaged in the SUDPF process (Halla, 2000).
The cities include: Arusha, Dodoma, Iringa, Mbeya, Morogoro, Moshi, Mwanza, Tabora, Tanga
and Zanzibar. The positive and negative outcomes of SDP seem to also have recurred in all these
secondary cities.
Thanks to the Government of Denmark through Danish International Development Agency
(DANIDA) for having since 1999 come to rescue the SUDPF process with respect to six of these
cities by funding continuation of technical backstopping. DANIDA funded cities include Arusha,
Iringa, Moshi, Morogoro, Mwanza and Tanga. Again, thanks to the Government of Germany
through GTZ for having since 1999 come to rescue the SUDPF process with respect to Zanzibar
City. So, the SUDPF process with respect to the remaining three cities, namely Dodoma, Mbeya
and Tabora does not seem to be sustainable given their lack of funding of technical backstopping.
Added to this list of Tanzanian cities that have engaged in the SUDPF process are the following
tertiary cities: Songea and Shinyanga, which are funded by the Tanzanian Government; Kahama
(Halla, 2002), which is funded by the Government of the Netherlands; and Bagamoyo, which is
funded by the Government of Sweden through Swedish International Development Agency
(Sida). So, this last mentioned case city is used in this paper to analyse the critical elements in
sustaining the SUDPF process.
The SUDPF process with respect to Bagamoyo started in March 2000 as a demand driven
endeavour by the town’s stakeholders to join together, regardless of rank, job, gender, income and
sector, to identify and address the dominant critical issues prevalent in Bagamoyo Town. The
town’s stakeholders started to engage in the SUDPF process in a 2-day town-wide consultation
meeting. To-date the town’s stakeholders have already held four town-wide consultation
meetings, identified five dominant critical issues, agreed on workable strategies and bankable
projects that have to be implemented in order to address the identified dominant critical issues,
started to mobilize implementation resources, and empowered the SUDPF Implementing Team of
17 persons to coordinate the implementation of the contents of the SUDPF process.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 139
This paper is organized into the following sections: Abstract, Introduction, Conceptual and
empirical bases, Critical elements in sustaining participatory urban planning, Bagamoyo strategic
urban development planning framework, and Concluding remarks.
2. Conceptual and empirical bases
2.1. Analysing the roles of urban planning
According to Tanzanian 1956 Town and Country Planning Ordinance, as revised in 1961,
urban development planning is charged with the professional task of preparing and implementing
general and detailed planning schemes for urban and rural settlements (URT, 1956). From
practices of urban development planning in Tanzania, one main assumption underlying the
acceptance of this professional task is that the profession can effectively play two opposing roles.
The first role is urban development control by enforcing zoning regulations through detailed
planning scheme(s), which in practice can be prepared and executed with or without general
planning scheme(s). The other role is urban development coordination by enforcing a general
planning scheme that bears long-term proposals on city’s land-uses and capital investments in
infrastructure.
Whereas, in Tanzania, the first role continues to be done through zoning practices as a matter
of government function, the second role does not. A single entity in government machinery finds it
difficult to simultaneously do the policing and coordination of urban development without
leaning to either role. According to Rexford Tugwell (1974), government (that consists of the
legislative, executive and judiciary wings) continues to practise urban development control (by
enforcing zoning regulations) as one of its functions. But, for government to be able to practise
development coordination through participatory and strategic approaches, it would require the
fourth wing to perform as ‘‘think tank’’ for the executive wing, which the status quo does not
readily grant (Tugwell, 1974; Halla, 1999).
2.2. Operational and professional conflicts in urban planning practices
The problematic duo role of the profession that requires both development control and
development coordination has been challenged in both theory and practice of urban development
implementation. In practice, such duo role is challenged by the inability of the profession to
address the dominant critical issues that prevail in cities. It is challenged also by the continued
defiance of zoning regulations that have been embedded in both detailed and general planning
schemes by spontaneous land developments and informal sector activities. As a result, operational
conflicts between developers and development controllers/coordinators have recurred in such
cities. To resolve the operational conflicts, theoretical criticism suggests that urban development
practitioners assume the role of development coordination where dominant critical issues prevail
(Ogu, 2000; Choguill, 1999; Halla, 1994).
At the same time, shifting the role of development coordination from the technocratic
planning machinery to the participatory planning machinery leads to professional and
institutional conflicts between development controllers in government and development
ARTICLE IN PRESS
coordinators in the SUDPF process. In order to resolve the recurring operational conflicts
between developers and development controllers, the UNCHS has since 1992 provided technical
support to Tanzania to institutionalise the SUDPF process (Halla, 1994; Halla & Majani,
1999a, b) starting with the Sustainable Dar es Salaam Project and then replicating it to secondary
and tertiary cities.
2.3. From technocratic/comprehensive to participatory/strategic urban planning
From practices of urban development planning in Tanzania in the past century, one might
not hesitate to note the shift in concepts and approaches to urban development planning that
has taken place in the 1990s. The shift is from technocratic and comprehensive to participatory
and strategic concepts and approaches to urban development planning. The conceptual context of
the paradigm shift, and therefore SUDPF preparation and execution, relates to interpretation
of the legal requirement of preparing a general planning scheme and detailed planning schemes
to guide development of a given city (URT, 1956). In Tanzania general planning schemes
have until early 1990s been prepared and executed using the technocratic and comprehensive
concepts and approaches. During both the colonial and post-colonial eras technocratic and
comprehensive planning was applied because decision-making in political and government
systems was top-down, centralized and technocratic (see, for example, Arimah & Adeagbo, 2000).
However, economic liberalization and political democratization that emerged in the country
from the late 1980s to mid-1990s had prompted the democratization of one of the professional
roles of urban planners namely, the preparation of a general planning scheme. The move
has required the participation and partnerships of city stakeholders in both the planning
and implementation of urban development (see, for example, Choguill, 1999; Ogu, 2000;
Steinberg & Sara, 2000).
Participatory and strategic preparation of a general planning scheme has continued to take
place worldwide and has been reported by, for example, Healey (1994), Innes (1996), Ogu (2000),
and Steinberg and Sara (2000). The reportage reveals that participatory and strategic planning,
which manifests itself in interchangeable names like environmental planning and management,
participatory planning, coordinating approach to planning, strategic planning, urban manage-
ment and governance, and SUDPF has replaced technocratic and comprehensive planning in
terms of concepts and approaches to preparing and executing general planning schemes in several
cities worldwide.
Participatory and strategic urban development planning (i.e. the SUDPF process) involves the
following activities:
(i) Conducting a citywide consultation meeting during which city’s stakeholders’ agree to
engage in the SUDPF process and to empower a Coordinating or Steering Team.
(ii) Conducting participatory rapid appraisal of city’s development and environmental profiles
including identification of dominant critical issues that prevail in such city.
(iii) Conducting the second citywide consultation meeting during which city’s stakeholders
agree on dominant critical issues that prevail in such city and empower issue-
specific taskforces to prepare action-plans for addressing the identified dominant critical
issues.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
(iv) Operationalizing the issue-specific taskforces in action planning that should culminate in
workable strategies and bankable projects, which once implemented would squarely address
the identified dominant critical issues.
(v) Conducting the third consultation meeting during which the city’s stakeholders agree on the
action plans, workable strategies and bankable projects that the issue-specific taskforces
would have prepared and presented and empower an Implementing Team.
(vi) Operationalizing the SUDPF Implementing Team, which would include Issues-Specific
Taskforces, in executing the SUDPF outputs.
(vii) Stop the operations of an issue-specific taskforce once the conflict or problem at stake has
been, respectively, resolved or solved. Or continue with the operations of the issue-specific
taskforce if the conflict or problem at stake has not been, respectively, resolved or solved. Or
initiate the above cycle of objectives for a new critical issue.
3. Critical elements in sustaining participatory urban planning
Whereas technocratic and comprehensive urban planning has been sustained by government
machinery, participatory and strategic urban planning has to be sustained by heeding to the
following critical elements as assessed from the decade-long experiences from Tanzania and other
practising countries:
3.1. Commitment of issue-specific stakeholders’ participation and partnerships
As stated above, this paper analyses the critical elements in sustaining the SUDPF concepts,
approaches, methodology and activities. The SUDPF process, as a methodology for preparing
and implementing a general planning scheme, is expected to bear at least two strengths over the
technocratic and comprehensive planning process. One strength is that development stakeholders
should get included in all the activities of plan preparation and implementation through
sensitization and information gathering workshops, issue-specific taskforces, consultative plenary
sessions, and implementation arrangements. Every city resident having a stake in any critical issue
has to be urged to participate fully in the SUDPF forums. The question here is that does this
assumption hold in the SUDPF process in cities where it is practiced? An answer to this question
would constitute a critical element in sustaining the SUDPF process.
3.2. Strategic flexibility
The other strength is that there supposed to be some built-in coordinating dynamism involving
the SUDPF process, development control machinery and city developers in facilitating
transparency and flexibility with regard to urban development implementation. Investment
decisions taken by developers in government, business and local community sectors are supposed
to be facilitated by the development-area concept that characterizes environmental features,
existing and attracted activities, and development conditions (Halla & Majani, 1999a). They are
also supposed to be facilitated by the requirement that any development should be scrutinized
through both the SUDPF process using the development-area concept and development control
ARTICLE IN PRESS
process using zoning regulations. The question here is that does this assumption hold in the
SUDPF process in cities where it is practiced? Again, an answer to this question would constitute
a critical element in sustaining the SUDPF process.
3.3. Continuity and replication in terms of mobilizing interest and resources
Besides the above two assumptions on strengths of an acceptable approach to preparing

citywide general planning scheme, a main source of opportunities for the SUDPF process or any
other better process should involve the greater room and higher chances for its continuity and
replication to other towns and cities. In Tanzania, SUDPF process emerged when UNCHS had in
1992 started to backstop environmental planning and management for Dar es Salaam. UNCHS
had since 1997 backstopped the replication of the process to ten secondary cities. Recently, the
government ministry responsible for human settlements development has started to backstop the
replication of the process to nine towns. A few local government district councils, backstopped by
international development assistance and cooperation arrangements, have recently started to
engage in this process. The questions here include: Do experiences from the replication of the
process depict any satisfaction on the part of respective city stakeholders in comparison to other
processes of preparing citywide general planning schemes? Do all urban centres require engaging
in the process in order to guide respective urban development decisions? Do urban development
stakeholders of each urban centre that has engaged in the process appreciate their participation in
preparation and implementation of respective general planning schemes? Under international
development and cooperation arrangements, can financial backstopping be extended to cities that
are implementing SUDPF outputs? Again, answers to these questions would constitute critical
elements in sustaining the SUDPF process.
3.4. Utility of the SUDPF process in terms of project and land-use planning
However, according to Halla and Majani (1999a), SUDPF process seems to suffer from one
weakness: the difficulty of graphic presentation of attracted activities in each development
area in the form of an acceptable future land-use map. If for a given development area an
activity can afford rent and interacts sustainably with the environment then it is listed under
attracted activities. Deliberately, no attempt is made to prioritise such attracted activities
because their implementation is based on first-come-first-accommodated principle. So, there
is no single activity pattern that can be determined across the development areas as a desired
or blueprint future land-use map. What can be mapped is an acceptable current land-use map.
It is also necessary to map the location of all development areas while tabulating environmental
features, existing and attracted activities, and development conditions. The question here is
that do city stakeholders find this output more useful and sustainable than the blueprint land-use
plan? At the same time, the SUDPF process is threatened by the risk that stakeholders take
in working out strategies and projects for addressing critical issues but they end up being
unable to implement them because of their limited financial resources. The question here is
that can city stakeholders mobilize the necessary resources for implementing their action plans?
Again, answers to these questions would constitute critical elements in sustaining the SUDPF
process.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
3.5. Institutional arrangements for the SUDPF process
A more general question is whether the SUDPF process bears the capacity of operationalizing
all the above-stated conceptual assumptions and questions through the following methodological
activities:
(i) First, since SUDPF process is consensus building, participatory and coordinating, it is
essential for the respective coordinating committee to embark on stakeholders’ awareness
and sensitization with a view to agreeing to engage in the process.
(ii) Secondly, SUDPF Team conducts a participatory rapid appraisal of the city’s profile by
collection of information that is available among stakeholders.
(iii) Third, stakeholders have to agree on analyses of the critical issues in a plenary session.
(iv) Fourth, stakeholders have to work in taskforces to develop strategies and projects that are
necessary to address the critical issues.
(v) Fifth, stakeholders have to agree in a plenary session to implement workable strategies and
bankable projects in order to address the critical issues.
(vi) Sixth, stakeholders have to facilitate the implementation of the workable strategies and
bankable projects that constitute SUDPF for the given city.
(vii) Seventh, since both the process and outputs of SUDPF are strategic and forward
rolling, citywide planning process will have to continue until all critical issues have been
resolved.
3.6. Linking the SUDPF process to zoning and investment processes
Additional critical elements in sustaining the SUDPF process may arise from answers to the
following questions:
(i) Considering strengths and weaknesses of the SUDPF process and opportunities for and
threats to its continued application, are the prospects for participatory and strategic
planning brighter than those for technocratic and comprehensive planning?
(ii) Can citywide stakeholders’ participation and partnerships facilitate urban development
planning and implementation?
(iii) Does the SUDPF process bear any built-in mechanisms for transparency and information
sharing among stakeholders and the search for problem solution and conflict resolution?
(iv) Should city stakeholders tackle simple problems and resolve simple conflicts that require
little resources while they continue to mobilize additional resources for addressing the
complex problems and conflicts?
(v) Is citywide development coordination facilitated more by the SUDPF process and outputs
than by those of the technocratic and comprehensive planning process?
(vi) Can the SUDPF process operationalize the development coordination role while linking up
to the development control role?
(vii) Can the SUDPF machinery scrutinize the development coordination process while the
zoning regulatory machinery scrutinizes the development control process in order to
facilitate city developers in scrutinizing the investment implementation process?
ARTICLE IN PRESS
(viii) Can the SUDPF process yield outputs that are realizable, useful and sustainable?
(ix) Can the institutional arrangements for the SUDPF process accommodate its
participatory and strategic assumptions, concepts, strengths, opportunities, activities and
outputs?
(x) Can the necessary institutional arrangements be operated for SUDPF process to generate
an acceptable general planning scheme including action plans for implementing bankable
projects, workable strategies and a land-use planning framework?
Again, answers to these questions would constitute critical elements in sustaining the SUDPF
process, which this paper seeks to analyse.
4. Bagamoyo strategic urban development planning framework
4.1. Background to Bagamoyo town
Bagamoyo is a historical town, dating back to the slave trade era. The town is the headquarters
of Bagamoyo District, in Coast Region, Tanzania. It is located 60 km to the north of Dar es
Salaam, which is the only primate city of the country. Its economic base is hinged upon trade in
fishing and agricultural products, regular remittances from relatives working outside the town
(particularly Dar es Salaam), and tourism. The town has a potential to develop into a major
tourist-attraction centre. It has a clean beach and historic buildings and monuments. Tourists visit
the town for its historic cultural heritage and beach resort recreation and retreat. The town’s
cultural heritage is founded mainly on the 19th century slave trade between the east African
inland and the Zanzibar based Arabic sultanate. The town’s built-up area, covering 17 km2 out of
the total area of 65 km2, includes a distinct Stone Town at its hub. Its main economic activities
include fishing, urban farming, salt works, light manufacturing and commercial and community
services. From these economic activities carried out in Bagamoyo District, the local government is
able to collect up to USD 100,000 annually, the amount that the Central Government tops up by
up to USD 200,000 annually. Local sources estimate the current town’s population to be 30,000,
which has increased from 5772 in 1967.
Bagamoyo District Council (BDC), established in 1979, is the local authority responsible for
administering the town. The Council comprising elected councillors and led by Chairman
elected from among the councillors, is answerable to both the Central Government through the
Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Governments and to the electorate within the
district. The Central Government is represented in the district by the District Commissioner’s
Office. The Council comprises the following committees: Finance and Planning, Education and
Culture, Social Services, Economic Services, and Establishment and Administration. The Council
has employed about 280 technical and administrative staff, headed by Executive Director, to
operate its day-to-day activities. Departmental heads such as District (Economic) Planning
Officer and District Town Planning Officer assist the District Executive Director. The serving
departments include: Planning, Treasury, Education and Culture, Health, Trade, Community
Development, Natural Resources, Land Development, Cooperative and Marketing, Agriculture
and Livestock, Water, and Works. At the sub-district level each elected councillor is responsible
politically to a respective constituency called a ward. For each ward there is a Ward Executive
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 1. Bagamoyo development areas.
Officer as an administrator. At the sub-ward level Village Chairmen are responsible over local
administration.
The area of jurisdiction of the Council consists of six administrative divisions and 16
administrative wards. The district has 83 registered villages including the villages of Dunda and
Kaole (in Dunda Ward) and Magomeni and Makurunge (in Magomeni Ward) that constitute the
core part of Bagamoyo Town. There are 645 sub-villages in the district. For the purpose of
strategic urban development planning, Bagamoyo Town includes the development areas shown in
Fig. 1. Although Bagamoyo does not currently have the official status of a Town that can be
administered by a Town Council, it served as the capital of Tanganyika from 1889 to 1891 and it
was in 1929 awarded the status of a Township by Government Notice No. 120. This explains why
the District Council is working on the recovery of the lost Bagamoyo Town status.
4.2. Critical issues prompting participatory urban development planning
4.2.1. The challenge of urban development versus stone-town conservation

Bagamoyo Town has several architectural peculiarities within its stone town. As such, carrying
out development in the town is controversial in as far as requirements for the conservation of the
stone town are involved. Being an international cultural heritage, the stone town is subjected to
Tanzanian Antiquities Act of 1964. The legislation to conserve this and other historic sites in the
town became operational since 1979. Since then practices of planning and managing urban
development have to relate well with the conservation objectives of the stone town. Development
ARTICLE IN PRESS
schemes in the town’s conservation area need to address themselves to conditions of both
individual monuments and the general environment of such monuments. A main challenge to
development stakeholders in the stone town is how to resolve the conflicting objectives of
mainstream urban development and the conservative historic heritage.
There are several conservative objectives that prohibit urban development as follows. There is a
limitation of the number of people who can dwell in a given conservation area. Deliberate surveys
must be done to determine the maximum population that a conservation area can accommodate
without causing any destruction to the structures being conserved. Such allowable population
must also be scrutinized to determine whether their occupations may cause destruction to the
structures being conserved. It will not be conservative, for example, if such allowable population
will operate milling machines or drive excessively within a conservation area! This is due to
mechanical vibrations from such operations that may readily lead to destruction of the aging
structures in terms of cracks. Changes in use of land and building should enhance the
revitalization of original uses.
Conservation of stone towns entails preservation of original buildings, objects, plants, grass,
paths, and wells. In such towns there is no question of welcoming any schemes of urban renewal
or redevelopment that are characterized by demolition of structures. Any proposed new
development in such towns has to be assessed to determine whether it will be adequately
conservative with the historic heritage in terms of development scale, materials, finishes,
streetscape and skyline. Land tenure, within such towns, is quite sensitive and controversial since
it involves transfers of ownership of land from individual developers to the state for public use.
Land tenure is an issue here because maintenance of structures that exist in a stone town is
essential. It includes routine observation, analysis of the behaviour, and repairs of individual
monuments and sites.
So far, the conservation and development of the town have been guided by the 1980 Bagamoyo
Master-Plan that was prepared by staff of the Master-Plan Section of the Urban Development
Department of the Central Government Ministry responsible for lands, housing and urban
development. However, the contents of the plan suggest that only minimal incorporation of the
interpretation and application of the Antiquities Act was done. The Town and Country Planning
Ordinance, instead, was interpreted and applied in preparation of the plan. So, the plan is biased
in favour of urban development and against conservation of the stone town. The interpretation
and application of this legislation necessitates quite a substantial compromise with that involving
the Antiquities Act (URT, 1964). As such, the general planning scheme and detailed planning
schemes prepared for the town as a whole, because they have been based on the Ordinance, are
too progressive to blend well with the conservative control machinery of the stone town. However,
the Antiquities Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism has stationed staff
in the town to enforce the Antiquities Act and prepared the partially implemented 1988
Bagamoyo Stone-Town Conservation and Development Plan. At the same time the Tourism
Department of the same ministry has worked out strategies to promote tourism for Bagamoyo as
a tourist region.
At the same time the rate of historic heritage tourism has increased because of the stone town
that depicts remnants of the 19th and 20th century international slave trade via Zanzibar. The
newly developing transportation and communication facilities that connect the town to the rest of
the world via Dar es Salaam are likely also to augment the rate of such tourists visiting the town.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Most of the buildings in this conservation area are of German and Arabic architecture. They
are built of coral stones, wooden doors and windows of iron works and indigenous
louvre shutters. The modern history of the town commenced in the early 19th century when
the then Sultanate of Oman transferred its capital from Muscat to Zanzibar. The town had
then facilitated the Arab trade that was based in Zanzibar with the interior of eastern and
central Africa. During the later part of the 19th century, the Sultanate passed the admini-
stration of the town to then German colonial administration. During the German colonial
administration the town was until 1891 the capital of then German East Africa before shifting to
Dar es Salaam.
The ongoing development pressure with respect to the stone town has resulted in the advent of
‘‘alien’’ activities including construction of cement-block buildings and operation of filling
stations and garages within the stone town. Moreover, the presence of unused parcels of land
within the stone town attracts further ‘‘alien’’ developments to set in the area. The vast open land
within the stone town is quite attractive to potential investors. Currently, beach resorts have been
developed to the north of the stone town; beach resorts are also attracted to the south of the stone
town; and developments other than beach resorts are also taking place at a steady pace in the rest
of the outer parts of the town. As such, the stone town gets unnecessarily isolated from the rest of
the town in investments.
4.2.2. Managing beach resort tourism

The main issue here is the apparent shortage of beach plots to invest in beach resorts in the near
future. Currently, there are about ten beach resorts and several in-town guesthouses and
restaurants that appear to meet the existing demand exerted by tourists and visitors. However,
given the newly completed reconstruction of Dar es Salaam–Bagamoyo tarmac road and the
ongoing aggressive marketing of the town as a tourist destination, investment in additional beach
resorts appears to be increasing fast in the town. Potential investors are likely to be attracted to
invest in such beach resorts within the stone town, as already is the case with two existing beach
hotels. A related issue is the observation made by tour operators and hotel developers who are
represented through Bagamoyo Investors Association that the marketing of the town’s tourist
attractions needs to be coordinated. A one-stop centre needs to be established in the town, with a
branch in Dar es Salaam, for marketing the town’s tourist attractions including the operation of a
single tourist fee package while in the town.
4.2.3. Managing the tapping of the coastal resources

Access to the beach guarantees a beach stakeholder access to several coastal resources including
the beach itself for recreation; the ocean for swimming, fishing and transportation; coral reefs, salt
minerals and mangroves for extraction or harvesting. In this regard, the involved issue-specific
stakeholders include the following: beach-resort developers, fishermen, boat makers, sea-
transport operators, salt miners, beach goers, hotel lodgers, petty traders, and the law-
enforcement machinery in the government sector. But current trends and practices of beach resort
development may eventually deny the other beach stakeholders direct accessibility to the beach.
This conflict is likely to intensify when beach resort development will have covered the whole
beach length and if the resort developers will insist on controlling beach access through, and use
of the beach portions fronting, their premises. Currently, several resorts have already been
ARTICLE IN PRESS
developed and are operated on the northern segment of the beach. The extent of the conflict is yet
to be gauged, although the potential for its prevalence is high. A related issue is environmental
degradation taking place along the beach. It is caused by indiscriminate disposal of untreated
wastes that are generated by some activities of the beach stakeholders. The activities include fish
processing for sale along the beach, boat-making, petty trading and resort operations (particularly
liquid wastes for the latter).
Another conflict involves not the development stakeholders per se, but the planning
stakeholders with respect to the town. Not only the beach stakeholders alone, from the business
and local communities sectors, who continue to plan for their investments and daily income-
generating activities, but also the relevant departments of the Central Government and the
District Council. The departments include Antiquities, Tourism and Urban Development.
Whereas the Urban Development staff prepare plans for the socio-economic and spatial
development of the whole town, the Antiquities staff prepare conservation plans to cover only the
stone town; while the Tourism staff prepare different plans on tourist promotion for a larger
corridor and region than the town. The apparent and potential conflicts over access to the
beach and, hence, access to coastal resources and similar others have prompted participatory
and partnership institutional arrangements to facilitate the town stakeholders to, respectively,
resolve and solve the various dominant developmental and environmental conflicts and
problems.
4.2.4. Strengthening the economic base
The economic base of Bagamoyo Town is weak and results in a very small employment capacity
of the formal sector. Limited employment opportunities in the formal sector coupled with the
increasing informal sector income-generating activities have a direct bearing on the town’s
development and environment. This situation has primarily induced a significant proportion of
the economically active people to migrate to Dar es Salaam and other urban centres to search for
employment. Those remaining behind, if not employed in the formal sector, have to adapt
themselves to unreliable survival strategies and livelihoods such as petty commodity production
and trading. The common informal sector activities carried out in the town include food vending,
street hawking, handcraftsmanship and sculpturing, urban farming, fishing, bicycle passenger-
transportation, cart goods-transportation, tailoring, carpentry, garages and workshops, retail
trading (kiosks), extraction and selling of sand and stone, salt extraction, and boat making.
Although the activities are located at different premises, they are concentrated at marketplaces,
bus stations and the beach where there are always many potential customers. Among the common
conflicts arising from such informal-sector activities include the following:
(i) Operators of informal-sector activities conflict with the District Council on grounds of
environmental cleanliness or taxation. For example, there has recently been a move by the
Council to shift such operators from the busy Magomeni marketplace to Magambani
marketplace, which is misplaced with respect to customers.
(ii) Operators of informal-sector activities conflict with adjacent neighbours (e.g. businesses,
residences, offices, and worship buildings) on grounds of trespassing.
(iii) Operators of informal-sector activities conflict with the Antiquities Department on grounds
of not conserving the Stone Town, given environmental degradation that is commonly
attributable to their activities.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
(iv) A more structural conflict involves informal and formal sectors in terms of higher rates
of both unemployment and resource under-utilization. The formal sector is too weak to
engage all those resorting to the informal sector, which is too uneconomic in resource
utilization.
4.2.5. Managing the sanitation

The town has the basic infrastructure in terms of connections to the country’s main supply
networks for electricity, water and telephone. However, the issue is that most town residents
cannot afford getting connected to such trunk service lines of utilities. Only the investors such as
those in beach resorts have been able to do so. Moreover, as part of the issue, the District Council
cannot afford from its small tax-base to maximize the town’s locational accessibility by improving
local roads and constructing new ones where necessary. As a result of this critical issue, the town
residents and tourists or visitors have to contend with the few and low-quality tracks for moving
around in the town. Most residents also have to contend with other elementary forms of utilities
than electricity, tap water, telephone and formal waste-disposal systems. The accumulated effect
of such a situation is the low-quality sanitation of the greater part of the town in terms of
unmanaged waste disposal, track potholes, clogged storm-water drains, flooded tracks when it
rains, tap-water shortages, and interrupted electricity supply and telephone links. The Town does
not operate substantial fleets of vehicles for emptying pit latrines and septic tanks and solid waste
collection except for the District Council that collects solid waste generated at the two central
marketplaces and the district hospital using a tractor and dumps it at undesignated areas. Both
liquid and solid wastes are disposed of into the ground, onto streets and open spaces, and into the
ocean and thereby polluting the environment.
4.2.6. Managing urban expansion and land use

Bagamoyo is among the fast developing district towns of Dar es Salaam Metropolitan Region.
The town is endowed with the naturally occurring beach and the historic cultural heritage that
have attracted landed investments to cater for tourists. The multifaceted tourists come to the town
to enjoy the beach resorts, the historic cultural heritage, and business retreat facilities. As such,
the growth rate for the town’s population is likely to increase in the near future. Already the
demand for developable land has increased in the past decade. Such anticipated high rate of urban
growth, with respect to the town, far exceeds the rates of land servicing and provision of
community facilities. This trend has led to environmentally non-sustainable urban development
that manifests itself in topmost critical issues that have been outlined above.
The Town’s residential expansion has assumed a horizontal dimension along radial roads.
Expansion of other categories of land use has tended to follow such residential expansion. Beach
resort development has taken place to the north of the stone town. But within the stone town, no
or negligible urban expansion has taken place in recent years. Although the land values for the
stone town are highest in the town, given its central location and proximity to the beach, its land
use seems to be inefficient. The nature and conditions of its buildings and the human activities
therein are characteristic of the low land-rent paying capability. The buildings are mostly small in
size and used for residential and small-scale retail trade. The available few but giant buildings are
aging fast, deserted or abandoned or unoccupied, and have collapsed or are collapsing. Such
ARTICLE IN PRESS
inefficient urban expansion and land use with respect to the stone town may lead to gross
disinvestments and urban decay not only in the stone town but also town-wide.
At the same time the development pressure and environmental conflicts had occurred in the
town because there were no guidelines that are acceptable to the town stakeholders to coordinate
the sectoral approaches to urban development. Investors adopted market-based project appraisal
methods to develop the town. The Antiquities Department enforced a law to conserve the stone
town and other related sites. The Urban Development Department enforced zoning regulations
to control urban development. Other departments in the Local and Central Government
also enforced relevant pieces of legislation and policies to administer urban development in
their respective sectors. The town’s general public including operators of income-generating
activities in the formal and informal sectors adopted survival instinct approaches to live or survive
in the town. Such development activities, which were done by the town stakeholders while
applying different principles of urban living, required acceptable guidelines that would coordinate
not only their activities but also efficient urban expansion and land use.
As such the previous tools for guiding urban expansion and land use for the town were so
sectoral that they required coordination through the SUDPF. The SUDPF process was seen to be
necessary in providing coordinated guidance to the town developers, investors and local
communities amidst the enforcement of zoning regulations, conservation requirements, tourism
policy and several other pieces of legislation relevant to the town. It was the Antiquities
Department that in early 2000 initiated dialogue with the other town stakeholders to agree on the
modalities of partnership between government and the business sector in revitalizing the stone
town. Such investment in renovation of buildings and infrastructure improvement within the
stone town should guarantee both historic cultural heritage for the benefit of the general public
and tourists and cost recovery by the investors.
4.3. Milestones of the participatory urban development planning process
4.3.1. Stakeholders’ agreement on engaging in the participatory planning process and team
Fruitful attempts to both conserve and develop the town have since early 2000 necessitated the
town stakeholders to engage in the participatory and SUDPF process. Since then the SUDPF
process has effectively mobilized the conservation and development stakeholders in the town to
join together and devise workable strategies and bankable projects in order to resolve conflicts
between the increasing development pressure and the wishful conservative schemes. In so doing
positive conservative elements of the Antiquities legislation are incorporated into the other
relevant pieces of legislation including the Town and Country Planning Ordinance and the
country’s Tourism Policy. Similarly, positive developmental elements of the Ordinance and other
relevant pieces of legislation are being incorporated into the Antiquities Act. Such inter-linking of
the interpretation and application of the various pieces of legislation that are relevant to the
conservation and development of the town has involved also the stakeholders of the other
identified critical and crosscutting issues that are dominant in the town.
Heeding to pressure from the other town stakeholders, BDC had in early 2000 decided to
prepare and implement SUDPF as a tool for addressing the dominant critical issues. Inherent in
SUDPF process is inclusion of town stakeholders’ participation and partnerships. BDC made the
decision after the town stakeholders had realized that the technocratic and comprehensive model
ARTICLE IN PRESS
as adopted in the 1980 Bagamoyo Master Plan was not suitable for adequately addressing the
challenges of the rapid growth of the town. The model and the plan could no longer guide the
development of the town due to its inability to coordinate various sectors and institutions (public,
private and popular) that are the stakeholders in addressing dominant critical environmental and
developmental issues. Moreover, BDC could not continue to be the provider of subsidized services
due to the limited Central Government’s subvention and limited revenue collection at the local
government level. Owing to these realities, BDC had considered adopting the SUDPF process as a
more viable alternative approach to urban development planning.
Subsequently, BDC had on 20 March 2000 convened and conducted the first Consultation
Meeting of Bagamoyo Town stakeholders to agree on engaging in the SUDPF process. The
Consultation formed a 10-person team for steering and coordinating the SUDPF process. The
SUDPF Team, which comprised representations from the government, business and community
sectors, started the work of spearheading the SUDPF process with respect to the town alongside
their other official duties. BDC designated its Council Chamber to accommodate the Team
and the rest of the town’s stakeholders as they engage in the SUDPF process. In July 2000
BDC contracted consultants that are based in Dar es Salaam to backstop the town’s stakeholders
while engaging in the SUDPF process. The consultants had to backstop the SUDPF Team,
issue-specific taskforces and other town’s stakeholders in adopting and sustaining the process
in terms of maximum stakeholders’ participation and partnerships in plan preparation
and implementation and operation of an urban environmental management information
system.
4.3.2. Participatory rapid appraisal of the town developmental and environmental profiles
The SUDPF Team, while backstopped by the consultants, had in November 2000 mobilized
the participation and partnerships of the town’s stakeholders through a series of sensitization
workshops. The workshops served as forums for participatory rapid appraisal of the town’s
developmental and environmental profiles whereby focused group interviews were conducted.
Focused group interviews were conducted for the following town’s stakeholders: BDC staff
and councillors, Central Government staff based in the town, state-owned enterprises including
utility agencies, the business sector, civil-society organizations (CSOs), and local community-
based organizations (CBOs). During each workshop, the SUDPF Team recorded every
participant’s discussion of a critical issue. The Team encouraged the workshop participants
to submit later any written supplements to their verbal contributions. However, the Team
required every functional head in BDC to submit a written sectoral report based on a common
format.
4.3.3. Stakeholders’ agreement on critical issues and issue-specific taskforces

The SUDPF Team had in February 2001 compiled the verbal and written submissions
of all participants into the town’s developmental and environmental profiles that the consultants
edited. The SUDPF Team had on 14 February 2001 convened and conducted the second
Consultation Meeting of Bagamoyo Town stakeholders to present the town’s profile. After
the presentation, the town’s stakeholders deliberated on the profile and agreed to establish and
work in issue-specific taskforces in order to address the critical issues that result from
development–environment interactions as outlined above. During the consultation the town’s
ARTICLE IN PRESS
stakeholders empowered the SUDPF Team to spearhead the establishment and operation of the
respective issue-specific taskforces. The Team had then increased in number to 17 following the
addition of coordinators of all issue-specific taskforces. The town’s stakeholders who composed
the second Consultation Meeting had participated in workshops that the SUDPF Team had
organized for participatory rapid appraisal of the town’s profile and the first Consultation
Meeting.
4.3.4. Operationalizing the issue-specific taskforces and SUDPF compilation

The SUDPF Team had from February to April 2001 facilitated the working sessions of five
issue-specific taskforces. Each taskforce worked on the respective critical issue and produced
packages of workable strategies and bankable projects to address the respective issues. Ten to 15
participants had in each taskforce met once or twice a week in the Council Chamber to develop
strategies and projects that are required to address respective issues. The Team recorded the
deliberations of each taskforce. Each critical issue was subdivided into several sub-issues. Analysis
of each critical issue included the following parameters:
(i) Nature, extent, and indicators of the specific critical issue.
(ii) Causes and effects of the specific critical issue.
(iii) Locational analysis and pattern of occurrence of the specific critical issue.
(iv) Stakeholders’ earlier and current initiatives to address the specific critical issue.
(v) Objectives and targets in addressing the specific critical issue.
(vi) Workable strategies and bankable projects for addressing each specific critical issue.
The Team had in April 2001 compiled the strategies and projects of the taskforces into a
SUDPF that the consultants edited.
4.3.5. Stakeholders’ agreement on the SUDPF and implementing team

The SUDPF Team had on 20 December 2001 convened and conducted the third Consultation
Meeting of Bagamoyo Town stakeholders to present the workable strategies and bankable
projects as SUDPF. After the presentation the town’s stakeholders deliberated on the strategies
and projects and agreed to empower the SUDPF Team, using existing or new taskforces, to
coordinate the implementation of the agreed courses of action in order to address the critical
issues. The town’s stakeholders who composed the Consultation Meeting had participated in the
earlier Consultation meetings and participatory rapid appraisal workshops. It is worthy noting at
this juncture that because of the participatory nature of the SUDPF process, the third
Consultation Meeting had been delayed by 8 months, from April to December 2001. It did not
take place earlier because of conceptual conflicts over the nature of outputs of the SUDPF process
along the arguments that Halla and Majani (1999a) had stated in the case of a similar process that
involved Dar es Salaam City.
4.4. Implementation of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF
4.4.1. Sustained SUDPF process

Bagamoyo town-stakeholders have until today, 30 June 2003, continued to sustain the SUDPF
process as the SUDPF Implementing Team has continued to meet every Wednesday afternoon for
ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 h to deliberate on resource mobilization, Issue-Specific Stakeholders have continued to meet

when need arises, and the town-wide consultation meetings have continued to take place at least
once a year in lieu of the required quarterly frequency to deliberate on SUDPF implementation.
4.4.2. Managing stone town development and conservation

In terms of SUDPF implementation, the Sida has since early 2002 sponsored the organization
and conduction of the first international conference on promoting Bagamoyo Stone Town as a
candidate on the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
World Heritage List. The conference, which took place in the town in the second week of
September 2002, drew participants from the fields of archaeology, history, anthropology,
architectural studies, geography, linguistics, history of religion, and urban development. As a
prerequisite for the conference and UNESCO nomination file, Sida had from July to September
2002 funded emergency rehabilitation of some historically landmark buildings within the stone
town of Bagamoyo. It is noteworthy that a candidate for the UNESCO list must exhibit visible
qualities in order to be qualified (Sida, 2000). In the case of Bagamoyo the main structures
representing the caravan and slave trade are the old Arab Boma, the Caravan Serai, and the
Catholic Mission station. The Catholic Mission station was established to fight against slavery
and to purchase slaves sold in Bagamoyo in order to free them. The mission station contains a
small museum, which is a landmark in the fight against slavery. The Caravan Serai is the single
most important building connected with both the caravan trade and the slave trade. Caravan
porters rested here before they started their long march back to the central parts of the African
Continent. Slaves were kept in this compound before being shipped to Zanzibar. Sida is
considering contributing to the funding of major rehabilitation of the Stone Town buildings and
utilities by 2005 along the lines of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF.
4.4.3. Managing the tapping of the coastal resources

The SUDPF Implementing Team is in the process of action planning to mobilize Bagamoyo
stakeholders to contribute the required resources for executing the following proposals:
(i) Embark on emergency and routine environmental cleanliness campaign with respect to the
beach through a participatory process involving key beach stakeholders;
(ii) construct access paths to the beach including beach parking and landscaping through a
participatory process involving beach developers, beach goers and other beach operators;
(iii) renovate the beach fish market including improving public sanitary facilities;
(iv) sensitise coast users to tap the ocean resources in an environmentally sustainable manner and
(v) develop the naturally occurring harbour at Mbegani Fisheries Institute to cater for sea-
transport with respect to Bagamoyo town and district.
4.4.4. Strengthening the economic base

In terms of SUDPF implementation, the Sida has since July 2002 sponsored the construction of
Bagamoyo Town new central bus station, which is aimed at supporting the related urban
livelihoods and other survival strategies. Sida has at the same time sponsored also the
construction of a new marketplace for one of the town’s unplanned neighbourhoods, namely
Magomeni, which is aimed at supporting the related urban livelihoods and other survival
ARTICLE IN PRESS
strategies. Sida is considering to also contribute the funding of other income-generating ventures
that would support urban livelihoods and other survival strategies with respect to the urban poor
and the disadvantaged community groups in the town by 2005 along the lines of the 2001
Bagamoyo SUDPF. The SUDPF Implementing Team is in the process of action planning to
mobilize Bagamoyo stakeholders in government, business and civil society to invest in income-
generating activities such as the proposed venture to establish and operate a centre for informal
sector promotion in the town.
4.4.5. Improving utilities and services and enhancing the environment

In terms of SUDPF implementation, the Sida has since July 2002 sponsored the re-construction
of Bagamoyo College of Arts, which is aimed at enabling the town to serve as a centre of
excellence in training the cadre that would operate in the cultural, historical, archaeological and
performing arts for local, national and international needs. The Central Government Ministry of
Natural Resources and Tourism is considering to operate a branch of its National Hotels and
Tourism Management Training Institute. Bagamoyo Roman Catholic Mission has since late
1990s expanded the enrolment of female students to undergo a 6-year high-quality secondary
education. Sida is considering to also contribute the funding of major improvement of the town’s
infrastructure including a sanitary landfill and abattoir by 2005 along the lines of the 2001
Bagamoyo SUDPF.
4.4.6. Managing urban expansion and land use

In terms of SUDPF implementation, the Sida has in July 2002 sponsored the office equipment
and the initial 12-month operations of the SUDPF Implementing Team. Prior to Sida’s
contribution the Central Government Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism and the
BDC had since January 2002 facilitated the establishment and operations of the office of the
SUDPF Implementing Team including premises for free office accommodation. Sida is
considering to also contribute the funding of major SUDPF strategies and projects, including
the running of its office, by 2005 along the lines of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF. Sida would also
fund aerial photography for updating the town’s base-map, which would be used by the SUDPF
Implementing Team.
Meanwhile, the SUDPF Team has since November 2000 continued to develop a non-
computerized Urban Environmental Management Information System (UEMIS) in the SUDPF
office. The Team has mobilized and facilitated the SUDPF Issue-Specific Taskforces and other
town stakeholders to contribute the necessary inputs for the capture of spatial and non-spatial
data into UEMIS. Although the SUDPF office is not yet equipped with computerized UEMIS,
the Team operates a series of reports that is readily accessible to the town’s stakeholders. To
computerize the report series as UEMIS, the SUDPF process is action-planning for resource
mobilization to facilitate further capture of spatial and non-spatial data including digitizing the
town’s maps after completion of up-to-date town’s base-map, which in turn is subject to taking
the town’s aerial photographs. The available digital base-map covers only a minor portion of the
town’s rapid development.
As regards managing urban expansion and land-use, the SUDPF Team has since
November 2000 continued to generate a general planning scheme through the participation and
partnerships of the town’s stakeholders. The general planning scheme comprises action planning
ARTICLE IN PRESS
for workable strategies and bankable projects as outlined under the above sections of
SUDPF Implementation on the one hand, and the flexible framework for urban expansion and
efficient land use on the other hand. The flexible framework for urban expansion and efficient
land use consists of development conditions by development area and is dynamic in that the
SUDPF Team may through the SUDPF process modify the development areas and the
development conditions if necessitated by new rounds of development pressure and environmental
conflicts.
To generate the flexible framework for urban expansion and efficient land use, the SUDPF
Team has since November 2000 accomplished the following activities:
(a) Analysed the extent of the development–environment interactions and the resulting levels of
development pressure and environmental conflicts as they occur in various areas of the town.
The analysis culminated in a summary of environmental characteristics and development
activities that are dominant in each identified area of the town.
(b) Sub-divided, on the basis of Action (a) above, the town into 15 environmentally sustainable
development areas for the purpose of accommodating existing and anticipated environment-
friendly development activities.
(c) Analysed development activities that each development area can attract based on the concepts
of rent-paying capability and environmentally sustainable development.
(d) Established development conditions that are acceptable to the town’s stakeholders for
accommodating existing and anticipated development activities in each development area.
(e) Set a procedure for applying the development conditions established under Action (d) above
in terms of roles to be played by the law-enforcement machinery, investors and developers,
the general public, and the SUDPF Implementing Team. The procedure entails three steps:
(i) Development coordination scrutiny through the SUDPF process;
(ii) development control scrutiny through zoning regulations and
(iii) development implementation through the investment process.
Under development coordination scrutiny through the SUDPF process, a prospective

developer would submit the respective development proposals to the SUDPF Implementing
Team, through its Issue-Specific Taskforce on Managing Urban Expansion and Land Use. Then
the SUDPF Team and the developer would scrutinize the proposals against the development
conditions agreed for each development area. If the proposed activity in a development area of
first preference of the developer were listed under the respective development area, then the Team
would recommend that the developer could proceed to execute the activity subject to fulfilling the
respective development conditions. If this were not the case, then the Team and the developer
would negotiate on executing the activity in the next preferred development area. The Team
would make such recommendation to the development control machinery of BDC. Under
development control scrutiny through zoning regulations, the prospective developer would then
submit the respective development proposals together with the recommendation of the SUDPF
Team to BDC for processing a building permit. This is a procedural step that has to conform to
zoning regulations including a town-planning detailed scheme, a surveyor’s deed plan, a land-
registrar’s title deed, and the Council’s building permit. Under development implementation
through the investment process the following happens. After passing the above two steps of the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
scrutiny process the developer would then proceed to develop the respective land parcel for the
proposed activity through the normal investment procedures.
The analysis of the planning area with respect to Bagamoyo Town, using the development-
area concept, has culminated into 15 development areas shown in Fig. 1 and outlined
as follows:
Dunda is composed of the stone town in Dunda Ward. Characterized by historic sites and
buildings for cultural heritage, aged and under-capacity basic utilities, beach endowment,
and urban decay, this development area has attracted historic cultural heritage tourism
and conservation activities, beach resorts, office accommodation, and institutional, commercial
and residential activities. Meanwhile, the SUDPF process has endorsed the continuation of
the following development activities in this development area: historic cultural heritage tourism
and conservation activities, beach resorts, office accommodation, and institutional, commercial
and residential activities. In so doing, investors and developers of this development area should
heed to the following development conditions: conserve the historic cultural heritage; provide
parking facilities; permit beach access; improve basic utilities; and keep the beach clean
and safe.
Nunge-Chumvi is composed of the northeast of the town and eastern Magomeni Ward. Having
beach endowment and motorable tracks, this development area accommodates beach resorts and
institutional activities. Endorsed are beach resorts and institutional and residential activities.
Development conditions are to permit beach access, keep the beach clean and safe, and improve
basic utilities.
Mwanamakuka is composed of the southeast of the town in Dunda Ward including the College
of Arts and Sabasaba Grounds. Having beach endowment and poor accessibility, this
development area accommodates institutional, residential and commercial activities. Endorsed
are beach resorts and institutional and residential activities. Development conditions are to permit
beach access, keep the beach clean and safe, and improve basic utilities.
Soko-Jipya is composed of the town-centre area in Dunda Ward occupying the area between
the town bus station and Dar es Salaam Road. Accommodating the newer segment of the central
business district and aged and under-capacity basic utilities, this development area has attracted
office accommodation, public transport terminals and commercial–residential activities. Endorsed
are commercial–residential activities, office accommodation and public transport terminals. The
development condition is to improve basic utilities.
Mawanakalenga is composed of Block P in Dunda Ward between Kaole/Mbegani Road and
Dar es Salaam Road. Being highly accessible by both pedestrian and motor-vehicular traffic, this
development area is characterized by newly planned and serviced residential and commercial
development. Endorsed are residential, commercial and office accommodation activities. The
Misheni is composed of the area occupied by the Roman Catholic Mission and part of
Mangesani in Magomeni Ward to the northwest of the town. Characterized by historic sites and
buildings for cultural heritage, high water table but well drained terrain, coconut and mango trees,
this development area has attracted institutional, religious functions, and historic cultural heritage
tourism and conservation activities. Endorsed are religious functions, institutional, and historic
cultural heritage tourism and conservation activities. Development conditions are to improve
basic utilities, conserve the historic cultural heritage, and conserve trees.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Majengo is composed of Majengo and Ukuni areas in Magomeni Ward to the South of the new
marketplace. Being accessible by dirty tracks and over-flooding when it rains, this development
area accommodates residential, commercial and light manufacturing. Endorsed are solid-waste
dumping, light manufacturing, commercial and residential activities. The development condition
is to improve basic utilities.
Mangesani is composed of the central part of Dunda Ward. Being prone to floods, poorly
drained, and having high water table this development area accommodates residential and
commercial activities. Endorsed are residential and commercial activities. The development
condition is to improve basic utilities.
Magambani is composed of Magambani (or Bagamoyo) Secondary School and its surroundings
in Dunda Ward to the southeast of the town. Being mostly rural and endowed with natural
vegetation and mangrove swamps this development area accommodates urban farming and
institutional and residential activities. Endorsed are urban farming, institutional, residential and
commercial activities. Development conditions are to improve basic utilities and conserve
mangrove swamps.
Magomeni is composed of a greater part of Magomeni Ward to the west of the town.
Characterized by unplanned and unserviced residential development including limited vehicular
accessibility and flooding in rains, this development area accommodates residential and
commercial activities. Endorsed are residential, commercial and institutional activities. The
Kaole is composed of Kaole Village, Kaole Ruins and its surroundings in Magomeni Ward to
the southeast of the town. Endowed with historic sites and buildings of cultural heritage, coastal
slopes, mangrove swamps and natural vegetation this development area accommodates activities
related to historic heritage conservation, residential and urban farming. Endorsed are historic
heritage conservation, urban farming, and institutional, residential and commercial activities.
Development conditions are to improve basic utilities, conserve the historic cultural heritage, and
conserve the natural vegetation.
Sunguvuni is composed of the northwest of the town in Magomeni Ward. Endowed with coastal
resources like mangroves, this development area has salt-works being the dominant activity.
Endorsed are salt-works, light manufacturing, and institutional, recreational and residential
activities. Development conditions are to improve basic utilities, conserve mangrove forests, and
keep the coast clean and safe.
Bong’wa is composed of the swampy area along Dar es Salaam Road in Magomeni Ward.
Endowed by a wetland, high water table, and clay soils, this development area is not well drained.
As such urban farming (paddy cultivation) is a dominant development activity. The endorsed is
urban farming (paddy cultivation) activity. The development condition is to conserve the natural
swampy ecosystem.
Mbegani is composed of the southeast of the town including Mbegani Fisheries Institute in
Magomeni Ward. Endowed with a natural harbour setting, mangrove forests, and coastal and
offshore fishing grounds, this development area is readily accessible to both Bagamoyo and Dar es
Salaam. It accommodates fishing, fish-processing, urban farming, and institutional and
residential–commercial activities. Endorsed are harbour, fishing, fish processing, urban farming,
and institutional, residential and commercial activities. Development conditions are to improve
basic utilities, keep the coast clean and safe, and conserve mangrove forests.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Kiromo is composed of Kiromo and other surrounding villages in Magomeni Ward to the south
of the town. Endowed with natural vegetation, it is rural with scattered villages practising urban
farming. Endorsed are urban farming and any other demanding and environment-friendly
activities. Development conditions are to conserve the natural ecological systems and harness the
natural resources for environmentally sustainable human development.
5. Concluding remarks: toward sustained participatory planning
In order to sustain participatory urban planning through engaging in the SUDPF process, the
stakeholders of a given city should heed to salient features involved in the following critical
elements: scope and approach to urban development planning, form of urban development
planning team, resource mobilization for SUDPF implementation, problem solving and conflict
resolving by the SUDPF process, and SUDPF implementing team and institutional arrangements.
Regarding the scope of urban development planning, the SUDPF process has in Bagamoyo
been applicable at the level of the city, which involves preparation and implementation of a
general planning scheme. The general planning scheme, which serves as a development-
coordinating tool, involves identification and action planning for workable strategies and
bankable projects to solve problems on the one hand, and generation and enforcement of a
flexible framework for land-use planning to resolve conflicts on the other hand. This is the level of
urban development planning that lends itself to the participatory process involving the town
stakeholders because it focuses on dominant critical issues cutting across sectors and levels of
society. As such the SUDPF process has not involved sectoral issues that lend themselves to
preparation and implementation of a detailed planning scheme at the sub-city level. The detailed
planning scheme, which serves as a development-controlling tool, involves land subdivision and
enforcement of zoning regulations. This is the level of urban development planning that lends
itself to the technocratic process involving town planning and urban designing professionals
because it focuses on sectoral issues that require interpretation and enforcement of zoning
regulations. So, if the SUDPF Implementing Team and other stakeholders in the context of the
2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF will continue to heed to such separation of urban-development-planning
roles then the SUDPF process should be sustained.
On the approach to urban development planning, the nature of the urban-development-
planning process that Bagamoyo stakeholders have adopted for the town through the SUDPF
process is strategic, as opposed to comprehensive. It is strategic in that the SUDPF process has
focused on only strategic or critical issues of the town’s development. As such the planning
process has not been so comprehensive as to include all the issues involved in the town. A strategic
or critical issue is one that is cutting across the sectors and levels of society such that it can only be
addressed through the participation and partnerships of the issue-specific stakeholders from
government, business and the civil society at the levels of the town, district, region, nation and
international community. The SUDPF process has identified strategic or critical issues relating to
stone-town development and conservation, environmentally sustainable tapping of beach and
coastal resources, strengthening the economic base, improving urban utilities and services
including enhancing the urban environment, and managing urban expansion and efficient land
use. So, if the SUDPF Implementing Team and other stakeholders in the context of the 2001
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Bagamoyo SUDPF will continue to heed to such strategic citywide development planning then the
SUDPF process should be sustained.
In terms of form of urban development planning team, the nature of the urban-development-
planning process that Bagamoyo stakeholders have adopted for the town through the SUDPF
process is participatory, as opposed to technocratic. It is participatory in that the SUDPF process
has involved issue-specific stakeholders from government, business and civil society at the levels of
the town, district, region, nation and international community. As such the planning process has
not been so technocratic as to exclude some of the issue-specific stakeholders within and outside
the town. Issue-specific stakeholders emanate from three major categories of society:
(i) Person(s) or institution(s) benefitting or suffering from a given strategic or critical issue.
(ii) Person(s) or institution(s) causing the given strategic or critical issue.
(iii) Person(s) or institution(s) having legal mandate and responsibility to intervene to solve or
resolve the given strategic or critical issue.
Among the town stakeholders that the SUDPF process has involved include the following:
Bagamoyo District Council, Bagamoyo District Commissioner’s Office, Coast Regional
Commissioner’s Office, and Department of Antiquities of the Central-Government Ministry of
Natural Resources and Tourism, and the University of Dar es Salaam on the Government sector.
Others include Bagamoyo Investors’ Association, Dar es Salaam Water and Sewerage Authority,
Tanzania Electricity Supply Company, and Urban Management Consultants Limited on the
Business sector. Others include Bagamoyo Roman Catholic Mission, Bagamoyo Muslims
Association, Kibaha Centre for Informal Sector Promotion, and several non-governmental and
community-based organizations (NGOs and CBOs) on the Civil-Society sector. So, if the SUDPF
Implementing Team and other stakeholders in the context of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF will
continue to heed to such participatory citywide development planning then the SUDPF process
should be sustained.
As regards resource mobilization for SUDPF implementation, the SUDPF process has in
Bagamoyo been sustained by its ability to mobilize adequate resources for the preparation and
implementation of the SUDPF as outlined above under the Section on SUDPF Implementation.
Various stakeholder institutions have had so much stakes with the development of Bagamoyo
Town that they have contributed to the SUDPF process their resources in the form of funding,
technical backstopping, office and equipment, advice and information, labour-time and otherwise.
So, if the SUDPF Implementing Team and other stakeholders in the context of the 2001
Bagamoyo SUDPF will continue to mobilize resources for SUDPF implementation then the
SUDPF process should be sustained.
Problem solving and resolving conflicts related to urban expansion and land use should be the
real and ultimate outputs of the SUDPF process. To this end, the SUDPF process has in
Bagamoyo been aimed at problem solving and conflict resolving such that the town dwellers
would benefit in terms of citywide development, generally, and improved living standards,
specifically. The town dwellers look forward to the SUDPF process to really tackle the dominant
problems and conflicts relate to developing and conserving the Stone Town, efficient tapping of
the beach and coastal resources, increasing jobs and other income-generating activities, improving
access to public utilities and services including environment quality, and managing urban
expansion and efficient land use. This is the most terminal and conclusive element for sustaining
ARTICLE IN PRESS
the SUDPF process, which would take some time to materialize. However, all indicators as hinted
upon above under the Section of SUDPF Implementation point to greater likelihood of the
SUDPF process to solve problems and resolve conflicts prevalent in Bagamoyo Town. So, if the
SUDPF Implementing Team and other stakeholders in the context of the 2001 Bagamoyo
SUDPF will continue to join together to implement SUDPF as a citywide planning and
management tool then the SUDPF process should be sustained.
Lastly but not least, SUDPF implementing team and institutional arrangements should be
adequately stakeholder accommodating and rewarding. In this regard, the SUDPF process has in
Bagamoyo been subjected to a set of institutional arrangements that befit the above-outlined
critical elements, namely planning scope, approach, form, resources and outputs. Stakeholders
participating in the Bagamoyo SUDPF process are focused in their course of action and continue
to be committed to preparation and implementation of the town’s general planning scheme in as
long as the specified strategic or critical issues have not yet been squarely addressed. The stakes
that the stakeholders bear with respect to the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF process in terms of group
coordination and participation is not monetary centred, which cannot in itself sustain the SUDPF
process. The sustaining stake for one to coordinate and participate in the SUDPF process at the
levels of Implementing Team, Issue-Specific Taskforce, Citywide Consultative Meeting or
otherwise is the urge for a person or institution to bring a strategic or critical issue to the notice of
other stakeholders whose views, positions, resources and agreement are necessary to address the
given issues squarely. Through these levels of SUDPF institutional arrangements issue-specific
stakeholders are able to negotiate, translate agreements into action(s), draw on each other’s
resources and expertise for conflict resolution and problem solving, mobilize effective
participation and forge stable partnerships among themselves, and continue to work together
until each strategic or critical issue has been squarely addressed. So, if the SUDPF Implementing
Team and other stakeholders in the context of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF will continue to heed
to such set of institutional arrangements for citywide development planning then the SUDPF
process should be sustained.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements are due to the following parties. First, the Government of Sweden that has
since 2000 extended financial assistance to Bagamoyo District Council (BDC) for backstopping
Bagamoyo Town stakeholders in engaging in the process of preparing and executing a strategic
urban development planning framework (SUDPF). Secondly, my colleagues, namely Mr. Amini
Mturi, Mr. Don Kamamba, Mr. Albinus Makalle, Mrs. Nagy Kaboyoka and Dr. Phlip
Mwapilinda whom together we have been backstopping technically the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF
process. Thirdly, the 17-person SUDPF Implementing Team for having well understudied the
above-mentioned backstopping team of SUDPF consultants. Fourthly, second-year class of my
undergraduate students of urban and regional planning who in April 2000 did fieldwork in
participatory and strategic urban development planning in Bagamoyo Town. The author had in
September 2002 presented a modified version of this paper to a 5-day international conference on
Bagamoyo as a World Heritage Site held in Bagamoyo Town and sponsored by the Swedish
International Development Agency (Sida).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
References
Arimah, B., & Adeagbo, D. (2000). Compliance with urban development and planning regulations in Ibadan, Nigeria.
Habitat International, 24(3), 279–294.
BDC. (2001). Documentation series on Bagamoyo strategic urban development planning framework (SUDPF). Bagamoyo:
Bagamoyo District Council.
Choguill, C. (1999). Community infrastructure for low-income cities: The potential for progressive improvement.
Habitat International, 23(2), 289–301.
Halla, F. (1994). A co-ordinating and participatory approach to managing cities: The case of sustainable Dar es Salaam
project in Tanzania. Habitat International, 18(3), 19–31.
Halla, F. (1999). A framework for analysis of urban growth and development planning. Dar es Salaam: Dar es Salaam
University Press (DUP 1996 Limited).
Halla, F. (2000). Engaging in environmental planning and management: A false start in Dar es Salaam. The Journal of
Building and Land Development, 5(3), 62–71.
Halla, F. (2002). Preparation and implementation of a general planning scheme in Tanzania: Kahama strategic urban
development planning framework. Habitat International, 26(2002), 281–293.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1997). Environmental management strategy and environmental planning and management process
for Dar es Salaam. Dar es Salaam: Dar es Salaam City Commission.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1999a). The environmental planning and management process and the conflict over outputs in
Dar es Salaam. Habitat International, 23(3), 339–350.
Halla, F., & Majani, B. (1999b). Innovative ways for solid waste management in Dar es Salaam: Toward stakeholder
partnerships. Habitat International, 23(3), 351–361.
Healey, P. (1994). Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review, 63(2),
143–162.
Innes, J. (1996). Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the
American Planning Association, 62(4), 460–472.
Ogu, V. (2000). Stakeholders’ partnership approach to infrastructure provision and management in developing world
cities: Lessons from the sustainable Ibadan project. Habitat International, 24(4), 517–533.
Sida. (2000). Concept paper for Swedish contribution to Bagamoyo development. Dar es Salaam: Swedish International
Development Agency.
Steinberg, F., & Sara, L. (2000). The Peru urban management programme: Linking capacity building with local
realities. Habitat International, 24(4), 417–431.
Tugwell, R. (1974). The fourth power. In P. Salvador (Ed.), Tugwell’s thoughts on planning (pp. 149–186). Puerto Rico:
University of Puerto Rico Press.
URT. (1956). Town and country planning ordinance (Revised in 1961). Dar es Salaam: United Republic of Tanzania
Government Printer.
URT. (1964). Antiquities Act: Bagamoyo stone town conservation area. Dar es Salaam: United Republic of Tanzania
Government Printer.

1 s2.0 S0197397503000778 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0197397503000778 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

Critical elements in sustaining participatory planning:

*Tel.: +255-744-596560; fax: +225-22-2775391.

138 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 139

2. Conceptual and empirical bases

2.1. Analysing the roles of urban planning

2.2. Operational and professional conflicts in urban planning practices

140 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

2.3. From technocratic/comprehensive to participatory/strategic urban planning

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 141

3. Critical elements in sustaining participatory urban planning

3.1. Commitment of issue-specific stakeholders’ participation and partnerships

3.2. Strategic flexibility

142 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

3.3. Continuity and replication in terms of mobilizing interest and resources

Besides the above two assumptions on strengths of an acceptable approach to preparing

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 143

3.5. Institutional arrangements for the SUDPF process

3.6. Linking the SUDPF process to zoning and investment processes

144 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

4. Bagamoyo strategic urban development planning framework

4.1. Background to Bagamoyo town

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 145

Fig. 1. Bagamoyo development areas.

4.2. Critical issues prompting participatory urban development planning

4.2.1. The challenge of urban development versus stone-town conservation

146 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 147

4.2.2. Managing beach resort tourism

4.2.3. Managing the tapping of the coastal resources

148 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 149

4.2.5. Managing the sanitation

4.2.6. Managing urban expansion and land use

150 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

4.3. Milestones of the participatory urban development planning process

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 151

4.3.3. Stakeholders’ agreement on critical issues and issue-specific taskforces

152 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

4.3.4. Operationalizing the issue-specific taskforces and SUDPF compilation

4.3.5. Stakeholders’ agreement on the SUDPF and implementing team

4.4. Implementation of the 2001 Bagamoyo SUDPF

4.4.1. Sustained SUDPF process

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 153

4 h to deliberate on resource mobilization, Issue-Speciﬁc Stakeholders have continued to meet

4.4.2. Managing stone town development and conservation

4.4.3. Managing the tapping of the coastal resources

4.4.4. Strengthening the economic base

154 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

4.4.5. Improving utilities and services and enhancing the environment

4.4.6. Managing urban expansion and land use

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 155

Under development coordination scrutiny through the SUDPF process, a prospective

156 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 157

158 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

5. Concluding remarks: toward sustained participatory planning

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 159

160 F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161

F. Halla / Habitat International 29 (2005) 137–161 161

You might also like