| description abstract | Precarious districts are one of the world’s problems that challenge the international community due to their accelerated development and the complexity of their social, economic, and environmental dimension. Studying this problem through the slum of Sidi-Harb, located west of the city of Annaba, is the main objective of this work. In 2000, this shantytown was the subject of a project for resorption of precarious housing (RPH) initiated by the Algerian government with the support of the World Bank. The RPH as an international pilot program constituted a new model of urban planning action in which the different actors involved in the project process were put in a situation of coproduction. Conducted by the Ministry of Housing, which is responsible for supervision and coordination at the central level, this program aims to improve the living conditions of the poor by offering them housing that meets the construction standards set by the regulations. Thus, the study aims at defining the principles of this program and the modalities of its implementation by measuring the gap between the set objectives and a contrasting sociospatial reality. In order to meet this objective, the analysis method chosen uses a qualitative research technique that favors interview surveys and behavioral observation for a project that is said to be socially inclusive and of high quality at low cost. The results of this study show that rehabilitation and resorption policies have ambivalent and multidimensional effects. Their success therefore remains limited. Such a result is indicative of undermined public action. The intervention process is carried out in a random and circumstantial manner, lacking a scientific framework, and followed the directives of political management and not that of the experts and the mobilized parties. The Sidi-Harb participatory evolutionary housing program is an illustrative example of this process. In addition to the failure to take into account the social practices and dynamics in this neighborhood, the failure of the project is mainly related to the financing and the inadequacy of the standards and methodological procedures of the socioeconomic and urban realities. Intervention in precarious neighborhoods is not always synonymous with success, and for this to happen, these neighborhoods must be integrated into a genuine city project. The absence of a strategy for the effective implementation of public action produces a large gap between the discourse, the ambitions, and the reality on the ground. | |
