تأمين ملكية االراضى أداة للتحكم فى التلوث وتحسين نوعية البيئة فى

المستقرات الالرسمية

د. أحمدعثمان الخولى

أستاذ مشارك بقسم الهندسة المعمارية، جامعة المنوفية، جمهورية مصر العربية

الملخصالنمو االقتصادى والسكانى والذى حل بالمناطق ظهرت المشاكل البيئية مواكبة التطور الصناعى و

الحضرية، فقد اذداد حجم المخلفات وتنوع من الناحية الكيفية فى نهايات القرن العشرين نتيجة

تحوالت فى كال من عمليات االنتاج وانماط االستهالك وصلت لمستويات اعلى من ذى قبل.

لب مدن العالم النامى والتى من المتوقع أن وفى ذات الحين ظهرت مناطق االسكان الالرسمى فى اغ

تكون محل الزيادة السكانية فى العقود االولى من االلفية الجديدة، وتفتقد اغلب تلك المستقرات

الالرسمية الطار يؤمن وينظم اعمال حيازة االراضى، كما ان تلك المناطق هى مصدر لجميع انواع

والغازية، كما ان تلك المناطق تستهلك الموارد الطبيعية التلوث البيئى فى صوره الصلبة والسائلة

بانماط تهدد استدامة الموارد بتلويث المتجددة منها مثل تلوث المياه واهدار الموارد الطبيعية خاصة

غير المتجدد منها مثل االسماك بالصيد الجائر وذلك لدعم سبل الترزق والتعيش على سبيل المثال،

ى تؤثر بالسلب على نوعية البيئة الحضرية كما تعقد مشاكل البيئة العالمية مثل وتلك المناطق بالتال

تغير المناخ، واالحتباس الحرارى، وتأكل طبقة االوزون، وتهديد التنوع البيولوجى، والتصحر

والجفاف، وتلوث المياه الدولية.

ة يفترض اوال ويعرض البحث نموذج اقتصادى رياضى لتوطن االنشطة االقتصادية فى المدين

تخفيض تكاليف التوطن من خالل استبدال تكاليف النقل والمواصالت اليجار الوحدة االرضية

المخصصة لالسكان حيث تهدف االسر الى تعظيم دالة منفعتها الختيار امثل المواقع فى المدينة للسكن

م ارباحها من خالل فى ظل حدود ميزانيتها ؛ كما يفترض النموذج أن المنشاءات االقتصادية تعظ

التنافس للتوطن بمركز المدينة حيث تتوافر فرص العمل وتنخفض تكاليف النقل واالتصال، ويستفاد

من البنية والقاعدة االقتصادية المتوفرة بقلب المدينة، بينما تتوطن مراكز االنتاج قرب نقاط التصدير

والنهرية والبحرية، او بالقرب من مصدر مثل الموانئ والمطارات، على الطرق االقليمية سواء البرية

الخامات كالمناجم وابار الغاز والبترول.

ويقدم النموذج المعروض بالبحث شرح وتفسير لتناقضات المدينة المعاصرة مثل توطن االسر الفقيرة

بمركز المدينة حيث تكون اسعار االراضى اغالها، وتوطن االسر الغنية على اطراف المدينة حيث

سعر الوحدة االرضية لالستخدامات الحضرية ادناها، كما يفسر ظهور المناطق الالرسمية يصل

خارج الكتلة العمرانية مجاورة بذلك سكن االغنياء.

أن ظهور المناطق الالرسمية اليعتبر انهيار للسوق ولكن السوق الرسمى اليعترف بطلب الفقراء

الفعال، لذلك يظهر سوق الرسمى يوفر الوحدات حيث ان دخلهم اليؤهلهم ليكونوا جزء من الطلب

السكنية المتدهورة للمهمشين من سكان الحضر حيث يتزاحمون فى وسط المدينة على اسطح

العمارات و بدروماتها مشتركين فى الخدمات مثل الحمام والمطبخ موفرين بذلك تكاليف االنتقال، او

وفروا لهم العمالة الخدمية مثل اعمال الصيانةيعيشوا مجاورين االغنياء على اطراف المدينة لي

الكهربائية والميكانيكية والمنزلية مثل صيانة السيارات والسباك والطباخ وخدم المنازل.

2

أن تامين حيازة االراضى فى تلك المناطق يمكن ان تحسن نوعية البيئة وتخفض االنبعاثات الصادرة

احتاللهم الراضى اليملكونها اليمنحهم الدافع لالدخار منها حيث أن سكن الفقراء لمساكن جوازية و

واالستثمار وبذلك تتحول الموارد الطبيعية ومنها االراضى الى رأس مال غير مستغل وثروة مهدره

لذا فان المناطق الالرسمية تعتبر فرصة تنموية وليست عبء، والحل هو تأسيس سوق فعال من خالل

اضى مما ييسر عملية االتجار والتبادل، ويعطى حائزى االراضى تأمين حقوق الملكية وحيازة االر

االئتمان الالزم والوضع القانونى الذى يسمح للفقراء باألدخار واألستثمار مما يسهم بااليجاب على

اعمال التنمية االقتصادية وادارة الموارد باسلوب رشيد يضع المدينة والوطن على درب التنمية

.المتواصلة والمستدامة

أن تأمين حيازة االراضىعمل سياسى يسمح للفقراء والمهمشين بالمشاركة الفعالة فى صنع القرار

ويضع ادوات االنتاج فى حوزتهم وبالتالى تضيق الفجوة فى الموارد المتاحة وتوفر االمكانات الالزمة

العمال التنمية وحماية البيئة ولتمويل العمال االلتزام بالمعايير البيئية.

لى المستوى القومى، فأن تأمين حيازة االراضى يسهم فى تخفيض نسب التضخم حيث أن االموال وع

المطروحة للتداول فى السوق تدعم بسندات ملكية عقارية، كما أن تأمين حيازة االراضى وملكيتها

يدعم القاعدة الضريبية للحكومة ويضيف الى مواردها.

Land Tenure: A Tool for Controlling Pollution and Improving

Environmental Quality in Informal Settlements

Ahmed O. El-Kholei, Ph.D.

Assoicate Professor, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering,

Menofia University, Egypt

ABSTRACT

Urban settlements are places where large amounts of labor and capital are

mixed with small amounts of land to produce specific commodities and

services. The appropriate mixture of capital, labor and land is the secret for

locating an activity at a specific parcel of land. The model of urban land use,

better known as the monocentric model, provides valuable insights presenting

how and why land is used, and could explain the development of informal

settlements in particular location within the city proper or at the hinterlands.

Informal settlements in developing countries provide their settlers with

means of subsistence. They provide them with shelter and jobs to support

their families. Meanwhile, informal settlements are areas that lack amenities,

particularly social and physical infrastructures, and often the built

environment is degraded.

Environment is the source for materials to be used as inputs in the production

process, and the medium where wastes are dumped. Pollution results from

the return of unmanaged,untreated wastes to the environment. Firms and

households discharge their wastes to the environment in gaseous, liquid and

solid state.

Informal areas within and around a metropolis are among the sources of

polluting the urban environment, and significantly contribute to global

environmental problems. This paper attempts to show how securing land

tenure for settlers of informal areas is bound to abate pollution and improve

the quality of the environment. The paper uses the model and related body of

the economic theory to argue that registry of real estate, particularly land,

through securing its tenure will mobilize resources needed for improving the

degraded built environment of informal settlements.

2

1. INTRODUCTION

Environmental problems emerged in association with the Industrial

Revolution. Environmental degradation of urban settlements has often

associated with social and political problems in the writings of leading

scholars. Friedrich Engels’ classic piece, The Condition of the Working

Class in England, first published in 1845, clearly presents the impact of rapid

urban growth of European nineteenth century cities on the built environment.

He argued that slums are the residences of the working class. Spatially, he

noted that “poverty often dwells in hidden alleys close to the palaces of the

rich; but, in general, a separate territory has been assigned to it, where,

removed from the sight of the happier classes, it may struggle along as it can”

(Engels [1845] 1986:51)i. He then describes the streets as “generally

unpaved, rough, dirty, filled with vegetable and animal refuse, without

sewers or gutters, but supplied with foul, stagnant pools instead. Further, the

streets serve as drying grounds in fine weather; lines are stretched across

from house to house, and hung with wet clothing”(Ibid.) His description fits

many informal settlements in contemporary urban centers of developing

countries.

The volume of generated wastes discharged in the environment has increased

in the late twentieth century. Waste generation is a function of both

production and consumption processes. Invested capital mixed with hired

labor at certain levels of technological development generates waste as a by-

product of the production process. By the same token, consuming

commodities to fulfill certain needs also generates wastes discharged in the

environment. Discharging wastes in the environment pollutes it, but

unfriendly means of managing wastes complicates the matter. Finally, rapid

urbanization contributes positively to the generation of waste, which in turn

pollutes the environment.

One of the attributes of informal settements in cities of developing countries

is unsecured land tenure and ownership. This paper attempts to argue that

securing land tenure for dwellers of informal settlements has its positive

environmental impacts. It questions, first, reasons for the spatial location of

informal settlements, then, attempts to show that securing land tenure has its

environmental benefits. The paper begins with a model that explains the

spatial allocation of activities within a metropolis, then tries to show how

insecured tenurship of land has its negative impact on the environment.

2. THE MODEL

The basic assumption of the monocentric model is to minimize location costs

by trading-off rents for land against commuting costs (Clark 1982)ii. It is a

model that maximizes households’ utility function subject to their budget

constraint in search for optimum residential locations. The model assumes

3

that the city is located in a featureless plain with one single central business

district (CBD), which is the only employment center in the city. It assumes

perfect competition in the market. According to Mohan (1979)iii

, Wingo

(1961), Kain (1962), Alonso (1965), Mills (1967) and Muth (1969)

developed several versions of the modeliv

.

Housing consumption and commuting costs are positively correlated with

distance from CBD. Meanwhile, heights of buildings, housing expenditures,

land rents and population densities are inversely related to distance from

CBD. Low-income families will save commuting expenses and live in

downtown, crowded slums nearby the CBD. Other low-income families

might reside squatter settlements at the hinterlands of the metropolitan area,

where land rent is the minimum. The decision to which settlement the low-

income family will reside is totally based on access to job markets, which are

often in the informal sector of the urban economy. They will engage in

marginal jobs, such as food vendors, house servants, and in certain instances,

they will engage in illegal activities, such as pan-handling, drug

trafficing…etc. Upper-income families have the option to live close to CBD,

thus reducing commuting costs and willing to bear expensive housing cost; or

to live in new developments, outside the metropolitan area where they enjoy

the amenities associated with low population densities, and consume more

housing services at lower prices.

To prove the above argument, let the utility function of the household be:

U= U (x, q) (1)

where x is the consumption of goods other than housing, and q is the

consumption of housing services, i.e., the utility a consumer derives from

consuming housing per unit of time. Now, let household’s budget line be

defined as:

Y= x+ P(u) q+ T(u, Y) for all T(u)> 0 (2)

where Y is the household income, u is the distance from CBD, P(u) is the

price of housing services that vary by distance from CBD, T is the costs of

commuting and it is function of the distance from CBD, and finally, T(u) is

the partial derivative of commuting costs with respect to distance. Next, let’s

maximize Equation (1) subject to Equation (2) by forming the Lagrangian

function to be:

L = U (x, q) – [Y- µ (x+ P(u) q+ T(u, Y))] for all T(u)> 0 (3)

Let’s derive the partial derivative of this Lagrangian function where µ is the

Lagrangian multiplier, and in this case, it is the marginal utility of money.

The first order condition will be:

(∂L/∂x)= Ux - µ = 0 (3.1)

(∂L/∂q)= Uq - µ = 0 (3.2)

4

(∂L/∂µ)= Y – [x + P(u) q + T(u, Y)]= 0 (3.3)

Therefore

(Ux/Uq) = - (T/P) (4)

and

-q P = T(u) for all T(u) > 0 (5)

Then, an increase in (u) will increase commuting costs by T(u). Under full

equilibrium, savings in housing expenditure balance these commuting costs.

The price of housing services decreases when (u) increases.

On the production side, the model defines firms as profit maximizers.

Assuming all firms have the same identical production function, then their

profits are equal regardless of location. In this case, firms will compete to

locate at the hub of the metropolitan area, i.e., the CBD, to minimize

transportation and transaction costs, and benefit from the agglomerated

economies.

To prove the aforementioned argument, assume that all firms are identical,

and have the same production function, their profit maximization function

will be:

π = pq (L, NL) - rL- α (NL) (6)

where π is profits, L is land inputs, NL is non-land inputs, r is price for land,

and α price of non-land inputs. The housing production function is q (L,NL).

Assuming perfect competition, the prices of L and NL vary by location under

equilibrium. Then

(ru/r) = L/SL (Pu/P) – SNL/SL (αu/α) (7)

where SL is share of land input and SNL is share of non-land inputs.

Adopting the Cobb-Douglas production, which has reciprocal transformation

format, for producing housing, then prices of housing, land rent, building

heights and population densities are bound to fall exponentially when u

increases. The metropolitan area will, therefore, consist of concentric circles

of social and economic activities where the CBD is the hub of these circles.

Users of land make their decisions based on their budget constraint. “The

demand for sites by each activity to the quantity of output of each that could

be sold in the market served” (Heilbrum 1981: 132)v.

The slope of the land rent function, as depicted in Figure 1, measures the

benefit that accessibility confers to a given activity (Heilbrun 1981, Clark

1982). Three factors govern the slope of the rent function:

5

(1) Maintaining contact with the center, the greater the contact with the

CBD the steeper the slope of the rent function.

(2) Size of output, the larger the number of units, the greater the

steepness of the rent function; and finally,

(3) Capital, the more inputs used in the production process, the less land

is needed and used.

Then, corporate activities, such as banks and law firms, will prefer to locate

at the center of the metropolis since they require personal contact.

Manufacturing establishments will utilize proximity to transit terminals, such

as ports and railway stations, by locating on major routes. The labor needed

for the production planst will often live in informal settlements at the

hinterland of the metropolis.

New technological advances in communication and informationmight not

have drastic change on the model and the spatial allocation of activities

within and around the city. These advances merely compressed time and

space needed for the process of capital accumulation. Technological

advances impact are minimal since optimization is the basis for the decision-

making of both establishments and households.

Figure 1: Rent function as derived by the model where R(u) is rent of

land explained distance from CBD, and u is distance from CBD.

Source: Mills, E. and B. Hamilton (1989), Urban Economics, Fourth Edition, p. 109,

Glenville, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company.

“Location within urban areas is especially affected by the need for movement

of people and direct personal contact with time consequently playing the

6

major role in transfer costs and access advantages. Complex linkages among

units and activities, and competition for space are also important factors in

the urban context” (Hoover and Giarratani 1984: 199)vi. Present urban

sprawl result from the differentiation between production plants and their

administrative activities giving the way for a metropolis with a CBD and

several sub-centers where land value declines away from the CBD as the

model showed to raise once more when approaches the sub-centers.

The model “emphasizes the location interdependency between the core and

the other sites in the city” (Levy 1985:74)vii. It offers explanation for certain

paradoxes of the conventional city, such as low-income families living on the

most expensive land (Clark 1982). Most of low-income families live in

informal areas where property is not documented or linked to a legal registry

and global market economy. The emergence of informal settlements, as the

model presented, is not an indication for market failure, i.e., market forces,

that is supply and demand, failed to provide the low-income families with

decent, standard housing. The model clearly shows that the poor do not have

the income or the credit to demand standard housing since they lack the

initial endowments necessary for them to be part of the effective demand,

which producers of formal housing observe and acknowledge. They take

their demand to an informal market that supplies them with substandard

housing that meets their needs. Existing formal organizations and institutions

do not recognize these informal holdings of real estate (de Sotto 1997)viii.

By owning a parcel of land, a property is transformed into capital. The legal

acquisition and holding of the parcel of land directly puts credit and capital in

the hands of the poor.

The Greater Cairo Region (GCR) is a world metropolitan area. It is used as a

case that supports the above argument. Figure (2) depicts the location of

informal settlements in the Greater Cairo Region. The river Nile is the

backbone of the metropolis. The fan shape results from the two major natural

constraints for urban development: the Mouqattam hill and the Pyramids

plateau. Furthermore, urban development followed regional infrastructures,

particularly roads and highways, such as the development of industrial

complex North of Cairo between Shoubra El-Kheama and Qalub parallel to

the Cairo-Alexandria Agricultural Road, which is an urban corridor all the

way to Benha, Qalubia to the North.

Most of the informal settlements, as the figure presents, are West, Northwest

and North of Cairo where the prevailing wind blows. Informal settlements

around the metropolis include the dump sites of municipal solid wastes,

foundaries, lead smelters…etc. that negatively affect the quality of Cairo air.

Municipal solid wastes, for example, produce methane gas that negatively

contributes to Cairo air, climate change and global warming. Due, in part, to

the considerably large organic content of the solid wastes, self ignition is a

usual scenario that produces carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, which affects

the heart contractions, and Nitogen and Sulphur oxides, not to mention

emitting dangerious chemicals in gaseous state that are carcenogenic.

7

There are number of locations housing garbage collectors around the Greater

Cairo Region including Ezbet El-Nakhil, Mansheit Nasser, Ein El-Serra,

Tohra, Helwan, Al-Barageel, Imbaba, and last but not least, Mo’ttammadia,

Giza. All these settlements developed informally as a function of the

technology used in collecting solid wastes, such as pick-ups, a donkey and a

cart…etc. from the dwellings and establishments that fall within their

domain. For example, the garbage collectors who reside in Mansheit Nasser

collect from houses and establishments of Nasr City, Abbasiaya, Sayeda

Zeinab. The distance of the trip to the establishments and residences to

collect wastes is a function in their technology for transporting the waste

from the collection area to their settlement, which is in accord with the

model. This location pattern could explain the quality and quantity of

generated and collected municipal solid wastes. Also the location and

ecoonomic activity of the informal settlements, explained by its land uses

could explain its development history.

Figure 2: The Location of Informal Settlements in GCR, 1993

Source: The General Organization for Physical Planning, report on upgrading informal

settlements in urban Egypt, 1993.

Can land tenure and secure ownership of realestate improve environemntal

conditions of these areas? The next section of the paper attempts to show

that environmental degradation of these settlements is the outcome of

unsecured land tenure.

8

INSECURE LAND TENURE LEADING TO ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION

More than two centuries ago, Adam Smith argued in his book The Wealth of

Nations argued that competitive markets have an invisible hand, which

allocates resources optimally. He warned against violation of assumptions

for perfect competition. Large number of buyers and sellers, rational

behavior of agents, perfect information, free entry and exist into the markets,

identical production process, homogeneous, mobile commodity are among

these assumptions. The violation of one, or more, of these assumptions

causes market failure and requires government intervention through planned

actions.

The development of informal settlements within a metropolis and at its

hinterlands is not a sign of market failure, rather the resultant of

malfunctioning market mechanisms. The formal housing market fails to

provide the poor with housing within their budget limits. They demand

housing, and slumlords supply it in the form of dilapidated dwellings at the

center of the city. In other cases, as the model presented, these settlements

exist on the periphery where the rent for urban land is almost zero.

Informal settlements represent an opportunity not a problem. In The Wealth

of Nations, Smith clearly differentiated between money and real wealth.

Money is a mere medium for transactions that provides a common

denominator value but not capital or wealth. Informal settlements develop in

the sphere of capital circulation, and their spatial location, as the model

presented, is due to functional relationships with the location of residence of

the wealthy and/or marginal activities at the city center. In 1995, Abu-

Zekryix

argued that the existence of functioning land markets is the raision

d’etre for developing urban settlements, where the wealthy are attracted to

invstment opportunities, and the poor follow suit.

Panayotou (1992) argued that mismanagement and inefficient utilization of

natural resources and environmental degradation, including land, is a direct

outcome of malfuncting market mechanisms. He argued that environmental

degradation results from malfunctioning markets. One of the reasons for

market malfunctioning is insecured, unrespected property rights. He argued

that property rights over all resources must be clear and secured. Much of

the mismanagement and inefficient utilization of natural resources,

particulalry land, can be traced to such malfunctioning, distorted or totally

abscent markets. A fundamental condition for the efficient operation of land

markets is to have well-defined, exclusive, secure, transferable and

enforceable property rights over all resources, goods and services (Ibid.),

particularly land. Property rights are a prerequiste and a necessary condition

for efficent use of resources. Well defined, secured, transferable and

enforceable property rights, as Panayotou argued, is a precondition for the

flow of both trade and investments necessary to advance economic growth;

and induce efforts for environmental conservation against pollution and

better resource management as well.

9

Securing and acknowledging property rights is political. Pugh et al. (2000)

argued that economic growth and sustainability are not necessarly

deterimental to each other. There are significant gaps between a prescription

for growth and sustainability; and the realities of the world. Environmental

connection may draw contemporary studies more closely in interdependence.

The theory and practice of sustainable development is inherintly embedded in

political economy. Todays “main needs from political economy perspectives

are to improve the performance of states, markets, Non-Government

Organizations, Community-Based Organizations and households, acting

separately and in partnerships” (Pugh el al. 2000: 237)x.

In their article “Leading from below: The Contribution of Community-Based

Intiatives,” Rowe and Robbin (2000)xi

examined community, social

networks and local decision-making and validity of the need for

neighborhood planning. They evaluated the impact of environmental and

local economic projects on local resource use and community capacity

building. They reviewed two programs to reach their conclusions: Waste

resuction in Community Project (WRCP) and Local Exchange and Trading

Scheme (LETS). Rowe and Robbin demonstrated how, in what ways, and to

what extent, resources can be used locally, and whether this is a temporary

output. They showed that local initiatives are essential for closing resource

gaps, and to reduce the impact of the community on environment as well.

They examined the capacities of the community to evaluate the form of local

initiatives and how and by whom the forms of these initivatives were

experienced and whether they were, or could be experienced.

Securing land tenure and ownership puts credit at the dispose of low-income

families. This means immediately moving them from lower levels of utility

and housing services to higher ones simply because land teure has directly

increased their incomes and relaxed their budget constraints against which

their utility function are maximized. Formalizing land holding turns the

residents to formal objects that financial and assitance programs recognize.

Securing ownership means encouraging savings and investments to improve

the the dwelling unit and workshop. This means encouraging the people to

invest in their holdings, including complying with environmental regulations,

such as installing filters to minimize emissions. Finally, formalizing land

holdings secures the political and social stability of the community by

facilitating people’s access to resources and decision-making. Upgrading the

informal areas of Ismailia, for example, is a model to be replicated in Egypt

and other developing countries.

Recent research in the field of environmental economics in support of

sustainable development analyze environmental Kuznets curves (EKC) that

assume an inverted U-shaped reationship between a variety of indicators of

environmental pollution or resource depletion and the level of per capita

income. The implication of this hypothesis is that envirnmental degradation

should be observed initially to increase, but eventually to decline, as per

capita income decreases. The following figure shows an example of EKC for

10

sulphur dioxide. The figure suggests that general economic development will

take care of the environment automatically (Pearce and Barbier 2000)xii

.

Figure 3: An Envirnmental Kuznets Curve for Sulphur Dioxide

Source: Pearce, David and E. Barbier (2000) Blueprint for Sustainable Development, p.25,

London, UK: Earthscan.

At the macro level, if a major, national program for formalizing land holding

and securing its tenure were implemented, many current economic problems

will be eased. First, inflation rate will drop since the money supply will be

backed with real holding of assets. Second, most of the poor who holds these

land will mobilize resources, specially financial ones, to be turned into

wealth and capital through savings and investments in improving their

residents. Furthermore, securing tenure of land is bound to increase and

enhance government revenues mainly because ehances brought to the tax

base.

CONCLUSION

The paper attempted to explain reasons underlying the location of informal

settlements in a metropolis using the moncentric model. Then, argued for

securing land tenure in these settlements as a means for improving

environmental quality of urban areas, not to mention easing conditions

leading to global environmental problems. The paper showed that informal

settlements are not problems rather an opportunity. Securing property rights

is a sine quo non for efficient operation of land markets needed for promoting

11

trade and investments that will drive forces of economic growth. The paper

showed that local initiatives at the community level will close resource gaps

and improve environmental conditions by putting credit at the dispose of the

marginalized poor who live in these settlements. Finally the paper showed

the positive impact of securing land tenure extends from the community to

the national level.

REFERENCES

i Engels, Friedrich ([1845] 1986) “The Conditions of the Working-Class in England” in

Third World Urbanization, J. Abu-Lughod and R. Hay, Jr. (editors), New York, NY:

Methuen.

ii Clark, David (1982) Urban Geography, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University

Press.

iii Mohan, R. (1979) Urban Economic and Planning Models, Baltimore, MD: The Johns

Hopkins University Press.

iv Muth, Richard F. (1960) “The Demand for Non-Farm Housing,” in The Demand for

Durable Goods, Arnold C. Harberger (editor), Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Wingo, Lowden, Jr. (1961) “An Economic Model of the Utilization of Urban Land for

Residential Purposes,” Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, 7:191-

205.

________________ (1961) Transportation and Urban Land, Washington, D.C.: Resources

for the Future, Inc.

Kain, John F. “The Journey to Work as a Determinant of Residential Location,” Papers and

Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, 9.

v Heilbrun, J. (1981) Urban Economics and Public Policy, Second Edition, New York, MD:

St. Martin’s Press.

vi Hoover, E. and F. Giarratani (1984) An Introduction to Regional Economics, Third Edition,

New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopg.

vii Levy, J. (1985) Urban Economics, New York, NY: McGraw Hill Company.

viii De Sotto, Hernando (1997) “Dead Capital and the Poor in Egypt,” Distinguished Lecture

Series, No. 11, Cairo, Egypt: The Egyptian Center for Economic Studies.

ix Abu-Zekry, Tarek (1995) “The Pivtol Role of the Wealthy in Raising the Trends of

Settlements Historically: Lessons Learnt for the Policy for New Egyptian Cities”,

Conference on the Development of New Cities in Egypt, Cairo: The General Organization for

Physical Planning, (text in Arabic).

x Pugh, Cedric (2000) Sustainability, the Ebnvironment and Urbanization, United Kingdom:

Earthscan.

12

xi J. Rowe and C. Robbins (2000) “Leading from Below: The Contributions of Community-

Based Initiatives,” in Sustainable Communities: The Potential for Econ-Neighborhood, H.

Barton (editor), London, UK: Earthscan.

xii Pearce, David and E. Barbier (2000) Blueprint for Sustainable Development, London, UK:

Earthscan.