Namibia's subsidised housing program as disaster response for Twaloloka's fire victims during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

Twaloloka, an informal settlement in Walvis Bay, Namibia, has repeatedly experienced fire incidents due to congested living conditions and flammable building materials. In July 2020, a devastating fire destroyed shacks and displaced residents at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, creating a syndemic disaster in which fire, poverty, inadequate housing and a global health emergency combined to exponentially amplify vulnerability. The Namibian government responded with an unprecedented intervention: rather than providing temporary shelters, authorities delivered permanent, subsidised brick-and-mortar houses to fire victims. This marked the first time Namibia shifted from emergency relief to permanent housing as a disaster-response mechanism. For a developing country with limited resources, substantial housing backlogs and nearly one million people living in informal settlements, this decision raises fundamental questions about sustainability, equity, implementation capacity and precedent.

This study evaluates the implementation and outcomes of the Twaloloka subsidised housing programme from the perspective of multiple stakeholders. Employing a qualitative case study design, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 20 housing beneficiaries; three Twaloloka residents who lost their homes but received no housing; and eight officials from the Municipality of Walvis Bay, the National Housing Enterprise, the Ministry of Urban and Rural Development and the Shack Dwellers Federation of Namibia. Thematic analysis revealed critical implementation gaps arising from unclear beneficiary selection processes, inadequate due diligence, funding shortfalls, inter-agency dysfunction, political interference and the exclusion of affected communities from decision-making. The findings show a programme that, while materially superior to temporary relief, fundamentally failed to meet its stated objectives. Beneficiaries acknowledged improvements in access to water, electricity, sanitation and protection from fire, yet expressed profound disappointment over poor workmanship, broken promises regarding quality and title deeds, and community fractures stemming from opaque selection processes. Five years after the handover, none of the beneficiaries had received title deeds, leaving them without legal ownership or economic security. Officials expressed regret over the lack of inter-agency collaboration, insufficient planning time, absent policy frameworks and political pressures that prioritised electoral timelines over quality outcomes. The study identifies policy fragmentation as the root cause: neither Namibia’s National Housing Policy nor its Disaster Risk Management Policy explicitly addresses permanent housing as a disaster-response mechanism, leaving implementing agencies without guidelines, standards or accountability structures.

This research contributes to scholarship on disaster recovery, housing policy implementation and spatial justice in informal settlement contexts. It demonstrates how policy vacuums, community exclusion and syndemic vulnerabilities can produce failed interventions despite humanitarian intentions. The study offers evidence-based recommendations for national governments, municipalities, housing agencies and affected communities, emphasising the need for explicit disaster-housing policies, enforceable quality standards, transparent beneficiary selection criteria, inter-agency coordination frameworks and meaningful community participation. Critically, the findings confirm that housing programmes should not be implemented during emergencies without pre-established policy frameworks, adequate planning time and sufficient resources. The Twaloloka case offers invaluable lessons for Namibia and similar developing countries as they navigate the connection of disaster management, urban informality and the constitutional right to adequate housing.