Sub-Saharan Africa » Rwanda » National Urban Structure
 |
Rwanda National Urban Structure |
 |
|
| Rwanda is leaping ahead with double-digit annual growth figures. Will it be a template for other African countries? Development requires infrastructure, coordinated infrastructure with a long-term vision. Not disaggregated piecemeal shortsighted incrementalist decisions. Rwanda Government is in the right path. This report presents the completion of the National infrastructure policies that are now under way with a long-term integrated vision.
Infrastructures: Rwanda primary backbone and excellent secondary road network will require a new layout, independent from interferences, to achieve full development. The size of the country allows for 30 km interurban connections (IE: Kigali-Muhanga) in the 15-minute range, not 1 hour: a network independent from city centers and urban areas. Infrastructures must achieve synergies. Main highways, trains and airports have to be synchronized with the urban structure, avoiding dispersion of efforts. Housing: Expected urban growth will move 2 millions Rwandese to cities in the next 8 years. This will require the production of 70.000 housing units every year, of which 50%, 35.000, in Kigali and 2.500 units each year in each of the 14 secondary urban centers. Houses for the 60-dollar month lower income migrants. Only a small percentage will be provided directly by the private sector to the higher incomes. Direct involvement of the public sector will be required for the production of at least 50% of those figures. With 10.000 USD units in a 5.000 USD/unit serviced land these 35.000 (really) affordable housing units will require an annual finance of 600 million USD: 8% of the GDP and 25% of the National Budget. Can the Rwanda afford it? Rwanda can neither afford reports that discuss the need for further reports, reports that take 5 years to bring any implementable solution. Rwanda has no time for that. Kigali doubles every 9 years. Every year 35.000 houses are not built, the deficit will grow and the burden put on the future, until that future is at risk. If 35.000 houses a year is a difficult task (now producing less than 9.000) what about 70.000, or 140.000? Reports should set up straightforward solutions. They should frame and balance the problem in the large context even though quantitative precision is later required to maximize investment efficiency and budgetary accuracy. We embrace reports that take risks being direct and clear, reports that are applicable for policy making and not just for expert discussion. We think those reports are the useful ones for Rwanda. That is our bet. |
|
 |