Examining How Land Eviction Affects Social Cohesion in an Integrated Community: A Case of Maela Integrated Community, Naivasha, Nakuru County

Examining How Land Eviction Affects Social Cohesion in an Integrated Community: A Case of Maela Integrated Community, Naivasha, Nakuru County

Kezamutima Steeven, Dr. Wilkister Shanyisa Milimu

A Masters of Arts Degree in Justice Peace and Cohesion of The Catholic University of Eastern Africa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.11120087

Received: 09 December 2024; Accepted: 14 December 2024; Published: 24 January 2025

ABSTRACT

The issue of land eviction has been profound, particularly in areas where political violence has been prevalent in Kenya. The aftermath of the 2007-2008 election violence resulted in loss of lives and property, internally displaced persons (IDPs) among others.  The impact was greatly experienced in Nakuru County which reported an influx of IDPs with the Maela integrated community hosting IDPs who were kicked out of their land in mountains of Enosubukia. This has a greater impact on social cohesion of a given community. The study sought to investigate the effect of land eviction and social cohesion in an integrated community: a case of Maela integrated community, Nakuru county, Kenya.  Specific objectives included; to examine the implications of land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community of Nakuru County, to analyze the level of community integration in the Maela Integrated Community, to evaluate how cultural integration influence social cohesion in Maela Integrated Community, and to assess the effectiveness of government policy in relation to solving the issue of land eviction in Maela Integrated Community Nakuru County. The study was anchored by Social Capital theory, conflict theory and identity theory. The study adopted a mixed methods approach with a focus on descriptive research design. It targeted 500 people sampling out 50 participants using a margin error of plus/minus 10. Quantitative data was collected using questionnaires while qualitative data was collected using interview guides. Quantitative data was analyzed with the help of SPSS version 26 while thematic content analysis was used to analyze qualitative data.  It was guided by the overall principle of “DO NO HARM” to participants.

The study findings revealed that while integration fosters security and a sense of belonging, it also causes tension when eviction disrupts established networks. Compensation inadequacies lead to economic hardship and affect social structures.  However, disparities in resource distribution and cultural differences remain challenges. Government policies have had mixed effects, with community development initiatives receiving positive feedback, while housing issues persist, hindering full cohesion. The study recommends the promotion of inclusivity, equitable resource distribution, mental health support, and infrastructure development to foster resilience and community social cohesion.

INTRODUCTION

Residential evictions, particularly in low- and middle-income neighborhoods in the U.S., have escalated as a growing concern over the past two decades. An estimated one in forty rental families, equating to nearly four million people, face formal eviction each year (Graetz et al., 2023). By adolescence, one in every seven children from large cities has experienced eviction, with the risk rising to one in four among those living below 50% of the poverty level (Lundberg and Donnelly, 2019). These figures exclude informal evictions, which are challenging to document but are estimated to occur at a rate five times higher than formal evictions. Informal evictions involve tactics like abrupt rent hikes and tenant harassment, pushing tenants out extralegally (Gromis and Desmond, 2021). The rising eviction rates are difficult to manage, and solutions to mitigate them are becoming more elusive.

To investigate the effects of land eviction on social cohesion, this chapter provides a detailed evaluation of specific policies related to land evictions in Kenya, including an analysis of the National Land Policy, the 2010 Constitution, and government programs aimed at addressing land rights for internally displaced persons (IDPs). A deeper dive into how these policies are being implemented and their effectiveness would add value to the study. This includes the background, problem statement, research objectives, questions, assumptions, study justification, significance, scope, conceptual framework, and operational definitions. Urbanization-driven population growth has intensified global eviction rates, with governments often displacing low-income communities to prioritize infrastructure, sidelining social welfare to attract foreign investments (Davis, 2014). These evictions, motivated by political and economic agendas, target marginalized communities for high-end developments, as observed globally in the 2000s (Bhan, 2016). While authorities cite “public good” as justification, the impact on displaced communities’ health and well-being is profound yet under-researched. According to Khadka et al. (2020), neglecting community health in eviction studies overlooks crucial preventive policy measures. Data from Princeton University’s Eviction Lab (2000-2018) tracks eviction risks at the community level, while the World Bank (2022) reveals that 84 million people faced forced evictions globally by mid-2021, including millions of refugees from Ukraine, Yemen, and Ethiopia. These forced displacements disrupt social cohesion, create inequality, and spark economic instability. California’s 2018 wildfires, affecting over 355,000 hectares, displaced communities, causing over 354,000 new displacements and showing the impact of disaster-related displacement on community stability (GRID, 2019). Weather-related events have caused further disruptions, as in the East Asia and Pacific region, with countries like the Philippines experiencing millions of displacements due to natural disasters, exacerbating social challenges (GRID, 2019). Conflicts in the Middle East, North Africa, and SubSaharan Africa have also led to significant displacements. In 2018 alone, over 21 million new displacements occurred in the Middle East, with 11 million people still displaced by year’s end (GRID, 2019). Conflict and environmental disasters continue to displace millions in Ethiopia, Nigeria, Somalia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, weakening social cohesion (IDMCGRID, 2019). African countries like Kenya, Nigeria, and Cameroon illustrate how conflict-driven displacement erodes social cohesion. In Kenya, political violence during the 2007-2008 elections caused 1,133 deaths and displaced around 500,000 people due to ethnic and land-related tensions, leading to severe human rights abuses. Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County, Kenya, formed by displaced individuals from regions affected by election-related violence, faces ongoing challenges. This community struggles with disease, limited access to education and healthcare, and economic hardship, reflecting how historical marginalization and colonial past influence social cohesion (Institute of Development Studies, 2020). Social cohesion and resilience, however, have received limited research attention compared to political and economic aspects, a gap evident in global datasets on Kenya. Land evictions worldwide threaten social cohesion, breaking social networks and fostering social tension (UN Habitat, 2020).

In Africa, urbanization, infrastructure expansion, and agriculture drive evictions, impacting community structure and economic stability (African Union, 2020). In Kenya, forced evictions in Nairobi’s informal settlements disrupt communities, fragment social bonds, and heighten poverty levels. The Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County exemplifies the adverse effects of forced evictions, a subject for the present study. Its formation from various parts of the Rift Valley reflects the long-standing implications of eviction and forced migration in the region. Despite the challenges, Maela’s residents, many facing the constant threat of further eviction, find resilience through social networks, notably among women who rely on community connections to mitigate economic hardship (Olatunde et al., 2021). Similar trends are observed in Uganda, where evictions for large-scale agricultural projects foster social unrest (LEMU, 2021). The Maela case highlights how historical injustices perpetuate generational challenges, with displaced individuals from the 1994 Maela camp forced to relocate to areas in Central Province, underscoring the deep social scars caused by forced evictions. The government, defending eviction as a means to enforce laws and environmental protection, often disregards the constitutional rights to due process and human rights, as outlined in Articles 2(5) and 23 of Kenya’s constitution. This disregard, accompanied by minimal compensation, exacerbates social discontent, as seen in the Maela camp’s 1994 eviction where families were ordered to leave belongings behind, later enduring inhumane relocations by government forces. Those who evaded relocation integrated within the Maela community, forming a network that has since faced risks of further eviction and oppression. Recognizing land access as a basic right underpinning housing and food sovereignty, this study aims to document these untold narratives, examining land eviction’s enduring impact on social cohesion in Maela.

Objective  

To examined how land eviction affects social cohesion in an integrated community: a case of Maela integrated community, Nakuru county.

Specific Objectives 

To assess the effectiveness of government policies in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community of Nakuru County.

Research Questions 

How are the government policies effective in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County?

RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS

This study operated under the following assumptions:

Effective government policies   play a crucial role  solving issues relation to land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County.

This study focuses on the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County, Kenya, a region historically sheltering internally displaced people affected by land evictions and historical injustices. The study seeks to address gaps by examining the impacts of land eviction, community integration, cultural influences on social cohesion, and the effectiveness of government policies in managing land issues. Its findings are essential for addressing historical land injustices, promoting peaceful coexistence, and preventing future evictions, not only in Nakuru County but across Kenya. These insights will aid policymakers, government entities, and NGOs in creating effective responses to the grievances of affected individuals, enhancing social cohesion, and safeguarding the right to land access. Additionally, the study contributes significantly to academic literature on internally displaced people, informing future research on land eviction and its socio-economic impacts. Conducted within Maela Community, the research specifically assesses social and cultural integration issues and critiques governmental interventions related to land injustices. Challenges faced include accessing certain areas and contacts, limitations in sample size, and difficulties in employing probability sampling, which affects generalizability. However, the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods strengthens the study’s reliability by enabling comprehensive data collection from diverse respondents, ensuring valuable recommendations for policymakers and academics alike.

LITERATURE

In 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council remarked on the role of local authorities, a vital frontline but often-overlooked actor in responding to the needs of non-camp Eviction and Social Cohesion in an Integrated Community, highlighting that local governments play a crucial role in facilitating access to essential protection and support for communities, which contributes to the sustainability of efforts aimed at addressing issues related to Eviction and Social Cohesion in an Integrated Community; therefore, the study sought to investigate the impact of Land Eviction and Social Cohesion in an Integrated Community, with a focus on the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County, which reflects the theoretical frameworks that underpin this research.

Critical Review of Relevant Theories Social Capital Theory

This theory was introduced by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, who studied the dynamics of power in society and emphasized the interplay between various forms of capital—cultural, social, symbolic, and economic—which economists recognized as a catalyst for economic growth and development in the 1990s, asserting that social capital, foundationally linked to humanism, is crucial for addressing societal issues; as supported by scholars such as Fukuyama, Putnam, Coleman, and Bourdieu, social capital enables integrated communities, particularly the impoverished, to meet their daily needs through the establishment of networks and reciprocal relationships that provide financial, social, or political support, as highlighted by Grootaert and Swammy (2002), who found that participation in local groups enhances access to loans, thus demonstrating that social capital fosters cooperative behavior and reduces opportunistic actions, leading to economic prosperity through better information sharing; moreover, Grootaert et al. (2004) indicated that communities with higher levels of social capital are more adept at avoiding information asymmetry, thereby lowering transaction costs and uncertainties; social capital theory posits that identity, norms, trust, and networks are critical for fostering social cohesion within integrated communities, where networks facilitate resource acquisition, such as housing and jobs, while trust enhances emotional support and collective action; however, land evictions can disrupt these social bonds, undermining identity and belonging, leading to alienation, which necessitates an understanding of these dynamics to develop remedies for communities facing displacement and to promote unity; the second theoretical framework.

Conflict Theory

This theory was presented by Mariola Pytliková et al., articulates that Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) often relocate due to violence in their regions, using the Maela Integrated Community as a case study to assess the interplay between social cohesiveness and land eviction, revealing that land evictions exacerbate social conflicts and inequality, ultimately weakening social cohesion; Conflict Theory explores the origins of conflict, suggesting that social change emerges from disagreements leading to compromises, contrary to the structural functional theory that emphasizes social order, and addressing various social phenomena, including wars, revolutions, and domestic violence; according to Adsera et al. (2016), migrants are compelled to leave when their safety is threatened, with land evictions in Kenya, particularly in the Maela Integrated Community, resulting from a pervasive lack of security, affirming that conflict theory aptly explains forced relocation; Arai (2017) reinforces this notion by asserting that social inequities, resource competition, and power disparities lead to land evictions that exacerbate socioeconomic inequities, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, while resistance movements can foster social cohesion through collective action against dominant power structures; furthermore, Crossman (2019) indicates that the unequal distribution of power and resources among social groups fosters tensions and conflicts that can catalyze social change, with Frynas and Yamahaki (2016) emphasizing that conflict theory provides insight into societal power dynamics, thereby aiding in the identification of areas needing development; thus, the researcher employs conflict theory to examine competing interests in the Maela Integrated Community, focusing on how land evictions fuel conflict over scarce resources; the third theoretical framework.

Review of Empirical Studies

The effectiveness of government policies in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community of Nakuru County

In efforts to restore municipal order, Zimbabwe’s Operation Murambatsvina displaced about 700,000 people, aiming to improve Harare’s standards amid claims that lax local law adherence had tarnished the city’s reputation, yet critics argued that more formal housing was unnecessarily targeted (Chitekwe-Biti, 2009); meanwhile, Mutiso Jane and Wambua Esther’s (2014) research in Nairobi County highlighted the significance of government aid for community development, finding it essential for resource allocation despite barriers like inadequate funding and poor coordination that hindered effective support for integrated communities; similarly, Rahman Mohammad and Hossain Md. Mahbub (2016) showed that in Bangladesh, government policies are foundational for integrated community initiatives but pointed out a need for sustained, targeted interventions to meet community needs, while in Tanzania’s Dodoma Region, Mushi Emmanuel and Ngowi Benjamin (2015) demonstrated how government support has promoted community integration, though emphasized the need to strengthen local capacity and engagement to ensure project success.

METHODOLOGY 

According to Creswell et al. (2017), a research design refers to the framework or strategy used to conduct research and address the problem under investigation. This study utilized a census methodology with an emphasis on a qualitative approach to generate descriptive data. This design was deemed appropriate for the instruments and research objectives, enabling a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena being studied. The target population consisted of the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County, focusing specifically on 50 elderly residents from the camps. These individuals represented the demographic for both qualitative and quantitative aspects of the study. A census approach was adopted, involving the inclusion of all members of the target population to ensure comprehensive and precise findings. As Mvumbi and Ngumbi (2015) note, an adequate sample size must capture the essential attributes of the intended audience.

Neuman (2016) emphasizes the importance of selecting appropriate data collection methods to address research questions effectively. In this study, structured questionnaires were utilized to gather quantitative data. Before conducting the surveys, the researcher obtained a permission letter from the Catholic University of Eastern Africa. Each survey session was capped at 30 minutes, ensuring respondents’ comfort and adherence to privacy protocols. Mugenda and Mugenda (2018) define validity as the extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure. This study employed both content and construct validity to ensure alignment with research objectives. Content validity was achieved by designing a questionnaire related to the research variables, reviewed by experts for relevance and comprehensiveness. Construct validity was evaluated through expert panels to ensure the questionnaire accurately measured the intended constructs (Kothari, 2019). Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure (Schindler & Cooper, 2011). The study assessed internal consistency using the Cronbach Alpha coefficient, which should be at least 0.7 to be considered acceptable (Drost, 2012).

Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, with results presented through pie charts, graphs, and tables. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 26 to ensure accuracy and clarity in interpreting the findings. Ethical considerations were a core component of this study, as defined by Saunders et al. (2009), who describe ethics as the moral standards guiding behavior and relationships. The researcher adhered to the following ethical principles: Participants were informed about the study’s objectives and provided written consent before participation. Participants’ privacy was safeguarded through anonymized responses and coding methods. The researcher obtained a NACOSTI research permit and an introduction letter from the Catholic University of Eastern Africa. Strict protocols were followed to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the data collected. This methodology ensured the research was conducted with rigor, precision, and ethical integrity, thereby contributing to the study’s reliability and validity.

RESULTS

The effectiveness of government policies in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela integrated community of Nakuru county 

The study adopted likert scale formula on which the researcher asked the following question; what is your level of agreement to the following statements that relate to the degree of acceptance among community members in Maela Center post-eviction? Use a scale of 1-5 where 1= Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Uncertain, 4= Agree and 5= Strongly Agree.   Table 1: The effectiveness of government policies in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela integrated community of Nakuru county

Statement 

Statement	Strongly Disagree (%)	Disagree (%)	Neutral (%)	Agree (%)	Strongly Agree (%)
Government initiatives and assistance have considerably aided economic growth and stability in the Maela Integrated Community.	0 (0%)	15 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Government-initiated community development projects have empowered local residents by providing them with the skills and resources they need to be self-sufficient.	6 (12%)	31 (62%)	13 (26%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)
Despite government attempts, housing options in Maela Integrated Community remain poor.	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	10 (20%)	12 (24%)	28 (56%)
There is a sense that government policies and assistance frequently overlook the opinions and requirements of local citizens.	0 (0%)	19 (38%)	13 (26%)	18 (36%)	0 (0%)
Government support has resulted in improved public services such as water supply, sanitation, and transportation.	0 (0%)	17 (34%)	14 (28%)	19 (38%)	0 (0%)
While government initiatives try to create work possibilities, many citizens say they have not been effective.	0 (0%)	18 (36%)	0 (0%)	22 (44%)	10 (20%)

Source: Fieldwork Data, (2024)

The study on government actions’ impact on Maela’s economic stability and growth reveals mixed responses. While 42% believe government support significantly fosters stability and growth, 28% see moderate benefits, and 30% acknowledge some improvements without deeming them fully effective. Government-led community initiatives have shown promise, with 62% finding empowerment programs effective for self-sufficiency, though 26% view them as only moderately successful, and 12% see no benefit, indicating potential shortcomings in program implementation. Housing remains a critical concern, with 56% expressing dissatisfaction and no respondents reporting favorable conditions, highlighting a major gap in government support. Additionally, 38% feel government policies overlook local needs, and 36% agree, pointing to a disconnect that risks diminishing trust and social cohesion within the community. Public service funding shows progress, with 38% citing improvements in transport, sanitation, and water, yet many (34%) feel these changes are insufficient. Employment initiatives face significant dissatisfaction, as 44% feel job creation efforts are ineffective, with only 20% viewing them positively. This mismatch between policy goals and community needs suggests a need for stronger alignment. Research by Mohammad and Hossain (2016) on Bangladeshi government policies supports these findings, emphasizing that government involvement is crucial to integrated community success. To strengthen cohesion in Maela, policies should align with local needs, particularly in housing and employment, fostering inclusive governance, transparency, and active community engagement. Overall, while some advances are evident, significant gaps remain, requiring a more responsive approach to community-specific challenges.

How do the effectiveness of government policies in relation with solving the issue of land eviction in the Maela Integrated Community of  Nakuru County. 

The researcher asked the following questions regarding the effectiveness of government policies in relations with solving the issues of land eviction in Maela Integrated community. These questions: How have government policies positively influenced the development of the Maela Integrated Community?, How has government intervention improved living standards in the Maela Integrated Community?, How have government policies negatively impacted the Maela Integrated Community? And What gaps exist in government support for the Maela Integrated Community?.

The following are the participants insights;

I have seen that the Maela Integrated Community—which is made up of a number of ethnic groups, including the Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Luo, Luhya, Kisii, Twa, Tutsi, Hutu, and Somali—has developed favorably as a result of government programs. By building roads and expanding access to vital services like clean water, healthcare, and education, the government has improved community connectedness through focused initiatives like infrastructure development. Policies that support equality of opportunity and inclusion have also contributed to social cohesiveness among the community’s many ethnic groups. Government-sponsored educational initiatives, for instance, have made it possible for kids from many ethnic origins to have a good education, which has helped to foster harmony and ease tensions amongst the various ethnic groups. By giving locals the equipment, know-how, and resources they need to engage in profitable farming, agricultural initiatives have also increased economic stability and enhanced food security for the community. A more peaceful atmosphere has also been created by the government’s emphasis on peacebuilding and conflict resolution, which has assisted in resolving past grievances and tensions, notably among the Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Tutsi, and Hutu populations. All things considered, the Maela Integrated Community’s development and standard of living have been greatly aided by government programs.

Source: Fieldwork, data (3) participants, (2024)   Regarding the second question:

I have personally seen how much the government’s assistance has raised living conditions in the Maela Integrated Community. Enhancing the general well-being of the many ethnic groups living in the region—Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Luo, Luhya, Kisii, Twa, Tutsi, Hutu, and Somali communities—has been made possible by the government’s efforts to offer basic amenities. The government has made sure that citizens have access to necessary medical treatment through programs including the provision of cheap healthcare services, which has improved health outcomes and decreased the number of avoidable illnesses. In order to address the issue of inadequate housing, government-sponsored housing initiatives have also been put in place. These programs help many families find quality and cheap houses, which improves their living conditions. Supporting vulnerable households, especially those from the marginalized Twa and Somali populations, has been made possible by the establishment of social protection programs like cash transfers and food help. Furthermore, as a consequence of the government’s emphasis on education, more girls from the Luo and Luhya groups are enrolled in school, giving them the information and abilities they need to ensure brighter futures. The Maela Integrated Community’s members now enjoy much higher living conditions as a result of all of these actions combined.

Source: Fieldwork, data (5) participants, (2024)   Concerning the third question:

The Maela Integrated Community has developed as a result of government policies, but I have also noticed that some of these policies have negatively impacted the various ethnic groups that call the Maela home, such as the Somali, Tutsi, Hutu, Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Luo, and Luhya communities. For instance, several indigenous and marginalized communities, like the Twa, have been displaced as a result of land policies that support large-scale agriculture and infrastructure development, losing their traditional lands and means of subsistence. This has made tensions between various ethnic groups worse, especially when it comes to systems of compensation and relocation that some feel are insufficient or unjust. Residents, especially those of the Kalenjin and Kikuyu communities, have also felt disenfranchised as a result of some development projects being implemented without enough consultation with the impacted communities. They may believe that their voices and concerns are not being sufficiently represented in government decisions. Additionally, there have been instances where the concentration of government resources and services has resulted in an unfair distribution of advantages, leaving some ethnic groups—like the Hutu and Somali—feeling ignored or excluded from infrastructure, healthcare, and educational opportunities. These negative impacts highlight the need for more inclusive and participatory policy-making processes to ensure that all ethnic groups in the Maela Integrated Community benefit equitably from government interventions.

Source: Fieldwork, data (3) participants, (2024)   Regarding the final question:

Even while the government has made progress, there are still large gaps in the services offered to the Maela Integrated Community, as far as I can see. The absence of proper representation and involvement of all ethnic groups—Kikuyu, Kalenjin, Luo, Luhya, Kisii, Twa, Tutsi, Hutu, and Somali—in decision-making processes is one of the most obvious gaps. As a result, some populations have been marginalized, most notably the Twa and Somali, whose distinct needs and issues are frequently disregarded. Furthermore, there exists a significant deficiency in the availability of customized social services that address the unique cultural and socio-economic circumstances of every ethnic community. For example, the Twa community, whose livelihoods have historically depended on forest resources, has not received enough assistance in shifting to sustainable, alternative livelihoods after conservation measures have been put into place. Furthermore, there are considerable differences in the standard of the community’s roads, schools, and healthcare facilities. Some regions, especially those occupied by the Hutu and Somali populations, are particularly poorly supplied. Another gap lies in the lack of sustained efforts to address inter-ethnic conflicts and promote long-term peacebuilding, which is crucial for fostering social cohesion in such a diverse community. Addressing these gaps is essential to ensure that all members of the Maela Integrated Community can fully benefit from government support and development initiatives.

Source: Fieldwork, data (4) participants, (2024)

CONCLUSION

The study investigated the impact of land eviction on social cohesion and community integration within the Maela Integrated Community in Nakuru County. The effectiveness of government policies in addressing these issues was mixed, with some respondents acknowledging improvements in economic growth and stability, while others remained skeptical. Inadequate housing options and the ongoing impact of historical grievances were noted as significant obstacles to achieving a fully integrated and cohesive community. The study concluded that while community integration and social cohesion are crucial for the well-being of displaced individuals, land eviction poses significant challenges that require comprehensive strategies to address. Adequate compensation, inclusive policies, mental health support, and efforts to preserve cultural connections are essential for promoting resilience and fostering a more cohesive and integrated community in the aftermath of eviction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• The study recommends that the government and relevant agencies provide adequate compensation to displaced individuals, sufficient to cover relocation costs and support rebuilding their lives, thereby mitigating prolonged economic hardship. Providing psychological and emotional support to displaced individuals is also essential in addressing the trauma associated with eviction and relocation, fostering social cohesion and community resilience.
• Moreover, the study recommended that infrastructure development should continue to be prioritized in newly planned communities, ensuring that improvements benefit all residents equally and contribute to long-term stability and unity. Enhancing incluzivity in decisionmaking processes is crucial, ensuring that all community members, especially those who feel excluded, are actively involved to prevent feelings of isolation and division.
• Finally, the study recommends regularly evaluating and improving government policies related to land eviction and community development, making necessary adjustments to ensure they meet the community’s needs. Efforts should focus on improving housing conditions for displaced individuals and ensuring that government initiatives in this area are effective and aligned with community expectations. Enhancing government-initiated community development projects by providing skills and resources that empower residents to achieve self-sufficiency and contribute to economic stability is also essential.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It would be a lengthy task to appreciate and thank individually all the people who have contributed to the completion of this study. This list is in fact long. In all dimensions academic, material and moral the author has been made welcome and generously provided with the help he requested.

I would like to express special gratitude to Dr Wilkister Shanyisa  Dr  Mwita James  and Dr Omuchesi  Jonathan who supervised me and directed me as I wrote this thesis and coordinated the whole research process. Without their commitment and friendly encouragement, this thesis would not have been completed. I am greatly indebted Fr Joe Rosansky, Sr Mary Wangare Sebastian, Gerald Mugo family, Prof Ronald Pagnucco and Mr Richard Kakeeto whose financial support and encouragement contributed a lot for the achievement of this study. A special mention must be made also of my late dad Irahinyuza Dieudonne , my mum Nimbona Alvera , my wife Kundane Anne Marie and my whole family for their continuous   encouragement, support and understanding when undertaking my research and writing my project. Your prayers for me is what sustained me this far. Finally, I would like to thank God for letting me through all the difficulties. I have experienced your guidance day by day. You are the one who let me finishing my degree, I will keep on trusting you for my future.

REFERENCES 

1. ACAPS, (2019). Start Network “, DRC/Congo-Brazzaville, Yumbi – IDPs and refugees to Congo B, Briefing note”, February 14.
2. ACLED, (2018) “Understanding Inter-Ethnic Conflict in Myanmar”, September 28. Addis Fortune, (2018). “Ethiopia: Displacement, No Easy Way Out”, August 28.
3. African Union. (2020). Land Tenure Systems and their Impacts on Land Evictions in Africa. African Union Commission Report. Retrieved from African Union
4. Ahsan et al , (2016) “Climate Migration and Urban Changes in Bangladesh”, January.
5. Al Jazeera News, (2019). “DR Congo election observers say setbacks kept many from voting”, January 3.
6. Arai, T. (2017). Toward a Buddhist Theory of Conflict Transformation: From Simple Actor-Oriented Conflict to Complex Structural Conflict. Peace and Conflict Studies.
7. Atto, K.L., (2017). Internal Displacement and Social Reintegration in host communities: a case study of children in Agago town, council, Agago district, September, 2017.
8. Ayantunde, A.A., R. A., M.Y. Said and Fall A. (2014). ‘Transhumant Pastoralism, Sustainable Management of Natural Resources and Endemic Ruminant Livestock in the Sub-Humid Zone of West Africa’, Environment, Development and Sustainability 16(5): 1097-1117
9. Bhan, G (2016). In the Public Interest: Evictions, Citizenship and Inequality in Contemporary Delhi. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
10. Chitekwe-Biti, B (2009). “Struggles for urban land by the Zimbabwe Homeless People’s Federation”. Environment and Urbanization 21(2): 347-366. Congo Research Group , (2018). “What’s happening in Ituri?”, March 5.
11. Cotula, L., Vermeulen, S., Leonard, R., & Keeley, J. (2009). The Global Land Rush: Land Grabs, Agricultural Investment, and the Scramble for Food Security. IIED.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2^nd). CA: Sage Publications.
13. Cummings S.; Heeks R. and, Huysman M., (2006). Knowledge and learning in online networks in development: a social-capital perspective, Development in Practice, 16(6), 570-586.
14. Davis, DE (2014). “Modernist planning and the foundations of urban violence in Latin America”. Built Environment 40(3): 376-393.
15. Domı´nguez L, Luoma C.(2020). Decolonising Conservation Policy: How Colonial Land and Conservation Ideologies Persist and Perpetuate Indigenous Injustices at the Expense of the Environment. Land, 9 (3): 65.
16. Fajth et al., (2019). How do refugees affect social life in host communities? The case of Congolese refugees in Rwanda,          Comparative Migration Studies (2019) 7:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-019-0139-1.
17. Gamo, B. R., & Park, D. (2023). Sense of community affects community satisfaction: Mediating role of community participation. Journal of Community Psychology, 52(1), 258–275.
18. Global Report on Internal Displacement (GRID) & (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre) (IDMC), (2019) in partnership with Norwegian Refuge Council (NRC).
19. Global Report on Internal Displacement (GRID), (2019)
20. Government of California, (2018). “Fire Statistics”. January 24, available at, http://cdfdata fire ca gov/incidents/incidents_ stats?year=2018; Government of California, Archived Fires, available at, http://cdfdata fire ca gov/incidents/incidents_ archived
21. Grootaert ; and  Swammy,  A. (2002). Social capital, household welfare and poverty in Burkina Faso,Journal of African Economies, 11: 2002, 4-38.
22. Grootaert C.; Narayan D., V. Jones N. and, Woolcock M., (2004). Measuring Social Capital. An Integrated Questionnaire (Washington D.C: World Bank, 2004).
23. Gupta, S. (2018, 01 07). Sentiment Analysis: Concept, Analysis and Applications. Retrieved from Towards Data Science: https://towardsdatascience.com/sentiment-analysis-conceptanalysis-and-applications-6c94d6f58c17.
24. Hall, R., Edelman, M., Borras Jr., S. M., Scoones, I., White, B., & Wolford, W. (2015). The Politics of Land Grabs: From Mosquito Nets to Markets. Routledge.
25. IDMC, & GRID, (2018), “South Asia, Regional Overview”
26. Institute of Development Studies. (2020). Displacement and Social Cohesion in Kenya: Case Study of Nakuru County. IDS Working Paper. Retrieved from IDS
27. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) & Norwegian Refuge Council (NRC), (2018). 10 million people internally displaced across sub-Saharan Africa.
28. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010, March 2011, p. 13.
29. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre internal-displacement.org
30. International Federation of the Red Cross, (2018). “Nigeria: Floods, Emergency appeal”, “1 4 million people in Nigeria affected by floods disaster”, September 25.
31. Jacqueline M Klopp, (2001). ‘Ethnic Clashes and Winning Elections’, Canadian Journal of African Studies 35 (2): 473-517.
32. Jim Yong Kim President WorldBank Group, (2017). Forcibly Displaced Toward a Development Approach Supporting Refugees, the Internally Displaced, and Their Hosts. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202–473–1000; Internet: worldbank.org Some rights reserved 1 2 3 4 20 19 18 17.
33. Johan Galtung, (1967). Theory of peace. A Synthetic Approach to Peace Thinking. International Peace Research Institute, Oslo.
34. Kokunda S, Nahabwe H, Nahamya J, Niwamanya S, Mazirwe R, Gougsa S, et al. (2023) Batwa Indigenous Peoples forced eviction for “Conservation”: A qualitative examination on community impacts. PLOS Glob Public Health 3(8): e0002129.
35. Kothari, C. R. (2019). Research methodology-methods and techniques (4^nd revised ed.) New Delhi
36. Land and Equity Movement in Uganda (LEMU). (2021). The Social Impact of Land Evictions in Uganda. LEMU Report. Retrieved from LEMU
37. Mabikke, S. (2020). Evictions and Rights: Experiences from Kibera, Kenya. African Journal of Land Policy and Geospatial Sciences, 3(1), 45-60.
38. McLaughlin, K. R. (2020). Guiding Principle 28: The Unfulfifilled Promise to End Protracted Displacement in Azerbaijan. University of South Dakota.
39. Menkhaus, K. (2017). Dadaab Returnee Conflict Assessment. DDG.
40. Musgrave, J. (2020). Indigenous peoples and internal displacement: A legal no man’s land? [Master’s thesis, Lund University].
41. Mushi Emmanuel, Ngowi Benjamin (2015) Impact of Government Policies on Integrated Community Development in Tanzania: A Case Study of Dodoma Region . Journal of African Studies and Development.
42. Mutiso Jane, Wambua Esther (2014) Government Support and Integrated Community Development in Kenya: A Case Study of Nairobi County. Journal of Community Development and Rural Affairs.
43. Mvumbi, F. N.,&Ngumbi E. K. (2015). Companion to research methodology: focus on humanities, education and social sciences. Eldoret: CUEA Press.
44. National Policy on the Prevention of Internal Displacement, Protection and Assistance to Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Kenya. Final Draft. AUGUST, 2011.
45. Norwegian Refuge Council (NRC), (2018). More people displaced inside their own countries than ever before. Disasters and violence displaced two million people across the Americas.
46. NRC, (2016). “Housing, Land and Property Rights of Displaced and conflict-affected communities in Eastern Ukraine”, January.
47. NRC, (2018). “Troubling trend sees evictions in Somalia double”, August 28, 2018; IDMC, “City of flight, New and secondary displacements in Mogadishu, Somalia”, November.
48. OCHA, “Emergency Response Plan, Summary, Cameroon North-West and South-West”, May 2018. OSCE, (2014). “Internal Displacement in Ukraine”, August 12.
49. Overbeek, W. (2010). Land Grabbing in Kenya and Mozambique: A Report on Two Research Missions. Friends of the Earth International.
50. Plöger, J., & Kubiak, S. (2018). Becoming ‘the Internationals’—how Place Shapes the Sense of Belonging and Group Formation of High-Skilled Migrants. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 20(1), 307–321.
51. Prayogi, A. (2022). Perspektif Filosofis dalam Pendidikan Terbuka dan Jarak Jauh. Jurnal Pendidikan Terbuka Dan Jarak Jauh, 23(2), 23-32.
52. Prisca K. and Jacqueline M K., (2019). Failure to protect: lessons from Kenya’s IDP network. For further information about internal displacement in Kenya, visit www. internaldisplacement.org.
53. Prisca K., (2019). National Response to Internal Displacement: Achievements, Challenges and Lessons from Kenya. Overview of Internal Displacement in Kenya.
54. Radel off et al , (2018). “Rapid growth of the US wildland-urban interface raises wildfire risk”. March 27 EcoWest, “Wildland urban interface”, available at, http://ecowest org/fires/wui/
55. Rahman Mohammad, Hossain Md. Mahbub ( 2016) The Role of Government Support in Integrated Community Development: A Case Study of Bangladesh.  Journal of International Development and Cooperation.
56. Sánchez Mojica, B. E. (2016). A silenced exodus: intra-urban displacement in Medellín. In D. J. Cantor & N. Rodríguez Serna (Eds.), The New Refugees: Crime and Forced Displacement in Latin America (pp. 87–108).
57. Silveira, M., & Araújo, A. V. (2012). Land Grabbing and Human Rights: The Role of EU Actors Abroad. European Parliament.
58. TATLI, H. (2013). “Sosyal Sermayenin Bireylerin İstihdamı Üzerindeki Etkisi Hanehalkı Reisleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma”, Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 15/3, 87-114.
59. The World Bank, (2022). Forced Displacement and Social Cohesion https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/social-cohesion-and-resilience/brief/forceddisplacement-social-cohesion.
60. The World   (2021).             World bank    open    data.    Available         from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=SO-ET-SD-SS-YE.
61. UN Habitat. (2020). Forced Evictions: Global Crisis, Global Solutions. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Retrieved from UN Habitat
62. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). (2020). Forced Displacement in 2020. The UN Refugee Agency.
63. Wily, L. A. (2011). Land Tenure and Conflict in Africa: Prevention, Mitigation, and Reconstruction. USAID.
64. Woolcock M. and Narayan, D. (2000).  Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy,World Bank Research Observer15 (2): 2000, 225-49.
65. YİYİT, T. (2017). “Sosyal Sermaye Kavramına Türkiye’deki Örgütsel Davranış Çalışmaları Açısından Bir Bakış”, Hitit Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10, (2), Aralık 2017, 1499-1520.