Design and adaptation in contested urban spaces : 
the case of the Toi Market as a multi-level settlement in Nairobi, Kenya
Nairobi has nearly 200 slums where 70% of its population live. Most slum dwellers lack tenure security and suffer the constant threat of eviction. Yet, we still know very little about how these slums form, grow, and consolidate in contested urban spaces, and how their residents adapt to uncertainty. Part of the reason lies in the gap between design and adaptation theories. Whereas design theory focuses mainly on professionals’ cognitive processes (largely ignoring adaptation mechanisms adopted by slum dwellers), spatial transformations in slums are often addressed by resilience theory, which usually overlooks design processes.  What is the role of design in adaptation processes in contested urban spaces? I answer this question by exploring the relationships between design and adaptive capacities in the Toi Market, the second largest informal market in Nairobi. I study the market’s tenure regimes and traders’ design practices through a case study that combines longitudinal and cross-section investigation. The research reasoning is abductive, made of iterative paths between conceptual frameworks and empirical results. It is largely based on a literature review on land tenure and design theory. The concepts of bounded rationality, uncertainty, and adaptive mechanisms constitute the basis of the theoretical framework used to analyse the empirical data. Methods include participant observation, 59 interviews with traders, meetings with market leaders, mapping techniques and the analysis of over 80 pertinent documents about the market. Results show that the Toi Market has three types of controversial tenure regimes and traders conduct design at three levels: development design, evolutionary design, and consolidation design.  Development design consists of collective adaptive initiatives prompted by survival mechanisms. It strengthens social capital, emerges in reaction to ordinary urban interventions, and seeks to improve functionality. Evolutionary design is conducted by community sub-groups in response to major external forces and events. It leads to social and morphological changes at the urban scale and depends on governance and control mechanisms. Consolidation design refers to individual and group-led adaptive initiatives conducted during times of relative stability. It reinforces economic development and networks and seeks to achieve land tenure security. It emerges mainly in vacant niches, as slum-dwellers take advantage of empty, underused spaces.  These three levels of design generate what I call here Multi-Level Settlements. I oppose this concept to “informal settlements” that fails to represent how slums and markets work and evolve. I thus reject the formal/informal dichotomy that persists in literature. The Multi-level concept recognises shifting alliances and multiple levels of governance as integral part of design processes. In it, design emerges as a connector of adaptive capacities. The concepts of Multi-Level Settlements, Vacant Niche and Design as a connector of adaptive capacities can help developing slum upgrading initiatives that meet the design approach naturally adopted by slum-dwellers. These initiatives can therefore acknowledge the presence of multiple alliances, which sometimes hinder—and others, foster—desired change. Community design practices can also be tailored to balance collective and individual objectives. By understanding these concepts, decision-makers can both optimize available space according to local practices and forecast how patterns will emerge in planned spaces. Finally, I encourage scholars and practitioners to further explore slum-dwellers’ design-thinking and practices to include them in mainstream design theory.
Herbert Simon Adaptation Nairobi Kenya Toi Market Urban planning Urban design Informal urbanism Informal settlements Informal markets Design theories Spatial organization Adaptive capacities Land tenure Longitudinal case study Contested urban spaces Bounded rationality