Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41809714›Full record

ArticleJamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa)2026

'A successful re-blocking project is when the government works hand in hand with the community': Factors determining the longevity of re-blocking projects for fire-risk reduction.

Siyachuma S Sintu, Robyn Pharoah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Jamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Siyachuma S SintuResearch Alliance for Disaster and Risk Reduction, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2801-9438
Robyn PharoahResearch Alliance for Disaster and Risk Reduction, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7291-371X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Informal settlements are highly vulnerable to fires, due to housing materials, poor infrastructure, dangerous energy sources and housing densities that facilitate the spread of fires and hamper firefighting. Re-blocking aims to reduce fire risk by spatially reconfiguring and de-densifying settlements and upgrading services. However, re-blocked settlements often re-densify, potentially undermining long-term risk reduction benefits. Using case studies of two re-blocked informal settlements, this study aims to explore informal settlement dwellers' perspectives on re-blocking interventions and identify the factors influencing their long-term success, especially the dynamics leading to re-densification. A qualitative research approach was used, employing a comparative case study design. Data were collected through 10 in-depth semi-structured key-informant interviews with officials, implementers and community leaders, and six focus groups (three in each community) involving 84 participants selected based on involvement in the process. The findings suggest that the primary reason for re-densification was that the allocated housing spaces were too small for households' needs or growth. Others included opportunism and push for better housing conditions. Although participation was intended, some residents felt the process was rushed or exclusive and that decision-making neglected their needs, leading to dissatisfaction that could reduce the longevity of spatial changes. The findings suggest the long-term effectiveness hinges on addressing beneficiaries' core needs and expectations. Ultimately, deep, inclusive and unrushed community engagement is crucial to capture diverse needs, ensure sustainable outcomes and achieve intended risk reduction benefits. Contribution: This research fills a practical gap by examining the underlying non-fire safety factors that drive re-densification and provide insight into how re-blocking interventions can be improved.

Indexed as

Cape Townfireinformal settlementsre-blockingrisk reduction

Identifiers

PMID41809714
PMCPMC12969522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.