Editor,

RE: "An alternative lens into ‘the African City’” (The New Times, December 16). I have no idea what the article is saying – it seems too academic to me; if someone can summarize in a more understandable way.

Kigali Girl

*************************

The way I understand it, the clue lies in this ‘motion’ the author submitted for debate to her students: ‘Living in informal settlements is better than living in formal settlements’. And the keyword here is the qualifier "better”.

If the concept behind the term "better” has not properly and thoroughly been explained, either before, all along the discussion, or after, then the debate has been and will remain at the level of mere platitudes.

Or else, one would ask: Somewhere along the debate or study, had the formal and informal African urban settlements been fully described and compared, prior to the judgment of who won the debate and came to the conclusion reported?

And leading to this conclusion, were all the most significant factors such as safety, comfort, and all major and minor costs and advantages related to building up and living in either of those settlement categories weighed enough and objectively compared during the pre-vote exercise?

In my view, only with such ‘hard’ data shall we, eventually, be in a position "to convince the world to start looking at African cities optimistically”. And if not, we’ll just keep indulging in an appalling actual and prospective mediocrity.

Francois-Xavier Nziyonsenga