A year after the start of the full-scale Russian invasion, Ukraine’s economy and infrastructure are in tatters. International institutions are planning the biggest reconstruction effort since World War II. Last September, President Zelensky estimated that more than $1 trillion would be needed to rebuild the country. The architect and urban planner, Martin Duplantier is involved in the reconstruction of Ukraine. His projects range from small-scale works, such as the construction of bomb shelters, to large-scale works, when it comes to building completely destroyed cities like Izium. Sylvie Noël met him in kyiv.
RFI: Talking about the reconstruction of Ukraine may seem premature when the war is not yet over. Martin Duplantier, why do you think it is relevant to talk about reconstruction right now ?
Martin Duplantier: It is important and above all essential to talk about reconstruction because territories in this country have been devastated by the Russian presence, by Russian bombardments. Infrastructure is on its knees, more than 1 million homes have been demolished. However, people continue to live in these territories, an economy continues to function. We must therefore rebuild immediately without waiting for the armistice. I remind you that we did not wait for 1945 to project ourselves into the post-Second World War period. During the First World War, reflection began in 1915. Three years before the armistice, we therefore began to draw up plans for the reconstruction of cities in Belgium and France.
As you said, cities have been damaged, others have been completely destroyed. What should be the priorities of this reconstruction?
Regarding priorities, first of all urban infrastructure to meet urgent needs. Cities must be able to accommodate people who would like to return and provide them with basic services.
Secondly, the public facilities which have been the target of the Russians, such as access to healthcare, to education. More than 1,200 hospitals and health centers have been bombed. More than 2,000 schools have been hit by strikes. These buildings need to be put back on their feet with additional security. Particular attention is paid to the adaptation of public facilities to this new grammar of the bomb shelter which must be more than a shelter, which must also be able to function in other configurations.
Speaking of bomb shelters, many buildings have had such structures in recent months. Has it become an essential infrastructure?
Yes quite. It is a question of creating shelters, or of reinforcing existing shelters with a search for improvement in terms of comfort. You should know that we sometimes experience 3 or even 4 alerts during the day, that is to say that we spend most of our time in shelters. To avoid a significant loss of time, the bomb shelter must be something other than a place to pile in. These places must have a dual use, for example, classrooms must also act as shelters.
The third point is the heritage, because it’s the culture that gives meaning to the fact of finding oneself in the city, of forming one body. If we don’t take care of the Ukrainian heritage, I fear that we will repeat the mistakes of the post-World War II period when the Soviets rebuilt on a clean slate. We don’t want to repeat this mistake of extreme standardization in the city; on the contrary, we want to rely on the history of the site, on the link between the populations and their geography. All of this involves protecting the existing heritage first, then defining the twenty-first century heritage that we want to create. Ecology, here, is not an ideology, it is an obligation. You have to be energetically independent, so that implies sobriety, frugality via, perhaps, new technologies that we could make available to Ukrainians to rebuild while calling on local know-how, because this country is full of potential. We have to help them to express it and this daily support must be based on this long term.
The reality of this war is the dead, but also the wounded. The reconstruction of the housing stock must also include this new problem.
Absolutely. We are talking today about 300,000 broken faces, so physical injuries and three times as many injuries on a psychological or psychiatric level. There arises the major problem of the reintegration of these populations, whether civilian or military, into society. We are working on a post-traumatic center project by combining the hospital, a public space, with a research and development center linked to a university with a view to their reintegration. These are projects that will have to multiply in Ukraine because the demand is unfortunately huge and it is not over.
Another problem, that of displaced persons?
This is a real question in itself. According to the assumptions of the United Nations, a city, even bombarded, at the end of the war, recovers at least 60% of its population. Beyond that, for cities like Kharkiv which are 20 km from the border, it will depend on the degree of Russian warmongering. What will become of these cities? Kharkiv, for example, which used to be a center of commerce, finds itself in a cul-de-sac 20 km from the border of a country that will no longer be open to it. Will these cities recover all of their population or not? This is a first question mark.
The other question mark concerns western Ukraine, which has finally become the new logistics gateway for an entire country. Before, it was Odessa, but with the war, access to the Black Sea became more complicated. It is the rail that is essential via the West which is experiencing a fairly strong boom. Integration into the European Union will also, as was the case in Poland and Romania, benefit the West of the country, in terms of investment and infrastructure. These are hypotheses that must be taken into account and that will be refined over time. Everything depends, once again, on the outcome of this war. She will be victorious, that’s for sure, but on the other side of the border, what will happen? That is still uncertain.
Let’s talk about the housing stock. There is a characteristic in Ukraine, it is that 90% of this housing stock is private. They are owners. Is it a particular problem?
Absolutely, since you know that in 1991 we went from the Soviet system, where no one was the owner, to a liberal system where everyone suddenly became the owner of their home.
These owners must be involved, they must also be compensated. There is a support fund for people whose homes have been demolished. But there is a relatively long time to obtain compensation. In an emergency, we have to rebuild and initially rent these accommodations to them at a preferential rate and then sell them to them once they have received the compensation from the State.
To provide housing at an affordable price, there is also a private social rental mechanism that is set up through foundations that become local social landlords.
But unbridled reurbanisation must be avoided. It is necessary to have town planning tools which should make it possible to hold the reins of this development. The Ukrainian central government must get down to it, but also the local authorities, because a process of decentralization was voted – before the beginning of the war – which gives a lot of power to the mayors.
Is corruption a fear?
When you give a lot of power to local elected officials, you also give them the possibility of being corrupted. But one thing has changed radically since the beginning of the war: people have become intractable vis-à-vis corruption. Today, mayors and deputies are removed from office for not having managed humanitarian aid fairly, for example.
And then there is the inventiveness of the foundations, these new players on the real estate market who want to be sure of the destination of each euro donated. So, rather than handing over the management of an entire building to the local authorities, the foundations retain the management and thus ensure the proper use of the funds and of these dwellings.