Why Families Are Living in Damaged Gaza Buildings Despite the Risk of Collapse

Families in Gaza are continuing to live inside damaged buildings because the alternatives—overcrowded displacement sites, inadequate tents and other unsafe shelters—can be just as dangerous and, in some cases, offer no realistic place to go. The dilemma was brought into sharp focus on September 16, 2026, when a seven-storey residential building in Gaza City collapsed, killing at least 20 people, including six children, and injuring 14 others. Gaza Civil Defence said nearly 100 people were believed to be trapped beneath the rubble.

The collapse was not an isolated housing problem. UN humanitarian officials say hundreds of damaged structures across Gaza are considered unsafe, while Reuters reports that roughly 2,000 damaged buildings are still being inhabited by families. The central problem is therefore not simply that people are choosing to ignore structural danger: the housing stock has been devastated, displacement sites are overcrowded and humanitarian agencies have limited capacity to provide safer alternatives or repair partially damaged homes.

The choice is between different kinds of risk

For a family without a functioning home, leaving a damaged building does not necessarily mean moving into a safe one.

Gaza’s housing shortage is the result of extraordinary levels of destruction. A UN, World Bank and European Union assessment published in April 2026 estimated that more than 371,888 housing units had been destroyed or damaged and that about 1.9 million people had been displaced, many of them repeatedly. The assessment estimated Gaza’s recovery and reconstruction needs at $71.4 billion over the coming decade.

That leaves families making decisions under conditions in which ordinary housing choices have largely disappeared.

A damaged apartment may still provide walls, a roof and some protection from wind and rain. A tent may avoid the immediate structural danger of a compromised building but provide little protection against flooding, cold, heat or storms. Collective shelters can offer some services but are often severely overcrowded.

The decision is consequently less about choosing between a safe and unsafe home than between several forms of insecurity.

Gaza’s housing system has been damaged on a massive scale

The scale of structural damage makes conventional relocation extremely difficult.

UNOSAT, the United Nations satellite-imagery analysis centre, estimated that by June 16, 2026, about 201,290 structures—82% of all structures in Gaza—had sustained damage. That included 134,422 structures assessed as destroyed, 13,848 severely damaged and 28,096 moderately damaged. The same assessment estimated that 328,627 housing units had been damaged.

A separate detailed assessment of 38,240 buildings conducted by humanitarian partners and reported by the UN in September found that 60% of the 178,632 housing units inspected were severely damaged, destroyed or otherwise considered uninhabitable. Only 627 units had received basic repairs since the beginning of 2026, according to the same report.

Those figures explain why the phrase “just move somewhere safer” is misleading. There are simply not enough intact homes to absorb people who have lost theirs.

Why damaged buildings can still seem safer than tents

Weather is one of the most important factors.

Reuters reported that families have told its journalists they were living in partially damaged buildings partly because the structures offered protection against wind and rain, and because new tents were unavailable.

The humanitarian situation becomes particularly difficult as the rainy season approaches. UN assessments have warned that displaced people are facing flooding risks, deteriorating shelters and inadequate drainage. In early September, safety audits covering about 230 displacement sites found problems including deteriorated shelters, poor drainage, unsafe sanitation facilities and overcrowding.

This creates a difficult calculation for families. A building with cracked walls or a compromised roof presents a potentially catastrophic structural hazard, but a tent exposed to heavy rain or flooding can also become uninhabitable.

For families with children, older relatives or people with disabilities, moving repeatedly can create additional practical difficulties. Every relocation requires finding space, transporting belongings and securing access to water, sanitation, food and medical care.

The problem is not only the buildings—it is the shortage of alternatives

The UN’s humanitarian coordinator for the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Ramiz Alakbarov, said on September 16 that people across Gaza were living in “hundreds of damaged structures assessed as unsafe, for lack of better options.” He said humanitarian organizations were supporting people who chose to relocate from damaged buildings and flood-prone areas to safer sites.

Shelter needs remain enormous. An August OCHA report, based on Shelter Cluster surveys from June, estimated that 1.98 million people—94% of Gaza’s population—required shelter assistance and non-food items. It said 58% of the population faced critical or catastrophic shelter needs.

Humanitarian organizations have been distributing tents, tarpaulins, mattresses and other supplies, while some agencies have begun basic repairs to partially damaged housing. But these measures operate at a much smaller scale than the underlying need.

That gap is one reason damaged buildings remain occupied even after authorities or humanitarian workers identify them as unsafe.

Collapse risk can increase after the initial damage

A building does not have to collapse immediately after being struck to remain dangerous.

Damage to structural components can weaken a building while leaving it standing. Further deterioration, vibration, water intrusion or additional damage can change its condition. Rain can be particularly concerning for already compromised structures, which is why humanitarian officials are pressing for winter preparations and safer accommodation before the rainy season intensifies.

The September 16 collapse demonstrates the consequence of that accumulated risk. According to Reuters, Alessandro Mrakic, head of the UN Development Programme’s Gaza office, said about 400 buildings were at risk of collapse and warned that rain could worsen the danger.

The exact structural condition of individual buildings cannot be determined from satellite damage classifications alone. A building labelled “damaged” is not automatically on the verge of collapse, and a building that appears standing from outside may contain serious internal structural weaknesses. Proper engineering assessments are therefore important for determining which structures can be repaired, which can be temporarily occupied and which should be evacuated.

Rescue capacity is another part of the housing crisis

The danger does not end when a building collapses. Survivors may remain trapped, while rescue teams face an enormous debris-management problem.

Following the September 16 collapse, Reuters reported that rescuers were forced to work with inadequate heavy machinery, with some digging by hand. The UN said Egypt had provided heavy machinery to support the response and called for additional specialized equipment, fuel and engine oil.

This matters because Gaza’s damaged housing stock creates a dual emergency: preventing further collapses and being able to respond quickly when one occurs.

Heavy machinery is also needed for debris removal, road clearance, infrastructure repairs and reconstruction. Yet access to equipment, fuel and construction materials remains a significant humanitarian constraint.

Repairing homes is faster than rebuilding Gaza—but still difficult

Not every damaged building needs to be demolished and replaced.

Some partially damaged homes can potentially be made safer through structural assessment and targeted repairs. Humanitarian partners are already conducting assessments and emergency repairs, but the scale remains limited compared with the number of damaged housing units.

That distinction is important for the immediate shelter crisis. Full reconstruction will require enormous amounts of concrete, steel, machinery, skilled labour, financing and debris removal. Emergency stabilization and repair can sometimes return individual units to use much sooner.

But repairs are only meaningful when engineers can establish that a structure is suitable for rehabilitation and when sufficient materials and access are available.

What happens next will depend on safe alternatives

The most immediate unresolved question is whether families currently occupying unsafe structures can be moved before the next major weather event—or another structural failure.

The UN is urging the provision of tents, tarpaulins and other shelter materials, while humanitarian agencies are supporting voluntary relocation from buildings assessed as unsafe and from flood-prone areas.

Longer term, the problem cannot be solved through relocation alone. Gaza needs systematic structural assessments, emergency stabilization of repairable buildings, removal of hazardous structures, debris clearance and a large-scale rebuilding programme. The April 2026 damage assessment estimated $26.3 billion would be required during the first 18 months of recovery to restore essential services, rebuild critical infrastructure and support economic recovery.

The September collapse has made the immediate priority stark: identifying buildings that present an unacceptable structural risk is only useful if families have somewhere safer to go. Until that second condition is met, people who know their homes are damaged can still find themselves with no practical alternative but to remain inside them.