CHAPTER 6: HOUSING POLICY AND PRACTICE
6.6 The World Bank and housing
6.6.1 The evolution of the World Bank's housing policy
6.6.1.1 Limitations of self-help policies
Self-Help-Housing which was adopted by the World Bank as a policy to solve the housing needs of the urban poor households in developing countries and was
implemented under the term 'Site and Services and slum upgrading projects' between 1972 and 1990. In South Africa where Self-Help-Housing is incorporated in the Housing Policy under the appellation of People's Housing Process (PHP), the Department of Housing recognised that Self-Help-Housing allows beneficiaries to be "in control of important decisions such as how the house is designed, how resources are used where and how they can obtain affordable building materials and how the house will be built" (Department of Housing, 1997). Marais et al (2003) confirms the assumption made by the South African Department of Housing regarding Self-Help- Housing when he pointed out that houses produced through Self-Help-Housing are bigger and cheaper than the government houses delivered through low-cost housing known in South Africa as RDP houses. Besides, it is widely believed by the advocates of Self-Help-Housing such as Turner (1972), Mathey (1992), Schulist and Harris (2002) and Marais (2003), that it has the ability to provide access to shelters for thousands of families where conventional housing could only reach hundreds (Turner, 1972, Mathey, 1992).
Although it is advantageous, Self-Help-Housing should not be taken as a panacea to solve the housing needs and problems of urban poor households. Virulent criticisms against Self-Help-Housing emanates from the Marxist view of which Burgess (1985) is the pioneer. Burgess (1985) who was inspired by Althusser (1977) and Poulantzas (1973) criticises Self-Help-Housing from a political, economic and ideological point of view. Related to economic point of view, based on the 'artisanal form' of housing production in which many poor households in less developed countries are engaged, Burgess argues that Self-Help-Housing creates additional charges that poor households cannot afford. In fact, Burgess observed that in the artisanal form of housing production, land is illegally purchased and there is an absence of service cost and non payment of taxes. However, in 'assisted Self-Help-Housing' known in the literature as 'State Self-Help-Housing' like sites and services and upgrading project initiated by the World Bank between 1972 and 1990, claims that land is developed for the purposes of exchange, providing services and where taxes are payable. However, these additional charges place economic pressure on poor households, which are already of a weak nature.
Self-Help-Housing was also challenged by Marcuse (1992) who outlines ten weaknesses such as it violates sound and necessary planning principles, it produces only a temporary solution to the immediate housing problem and it does nothing to redistribute social resources in accordance with need. In this sense, it can be argued
that Self-Help-Housing legitimises poverty (Kerr & Kwelle) instead of combating it. In one of the ten weaknesses of Self-Help-Housing which may be considered as the summary of the weaknesses, Marcuse (1992) avers that Self-Help-Housing is inefficient.
Regarding South Africa, Huchzermeyer (2002) observes that poverty and inequality are the main causes of poor housing conditions; therefore acts as the stimulus to Self- Help-Housing which is adopted as an housing solution for the poor households in the situation of economic and political crisis (Harm, 1992). In this sense, without combating the main causes of poverty and inequality, Self-Help-Housing cannot constitute a durable housing solution for South Africans' poor households. Instead, it will legitimise poverty and inequality. Besides, like in other developing countries, South Africa has a high rate of unemployment and people who are underemployed. Implementing Self- Help-Housing means that the housing market is extracted from the building industries;
and unskilled people are hired for housing development, while there are qualified and skilled people who can be efficient for the job. This means that the implementation of Self-Help-Housing in South Africa may decline the construction industry. Although Self- Help-Housing facilitates some people to acquire building skills, it does not solve the unemployment issue in the short term. It only prepares those who are involved for the long run, where they can be useful for the construction industry.
Although critics of Self-Help-Housing, Mathey (1992) who has analysed Self-Help- Housing in Cuba, persists in arguing that Self-Help-Housing should be considered as a realistic housing solution for the poor households in developing countries. He pOinted out that limits of Self-Help-Housing stand in capitalist societies and that the study of Self-Help-Housing in socialist countries is needed in order to have a complete approach of Self-Help-Housing.
Mathey's (1992) counter argument regarding the limits of Self-Help-Housing could stand if housing crisis in developing countries, including South Africa, was only a housing problem requiring a housing solution, which is not related to other issues such as poverty, inequalities and unemployment. However, as housing crisis results from economic crisis and an unfair political system, an integrated solution, which does not only focus on poor households, but on all income groups including middle and high incomes, is required for a durable and global housing solution. As the Self-Help- Housing seeks to tackle the housing crisis without combating the causes of housing crisis, it should not be considered as a sustainable housing solution for poor households in developing countries.
6.7 The Housing Policy in South Africa
6.7.1 Introduction
The current South African Housing Policy contained in the 1994 White paper evolved from the National Housing Forum, a multi-party non-governmental negotiating forum, comprising of members from government, business and community and development organisations (Huchzermeyer, 2001; Khan & Thurman, 2001; Charlton, 2004). This forum undertook investigations and debated key issues of policy, some of which were used by the Government of National Unity when it was elected in 1994. One of the key concepts of the housing policy is combating and addressing homelessness, whereby a house is understood as something more than a mere shelter (Charlton, 2004).
In October 1994, the National Housing Accord was held at Botshabelo in the Free State. This Accord was significant since all the key parties including government, business, communities and individuals agreed to work together to achieve a housing vision for South Africa (Jenkins, 1999). The Housing White Paper published in 1994 provided a roadmap in achieving the national housing vision. All policy and policy refinements fell within the framework set by the White Paper.
With the adoption of "Urban Development framework" in 1997 as an official response of the Ministry of Housing to the 1996 Habitat agenda (Huchzermeyer, 2002) and the promulgation of the Housing Act, 1997 (Act No. 107, 1997), now, the Supreme Housing law in the land, the legislative framework for the housing policy in South Africa was established. The Housing Act and the Urban Development Framework aligned the NHP with the Constitution of South Africa and prescribed the roles and responsibilities of the three spheres of government viz, national government, provincial government and local government. In addition, the Housing Act of 1997 laid down administrative procedures for the development of the NHP.
The NHP intended to address the issue of fragmented cities (Harrison, Huchzermeyer
& Mayekiso, 2003) and a dysfunctional housing market observed the problems
inherited by the post Apartheid government both on the supply and demand sides. The observation from the supply side was the issue of a severe housing shortage, lack of end-use finance and insufficient land for housing construction. From the demand side, there was evidence of a lack of affordability from the majority of Black people due to high rate of unemployment, the non-payment of housing rentals and service payments
boycotts. The NHP was strongly influenced by the need to address and normalise these problems. Consequently, the Policy takes advantage of a number of opportunities that also exist within the environment.
South Africa's Housing vision comprises the overall goal, to which all implementers of the housing policy should work. The vision is outlined in the definition for 'housing development' contained within the Housing Act, 1997 (No 107 of 1997) states that:
" ... the establishment and maintenance of habitable, stable and sustainable public and private residential environments to ensure viable households and communities, in areas allowing convenient access to economic opportunities, health services, educational and social amenities, in which all citizen and permanent residents of the Republic will have access to:
(a) permanent residential structures with a secure tenure, ensuring internal and external privacy and providing adequate protection against the elements; and
(b) potable water, adequate sanitary facilities and domestic energy supply".
The vision is reinforced in both the Urban and Rural Development Frameworks (URDF) which extend the vision to focus on improving the standard of living of all South Africans, with a particular emphasis on the poor and those who have been previously disadvantaged. The National government's goal is to increase housing delivery to a peak level of 350 000 units per annum (this is, of course, subject to fiscal affordability) until the housing backlog is overcome.
One may argue that the will of the post Apartheid government to create a post Apartheid South African society defined as democratic, integrated, and based on the principles of equity, fairness, non-racialism and desegregationist, cannot be questioned. However, the way this vision is translated into policies including the NHP and the impact of formulated policies on the creation of a post Apartheid South Africa are the subject of debate. Research related to housing policy and its contribution to the creation of sustainable human settlements reveals that either the implementation of housing policy through low-cost housing is deepening the segregation created by the Apartheid regime (Huchzermeyer, 2003) or it does not translate the original intention, to use the housing policy as an instrument to restructure South African society (Napiers, 2005). Harrison, Huchzermeyer and Mayekiso, (2003) further argued that the fragmentation of South African cities persists despite the end of Apartheid.
The discussion below of the contents of the main policy documents constituting the framework for housing policy, undoubtedly highlight the importance of housing development in the creation of a post Apartheid South Africa. The question that arises from the debate is why, despite the existence of policies, aiming at redressing South African society and the will to empower people, who were previously disadvantaged, after more than ten years of the housing delivery and the demise of Apartheid, South African society still looks fragmented and unequal as it looked in 1994 (Harrison, Huchzermeyer & Mayekiso, 2003). Are the existing policies inappropriate to redress the imbalances that exist in South Africa? Is the implementation of policies giving rise to post Apartheid problems? It seems that the problem lies within the housing policy itself (Huchzermeyer, 2002 & Charlton & Kihato, 2006) and in its implementation (Radikedi, 2005).