3. BACKGROUND
3.3 Post-apartheid: Change in South Africa’s spatial arrangement
58
In conclusion apartheid was an era that tried to retain racial segregation within many societies in South Africa. The pattern of forced removal and destruction was a common aspect that many individuals had to encounter in South Africa. It ensured that white South Africans were at the controls of a racial oligarchy that was developed on the suppression of black South Africans (Schensul, 2006). A near monopoly on money, power and influence were in the hands of a minority and they used this to either violently suppress the majority or, at best, transfer resources in order to stave off the inevitable revolution (Schensul, 2006). Apartheid intended to contain, fragment and seclude the majority of the population from benefits and equal opportunities to resources and employment opportunities. It can be described as a solidified process of inequalities. South African cities and especially Durban, were engineered to segregate and isolate (Schensul, 2006). However, the repercussion of this was a development of a complicated residential settlement pattern with many under resourced and informal residential spaces in the cities. Subsequently due to the rise of a new democratic political government, the apartheid policies have been dismantled and the democratic government presently is addressing the inaccuracies made by the past apartheid government. This will be addressed in the following section.
59
KwaZulu-Natal’s development and then provide an understanding of Durban’s present development. Presently there are inequalities in South Africa that has been as a result of the apartheid regime. Similar to the importance of understanding the apartheid regime, the post-apartheid regime also gives insights to understanding the unequal access of certain individuals’ rights to the same opportunities and resources, in this regard, land.
South Africa’s greater struggle since early post-apartheid days has been the attempt to undo the economic vestiges of the system of racial exclusivity (Maharaj, 1999; Bhorat and Kanbur, 2006; Hoogeveen and Ozler, 2006; Robinson, 2006). The country inherited vast inequalities in education, health, basic infrastructure, access to safe water, sanitation and housing (Hoogeveen and Ozler, 2006). The majority of the South African citizens at present are exposed to these inequalities. There is a vast distinction between those that have and those that do not. Presently the majority of the population, especially black South Africans, have unequal access to resources and opportunities due to uneven social development programmes that the present democratic ANC government have been implemented.
Access to resources, especially land, has been on the agenda of many municipalities in South Africa. One of the problems that the post-1994 government has faced is access to land in urban areas. The problem is that government cannot easily relocate those communities that were moved in the past. Another issue is that, the African National Congress government promised housing to the disadvantaged population, but this has not progressed in the way that the ANC promised (Miller and Pope, 2000). After the post- apartheid constitutional transformation of 1994, the policies regarding land in of South Africa had to be revised to conform to the new constitutional order (Miller and Pope, 2000;
Robinson, 2006; Yanou, 2006). Section 25 of the 1996 constitution – the property clause of the new dispensation - marked a welcome departure from the past by re-conceptualising access to land for the previously disadvantaged as a human right (Yanou, 2006). By mandating the state to take reasonable legislative and other measures “to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis”, it makes equity and fairness the new spirit that should underpin the rules of accessing land (Yanou, 2006: 62).
There have been debates on equal distributive rights of especially the marginalized groups of society within cities. The scope for major improvements in access to land assets by the poor have great significance for the possibilities of achieving greater equality and more inclusive economic development in each country (Yanou, 2006). The following section
60
examines the issue of land occupation and squatting in South Africa with reference to KwaZulu-Natal.
3.3.1 Land occupation and squatting in South Africa with reference to KwaZulu-Natal In South Africa’s provinces and cities, land occupation and unequal access to land have become a contentious issue that the present democratic government is addressing. This section attempts to highlight the issue encompassing the occupation of land and squatting in South Africa. In KwaZulu-Natal, there is distinct relationship of exclusion and oppression in relation to land and space, and this accounts for present common struggles (Singh, 2005; Purcell, 2006). KwaZulu-Natal’s government, have implemented policies to address the exclusion and access of land, but to no avail (Purcell, 2006). There has been no change in the spatial management of land (Bhorat and Kanbur, 2006; Purcell, 2006).
Access to land is still affected by inequalities and it is mostly the marginalised individuals who are directly impacted upon. This section attempts to give an overview of what access and occupation of land entails in South Africa as well give a reasoning for the squatter developments that have become a characteristic feature in many provinces and cities due to the inability to acquire land.
In order to understand the dilemma of occupation of land, the idea of occupation needs to be unfolded. Purcell (2006: 35, 36) advocates that ““occupation” should be defined as a continuous physical presence, but excluding presence for work, sporting events, temporary presences for the use of amenities, and any presence outside of a designated area for which a person is assigned”. Occupation thus entails a physical existence of a person’s residence.
The White Paper on Urbanisation (1986) affirms that “occupation should be used as a deliberate measure to promote orderly urbanization, especially under conditions of rapid urbanization” (cited in Purcell, 2006: 36). The occupation restrictions mean, in other words, that the state will act to upend existing settlements of non-owners, that is, disqualified persons (Purcell, 2006). In defining occupation to exclude those poor people who move and settle in shacks, tents, or other informal structures, the occupation strategy is disadvantageous to poor groups and especially those without title rights to land (Purcell, 2006). The economically hard-pressed blacks increasingly occupy vacant land in the peri- urban areas (as well as farms) in order to access job opportunities and better facilities, formally or informally (Parker et al., 1995). These people are left with few alternatives but to look for open land near their places of employment in the peri-urban areas where land
61
occupation occurs (Parker et al., 1995). This type of land occupation is known as squatting and these individuals have no legal rights to the land.
Squatting is used to refer to invasion in the past (before politicization) and now refers to the illegal stay of people on a piece of land (Crankshaw et al., 1990; Moyo, 2000). In South Africa, this type of land occupation is widely referred to as land invasion, an apartheid borne concept that sought to politically oppose the concerted effort that the disposed black South Africans have made, in order to acquire land that was taken from them (Crankshaw et al., 1990; Martin et al, 2000). Land occupation is the one way by which poor black South Africans, who are economically marginalized acquire land in order to earn a living and access their inalienable right to land in a situation where the system denies timely access to it (Crankshaw et al., 1990; Martin et al, 2000). Occupation of land in this regard in viewed in a negative light. Therefore, land invasion is a racist concept to demonise the efforts of the black people to get access to land (Crankshaw et al., 1990;
Martin et al., 2000). It refers to the physical utilization of a piece of land by an individual or a group of people in order to fulfil their economic, social or political needs (Martin et al., 2000).
About 3.5 million South Africans in urban and rural areas lost their land and rights in property through forced removals (Department of Land Affairs, 1994). Approximately 13.5% of all households (1.06 million households) live in “freestanding” squatter settlements on the urban peripheries and in backyards of formal housing units (Republic of South Africa, 1994). The enormity of apartheid’s housing backlog posed one of the most significant challenges to reconstruction and development (Royston, 1998). In 1994, there were about 2.6 million formal housing units. An estimated 1.7 million households, that is, around seven million people, were living in shacks on un-serviced sites, and over a million people were in 620 000 shacks on serviced sites (Republic of South Africa, 1994). The large and increasing housing backlog was due to low rates of formal housing provision, coupled with an increasing number of people accessing land informally, in informal settlements, backyard shacks, in overcrowded conditions in existing formal housing and most contentiously, through land invasions (Royston, 1998). The post-apartheid government has inherited the land problem (Martin et al., 2000). Although the present government is trying to address these issues, especially with regards to access and occupation of land, through different policies, programmes and practices, the full execution
62
of these policies to benefit the marginalised population is yet to be seen. However, what policy-makers plan to achieve rarely occurs in reality (Swilling et al, 1991; Shatkin, 2004).
Due to the changes in population the physical landscape has been placed under major stress, since there are increased environmental pressures influencing individuals’ needs and wants. Due to the inadequacy of the previous government to sufficiently cater for blacks in South Africa during the apartheid era, there are a number of informal settlements that have emerged in and around urban residential areas, where land seems to be vacant. Low income and marginalised groups are subjected to inadequate housing schemes, and therefore have subsequently been socially displaced with regards to access to land. These informal settlements have become a characteristic feature of South African cities and it has been estimated that over six million people in South Africa are accommodated in such settlements (Nel et al, 2003). The following section narrows the scale of examining Durban’s post-apartheid urban planning strategies.
3.3.2 Durban’s post-apartheid urban planning strategies
Urban planning strategies and policies that the municipal government in Durban and elsewhere have implemented have proven to be ineffective since they were and are not properly implemented (Nel et al., 2003; Singh, 2005). This section examines what policies and initiatives the local authorities in the city of Durban have implemented in order to address the unequal social development amongst the races in urban and rural areas.
Durban, much like South Africa’s other two megacities, was planned for segregated residence, interaction, and social and economic development during the apartheid era (Schensul, 2006). In this city of 2.7 million people in 1996, approximately 63.4 percent were black, 21.7 percent were Indian, 11.4 percent were white and 3.5 percent were coloured (Schensul, 2006). The distribution of these race groups across the city shows extreme segregation. Blacks, whites, and Indians lived in very different areas, both spatially and socially (Schensul, 2006). Spatial and social distance between racial communities was huge, such that large barriers existed between the majority black population and the economic and social development enjoyed by the white population (Schensul, 2006).
Past apartheid structures represented Durban’s social, economic and political patterns, however, there has been transformation to these components. The post-apartheid planning measures are being implemented to undo the apartheid legacy. Presently, the municipal
63
government in Durban is extensively focused on drawing foreign capital into certain areas, and therefore this has lessened their efforts to properly address social issues in Durban.
Cities, like Durban are constantly changing due to unpredictable socio-political and economic dynamics (Swilling, et al, 1991). There are new social, economical and political initiatives that are implemented in many South African cities, especially Durban. Although apartheid policies have been largely dismantled, many South Africans are still feeling the effects of the oppressive and divisive policies such as those regarding access and occupation of land (Crush, 1992; Christopher, 2005). Usually, these effects are mostly felt by the disadvantaged and marginalised population in South Africa.
Although Durban is legally no longer racially segregated, the irregularities of the past still hamper individual opportunities, and this is what the present government is trying to rectify. The municipal government (eThekwini municipality) is trying to redefine the city.
(Swilling et al., 1991). However, as Purcell (2006: 54) states, “that the post-apartheid reforms have failed miserably, unless we consider the enrichment of the few a goal of the regime all along: though the gap between black and white has narrowed in the 1990s, the gulf between rich and poor has widened far beyond where it stood during apartheid”. The implementation of post-apartheid policies have somewhat not reached the height of addressing the needs of each and every individual equally, there was and there still seems to be this widening gap between the rich and the poor in spite of these new democratic policies. Shack settlements surrounding Durban are, likely, to be inhabited by the “poorest of the poor,” living in tin-roofed and paper-walled shacks in some of the most inhospitable venues in the city (Hendler, 1991; Bhorat and Kanbur, 2006; Purcell, 2006). There is a distinct hierarchy in society and the issues of those individuals that are at the bottom are less likely to be addressed compared to the issues of those individuals that are at the top of the hierarchy.
Durban has placed major importance on the economic development of the city, with respect to economic growth and thereby almost totally disregarding the social welfare of individuals especially the marginalized population. Privatization and economic expansion has allowed only certain social classes, usually the wealthiest and/or those with access to housing subsidies, are catered for (Bhorat and Kanbur, 2006; Purcell, 2006). Housing backlogs are staggering and service delivery is priced beyond the reach of the poor (Bhorat and Kanbur, 2006; Purcell, 2006). This has therefore led to many marginalized individuals in accessing make-shift housing, commonly referred to as informal settlements. Although
64
in the past the Illegal Squatting Act addressed the illegal occupation of land, however, the Durban municipality has acknowledged that it is illegal to move these informal settlements now, without proper alternative housing. The White Paper on Urbanisation (1986) recommends a revision of the existing influx control scheme and a repeal of the Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act (Purcell, 2006). The quality of life marginalised individuals who settle in these shack dwellings need to be addressed, however, the mere removal of these individuals without any consideration is illegal.
The land question is a long-standing issue in South African politics. Land is a dynamic factor that is present within all societies. Who and how individuals access land in post- apartheid South Africa is fundamental to human rights, development and prosperity of the people. Swilling et al., (1991: IX) state that “it was not simply that the planners who carved up the society into racial categories had a mistaken assumption about the nature of the society. It was more to do with the fact that the people whose communities they were carving up had their capacities to think, associate, and organize”. This section presented an overview on the account of the post-apartheid strategies that redressed the inaccuracies of the apartheid government with respect to equal opportunities and access to resources for all individuals in Durban. The significance of Durban’s transition is not about the deracialisation and reconstitution of the polity, its about the changing nature of time and urban space (Swilling et al., 1991). Although the present government is addressing the issue of deracialisation and the development housing in line of squatter settlements, many argue about the effectiveness of these present government strategies. In order to understand the development of informal settlements, the subsequent section encompasses the definition, description and causes of informal settlements.