According to Wilkinson (1998), before 1920 efforts by the government of the time to improve the living conditions of the poor people were coordinated periodically by the local authorities.
This led to the development of barracks and compounds, whose sole purpose was to accommodate single workers – in most cases, migrants. Africans during this time were left to fend for themselves; as a result, a majority of them lived in in filthy, congested, and hazardous slums dwellings and backyards (Wilkinson, 1998). According to Kihato (2014), the Native Land Act No 27 of 1913 intentionally demarcated urban areas as exclusively white, with blacks allowed in those areas only at the command of white needs. Scholars such as Maylam (1990) and Parnell (1991) as cited in Kihato (2014) argue this type isolation began in the nineteenth century in South Africa. The Transvaal Report provided principles, which formed the ground for controlling the movement of blacks in South Africa. The Act further recognise the principle that natives which included men, women and children were only allowed within municipal areas only to serve the interest of the whites (Kihato, 2014).
According to Wilkinson (1998), the migrant labour system and the geopolitical entities have been institutionalised in South Africa and regarded as Bantustans or homelands. In order to do this a wide-ranging apparatus of controls on urban migration, maintained the separation of the day-to-day survival of migrant workers from their families. This gave rise to a situation of low wage levels of African workers (Wilkinson, 1998). Harrison and Todes (2015) reaffirms that the spatial controls in South Africa evolved over a period of colonisation, but were implemented when apartheid was at its peak, around the 1950s to the mid-1970s. The pass laws were introduced around the twentieth century, as they were introduced at British borders, serving the same purpose – that is for the natives to sell their labour. Around the 1950s, black South Africans were actively contained in the homelands. This became a key element in advancing the apartheid state, which divided South Africa into racially- and ethnically- segregated territories (Harrison & Todes, 2015).
The period of reconstruction post 1994, included the provision of affordable low-cost housing, which served as a critical strategic goal for the South Africans. This was to promote a sense of community and nation building through participation of all South Africans (Khan et al., 2013).
Khan et al. further argue that allowing democratic inputs from communities who are affected by the planning and development of new human settlements can be the first step towards providing a sense of engagement with communities. This eases the way for the conversion from
83
informal settlements, backyard housing and relocation from the former overcrowded townships, which were created by apartheid government (Khan et al., 2013).
4.2.1. The Right to Adequate housing
Housing Policies in South Africa are guided by the principle that having a house is a basic need. The right to housing has been articulated in the Constitution of the RSA (1996), and in the RDP, introduced in 1994. The Housing White Paper of 1994 gives interpretation to the concept of adequate housing through its “vision of a viable, socially- and economically- integrated communities, situated in areas that have convenient access to economic opportunities; as well as health, educational and social amenities:
i) a permanent residential structure with secure tenure, that ensures privacy and provides adequate protection against the harsh elements; and
ii) potable water, adequate sanitary facilities – including waste disposal and domestic electricity supply” (DoH, 1994; Huchzermeyer, 2001).
According to McDonald (1998), the South African government committed itself towards improving the living and working conditions of the people on an impartial and sustainable basis allowing all citizens in the country to access humane, safe, secure, accessible and adequate shelter. This includes access to basic services, facilities and amenities, which meets the conditions, set out in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. This will further ensure equitable housing provision as well as access to basic services – with no discrimination based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, political ideology, social origin, property, birth or sexual orientation (McDonald, 1998).
4.2.2. Assessing the adequacy of housing
From its inception in 1994 RDP was aimed at building new houses through a subsidy programme. This created a hostile divergence between shacks that needed to be eradicated and formal housing that was expected to be built by the government. At the time, the state was prepared to provide top-structure RDP houses, according to specific requirements. The desperation of people to have illegal, dangerous, informal shacks and formal standardised houses became an obstacle to human settlements, as well as to the integration of neighbourhoods and accessible and functional cities (Bradlow et al., 2011). The failure of governments in developing countries to accommodate the increasing number of the urban poor
84
that has increased because of urbanisation. Citizens have had to rely on their creativity, energy, skills, and the resources at their disposal in order to access housing in the form of shacks (Keivani & Werna, 2001; Bredenoord & van Lindert, 2010). The creativity behind the construction of shacks and, took place on an informal bases and it has hampered the provision of basic services caused by the lack of formal interventions from the state (Bradlow et al., 2011).
Busch-Geertsema et al. (2016) identified three dimensions to be considers in accessing housing:
First, is the security domain, which relates to the extent to which households can have a home and stay for whatever period, as long as the legitimate obligations are met. This includes the security of tenure, which limits evictions.
Second, the physical domain relates to having enough space for the house to meet the needs of members of households in terms of quality and quantity. Quality considers the durability, protection from harsh climatic conditions, the provision of basic amenities, and the safety of one’s self and possessions. Whilst quantity reflects the size of the family (Busch-Geertsema, et al., 2016).
Third, the social domain ponders on prospects to escalate communal relationships in the family itself. This means respecting the culture and space for privacy in a family or community (Busch-Geertsema et. al., 2016).
Barry and Roux (2016) suggests that failures by government to deal with the delivery of houses to poor South Africans has consequences in alleviating poverty through subsidised housing programmes, and the overall property systems and land market. Hence, state subsidised houses in the country has a distinctive nature, as they are fully services singular parcels of land. Hodge and Gordon (2014) as cited in Barry and Roux (2016) reaffirms that as a result beneficiaries of housing in South Africa have been able to access clean drinking water and sanitation, which in the past, have shown to be important for community health. However, the challenge faced by municipalities has been that housing projects benefit the poor, who have limited livelihood opportunities, and who may struggle to pay municipal services (Alexander, 2010; Barry &
Roux, 2016).
85
4.2.3. Challenges and constraints of housing delivery in South Africa
The Department of Housing has acknowledged major challenges in housing delivery, in that it has been the lack of capacity, and mostly expertise by officials in all spheres of government, particularly local government officials. This has threatened local government capability to drive the establishment of sustainable housing environment. The ineffectiveness to efficiently package and the aligning of funding streams by employing innovative planning principles, acquiring inexpensive pieces of land, and retaining professionals in the department have threatened this sphere of government (DoH, 2004). Hence, this has led to problems such as community protests, the sprawling of informal in areas, which are dangerous for communities.
As a result, municipalities are finding it difficult to deal with these problems because of incapacity as well as other functions, which have been transferred to this sphere without clear mandates.
Some scholars, such as Mayekiso (1996) and Cross (1995) as cited in Huchzermeyer (2001) argue that the issue of private tenure is being exploitative, and is, as a result, not appropriate for poor households. Civil movements were in support of this idea, with the aim of discouraging tenants in residential areas, which was dominating at the time. The rising exploitative shack lordism in informal settlements was substituted with common land holding practices, common in African states, mostly especially in rural areas. This move made it possible for settlements to attract local and overseas support for development, because they were planned through various democratically-elected civic communities (Huchzermeyer, 2001). As a result, shack dwellers in Durban, referred to as Abahlali base Mjondolo in isiZulu, mobilised themselves for this course. This group was willing to engage in various acts of non-violent action against the City of Durban, which was to include making sit-ins in government offices, as well as other municipal areas (Pithouse, 2006). Gibson (2012) contends that shack dwellers through its organisation began to voice their right to live within the city and demanded active democratic participation. This was to be done from grass root ensuring that services were to be provided to the informal settlements. The emphasis was on criticising the political economy, which failed to address the politics of the state, and its spatial political economy. Gibson further indicate that the demand for housing by the shack dwellers was based on democratic and open engagements aimed at radically changing spatial and political economy in the city. This was to be done by moving away from post-apartheid public awareness through significant involvements in the political economy of the city. According to Monyai (2007:33) as cited in
86
Mpehle (2012), beneficiaries of public services have witnessed little improvement in the provision of these services. Hence, the service delivery protests are witnessed because of poor provisioning of services leading to most people living in poverty.
Displeasure amongst communities’ marks resulted to the disappointment to deliver material benefits to the people – but also from government’s non-consultative and often exceptionally careless style to urban governance hence, these material benefits included houses and access to water. Therefore, service delivery protests are more about incompetent local governance, caused by people not knowing the proper channels to raise their concerns (Tissington, 2011).
Bradlow et al. (2011) indicate that a people-centred approach puts emphasis to the concept of pro-poor strategies. In most cases, these strategies are designed and implemented without the integration of participatory processes by communities. Therefore, this approach was expected to take into account that interventions, which were effective, would oblige the state to provide space for well-informed and organised communities of the urban poor to be considered in such projects (Bradlow et al., 2011).
Policies adopted in South Africa post 1994 aimed at providing change, which does not fully respond to the dualistic challenge of providing services for human settlements, which also ensures a safe and sustainable environment (Goebel, 2007). While the Housing Department was aligning policies to development goals, uneven expenditure patterns arose. To improve the situation, policy instruments and implementing agencies it is important that they are brought together so as to achieve greater alignment, to enhance the flow of funding and housing delivery (DoH, 2004).
4.3. BACK-TO-BASICS AS A STRATEGY FOR SUSTAINABLE HUMAN