Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Enabling grassroots solutions to the urban housing problem

30 October 2023 Photo Bobby Shabangu

The aftermath of damage to a building in Johannesburg, after burning. — A recent fire that engulfed a downtown Johannesburg building illustrates the challenge of housing a bulging urban population in safe, dignified conditions.

Opinion article by Prof Ivan Turok, Chuma Giyose, Claudia Hitzeroth, Zama Mgwatyu and Andreas Scheba

The tragic loss of 78 lives when fire engulfed a downtown Johannesburg building illustrates the challenge of housing a bulging urban population in safe, dignified conditions.

While the apartheid government resisted urbanisation and refused to build liveable neighbourhoods for black people, the ANC government and metropolitan authorities have been ambivalent, fearing that cities would be overwhelmed.

The ‘RDP’ mass housing programme has constructed about three million small units in peripheral dormitory settlements, far from jobs and amenities. A formulaic ‘one house, one plot’ approach has produced sprawl with sparse facilities. The scheme is currently being cut back and replaced by serviced sites rather than free homes. This is bound to perpetuate urban fragmentation, instead of helping to densify and integrate cities.

More dynamic and adaptable way

Meanwhile, a more dynamic and adaptable way of providing affordable urban housing has emerged from the grassroots, beyond the formal housing system. Many poor households, small building contractors, and emerging developers are responding to the massive demand for low-cost accommodation by investing whatever resources they can muster to construct rental units in their backyards. They are countering unemployment and hardship with laudable energy, initiative, and self-reliance.

Their dwellings range in quality from simple wooden and zinc structures to solid brick-and-mortar two-storey flats with internal ablutions. Standards are improving over time as tenants demand better accommodation and builder-developers learn to design superior homes.

Small-scale rental housing (SSRH) is also stimulating township economies by raising household incomes and creating local jobs across the construction value chain via the supply of building materials, repairs and maintenance, and rental agents and other property services. It is providing a valuable shot in the arm for a struggling building industry.

These positive features and their multiplier effects make SSRH the fastest growing segment of the housing market in the country. An organic process of transforming underused land into more valuable property is being replicated over and over again across cities and towns, driven by the insatiable demand for affordable accommodation. The momentum is fuelled by the emergence of novel lending institutions, such as the Trust for Urban Housing Finance.

Yet, the very success of this phenomenon creates other challenges, including overloaded infrastructure, stretched public services, and degraded open spaces through population growth and crowding.

Dangers of SSRH

Most emerging developers and contractors are unaware of the formal rules and systems that regulate house building and urban development. The informal and unauthorised nature of SSRH poses dangers for resident communities and risks for the developers themselves.

The health and safety of tenants occupying substandard dwellings can be compromised through fires and structural failures. And the developers might never recover the value of their investments if they remain informal.

Research has shown that the costs of regulatory compliance faced by builder-developers are prohibitive. Following the formal approval procedures and paying the requisite professional fees and administrative charges would more than double the cost of developing rental units because of their onerous nature. Most developers either do not apply for permission to build — or they give up out of frustration halfway through this time-consuming process.

Despite the immense opportunities and looming threats facing SSRH, the sector is almost completely ignored by national, provincial, and municipal authorities. The tenants seem invisible to decision-makers because at least they have a roof over their heads and appear better off than people occupying informal settlements.

Finding creative ways to help upgrade and regularise backyard housing means navigating a legal and regulatory minefield that just seems too complicated to public officials, who do not know where to start.

Responding to the policy vacuum

Several grassroots intermediary organisations have begun to respond to the policy vacuum by providing practical support to builder-developers and advice to the government about what actions and reforms are most urgent and important. NGOs are rolling up their sleeves and offering direct assistance and advocacy on behalf of the sector. They believe that empowered citizens should drive local development, so they support small-scale operators looking to construct decent, affordable accommodation.

Some of these organisations have set up training courses and mentoring programmes to help nascent contractors and developers to improve their knowledge and capabilities. Hands-on technical advice and expertise are also offered to individual developers to package their project proposals professionally to help secure external funding.

NGOs have learnt from direct experience that a broad spectrum of builder-developers are engaged in township housing. The support they offer needs to be carefully tailored according to the distinctive needs and potential of different enterprises.

At one end are ‘homeowner developers’, who build in a piecemeal, intuitive, and incremental way according to whatever resources they can secure from personal savings and networks. Women are well represented among this group. They aspire to make better use of their backyards to supplement their household income and create a durable asset for future security.

Micro-developers

At the other end of the spectrum are ‘micro-developers’ who are more proficient and strategic. They have more extensive, specialist networks and can raise longer-term loans to fund their projects. These entrepreneurs usually build larger blocks of between six and twelve units on each plot and operate across multiple sites.

Township developers do not tend to work together closely because of natural rivalry. The spirit of independence has limited their collective voice to engage with public authorities and financial institutions. Consequently, NGOs encourage developers to organise themselves and build trust so that they can learn from each other and speak with one voice about urgent regulatory reforms.

Township developer forums have been created in some places to raise their visibility and negotiating power. These bottom-up initiatives are making a meaningful contribution to reducing the affordable housing backlog and deserve to be taken seriously.

SSRH fosters urban density, enhances livelihoods, and is more sustainable financially than free government housing. The benefits extend beyond shelter to bolster township economies through new and dynamic enterprises, construction jobs, and skills.

The rich experience that NGOs have gained from working in close proximity to everyday realities provides valuable insight into how to scale up and strengthen the SSRH phenomenon. This know-how is unique and different from the mindsets and understanding available to policy makers operating at national or even municipal levels. It is vital that local and national authorities recognise and respect such hard-earned expertise.

Novel social arrangement

Yet, initiatives from below cannot succeed without wider state support. To achieve its full potential, SSRH needs public investment in essential infrastructure and services, including clean water, sanitation, electricity, and waste collection.

The government also needs to simplify the procedures that regulate house building for emerging developers to obtain the legal compliance that will help to raise long-term finance, building insurance and protect the value of their investments when they decide to sell.

One way forward in a context of mistrust between municipalities, developers, and residents is to negotiate a novel social arrangement that will restore mutual obligations and stability. A ‘new deal for communities’ could vary in detail between different places, depending on local circumstances.

Municipalities could commit to improving the infrastructure and streamlining building approvals, in return for developers contributing to the cost of public services by paying property taxes and service charges. NGOs could play a valuable role in communicating and negotiating such arrangements at neighbourhood level.

Prof Ivan Turok, NRF Research Chair – University of the Free State, Distinguished Research Fellow – Human Sciences Research Council, Cape Town, ITurok@hsrc.ac.za
Chuma Giyose, Project Co-ordinator, Development Action Group, Cape Town, chuma@dag.org.za
Claudia Hitzeroth, Project Officer, Development Action Group, Cape Town, claudia@dag.org.za
Zama Mgwatyu, Programme Manager, Development Action Group, Cape Town, zama@dag.org.za
Dr Andreas Scheba, Senior Researcher, Human Sciences Research Council, Cape Town, and Senior Lecturer, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, ascheba@hsrc.ac.za

This article was originally published in the Mail & Guardian

https://mg.co.za/thoughtleader/2023-10-24-enabling-grassroots-solutions-to-the-urban-housing-problem/

News Archive

Official opening ceremony of the UFS Qwaqwa Campus

2006-02-15

Official opening ceremony of the UFS Qwaqwa Campus
11th February 2006 – Multipurpose Hall

Opening Speech:
Prof. Peter A. Mbati
Campus Principal

Successfully rising to the challenges of incorporations and mergers – developing a vibrant and academically stimulating satellite campus of the University of the Free State.

Thank you Mr. Program Director and good morning ladies and gentlemen.

I wish to once again welcome all of you to the official opening ceremony of the University of the Free State QQ campus. Thank you for taking time to share with us an important date in our campus academic calendar. I bring you greetings from our Rector and Vice Chancellor Prof. Frederick Fourie.

During such occasions we try and reflect on important matters that have affected us as an institution in the preceding year, commit ourselves to specific objectives for the current year, while planning for the proceeding year.

Today I shall be talking on Successfully rising to the challenges of incorporations and mergers – developing a vibrant and academically stimulating satellite campus of the University of the Free State’.

SRC inauguration
I would like to congratulate the SRC President and the entire SRC leadership for being elected into important positions of student leadership and authority.

As a university we are proud of the quality of our student leadership on the Qwaqwa campus. I am confident that you young leaders will rise to the challenges of your office and discharge your duties with diligence and without fear or favour. That you will rise above your party affiliations and provide effective leadership to the entire student body on campus.

Leadership is complex and requires you to be objective, just and fair in your approach to the many challenges that you will encounter. You will be judged not by the populist decision that you take when confronted with difficult choices, but rather, on the wisdom that you exercise in reaching consensus in decision making processes.

The era when management and student leadership viewed each other with suspicion and as adversaries is long gone. Management, academic and administrative staff, parents and students must have common agendas in as far the quality growth and development of our university is concerned and to strive towards academic excellence. I leave the challenge to you students, and more so to the inaugurated student leaders to define your agenda in achieving this noble objective. I trust that you will make the right choices.

Brief history of incorporation
On the recommendations of the National Working Group of Higher Education, the Qwaqwa Campus of the then University of the North was incorporated into the University of the Free State on 1st January 2003. We suddenly had to move from a campus that was originally semi-autonomous and with its own culture developed over almost 20 years, into a campus that had to operate as a fully integrated campus of the UFS, a 100 year old institution with its distinct culture.

Following incorporation, we not only had to continue with our core business of teaching, learning, research and community service, but we also had to engage in other important aspects such as exploring the most appropriate models of governance for the campus, encouraging dialogue and interactions at all levels between personnel at the different campuses with a view to developing trust between colleagues. And with the added dimensions such as participation in the transformation task team we in effect are at the fore front of developing a new institutional culture at the UFS and a truly South African University.

UFS Strategic objectives
The strategic and transformation priorities of the University of the Free State for 2006 – 2008 as approved by the Executive Management at its retreat in January 2006 are:

Quality and Excellence
Equity, diversity and redress
Financial sustainability
Regional co-operation and engagement

Central to this priority is the integration of the Qwaqwa campus as a valuable constituent part of the UFS, and the strategic reconfiguration of the campus in order that the UFS can play a meaningful role in regional engagement and development.

National leadership

The five strategic objectives cannot be viewed in isolation and run simultaneously and in concert with each other.

The Question must therefore be what we on the QQ campus, staff and students, parents and our broader community are willing to do to achieve these strategic objectives. The reconfiguration and strategic planning of this campus, and therefore its success, must be a collaborative effort between colleagues at QQ and on the main campus. We must all be ready to work together, to plan together, to shoulder responsibilities together and sometimes, to share the pain and disappointments together.

The second question must therefore be: are we prepared to go that extra mile for our campus to ensure that we claim our rightful stake within the ranks of well respected academic institutions of higher learning in this country? At this point in its history this campus requires committed men and women from across the cultural spectrum who appreciate the challenges ahead of us and who are ready to give of their best and to constructively engage at all levels to make this dream a reality. Because this dream is possible and this dream will be realized!

Quality and Excellence (1st strategic objective)

As mentioned by the Rector in his speech at the official opening ceremony of the university on the main campus on Friday 3rd February, the university will in 2006 pay extra attention to Quality and Excellence. This is informed by the Higher Education Quality Committee’s (HEQC) institutional audit which is scheduled to take place this year. Our university as well as several other HEI’s will be subjected to this audit. This will call for a lot of hard work on your part in preparation for a successful audit and in this regard therefore I request for your cooperation.

As a further step in confirming our commitment to quality and excellence, we have simultaneously introduced on the QQ campus and the main campus workshops on performance management systems to a cohort group. This will be expanded in 2006 to a wider group of managers on the QQ campus to include among others all Program Heads and Subject Heads. PMS is an invaluable tool for fair, effective and efficient management of a very important resource on campus – the human resource. Benefits of PMS include among others:

Instilling and enriching a culture of performance management (quality assurance) as an integral part of the day to day functioning of staff at the campus
Improving staff performance through mentoring, development and training

Tri campus project
One of the more important projects that we as a university undertook in 2005 was the Tri Campus Project which was coordinated by the Free State Higher Education Consortium (FSHEC) through Niel Butcher and Associates consultants.

The Tri-Campus project focused on the strategic planning for higher education campuses in the Free State that have been incorporated with UFS and CUT during the reshaping of the South African higher education landscape. The Bloemfontein Vista campus and the Qwaqwa campus of the University of the North were incorporated with the UFS, and the Welkom Vista campus with the CUT.

The planning process involved a range of research and consultation activities during the course of 2005. This included:

Conducting situational analyses of the Qwaqwa campus during which staff and students were widely consulted;
Consulting with the campus and with a range of stakeholders in the sub-region
Review of the Free State Provincial Growth and Development Strategy and Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) of the regions and other research of relevance to the sub-regions, province and country.

An operational framework for the reconfiguration of the campus with a range of possible Program Qualification Mixes has been produced. In December 2005, the Rector, the Vice Rector Academic Planning Prof. Magda Fourie and I discussed this document with senior members of the DoE in Pretoria, and we will soon be meeting with the National Minister of Education Me Naledi Pandor for her guidance and to seek support in the further refinement of the document and subsequent implementation.

Recapitalization
This year a further R 6 M has been budgeted for recapitalization. In about two weeks time the third of phase of renovations on campus will commence and attention will be given to the administration building, the humanities and the outstanding work in the lecture hall complex. There- after the library, sciences and education buildings will follow. As you will recall a substantial portion of the R 8.4 million in 2005 was used to upgrade the student residences and the lecture hall complex.

I am certain that the renovations and upgrading of our infrastructure and physical facilities including landscaping will create an enabling environment for you to enjoy your work and studies on this campus.

Renovations come with some measure of inconveniences and I therefore wish to request for your patience and support during this period.

Closing remarks
There is a heightened spirit of optimism on what the future holds for this campus. This is evident when I talk to a large cross section of staff and students of this campus – and I therefore invite all of you to come and be partners with us on this journey of optimism and hope of what the future holds for the UFS – QQ campus.

Thank you and God bless!

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept