Informal and the progress has been modest at best,

Informal settlements in South Africa have continued growing, regardless of the extensive delivery of government subsidised housing since the end of apartheid. By the end of the first decade of democracy, the need for the development of a new paradigm was widely recognised, leading to the development of the “Upgrading Informal Settlements Programme” (UISP), as a part of the “‘Breaking New Ground’: A Comprehensive Plan for the Development of Sustainable Human Settlements” (BNG) document. (Huchzermeyer, 2006) The period after the introduction of this program was, however, characterised by the ‘eradication’ of informal settlements, inspired by the MDG goals and a practice which came to be synonymous with informal settlement upgrading in South Africa (ref..). Recent years have seen a gradual shift away from ‘eradication’ and towards more progressive upgrading of informal settlements. The change has been slow, and the progress has been modest at best, as there still exists a disconnection between policy and implementation. (Cirolia et al., 2016)In this chapter I introduce the various parties involved in upgrading informal settlements in South Africa. These include the government organisations responsible for housing development and delivery, as well as the community organisations and non-governmental organisations involved in the development of informal settlements. This aims to contextualise the bureaucratic practices in place for all development, and the approaches of community and non-governmental organisations, introducing the policies and working methods into which I will then introduce three projects as case studies. These which will be used to evaluate the different housing approaches present, and the actors participating in the development of each. This aims to contextualise the bureaucratic practices in place for all approaches while introducing the different possibilities found in design and implementation by organisations or designers with individual understandings of the problem. 1.1  The governmental organisations involved in the South African affordable housing provision sceneSouth Africa’s history of segregation, from colonialism to apartheid, left the country with a significant housing crisis, and deficiency of service provision to urban poor communities. With the dawning of democracy, the new government set out to rectify these issues. After the ANC came to power, the slow pace of reformation regarding the housing crisis was criticised. Housing therefore became a right under the new Constitution. (Williams, year?) The South African Constitution, drafted in 1996, has been referred to as ‘transformative’, with a Bill of Rights addressing a wide range of social and economic aspects, expressly obligating the government to fulfil and promote these rights (Williams, year? and Constitution). The Bill of Rights section 26 on Housing in the Constitution of South Africa states that:Housing1.      Everyone has the right to have access to adequate housing. 2.      The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of this right. 3.      No one may be evicted from their home, or have their home demolished, without an order of court made after considering all the relevant circumstances. No legislation may permit arbitrary evictions.With these rights the government became responsible for shaping an environment in which the realisation of thereof would be possible for all citizens. The government set up the Department of Housing in 1994 as the state body charged with handling the housing situation. (DHS, year?) Over the years, with the housing crisis not subsiding, despite an impressive delivery of subsidised dwellings, more organisations were established to better handle the many aspects of the crisis amidst growing criticism. With changing policies and strategies of providing housing and basic services to those in need, the formation of organisations capable of implementing these reforms became necessary. This section introduces the government organisations involved in upgrading informal settlements. The Department of Human SettlementsThe Department of Human Settlements has the responsibility to progressively work towards the realisation of the “right to have access to adequate housing” (Department of Human Settlements, year?? and Constitution…check ref), using all available measures, legislative or otherwise, to do so. The Department, renamed from the ‘Department of Housing’ in 2009, was established by the first democratic government in 1994, yet has roots in the Kliptown freedom charter of 1956, which included a clause stating that “there shall be houses, security and comfort” (Kliptown freedom charter, 1956 and DHS, year?)

The Housing Act sets the groundwork for sustainable housing development, by laying down the broad principles of housing development across all governmental spheres and defines the functions of the various levels of government, national, provincial and local, regarding housing development, and provides for the establishment of national and provincial housing boards.  The National Housing Code of 2009 lays out underlying policy principles along with guidelines, standards and norms applying to the different housing assistance programmes the government has introduced in the years since 1994. The Code gives a simple overview of the housing subsidies provided by the government to aid low income households in gaining access to their rightful, and adequate, housing. (DHS, year?)The housing and development
agency (HDA)An act of Parliament in 2008 lead to the founding of the Housing and Development Agency (HDA) as
a development agency in the public sector, answerable to the Minister of Human
Settlements. The agency acquires and develops land, and manages projects
developing human settlements and housing on this land. They work together with
various stakeholders, from governmental and municipal organisations to
developers, financiers to the communities themselves, with the primary
objectives being the identification and acquisition of well-located land for
the development of human settlements, the provision of services in support of
project delivery, including planning, project management and capacity support. The
HDA states that they prioritise sustainability and opportune location of human
settlement developments, including striving to create jobs throughout the
development process and always actively involving the local community. (HDA,
year??)The
HDA’s participation in the upgrading of informal settlements became clear
through their involvement in the N2 Gateway Project. After the 2011
Constitutional Court ruling on the case of ‘The
Residents of Joe Slovo Community, Western Cape vs Thubelisha Homes and Others’,
the HDA replaced Thubelisha Homes in the N2 Gateway project. Their role in this
project was mistakenly considered to be driven by the UISP. The agency’s role in informal settlement upgrading arose from
their involvement in this development and as demonstrated in the conflicted
project, their upgrading focuses on housing provision. This contradicted the
ideas the National Upgrading and Support
Programme (NUSP) was attempting to advance during this time. (Huchzermeyer,
2011:184) Elevating
upgrading to the mainstream through the ‘National Upgrading Support Program’
(NUSP)By
2007 Cities Alliance was raising
concern over the largely unimplemented upgrading programme of the National
Housing Code, and requested that the Department of Housing apply for funding to
refine the policies and form implementation strategies for the newly
established NUSP (Cities Alliance,2007-check ref and Huchzermeyer,
2011:172). NUSP had been assessing settlements across the country for
possible in situ upgrading, but
remained unable to find a way around the various obstacles defining the parameters
of which settlements are deemed fit for in
situ development (Huchzermeyer, 2011:172). In reviewing projects across the
country, including pilots of the BNG programme, to establish the degree of
variation and divergence from the national programme, they
found that many municipalities did not know Chapter 13 (of?) the UISP. NUSP
suggested forming the National Upgrading
Forum, which would bring together provincial and local governments with
community organisations and housing practicioners. (Huchzermeyer, 2011:182)NUSP
provides municipalities with support to fulfil the three pillars of the UISP. These pillars include the provision
of basic services, secure tenure and the empowerment of communities. The first two
issues fall within the largely standardised practice, it is the third issue
that has shown the least success upon implementation. NUSP’s purpose is
providing municipalities with the technical support to plan developments
together with communities. NUSP states that they work on building the capacity
of municipalities and provincial officers to both understand and better meet
the needs of residents during informal settlement upgrades, using workshops,
seminars and further information sharing, using their research to advocate their
identified best practices. (NUSP, year??)

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The
presidency’s announcement in 2010 to realise the in situ upgrading of informal settlements for 400 000 households by
the year 2014, provided a boost for NUSP. Two initiatives had been formed to
complement a new dedicated UISP, namely the Shack
or Slum Dwellers Internationnal’s (SDI) new Informal Settlement Network (ISN), and a lobby of consultants
voicing the urgent need in informal settlements of basic services needed and
interim improvements. (Huchzermeyer, 2011:172) This came after a restructuring
of the UISP in 2009, which then formed a part of the Housing Code (Department of Human Settlements, 2009b – check ref and Huchzermeyer,
2011:182), and after president Jacob Zuma paid visits to a few of the
settlements in which NUSP was working at the time. Arguably out of embarrassment,
from personally seeing the situation in informal settlements and the from the
litigations following the KZN Slums Act, the presidency announced in the state
of the nation address that in situ upgrading
would no longer be an exception, but form a part of the mainstream development
practice. (Huchzermeyer, 2011:182 and NUSP??) The new targets set during this
address were formalised under ‘Outcome 8 Delivery Agreements: Sustainable Human
Settlements and Improved Quality of Household Life’ of the document Measurable Performance and Accountable
Delivery – Outputs and Measures (Republic of South Africa, 2010 and
Huchzermeyer, 2011:183) However, this progress for upgrading programs was
stemmed by the HDA’s focus on the delivery of housing as upgrading during the
N2 Gateway project, as mentioned before, drew attention from the upgrading
principles NUSP was promoting.