|
This is
one of three briefing papers prepared for delegation organized Shared Interest
visiting South Africa from April 22 through May 2, 2004. Shared Interest is a U.S. not-for-profit social investment
fund guaranteeing loans to community development financial institutions
engaged in South Africa’s reconstruction process including affordable credit
for small businesses and social housing in South Africa’s lowest income
communities. To see other paper click links below. |
|||
|
Shared
Interest South Africa Delegation Briefing Paper April 22 – May 2, 2004 A Decade of Democracy: Housing, Services and Land in South
Africa By Richard Knight, March 19, 2004
It has
been ten years since the African National Congress won the first democratic
election on a program of meeting the basic needs of the people including
land, housing, water, electricity, telecommunications, transport, a clean and
healthy environment, nutrition, health care and social welfare. One and a half million houses have been
built and services have been extended to millions of people since 1994. Despite
this progress millions of people still live in shacks in squatter camps and
back yards; an additional 2 to 3 million homes are required to meet their
needs. This backlog is exacerbated by
high chronic unemployment leaving millions of people unable to afford basic
necessities. Many of those who do work
are employed in the informal sector and their incomes are low. The HIV/AIDS
pandemic, with 4.74 million South Africans infected, is adding to the development
problem. Access to land and security of tenure in both urban and rural areas
remain critical issues. Apartheid's Legacy Under apartheid, segregation was
mandated by law. Blacks could not live
in “white” areas but had to live in townships, on white farms (often as labor
tenants) or in impoverished rural areas in the former homelands or
Bantustans. Land dispossession under colonialism and apartheid resulted in
whites owning the best land and millions of blacks being forcibly removed
from their land and homes.[*]
From the 1960s very little new housing
was built for urban Africans. As the Gauteng Department of Housing notes:
“Africans were temporarily in the cities to serve in the mines and in
industries and services located in white parts of town. Once their working
life was over they were supposed to go ‘home’ to the rural areas.”[2]
(See Appendix I for more on government housing policy under apartheid.) Blacks
in urban areas lived in segregated townships in houses owned by that state. The struggle against apartheid increased
dramatically in townships across the country following the Soweto uprising in
1976. In 1983 the United Democratic Front was formed. As part of this
struggle in the 1980s township residents organized rent and services payment
boycotts. In July 1985 the government declared a State of Emergency. In 1986 influx control and the legal restrictions on a black person’s right to own property in
black urban areas were repealed. The change did not allow blacks to purchase
homes outside the townships in areas designated for whites. But few township residents were able to
exercise this new right because of technical problems and by the lack of
commitment by white government officials.[3] Political resistance at the local level
continued leading to an important victory in September 1990 when government
agreed to the Greater Soweto Accord that resulted in the writing off of rent
and service arrears and committed the government to the “transfer of houses
to the people.”[4] In 1990 South Africa entered in a period
of struggle mixed with negotiation. Nelson Mandela and many other political
prisoners were released and the African National Congress (ANC) and other
political organizations were unbanned. In 1991 the
Population Registration Act, Group Areas Act and Land Acts were repealed. In
1992 the National Housing Forum, a multi-party non-governmental negotiating
body comprising 19 members from business, the community, government,
development organizations and political parties outside the government at the
time, was formed to negotiate a new housing policy. It was agreed in the National
Housing Forum that a sustainable housing process was needed that would
“enable all people to secure housing with secure tenure within a safe and
healthy environment.”[5] When the ANC led government came to
power in 1994 there was only one formal brick house for every 43 Africans
compared to one for every 3.5 whites.
The urban backlog alone was estimated as at least 1.3 million units in
1994. Between 7.5 and 10 million
people lived in informal housing such as shacks in squatter camps and back
yards of black township houses. Housing Policy In
the lead up to the 1994 election the African National Congress adopted the
Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP), an
integrated socio-economic policy framework which is now the policy if the
government. The RDP set a goal of
300,000 houses to be built a year with a minimum of one million low-cost
houses to be constructed within five years.
In December 1994 government issued a Housing White Paper that set out
the framework of the national housing policy.
Adequate
Housing - Law of the Land The
1996 Constitution states that everyone “has the right to have access to
adequate housing” and that the state “must take reasonable legislative and
other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of this right.” Provincial legislatures and local
government share responsibility with the national government for delivery of
adequate housing. The Constitution also states “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.” In
October 2000, the Constitutional Court made an important ruling in Government
of RSA and others v Grootboom and others
on the government's constitutional obligation to provide adequate housing
for all and shelter for children. The
case involved 510 children and 390
adults living in appalling circumstances in an informal settlement. The
Court ruled that although they were not entitled to immediate shelter, the
program of the Cape Metropolitan Council was constitutionally deficient
because it failed to provide for any
form of temporary relief to those in desperate need, with no roof over their
heads, or living in crisis conditions The “Grootboom”
case has set a precedent for the defense of other social and economic rights.
(For a summary of this case see Appendix II.)
To
implement its Constitutional mandate for housing development Parliament adopted
the Housing Act of 1997. The Act legislated and extended the provisions set
out in the Housing White Paper, clarified the responsibilities of national,
provincial and municipal government and requires all three levels of
government to give priority to the needs of the poor. Housing development is
based on integrated development planning and provides as wide a choice of
housing and tenure as possible.
As required by the Act, in 2002 the Minister of Housing
issued the National Housing Code outlining national policy. Under the Act and
Housing Code each level of government – national, provincial and municipal –
has some responsibility for housing delivery. The national government
determines national housing policy which must be adhered to by provincial and
local governments. The national government also establishes and facilitates a
sustainable national housing development process. Provincial governments have
a responsibility to create an enabling environment within the province within
the framework of national policy. Municipalities seek to ensure the right to
adequate housing is realized by the development of housing, addressing the
issue of land, services and infrastructure and creating an enabling
environment for housing development within their area of jurisdiction.[6]
The government's goal, as set out in the Housing Code, is the provision of
350,000 houses per annum until the housing backlog is overcome. Broad principles of housing policy include
people centered delivery and partnerships; skills transfer and economic
empowerment; fairness and equity; choice; quality and affordability;
innovation; transparency, accountability and monitoring; and sustainability
and fiscal affordability. (For excerpts of the National Housing Code see
Appendix III.) The initial focus was on quantity not quality. Some houses
were so small and badly built that people joke that they are “so small you
need to go outside to change your mind.”
The Housing Consumer Protection
Measurers Act of 1998 protects
homeowners from inferior workmanship.
Builders are responsible for design and material defects for three
months, roof leaks for a year and structural defects for five years. In some
areas emerging contractors are developing ways to build quality housing, and
beginning to experiment with environmentally friendly and cost effective
technology. Housing Delivery A considerable amount of housing has
been delivered – by September 2003 more
than 1.5 million houses were built or under construction and some R 26,426
billion has been allocated for housing delivery. Minister of Housing Brigitte Sylvia Mabandla noted
recently: “To date the most commonly constructed housing
projects have been single unit houses located largely on the urban periphery
on sites provided by large developers. The majority of the houses built have
been in urban or peri-urban areas where rates of
urbanisation have been highest and the need for housing has been greatest.”[7] This represents an addition of 15.6%
to the total national housing stock and that government-supported low income
housing accounted for more than half of national housing production. Secure
tenure and safe homes have been provided to between 7 and 8.5 million poor
people.[8]
More than half of all subsidies approved have gone to women.[9]
The Housing
Code notes “High levels of unemployment and relatively low average wage
levels contribute to a major affordability problem in South Africa, and the
ability to pay for housing is severely limited among most families in the
country. Consequently, government has adopted a strategy to provide subsidy
assistance to households who are unable to satisfy their housing needs
independently.” The delivery
of 1.5 million houses has been achieved by the Housing Subsidy Scheme
that provides a state grant to qualifying beneficiaries, with a combined
household income less than R 3,500 per month, to acquire secure tenure, basic
services and a top structure. Some the 2.3 million subsides have been
approved.[10]
As of April 1, 2002 all beneficiaries of housing subsidies, except the
indigent, must contribute financially or in kind (sweat equity). Indigent
beneficiaries, those who are aged, disabled and health stricken, receive a
100% subsidy. When a beneficiary elects to have a contractor-built house the
minimum contribution is R 2,479 which must be paid upfront.[11]
The minimum cost for a subsidized house is R 25,579 ($3,666) including R 10,579
($1,515) for the cost of a stand and R 15,000 ($2,147) for a 30m2
(323 square feet) house. The rate of the subsidies varies according to
income.
There are a
number of different types of subsidies including: ·
Individual subsidies to enable beneficiaries to acquire
ownership of serviced stands and enter into house building contracts, or to
purchase existing improved residential properties which are not part of
approved housing subsidy projects. ·
Project linked subsidies to enable a qualifying
household to access a complete residential unit, which is developed within an
approved project linked housing subsidy project for ownership by the
beneficiary. ·
Institutional subsidies for qualified institutions
to enable them
to create affordable housing stock for persons who qualify for housing
subsidies. The subsidy is paid to approved institutions
to provide subsidized housing on deed of sale, rental or rent to buy options,
on condition that the beneficiaries may not be compelled to pay the full
purchase price and take transfer within the first four years of receipt of
the subsidy. ·
Rural subsidies for beneficiaries who have
uncontested informal tenure rights on state-owned land governed by traditional
authorities. ·
People’s Housing
Process subsidies enable
beneficiaries build or organize the building of their own homes and their
contribution is sweat equity as opposed to hiring a contractor. ·
Consolidation to afford previous beneficiaries of
serviced stands, financed by the previous housing dispensation, the
opportunity to acquire houses. The 2005-2006
People’s Budget, drawn up by COSATU, SANGOCO and SACC, recognizes these
achievements but notes a number of problems with the housing subsidy program.
To get the full subsidy a household must have an income of R1,500 or less. “Government has failed to raise the minimum income
to be eligible for a housing subsidy, despite inflation,” notes the People’s Budget. “Since this amount
was first set in the mid-1990s, the real value of this income has fallen by
half.” [12] Still, a large number
of people qualify. Some 63% of all those employed earn R2500 a month or less,
including 89% of those employed in the informal sector.
Financing for those who get a partial
subsidy or get no subsidy because they earn more than R3,500
per month is a problem. Commenting on the problem the People’s Budget says: “Families earning R1500 to R3500 a month
get only a partial subsidy, since they were expected to get housing bonds as
well. Banks are reluctant to lend to families earning less than R6000 a month.
Anyone buying a house in a township is also likely to be denied a bond
[mortgage].”[†] The 1994 White Paper
estimated that at least 70% of South Africa’s population is unable to afford
finance and a further 10 % to 15% is only able to afford limited finance,
most likely from nontraditional lenders. Nontraditional lenders include loan
sharks who charge up to 600% interest on an annualized basis. Moreover, even those black South Africans
who are able to afford loans are frequently denied credit as a result of
enduring discriminatory practices inherited from South Africa’s apartheid
past.
The Home Loan and Mortgage Disclosure Act of 2000, similar to the Home Mortgage
Disclosure Act in the U.S., encourages banks to grant home loans and requires
banks disclose annual financial statements so that their lending practices
can be monitored. The government is working with
financial institutions to address this problem the Department of Housing is currently
drafting the Community Reinvestment Bill aimed at increasing access to
finance by poor communities. This initiative has been delayed as the industry
moves to implement the Financial Services Charter. It is official
policy that houses should be built in a way that also builds communities. As
stated in the Housing Code the government seeks “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, and to health,
educational and social amenities.” Houses built should have “secure tenure,
ensuring internal and external privacy and providing adequate protection against
the elements.” But the People’s Budget notes that “the amount
of subsidy for each family is too low to provide decent housing near economic
centres, where residents could more easily find
work.” In addition to
the building of houses the government has undertaken several other steps to
improve housing. This includes:
·
Public Sector Hostels
Redevelopment Program: Under apartheid hostel were built to provide temporary accommodation
migrant workers in urban centers. These “temporary” workers were supposed to
return to their homes in the Bantustans. Some hotels were built by the
private sector, for example on the mines; others were “built by government
and managed by municipalities to provide communal, dormitory-type
accommodation, often along ethnic or language lines. They were often located
on isolated parcels of land, usually adjacent to existing black townships or
close to industrial and mining areas.” The hostels are being redeveloped into
accommodation for a mix of single people and families. The National Housing
Code estimated 182 hotels were eligible for upgrading under this program.[13]
·
Discount Benefit
Scheme to promote home ownership: This program had its origins in the Greater Soweto Accord. Under
apartheid, Africans were not allowed to own their homes in urban areas but
lived in state-owned houses. This scheme transfers state-owned properties in
former black townships and former Group Areas to their rightful owners, many
of whom have lived in these properties for many years. It also includes 622,000 serviced sites
(excluding sites delivered with the Independent Development Trust capital
subsidy financing) delivered in terms of the pre-1994 administration. More
than 480,000 households have had housing assets transferred to them under
this scheme.[14] ·
Promotion of Rental
Housing: Rental
housing outside of the former black townships is a relatively new option for
the historically disadvantaged.[‡]
To ensure
that more houses are provided for rental purposes and to regulate the
behavior of unscrupulous landlord to they do not charge exorbitant rents the Rental Housing Act of 1999. The Act
provides for dispute mediation between landlord and tenants and outlaws the
evicting of long-standing tenants from their homes with mediation. A Moving Target Despite this impressive record, the
housing backlog has not been eliminated. Population growth and rapid
urbanization have combined to increase the need for housing and the growth of
squatter camps. Between 1996 and 2001 South Africa population grew from 40.5
million to 44.8 million, a 10.4% increase. In 1996, 53.7% of the population
was urbanized; by 2001 it was 57.5%. Urbanization has resulted in the decline
in number of people per household from 4.5 in 1996 to 3.8 in 2001. As a
result the number of households increased 23.7% from 9.1 million to 11.2
million.[§]
Thus the government finds itself having to provide far more houses that it
originally projected.[15]
On the positive side, the percent of
households in formal housing increased from 57.5% in 1996 to 63.8% in 2001.
On the negative side, the percent of households in informal housing remained
the same and the actual number increased by 26.4%. Urbanization is reflected
in the decline of households in traditional dwelling such as a hut made from
traditional materials from 18.2% to 14.8%. A growing number or people live in informal
housing such as shacks in squatter camps. The number of such households in
these informal settlements grew by 31% from something over 1 million in 1996
to nearly 1.4 million in 2001. African households account for 97% of all
those living in such households. Because of urbanization 33% of all such
households are located in Gauteng. The Housing White Paper estimated that
approximately 150,000 new households per annum house themselves in this way.[16]
Many of these are the result of land “invasions.” People living in squatter
camps do not have secure tenure and occasionally are forcibly evicted. This lack
of secure tenure makes it difficult to provide housing subsidies or services.
Addressing the issue of people living
in informal settlements the Minister of Housing stated in February 2004 “[W]e are committed to improving the lives of our people in
informal settlements. We will be developing a national strategy in this
regard. Our programme will seek to meet the millennium development goals and
make a significant contribution to the reduction of 100 million slum dwellers
worldwide by 2015/ 2020.” The number of households living in an
informal dwelling/shack in a back yard has also increased from 403,328 to 459,526.
Estimates of Housing Needed African households
make up 96% of those living in informal housing in squatter camps and back
yards. With an average household size of Africans of 3.9 persons, this
suggests more that seven million people live in such inadequate housing. If
one adds traditional dwellings, which are often inadequate, that would add
another 1,654,787 households in need of housing. Thus between 1.8 million and
3.4 million proper dwelling units are needed not taking into account
population growth or further urbanization. This calculation is similar to
that of the former Minister of Housing Sankie Mthembi-Mahanyele who estimated in June 2001 that about
7.5 million people still needed to be provided with adequate housing and the
between 2 and 3 million houses had to be built to meet this need.[17] The Department
of Housing estimated in 1997 that the housing backlog was 2.2 million units
and because of population growth, this figure grows by about 204 000 every
year. The province of Gauteng, which includes Johannesburg and Soweto,
illustrates this problem. Gauteng is home to 19.7% of South Africa’s
population, and, because of people moving into the province, the population
has been growing at twice the national average. The Gauteng Department of
Housing notes that the estimated housing provincial backlog of 401,100 units
understates the actual need. “Since the extent of the backlog depends on an
eligibility criterion that has remained the same over the last eight years –
R 3,500 income for households that do not own a house – an alternative measure
might be the number of households, regardless of their incomes, who lack
adequate housing. In terms of the 1996 census, this number is about 561 000
households, 25% of the province’s total.”[18]
By October 2001 the number of households living in informal housing in
Gauteng had risen to 634,160.
The government has also noted the lack
of available housing stock in the R60,000 to
R100,000 ($8,590-$14,316) range. Such housing is not subsidized but needs to
be privately financed. The National House Code aimed to
increase housing delivery on a sustainable basis to a peak level of 350,000
units per annum until the housing backlog is overcome. This goal is subject
to fiscal affordability and in the last three years delivery has averaged
less than 200,000 houses a year. Originally the expectation was that housing
would constitute 5% of the national budget but in 2001/2 it was 1.4%.[19] Impact of HIV/AIDS Some 4.8 million people in South Africa
are infected with HIV/AIDS. In February 2003 the Department of Housing issued
an HIV/AIDS Framework document. The Framework document was based on a survey
conducted in all provinces. The study notes that HIV/AIDS is resulting in an
increasing number of households headed by children and that by 2010 there
will be 1.2 million orphans. The study concludes “These households will
definitely be more vulnerable to poverty and could eventually be homeless. In
addition this study also advocated the need to develop institutional housing
models to address the housing needs of orphans.”[20]
People with HIV/AIDS have a harder time
obtaining financing for houses both because lending institutions are hesitant
to make loans and because their incomes will be lower. People will spend more
on health care and thus will be able to spend less on housing and many will
not be able to afford their contribution needed to obtain a housing subsidy.
Women and children are particularly vulnerable – not only to infection but in
security of tenure. While children have succession rights, “women and
children are displaced from their homes by unscrupulous relatives once the
husband or parents have died or where child headed households are evicted due
to their inability to pay for services.”
If the beneficiary dies before taking possession the surviving family
tenure will be tenuous. A study conducted by the Human Services Research
Council found that people living in urban informal settlements had a higher
rate of infection due to the transient nature of such housing. “To ensure
that the housing programme is responding to the
housing needs of persons living with HIV/AIDS it is important that the
Department continues to prioritise the development
of these areas,” concluded the Framework Document. The government’s roll out of
anti-retroviral drugs could mitigate the problem of HIV/AIDS. But additional
measures are still urgently needed to increase access to housing for families
living with the virus so that they do not loose their shelter should the head
of household become sick or die. One example is the Housing for HIV program
formed by the Home Loan Guarantee Company and Shared Interest. Services During the 1999 election campaign the
ANC promised to provide free electricity and water to the poorest
households. In 2002 this became the official
policy when the government announced plans for free basic electricity and
free basic water. Under the Constitution it is the responsibility of
municipalities “to
ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner.” Water The RDP set the goal of the provision of
water clean water to every person from a point no more than 200 meters (219
yards) from their dwelling. As of October 2001, 72% of households who had
access to piped water in their dwelling, on site, or within 200 meters. An
addition 12.4% had access to piped water more than 200 meters away. The
government estimates that potable water has been extended to 9 million
people.[21]
Under the government’s Free Basic Water
program, households receive a basic free water allowance of 6,000 liters
(1,585 U.S. gallons) per month. This amount is based on the World Health
Organization’s standard of 25 liters (6.6 gallons) per person per day and
allows for a household of eight. About 87% of municipalities participate in
this program that reaches approximately 29.4 million people, representing 63%
of the population.[22]
This is about 49.4% of poor households defined as those earning less than R
1,000 ($143) per month. There are regional differences – in the Free State
and Gauteng 97% and 96% of the population is served respectively compared to
34% in the Eastern Cape.[23] Implementing free basic water is the
responsibility of municipalities. They can choose to provide a smaller or
larger amount and provide it to all residents or only those below a certain
level of income. The standard of “poor” varies but one often used is a
household with an income of R800 ($114.50) a month or less. Many people with
piped water in their homes or yards have pre-paid water meters that are
programmed to provide the basic amount free. After the basic amount is used
up people have to pay. If people are
unable or forget to pay the water is cut off.
Some 5 to 7 million people still do not
have access to clean and convenient source of water. The government’s goal is
to eliminate this backlog by 2008.[24] Many of those without access to piped water
and free basic water are those who live in informal housing in squatter camps
or rural areas that lack the necessary infrastructure. A new draft White
Paper on Water Services notes: “The provision of services to people living on
land without permission of the owner of the land poses a challenge to water
services authorities. Water services authorities should seek to address the
security of tenure issues expeditiously. In the interim, basic water services
(including basic sanitation services) should be provided.”[25] Electricity In 1994 only 40% of the population had access
to electricity. Between 1995 and 2002 electricity connections were made to
some 3,375,298 households. By October 2001 some 69.7% of households used
electricity for lighting.[26]
The government estimates it will take at least ten years before the existing
backlog approaches 100% and longer because of the growth rate of households.
Many of these connections are for a
special kind of pre-paid meter. The fact that many people find electricity
too expensive is reflected in the fact that only 51.4% of households used
electricity for cooking and 49% for heating. Paraffin, coal or wood was used
by 44.7% percent of households for cooking and 45.8% for heating. Many
households face at least temporary cut-offs because they could not afford to
pay. In 2001 the electricity company Eskom claimed
that Soweto residents owed R922 million.[27]
A Soweto Electricity Crisis Committee was formed to fight cut-offs and many
houses were illegally reconnected by residents. Eskom
claims that the cutoffs worked and that the payment rate in Soweto has
improved. In 2002 the government announced plans
to provide free basic electricity
to poor households. The program is behind that of water and its phased introduction
began in July 2003. Several pilot projects were launched in 2002. The monthly
allotment of free basic electricity is 50 kWh per month. Households will pay
for any consumption over the set free basic service level. Those household
with pre-paid meters will be provided with a non-interchangeable voucher or
token loaded with free basic units per month.
When the free units have been used up, the consumer will need to buy
additional units at the prevailing approved rates.[28] Implementation will be most problematic in
informal settlements and rural areas not connected to the power grid. Like
water, implementation is the responsibility of municipalities who can choose
to provide a different amount and limit the provision of free basic
electricity to those under a certain income. Land The land area of South Africa is 1,219,090 square
kilometers (470,693 square miles). The nine provinces vary in size from the
Northern Cape (361,830 sq. km.) to Gauteng (17,010 sq. km.). Terrain varies
from plateau, savanna, desert, mountains, and coastal plains. Only about 13%
of the land is suitable for commercial agriculture. Africans were dispossessed from their land during
the colonial and apartheid era beginning shortly after the first settlers
arrived at the Cape in 1652. The Native Land Act of 1913 made right to own,
rent or sharecrop on land dependent on race. Africans could not purchase or
lease land from whites outside of the reserves (which later became the
Bantustans), then about 8% of South Africa’s land area. The Native Trust and
Land Act of 1936 increased the reserves to about 13% of the land area.[29]
Under the Native Trust and Land Act Africans were denied the right to
purchase land even in the reserves and could only utilize communal land
administered by government-appointed tribal authorities. Africans who owned
land outside the reserves prior to 1913 were initially exempted. The result
was the creation of “black spots” of farming communities in white areas. Over
600,000 people were subjected to forced removal from black spots, primarily
from the 1950s though the 1980s. This resulted in virtually all commercial
farms outside the homelands being in the hands of white farmers. This has
changed little since 1994. Africans, Coloureds and
Indian/Asians in the urban areas had to live in segregated townships. Many
people today do not have secure tenure.[30]
Urban Areas As already noted,
population growth and rapid urbanization has resulted in a growing number of
people living in informal squatter settlements. Gauteng is the most urbanized
province, with 97% of the population living in urban areas, followed by
Western Cape (88.9%).[31]
As the 1997 Land White Paper notes: “Many
people were prevented by apartheid from acquiring access to urban land. They
found themselves kept out of, or removed from, urban areas in terms of the
pass laws, or were prevented by racially discriminatory legislation from
acquiring legal occupation of well-located land. The backlog caused by all of
these restrictions has created a large and unsatisfied need for secure access
to well-located urban land. One consequence of this is land invasion and
other forms of irregular occupation of land.”
[32] Rural Areas The 1997 Land White Paper
estimated that there are about 1.2 million farm worker households in South
Africa, many of whose housing is tied to employment. Other sources estimate
there are six million farm-dwellers (farm workers and their families) and
between 40,000 and 160,000 labor tenant families.[33]
Generally they constitute the poorest and lest secure in the country. Those
not working on commercial farms generally live on overcrowded communal areas in
the former homelands and suffer insecure tenure due to lack of title and
conflicting claims to land.
Land Invasions There
have been land invasions in both urban and rural areas. People are desperate
for a place to live and create informal settlements of shacks as discussed
above. Some of this land is privately owned, some state owned. The 1997 Land White Paper notes: “Government, while
strongly discouraging land invasions, does not believe that the only solution
lies in evictions, which are often a route towards confrontation and civil
disturbance.” Evictions should only be a last resort after all other
solutions have been explored. The White Paper further states “From both a
cost perspective, and from the need to minimise
conflict and stabilise communities, it is
preferable, that where it is possible and appropriate, in situ upgrading
of tenure and regularisation of land rights is seen
as a solution to land invasions.” The Gauteng Department of Housing notes “Currently, the
housing program in Gauteng is adversely affected by the emerging problem of
land invasion. Municipalities do not seem to have adequate capacity to manage
problems of invasions and construction of illegal structures. This results in the proliferation and densification of
informal settlements that impede new developments, since informal settlements
usually get prioritised for upgrading.”[34]
Many of these informal settlements are not on land suitable for housing
delivery. Land
Reform The government’s land
reform policy is based on the RDP. As outlined in the 1997 Land White Paper
it has three legs. Land Redistribution aims to provide
the disadvantaged and the poor with access to land for residential and
productive purposes. Land Restitution covers cases of forced removals
which took place after 1913. Land Tenure Reform seeks to improve security
of tenure and to accommodate diverse forms of land tenure, including types of
communal tenure. Both land redistribution and resettlement has been based on
a “willing buyer, willing seller” model which, critics note, has limited the
type, location and size of landholdings made available.[35]
Redistribution The focus of land redistribution
is on rural areas and “is intended to redress the racial imbalance in land
holding in South Africa, create livelihoods for the rural poor and develop
the agricultural sector.”[36]
Commercial agricultural land still remains overwhelming white-owned. By
contrast, some 70% of the rural population lives below the poverty line.
Wages of farm workers on commercial farms account for some 39% of rural
incomes.[37] The
RDP set the goal of redistributing 30% of agricultural land in the first five
years of democracy. The date to achieve this has now been changed to 2015. Between 1994 and the end of
1992, some 1,480,835 hectares had been transferred through land
redistribution to 130,453 households. This represents about 1.2% of South
Africa’s total land area but presumably a larger percent of the 13% of the
land that is suitable for crop production. The Land Redistribution for
Agricultural Development (LRAD) program may well speed up the process, with
some 260,000 hectares transferred under this program between August 2001 and
December 2002. [38]
Up until 1999 the
government’s land redistribution program was carried out through
Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG) which provided grants to poor people
to purchase land. In 2001 the government launched the LRAD program designed to
reduce rural poverty by providing grants to black South Africans to access
land specifically for agricultural purposes. LRAD grants may be used to
purchase land or to acquire a lease option for commercial agricultural purposes
and to obtain fixed assets, equipment that improves the value of the land and
production inputs for the development of the land that is acquired. To
qualify a an individual or group must be an African, Coloured
or Indian South African citizen, 18 years or older, willing to live and work
on or near the farm, and participate in a training program. A contribution
must also be made by those who receive a grant which can be in kind (sweat
equity with a value of up to the value of R 5,000), cash, livestock, equipment
and machinery relevant to the agricultural enterprise.[40]
Restitution More than 3.5 million
people were forcibly removed between 1960 and 1983. Removals consisted of
various categories, such as black spot removals, removal of labor tenants and
homeland consolidation.[41]
Urban removals came under the Group Areas Act (1951) and the Urban Areas Act
(1923). Rural removals came under the Land Acts of 1913 and Development Trust
and Land Act (1936) and Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act (1951).
The right to restitution of
land rights by a person or community dispossessed of property after June 19,
1913 was established in both the 1993 interim Constitution and the current
Constitution. This can be achieved either by restitution of property or by
equitable redress.[42]
But the Constitutions also guarantee both the rights of current land owners. To carry out its
Constitutional requirement in 1994 Parliament passed the Restitution of Land
Rights Act. Under the Act those dispossessed, or their decedents, were
eligible to submit claims. All claims needed to be lodged before December 31,
1998. The Act established a Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights
(CRLR). A Land Claims Court was set up in 1996 to investigate the merits
approve claims; grant restitution; mediate and settle disputes arising from
such claims disputes and to draw up reports with regard to unsettled claims
for submission as evidence before a court of law. However the process of
handling claims proved to be very slow – only seven claims had been settled
by the end of March 1998. As a result in 1999 the Restitution of Land Rights
Act was amended to allow shift from a judicial process to an administrative
approach. The Minister of Land Affairs was granted powers to settle claims on
the basis of agreement between the various parties. A total of 68,878 claims
have been filed, about 80% of which are urban land claims involving some
300,000 potential beneficiaries.[43]
The 20% rural claims represent some 3.6 million people. Generally urban
claims represent households and rural claims communities. Claims can be
settled in a variety of ways including restoration of the land from which
claimants were dispossessed; provision of alternative land; payment of
compensation; alternative relief including a combination of the
above-mentioned, sharing of the land, or budgetary assistance such as
services and infrastructure development; or priority access to state
resources with regard to housing and land development programs. A Claims Validation project concluded that,
prima fascia, 96% of claim are valid with the other 4% needing additional
investigation. Between 1995 and December
31, 2003 a total of 46,727 claims have been settled. Of those settled, about
88% represent urban claims. Initially urban claims had an unofficial priority
but in 2002 the Minister of Land called for rural claims to receive priority.[44]
Of urban claims, 35% were settled by land restoration, 59% by financial
compensation and 6% by an alternative remedy.
Of rural claims, 45% were settled by land restoration and 55% by
financial compensation. Total land restored was 810,292 hectares (2,129 sq.
miles) at a cost of R 992,931,869.
This represents about 0.66% of South Africa’s total land area. All
claims are supposed to be settled by the end of 2005. The rate of settlement
has increased significantly. Between April and the end of December 2003, some
9,380 were settled representing 20% of all claims settled and 34% of land
restored since 1994.
Much of the land restored
has been in rural areas in three provinces. Of the total land restored 30%
has been in Mpumalanga, 29% in the Northern Cape and 16% in KwaZulu-Natal.
The Northern Cape, with 29.7% of the land area of South Africa but just 1.8%
of the population, is largely rural and semi-arid. Claims settled in the
Northern Cape benefited just 5% of the individuals and 4% of the households
who benefited nationally. In contrast just 0.4% of all land restored has been
in Gauteng, the home of 19.7% of the population but with just 1.4% of the
land area. The cost per hectare to purchase this land in Gauteng was more
than seven times the national average and nearly thirty times the cost in
Northern Cape. But Gauteng accounts for 21% of all financial compensation
paid. Tenure Reform Tenure reform is the least
developed area of land reform. The main achievement has been the enactment of
laws to create statutory rights including the Extension of Security of Tenure
Act of 1997 and the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act of 1996. These acts
“protect the tenure of people living farms, prohibit arbitrary eviction and
provide a means by which farms dwellers can secure long-term rights to land.”[45] The Communal Land Rights
Act was passed by Parliament in February 2004. The objective of the act is to
provide greater security of tenure to those living on communal land in the
former homelands. People living on the communal land would have their tenure
rights fully recognized in law and by dead. The bill has been criticized for
reinforcing the power of traditional leaders who have historically excluded
women from communal land holdings. Likhapa Mbatha of the Centre for Applied Legal Studies commented:
“Women are most likely to be prejudiced by a once-off transfer of rights with
no appeal or dispute-breaking mechanism. Overall, the Bill is likely to
reinforce the status quo by confirming rights where they are, rather than
overhauling existing unequal power relations.” The National Land Committee
has condemned the bill saying heralded the end of democracy for rural South
Africans. The government claims that the bill recognizes, protects and
enforces the rights of women as well as other vulnerable people.[46] A Ways to Go The pace of both land
redistribution and restoration has improved significantly in the past two
years. The initial slow beginning to the land report program has been
attributed to insufficient funding, weak institutions, reliance on a
market-led model and low political priority.[47]
The number of restitution claims
settled has greatly increased but many observers question whether all claims
will be settled by the target date of the end of 2005. Funding for
both restitution and redistribution has increased. However, if the goal is to
be reached of transferring 30% of South Africa’s commercial agricultural land
to black people by 2015 and providing land with secure tenure for settlement
in the urban areas, the rate will have to be rapidly increased. Moreover
access to land is only the first step toward self-sufficiency, which also
requires access to capital and technical assistance to land commercially
viable projects. Conclusion The struggle against apartheid was not
just against repressive laws but for a government and an economic system that
would look after the needs of all the country’s people. Since the installation
of democracy a decade ago South Africa has made great strides in proving
housing and basic services such as electricity and water to the people of
South Africa. The delivery of 1.5 million houses means
that a larger percent of the population now lives in formal houses. The lives
of millions have been improved. But the government has not achieved its goal
of 350,000 houses per year and the number of people living in inadequate,
informal houses such as shacks has actually increased. Unless the rate of
production accelerates, population growth and urbanization will combine to
increase the need for housing at a rate as fast as or faster than it is being
built. The housing subsidy scheme is aimed at
the poorest of the poor, yet the income level has not been changed from R
3,500 per month or less, meaning one has to be poorer in real terms today
then a decade ago to qualify for a subsidy. HIV/AIDS is compounded the
problem as people spend their income on healthcare rather than housing,
although this may be mitigated by the plan to provide anti-retroviral
medications. Progress has also been made in services.
Free basic water is now widely available and free basic electricity is now
becoming available. But it will be at least a decade before these services
are available to all. Land reform is also making more rapid
progress. The rate of settlement of land restitution claims has increased
although many of these cases have been settled not with land but with
financial compensation. Land redistribution has also increased. Land reform
has the potential to increase rural incomes. But the goal of transferring 15%
of commercial farmland to blacks by 2015 will not be achieved at the current
rate. Land tenure reform and security of tenure remain a problem. Millions of people are better off now
than in 1994. But the challenges remain great. In the long term, meeting
people’s need for adequate housing and basic services requires not just
government programs but economic strategies, partnerships and growth that
reduce unemployment and bridge that gap between the rich and poor. ---------- Richard Knight is a New York City based
consultant on Africa, human rights and economic justice. He previously worked
at the American Committee on Africa/The Africa Fund. His web site is www.richardknight.com. Sources: Much of the information here comes from national
and provincial government web sites including those of the Statistics South
Africa, the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS), the Land
Claims Court and the national departments of Housing, Land Affairs, Minerals
and Energy, and Water Affairs. Provincial and municipal web sites especially
that of the Gauteng Department of Housing. .I have
also relied on material published by the Program for Land and Agrarian
Studies at the University of the Western Cape, the People’s Budget, the National
Land Committee and the Legal Resources Centre. Other sources are cited. I have occasionally used sentences or
phases without footing each or placing them in quotes, especially in
descriptions based on government web sites. Statistics: Statistics in this paper come from a variety of
sources that may not always agree. Some are estimates or based on surveys. In some cases there are not strictly comparable
statistics for different time periods. In general, statistics have only been
used if they are believed to provide and accurate, if not exact, view of the
situation. Spelling: In quotes from South African text and
titles South African spelling is used. In other places U.S. spelling has been
used.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[*] The term black in this paper is used to describe all those not classified as white. In terms of the use of racial classifications the following from Statistics South Africa should be born in mind: “Population group describes the racial classification of a particular group of South African citizens. The previous government used legislation to impose this type of classification, to divide the South African population into distinct groupings on which to base apartheid policies. For quite a different reason it remains important for Stats SA to continue to use this classification wherever possible. It clearly indicates the effects of discrimination of the past, and permits monitoring of policies to alleviate discrimination. Note that, in the past, population group was based on a legal definition, but it is now based on self-perceptions and self-classification. An African/black person is someone who classifies him/herself as such. The same applies to a coloured, Indian/Asian or white person.”
[†] A housing bond is a mortgage.
[‡] All the former black townships are now incorporated into a municipality.
[§] The
number of households excludes those living in collective living quarters
including hostels, hotels and institutions. Just less than 1.5 million people
lived in such housing.
[1] Evaluation: Housing Delivery, Sustainable Settlements and the Consequences of Apartheid, prepared by Professor Richard Tomlinson with the assistance of Gemey Abrahams and Kecia Rust, Gauteng Department of Housing, April 2002.
[2] Gauteng Housing Policy and Program Review: Executive Summary prepared by Richard Tomlinson, Gauteng Department of Housing, 2002.
[3] Democracy
and Property Rights in South Africa: The Land Issue by Louise Tager
available at http://www.cipe.org/publications/fs/ert/e11/safr-1.htm.
[4] Social Differentiantion
and Urban Goveranace in Greater Soweto: A Case Study
of Post-Apartheid Reconstruction by Jo Beall
Development Research Centre, LSE), Owen Crankshaw and
Susan Parnell (University of Cape Town), Development Research Center, LSE,
February 2002 availabe www.crisisstates.com; Transfer of Public Housing in Gauteng on
the UN-HABITAT web site at http://bestpractices.org/bpbriefs/housing.html
and Policy and Program Review: Other
Housing – Transfer of Houses Program, Public Owned Serviced Sites, Assets
Management Programme by Gerney
Abrahams, Department of Housing, Gauteng Provencial
Government, 2002.
[5] Evaluation: Housing Delivery, op. cit.
[6] Housing Act 107 of 1997 and Tomlinson, op. cit., p. 9.
[7] Address by
Mrs B Mabandla South African Minister of Housing to
the Norwegian National Conference for CSD-12 entitled: The Challenges of urban
Poverty and Slum eradication, February 11, 2004.
[8] Pocket
Guide to South Africa 2003,
Government Communication and Information System (GCIS), 2003.
[9] On October 2003 former Housing Minister, Sankie Mthembi-Mahanyele was honored by the United Nations Habitat for her delivery of 1,45 million houses worth R20 billion within a period of eight years, which housed six million people during her term in office. Among other achievements that have been acknowledged by the United Nations is the transfer of 400 000 former municipal houses worth R32 billion for ownership by people who had been renting them and her role in the initiation and implementation of the Rental Housing and Urban Renewal Programmes.
[10] Brigitte Sylvia Mabandla, Minister of Housing, Opening Address to the National Housing Summit, November 19, 2003.
[11] South African Yearbook 2002, p. 372. Subsidy figures from Ministry of Housing web site.
[12] 2005-2006 People’s Budget Proposal from COSATU, SANGOCO and SACC (National Labor & Economic Institute, Johannesburg, 2004)
[13] Gauteng Department of Housing
[14] National Housing Code and Minister, op cit. See also Gauteng Department of Housing.
[15]
Household data and population figures in this paper are generally from are from
the 1996 and 2001 censuses and are available from Statistics South Africa.
[16] See A New Housing Policy and Strategy for South Africa, White Paper, Department of Housing, 1994.
[17] Housing Shortage Still Desperate by
Barry Streek, Mail
& Guardian, Johannesburg, June 29, 2001
[18] Evaluation: Housing Delivery, Sustainable
Settlements and the Consequences of Apartheid, Department of Housing,
Gauteng Provincial Government, April 2002.
[19] Evaluation: Housing Delivery, op. cit.
and Gauteng Strategic Plan 2002-2005,
Gauteng Department of Housing
[20] HIV/AIDS Framework Document, Department
of Housing, February 2003.
[21] Budget Speech, Trevor A Manuel, Minister of Finance, February 18, 2004.
[22] Free Basic Water Provision: Key Issues for Local Authorities, March 2001, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry; Annual Report 2002/2003, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry.
[23] Figures are from the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry web page accessed February 26, 2004.
[24] A Decade Of Delivery by Mr
Ronnie Kasrils, Mp, Minister Of Water Affairs And
Forestry
[25] Draft White Paper on Water Services, October 2002.
[26] Census 2001: Census in Brief, Statistics South Africa and the National Electricity Regulator.
[27] Eskom v. Soweto: The Battle for Power by Patrick Lawrence, Focus, March 2002, Helen Suzman Foundation.
[28] Guidelines For The Introduction Of Free Basic Electricity Service, Department of Minerals and Energy (DME), May 5, 2003; other documents of the DME.
[29] The Native Trust and Land Act was also known as the Development Trust and Land Act.
[30] See South
African Land White Paper, June 1997, Department of Land Affairs and A History of Land Dispossession,
National Land Committee available at www.nlc.co.za.
[31] Housing Code
[32] South African Land White Paper, June 1997, Department of Land
Affairs.
[33] “Tenure act fails rural poor”, by Zakes Hlatshwayo, Business Day 29 May 2000.
[34] Stategic Plan 2002-2005, Gauteng Department of
Housing,
[35] 2005-2006 People’s Budget Proposal from COSATU, SANGOCO and SACC (National Labor & Economic Institute, Johannesburg, 2004)
[36] Land Redistribution by Peter Jacobs, Edward Lahiff and Ruth Hall (Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies, School of Government, University of the Western Cape, September 2003)
[37] Final Report by Ruth Hall, Peter Jacobs and Edward Lahiff (Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies, School of Government, University of the Western Cape, September 2003) and Farm Tenure by Ruth Hall (Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies, School of Government, University of the Western Cape, September 2003)
[38] Land Redistribution, op. cit.
[39] Ibid, op. cit.
[40] Land Bank of South Africa.
[41] The
full number of those removed is unknown. This figure comes from a study done by
the Surplus Peoples Project. Many removals took place before and after the date
of that study. See also Ruth Hall, Rural
Restitution, (Programme
for Land and Agrarian Studies, School of Government, University of the Western
Cape, September 2003)
[42] This cut of date has impacted provinces differently. Colonialism began in the Western Cape and dispossession had largely occurred by 1913.
[43] This is
the number of original claims filed. However, some claims have been split, for
example if claimants were divided on the manner in which their claim should be
settled (land or financial compensation). As a result, the total number of
claims as of February 2003 is 72,975. See Ruth Hall, op. cit.
[44] Rural Restitution, op.
cit.
[45] Final Report, op. cit. and Land Claims
Court of South Africa at http://wwwserver.law.wits.ac.za/lcc/index.php.
[46] “Parliament
Gives Rural Women a Raw Deal” by Pregs Govender, Sunday
Times, February 15, 2004; “Communal Land Rights Bill Passed,” Sapa, February 12, 2004; Communal Land Rights Bill Passed
in NCOP, Sapa, February 26, 2004.
[47] People’s Budget, op. cit.