An analysis of self-help housing programmes in South Africa: University of the Free State

Transcription

1 An analysis of self-help housing programmes in South Africa: Reflections from the Free State Lejone John Ntema University of the Free State

2 Structure of the presentation Aim of the paper Study areas Research methods Turner s theory and key concepts South African low-income housing policies and entrenched self-help principles Empirical findings Conclusion

3 Aim; study areas & research methods 1. Research aim: First, to demonstrate the extent to which South African policy on self-help l has conformed to Turner s theory and ideas; Second, to provide an analysis of which the application and practice of various self-help programmes in South Africa, especially in Free State, has deviated both from the policy guidelines and from Turner s initial ideas and principles on self- help 2. Study areas: The research was conducted in seven urban centres in the Free State Province:

4 Continued...

5 Continued Research methods: The paper uses a case study approach To gather the necessary data, the paper employed a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods

6 Turner s theory and key concepts Turner advocated and advanced a number of concepts that influenced and changed thinking on low-income housing during the 1960s and the 1970s Four of Turner s concepts are of crucial importance to this paper: (a). According to Turner, any housing programme may be capable of successfully delivering, provided it allows dweller control (b). freedom to build, which he defines as the issue of who decides (c). With housing by people, Turner s argument is that housing by the masses denotes that there is active participation by beneficiaries, and that it is much more viable than mass housing in which the government usually owns and controls the construction process (d). Housing as a process and progressive development, Turner argued that users will be able to consolidate or incrementally improve their housing, provided a enabling environment is created

7 South African low-income housing policies and entrenched self-help principles Turner s Theory Democratic era, Turner s concepts White Paper BNG PHP Dweller control/ Housing by people People-centred housing development Community engagement in housing delivery People-driven housing process Freedom to build Freedom of choice Determining preferred housing typologies Greater choice by beneficiaries Housing as a process Progressive access to housing Progressive eradication i of informal People s housing process settlements Use of local resources Silent on local resources Use of traditional technologies and Use of recycled or locally indigenous knowledge manufactured materials

8 Practise vs Turner s theory and policy guidelines The empirical evidence indicates that in practice, the application of various forms of self-help, particularly in the Free State, is to some extent found to have deviated both from Turner s concept of dweller control and from the self-help principles entrenched in various policy guidelines Three housing aspects would be key to the assessment (a). The choice of building materials and suppliers Qualitative comments by beneficiaries of various self-help projects in the seven towns confirms marginalisation of these beneficiaries directly or in-directly by state and/or state appointed agencies

9 Continued... Confirmation of beneficiaries marginalisation: Laissez-faire self-help project: We were given bricks and cement of very poor quality State-aided self-help project: If we had an opportunity to choose for ourselves, I don t think we would have chosen asbestos and these poor quality doors. When it rains, they absorb rain water and expand once filled with rain water, it requires two people to force it open Institutionalisedtionalised self-help project: We do not have any say when it comes to the appointment of building material suppliers; SEBRA is mandated by government in that respect

10 Continued... (b). The choice of housing designs: As alleged by the beneficiaries, in all projects across the three selfhelp programmes during the focus-group discussions, government appointed state agencies and/or contractors (e.g. SEBRA, New Housing Company and Focon Civil Company) to impose their decisions on beneficiaries to construct houses of their own choice Confirmation of beneficiaries maginalisation: Laissez-faire self-help project: They told us that if we want complete and adequate housing out of their material, we[should] [h rather adopt their four-room house plan as it looks in the show house because we don t have money for different plans which would have required additional material. Most of us adopted their plan

11 Continued... State-aided self-help project: We do not know who designed the house plans for all our two-roomed houses Institutionalised self-help project: Our houses look the same because of the plan given to us none of us beneficiaries could change it I personally wanted to have my door next to the toilet but they refused

12 Continued... (c). Construction process and the appointment of construction teams The dominance of state appointed agencies and/or contractors was not limited only to the choice of housing designs, building materials and suppliers, but extended also to the decision-making process in terms of the appointment of construction teams Although the laissez faire self-help project in Thabong was, to some degree, exceptional in this respect Beneficiaries in this project could individually or collectively appoint their preferred construction teams The same could not be said in respect of other projects in the two other forms of self-help (state-aided and institutionalised self-help projects)

13 Continued... Confirmation of beneficiaries marginalisation: State-aided self-help project: Contractors who were appointed by government to build our houses were not appointed on merit, but simply because they had connections with certain government officials That is why they could not be held accountable for their shoddy workmanship Institutionalised self-help project: Our project manager told us that it is his responsibility to appoint his own builders and our role would be only that of helping them with mixing mortar and bringing bricks closer and cleaning walls...

14 Conclusion In all the self-help housing projects across the three main forms of self-help in the Free State, the provincial government still controls, directly or in-directly through SEBRA; NewHousing and Focon Civil Companies, almost every aspect of the housing construction process Marginalisation of beneficiaries by the state s s appointed agencies and/or contractors not only eliminated Turner s principle of dweller control, but has also contradicted the enshrined key policy principles, i such as freedom of choice-white Paper on Housing 1994; greater choice by beneficiaries-php Policy Guidelines and the right by beneficiaries to determine their preferred housing typologies-bng Policy Guidelines