assignment 1 [informal settlements in johannesburg

INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN JOHANNESBURG A THEORETICAL EXAMINATION OF SPATIAL DESIGN TOOLS The following report analyses the informal settlements in Johannesburg, South Africa, and examines the lessons and opportunities that these slum morphologies provide, as well as exploring the design tools that will help in providing a better living environment for the urban poor.

SPECI

AL

TOPI

CS IN

URBA

N

DESI

GN,

SEME

STER

2,

2010

CATRIONA TATAM 13586577

SPECIAL TOPICS IN URBAN DESIGN, SEMESTER 2, 2010

INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN JOHANNESBURG SPECIAL TOPICS IN URBAN DESIGN, SEMESTER 2, 2010

C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………….

2. INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA AND JOBURG...................................

3. A CONFLICTED TOWNSHIP: SOWETO……………………………………………………………

4. RECONCEPTULISATION OF THE SLUMS………………………………………………………...

5. OPPORTUNITIES AND LESSONS…………………………………………………………………….

6. URBAN FUTURES: TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE HOUSING PROCESS……………….

PRIORITY..............................................................................................................................

BALANCE…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....

INTEGRATION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

CHOICE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………....................

INTENSITY AND DIVERSITY………………………………………………………………………………………………….

AFFORDABILITY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

CLUSTERING……………………………………………………………………………………………….........................

7. REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

INTRODUCTION

Human settlements define people’s existence. They are places – large and small, urban and

rural, formal and informal – where people live, learn, work, and create (Cotton & Franceys,

1991). The urbanization process has resulted in more urban settlements with larger

populations and the dramatic expansion of existing urban centres. One of the most pressing

issues facing the world today is the rapid urbanization and its impact on communities,

cities, economies and policies. It is projected that in the next fifty years, two-thirds of

humanity will be living in towns and cities and a large part of this growth will take place in

form of informal settlements (UN, 2005).

Informal settlements are dense settlements comprising communities housed in self

constructed shelters under conditions of informal or traditional land tenure. Also referred

to as squatter settlements or shanty towns, they are common features of developing

countries and are typically the product of an urgent need for shelter by the urban poor (UN,

2010). The need for illegal occupation of land and informal dwelling arrangement stems

from a deep marginalization and exclusion from formal access to land and development

(Huchzermeyer & Karam, 2006). These areas are characterized by rapid, unstructutured

and unplanned development, and as such they are characterised by a dense proliferation of

small, make-shift shelters built from diverse materials, degradation of the local ecosystem

and by severe social problems (UN, 2010).


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN SOUTH AFRICA AND JOBURG

Among many other countries, South Africa is currently faced with problem of informal

settlement and associated issues. South African cities are largely inadequate, shaped by

discriminatory and repressive apartheid planning and further expanded by powerful and

far from equitable market processes, driving apartheid’s planned inequality and exclusion

even deeper, and effortlessly overriding attempts at urban democratisation and integration

(Huchzermeyer, 2009). Informal settlements are never welcomed as informal land

occupation by the poor has been seen as entirely ineffectual in shaping the city

(Huchzermeyer, 2009).

From its origins with the discovery of gold in the late 1880s, Johannesburg has always been

a divided city (Beall et al, 2002). After the first democratic elections in South Africa in 1994

there was a significant change in the inner city profile, both economically and racially. As

poor workers moved into the city centre to be near their places of employment, rich white-

owned industry and commerce moved out, leaving many empty or squatted buildings in

their wake. Many buildings were abandoned to slum landlords and gangsters who collected

rent from these under-maintained and overcrowded units, which were also used as centres

for criminal activity (Tomlinson, et al, 2003) [Figure 2 &3].


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

Non-payment led to the cut-off of utility services, and neighbourhoods deteriorated with

the absence of basic social services including health facilities, policing and functioning

water, electric and sanitation utilities. Increasing corporate debts to banks led to the

refusal of loans for property development or ownership in the inner city, as it was

considered too high a risk (Cotton & Franceys, 1991)

The UN-Habitat (2006) estimates that in 2006 nearly 1 billion people live in informal

settlement areas in the cities of the world, most of these in the developing countries. A

greater concern is that if this is not dealt with properly, the number of informal settlement

dwellers is predicted to double by 2030. In response to these critical circumstances, the

‘‘cities without slums’’ Action Plan was launched by the cities alliance in 1999, which later

on was endorsed by the 150 heads of states and government attending the United Nations

Millennium Summit in the year 2000, of which South Africa was a signatory (Beall et al,

2002). The plan was reflected in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, to ensure

environmental sustainability and to achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100

million slum dwellers, by 2020 (United Nations, 2000) [Figure 4].


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

The rapid growth of informal settlements in the urban areas of South Africa poses

significant challenges to both national and local level government. South Africa’s response

to informal settlement over the last 12 years has been characterised by disaster

management strategies in the period prior to 2004 and thereafter programmes to eradicate

informal settlements through large-scale capital intensive structural interventions (often as

rollover or greenfield developments) have been underway (DAG, 2007) [Figure 5].

There are 180 informal settlements in Johannesburg to date, containing 180 000

households - more than 25 percent of its four million people (CS, 2007) [See Map 1]. A

significant majority of this population is located in the Greater Soweto area, with anywhere

from 50 to over 300 people per hectare. At Johannesburg's present rate of growth, some

90 000 new dwelling units will be needed each year (Tomlinson et al, 2003). It is

anticipated that only a third can be met through current delivery methods. The quality of

living and housing in these areas created by this housing shortage is widespread and

considerable [See Map 2]. A large proportion of these are in the form of backyard shacks

and informal settlements [Map 3]


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

A CONFLICTED TOWNSHIP: SOWETO

Soweto is an urban area in the City of

Johannesburg, in Gauteng, South Africa

[Maps 4 & 5]. Its name is an English syllabic

abbreviation, short for South Western

Townships, subsequently referred to by

relocating residents and other South

Africans as "So Where To" (Crankshaw &

Parnell, 1996)

Soweto is a relatively new creation, with

most of its townships established during the

1950s; from this time on Soweto became a

major reception area for African families in

Johannesburg. Today it has a population

that is estimated to be between 1.5 and 2

million people (CS, 2007).

A Greater Johannesburg survey for the State

of the Environment Project found that

Soweto was an openly and significantly

varied locality. This is manifested in various ways; predominantly the quality of the

accommodation, income levels, employment and educational qualifications. Many parts of

Soweto rank among the poorest in Johannesburg, although individual townships tend to

have a mix of wealthier and poorer residents (McDonald, 1998). In general, households in

the outlying areas to the northwest and southeast have lower incomes, while those in

southwestern areas tend to have higher incomes.

Soweto's image ranges from that of a township that is poverty-stricken and sprawling to

one that is vibrant and cosmopolitan (Beall et al, 2002). Images of Soweto’s barrack-like

hostels and endless ranks of ‘matchbox’ houses are symbolic of the apartheid state’s strict

http://www.bookrags.com/Regions_of_Johannesburg

http://www.bookrags.com/Regions_of_Johannesburg

http://www.bookrags.com/Gauteng

http://www.bookrags.com/South_Africa

http://www.bookrags.com/English_language

http://www.bookrags.com/Abbreviation#Syllabic_abbreviation

http://www.bookrags.com/Abbreviation#Syllabic_abbreviation


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

control of periphery South African townships,

while the irregular landscape of shantytowns

and informal settlements are increasingly the

keynote of the post-apartheid urbanization

challenge [See Figures 6-9].

Soweto was meant to exist only as a

dormitory town for black Africans who

worked in white houses, factories, and

industries (Crankshaw et al, 2000). Very few

backyard or informal settlement structures

existed pre-1980. This part of Soweto's

population started burgeoning from the early

1980's, after the severe restrictions on

housing availability had eased and influx

control had been scrapped (Morris et al,

1999). For a substantial section of the

Council house residents, backyard structure

tenants were an important source of income.

For the working class, who arrived in Soweto

from other areas, these backyard structures

were the preferred accommodation and also

the easiest to acquire (Crankshaw et al,

2000).

Criticisms of the housing built within this

period [1980’s-early 2000’s] includes quality,

size (very small) and location (numerous

identical houses in areas with no social or

economic infrastructure) (Charlton & Kihato,

2006).

http://www.travelblog.org/Photos/2218000


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

The economic development of Soweto was severely curtailed by the apartheid state, which

provided very limited infrastructure and prevented residents from creating their own

businesses (Mears, 1996) [Figures 10 & 11]. Sowetans could operate general shops,

butcheries, eating houses, sell milk or vegetables, or hawk goods. The overall number of

such enterprises at any time was strictly controlled. As a result, informal trading developed

outside the legally-recognized activities (Mears, 1996). These unofficial businesses and the

social networks they created helped to form the natural and irregular settlements of the

Soweto area.


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

RECONCEPTULISATION OF THE SLUMS

During the 1950s and 1960s urban migration and burgeoning informal settlements around

the cities of developing countries generally elicited hostile responses from governments.

[Figure 12] The urban poor were considered to be parasites on the formal system, and a

threat to orderly urban development (Tomlinson et al, 2003). By the 1960s the concern for

controlled urban development and political pressures on governments to intervene in the

housing markets on behalf of the poor led to the adoption of public housing programmes

(Charlton and Kihato, 2006). These generally failed to meet expectations; inappropriately

high standards and increasing implementation costs required ever higher subsidies that

could not be sustained over the longer term. In addition designs and locations were

invariably ill-matched to the needs and affordability levels of the intended low income

households (Knight, 2001).

There are mainly three major views of development and each enjoys some support

somewhere in South Africa. These are the growth-centred, the state-centred and the human

or people-centred approaches (Van Zyl, 1995). The capitalist or growth-centred version of

economic development emphasises the importance of economic growth and the freemarket

system as instruments to enhance the quality of life. It has contributed significantly to the

overall material progress of many countries, albeit with relatively little impact on relieving

the plight of the poor (Marais et al, 2008).


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

The state-centred version of economic

development was inspired mostly by a deep

concern with the phenomenon of social

justice. Human-centred development has

the ultimate objective of enabling all people

to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. It

weaves the development processes around

the people rather than weaving people

around the developmental processes (Van

Zyl, 1993) [Figures 13-15].

The exploration these alternative

approaches led to the emergence of the

aided self-help movement. During the 1960s

theorists such as John Turner, a British

architect, posited a reconceptualisation of

housing supply and delivery. Turner's

central thesis argued that housing is best

provided and managed by those who are to

dwell in it rather than being centrally

administered by the state (Burgess, 1978).

Furthermore Turner argued that given

access to available resources, and subject to

government support in the provision of

secure tenure and services, the poor would

be able to meet their own housing needs

through incremental improvements over

time (Kemeny, 1989).

The recognition of this theory involved an

implicit shift away from state housing


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

provision, and represented a step towards a support approach to housing delivery

(Charlton & Kihato, 2006). Although its basis lay in the reduction of costs by involving the

poor in the construction of their own houses, it was argued that this would foster a

commitment by them to their new houses, thereby reducing the incidence of speculative

resale to higher income groups (Turner, 1968). In the self-building and self-management of

housing and neighbourhoods, Turner demonstrated that neighbourhoods designed with

local groups worked better since people were experts on their own situations and should

be given the 'freedom to build' (Turner, 1968). Whether this freedom was granted by the

state or wrested from it through squatting was less important.

Turner stated that it is not necessary for people to be so self-reliant that they must do

everything for themselves; however, if all decisions are taken out of the hands of

individuals, they cease, to that extent, to have independent; they cease to be free; they

cease to be human (Kemeny, 1989). Karl Marx, in the Manifesto, wrote that “the free

development of each is the condition for the free development of all.” By that application of

philosophy to the field of housing, we can see that what South Africa has executed is

something far less than freedom [Figure 16].


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

OPPORTUNITIES AND LESSONS

There are a number of important and valuable lessons that have transpired during the

period 1994-2009 with respect to the upgrading of informal settlements in Soweto and

other parts of South Africa. Efforts have been made to create sustainable settlements for

the informal settlements that have either been upgraded or relocated under the Policies

arising from the Millenium Declaration. However, enormous challenges remain to develop

informal settlements in way that allow residents to create livelihood, access social services

and enjoy a supportive environment (DoH, 2004). South Africa, to a large extent, could be

said to interpret the Millennium Development Goals as meaning eradication (of slums,

rather than on the spot (in situ)

improvement of the lives of those

living in them (Huchzermeyer,

2009).

Conventional informal upgrading

strategies have still resulted in a

large number of relocations. Most

relocation and eradication from

poorly planned schemes have

resulted in worsened life condition

due to distance of the relocation

sites from livelihoods; and

disruption of social networks,

livelihoods and schooling and even

in some cases access to basic

necessities such as water and shelter

(Aigbovboa & Thwala, 2010) [Figure

16].


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

With regard to the rapid urbanization, modern urban planning should take into account the

social values that the local community treasures most. The basic problem is that the urban

planner is an engineer or a professional who is completely oblivious to the societal

heritages and general preference of the people (Turner, 1968). Urban planners can learn an

important lesson from the natural settlement pattern of the society.

Settlements are shaped by the needs of the people who inhabit them, which mean that the

livelihood strategies affect the actual form and structure of, as well as types of facilities

within settlements (Hamdi, 1991). The location of the settlement can be considered an

asset for the urban poor and can form part of their survival strategies, as well as an asset

for the wealthier in terms of investment potential and quality of life.

People and their own local organizations can do it effectively and better than anybody else

if they are free to do so and if the law protects them, or, alternatively if they are strong

enough to ignore the law (Turner, 1968; Kemeny 1989). They also need to have access to

the basic resources necessary in order to be able to plan, build, manage and maintain

neighbourhoods [Figure 17].


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

People are experts on their own situation and since knowledge is power, this is an

invaluable resource. So the power they have to make use of the resources at the local

level—resources of time and space—is maximised if they carry out this task themselves

(Turner 1968). If the control of these resources is taken away from people and centralized,

generally speaking much poorer use will be made of them and the frictions and waste will

have to be compensated for by heavier technologies, higher administrative costs, and

profits to cover the cost of additional labour. This escalates the costs with decisions being

made by outsiders lacking both detailed personal knowledge and often motivation to make

best use of the resources to match supply and demand (Burgess, 1978).

The findings by Crankshaw et al (2000) around backyard structures have interesting policy

implications. They illustrate that providing people with bigger plots can generate a good

deal of extra housing, accommodate growing families comfortably or alternatively provide

poor families with an important source of income and provide immigrants with affordable

accommodation [Figure 18 - 20].

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Rdphouses.jpg


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

Well constructed, well managed buildings which deliver value for money to low income

tenants who are viewed as clients leads to a culture of payment and participation (Mears,

1996). In the absence of amenities many of Soweto’s residents have created their own

social activities and burial societies and stokvels (the informal gathering of savings

amongst a group of people) form an important part of the social fabric, strengthening

bonds in families and communities (Crankshaw et al, 2000) [Figure 21]. The homes and

neighbourhoods developed by the urban poor often contain the seeds of an urban

development far more appropriate to local climate, culture and resources.


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

URBAN FUTURES: TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE HOUSING PROCESS

South Africa has made great strides in proving housing and basic services such as

electricity and water to the people of South Africa, despite not achieving its goal of 350,000

houses per year (Huchzermeyer, 2009). However, much remains to be done overcome the

housing backlog and make water and electricity available and affordable. Broad principles

of housing policy within the Soweto and Johannesburg area 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 (DoH, 2004).

Housing need is directly linked to human well-being (Van der Merwe & Van der Vuuren,

1992; Mears, 1996). There have been many formulations and definitions of well-being, but

most would agree that it includes basic material needs for a good life, the experience of

freedom, health, personal security and good social relations [Figure 22 & 23]. Together,

these provide the conditions for physical social, physiological and spiritual fulfilment

[Figure 24]. Aspects that contribute to material needs for a good life, include secure and

adequate livelihoods, enough food at all times and adequate shelter (GJMC, 1999). Aspects

that contribute to security include secure access to natural and other resources and living

in a predictable and controllable environment with security from natural and human-made

disasters. The type of dwelling and its location therefore plays an important role in human

well-being (GJMC, 1999; Marais et al, 2008).


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

The provision of land to manage the urbanization process is, however, regarded as one of

the greatest development challenges faced by South Africa (Charlton & Kihato, 2006).

Urban land policies thus lie at the heart of any future housing strategies and state

intervention in land markets is vital to securing access by the urban poor to affordable, well

located land [Figure 25]. Structures for financing low income housing should be informed

by the specific needs, cultures, and financial capacities of the urban poor.

Although economic considerations should not be the only measure of the value of housing

in development, it is arguably self-evident that facilitating access to housing on a

sustainable basis would contribute to social stability and wellbeing, as well as to economic

growth. Housing development would have an indirectly positive impact on the economy

through stimulating demand, such as for building materials, construction related services,

and consumer goods in general, which in turn stimulate employment opportunities (Marais

et al, 2008).

Formalising settlements, which involves registering the properties, naming streets, and

putting in services, allows settlement dwellers will be given the land on which their


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

dwelling has been erected, along with title deeds, thus formalising their ownership.

Investing in housing development should thus be regarded as essential to providing a

framework for social and economic development in a qualitative approach towards overall

economic growth (Aigbovboa & Thwala, 2010).


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

The following principles and design tools would assist in providing better living

environments for the urban poor regarding the spatial development and arrangement of,

within and between settlements.

PRIORITY

Investment in new and existing settlement upgrading and redevelopment should focus on

localities with greatest economic potential (Crankshaw et al, 2000). Highest priority should

be given to localities where high levels of economic opportunity, livelihood opportunity

and need overlap. Lower priority should be given to areas where only high levels of

sustainable livelihoods potential and need overlap (Knight, 2001).

BALANCE

The location and development of human settlements should balance the use of resources

for infrastructure development and operation with the carrying capacity of ecosystems;

thus ensuring the wise use of natural resources and environmental service areas (DoH,

2005). Where areas of high priority (high levels of economic and sustainable livelihood

potential and need) and high environmental sensitivity overlap, the need for special

planning and management at the more local scale must be highlighted.

INTEGRATION

Intensity, diversity and priority of investment should increase, mainly along transport

corridors, from localities of concentrations of greatest need towards areas of greatest

economic potential to facilitate spatial integration particularly of displaced settlements

with areas of opportunity and potential (Van Zyl, 1995).

Settlements should be located and designed in such a way as to facilitate structural and

functional integration. For example there should be transport opportunities in a reasonable

walking distance from houses to connect residents to other modes of transport, job

opportunities and bigger shops and metropolitan facilities, as well as smaller shops and

parks in close proximity to housing developments to fulfill the immediate local needs of

residents. The man-made infrastructure should also be integrated with natural areas.


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

CHOICE

In localities of low economic and livelihood potential but high levels of need, investment

should, over and above investment in basic services, focus on the development of people

through skills development and access to knowledge of opportunities; thus facilitating

choice and ability to move to areas of greater potential (Van der Merwe & Van Vuuren,

1992). The implication of continued investment in “place” rather than in “people” in these

areas of low economic and livelihood potential, is that existing spatial patterns of

development, originating in policies of separate development, become more firmly

entrenched and spatial restructuring will not occur (Knight, 2001).

INTENSITY AND DIVERSITY

The higher the level of economic potential of an area, the greater the intensity of

investment in higher density housing forms and in the provision of a greater range and

diversity of housing types and supporting services and the greater the mix of income levels

and activities should be (DoH, 2004). Settlements should ideally have many

neighbourhoods which offer different types of housing for different income groups to

facilitate social interaction between different groups and provide opportunities where the

wealthier residents can sponsor the establishment of facilities and events that the entire

neighbourhood can benefit from. In this way an integrated sense of ownership of the

neighbourhood can be created (McDonald, 1998).

The range of housing products should be broadened in appropriate localities to address the

extended and diverse needs of a range of people, including the elderly, people with

disabilities, children headed households, single headed households and migrant families.

The location of different types of housing in different regions should facilitate different

choices for people at different life stages and with specific needs (Marais et al, 2008).

[Figure 26]. Housing developments should also be combined with other land uses to reduce

the creation of dormitory neighbourhoods and address the needs of a range of residents,

including woman with children staying at home during the day, the elderly and the youth

(Knight, 2001).


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

AFFORDABILITY

Differentiated need in terms of income levels must be considered in relation to housing

product so that lower cost housing products are targeted in localities with higher levels of

lower income need while more, higher density, higher cost housing products are targeted

in areas of higher income need (Charlton & Kihato, 2006).

CLUSTERING

Human settlements should offer a range of social, economic and recreational opportunities

in reasonable proximity to different housing types (Cotton & Franceys, 1991). By clustering

many of these opportunities in nodes or along specific development corridors in growth

centres will increase accessibility and maximise the economies of scale.


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

REFERENCES

1. Aigbovboa, C. & Thwala, W. (2010) Lessons Learned From in situ Upgrading and Eradication of Informal Settlement in Gauteng Province, South Africa. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis. Volume 3, Issue 3.

2. Burgess, R. (1978) Petty Commodity Housing or Dweller Control? A Critique of John Turner’s View on Housing Policy. World Development. Volume 6, Issue 9/10.

3. Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (2005), Any Room for the Poor? Forced Evictions in Johannesburg, Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, Geneva.

4. Charlton, S. & Kihato, C. (2006), Reaching the poor? An analysis of the influences on the evolution of South Africa’s Housing Programme, in Democracy and Delivery: Urban Policy in South Africa, HSRC Press.

5. Community Survey (2007), Basic Results. Statistics South Africa, p. 2, [accessed at: www.statssa.gov.za/publications/CS2007Basic/CS2007Basic.pdf.]

6. Cotton, C. & Franceys, R (1991) Services for Shelter: Infrastructure for Urban Low Income Housing. Liverpool University Press.

7. Crankshaw, O; Gilbert, A & Morris, A. (2000) Backyard Soweto. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Volume 4, Issue 4.

8. Crankshaw, O. & Parnell, S. (1996) Housing Provision and the Need for an Urbanisation Policy in the New South Africa. Urban Forum. Volume 7.

9. DNH (1994) Guidelines for the Provision of Engineering Services and Amenities inResidential Township Development. CSIR (Division of Building Technology), Department of National Housing and the National Housing Board of South Africa

10. DoH (2004) Breaking new ground: a comprehensive plan for the development of sustainable human settlements. Presented to MINMEC, 2 September, Department of Housing, Pretoria.

11. DoH (2005) Housing Atlas 2005. National Housing Spatial Investment Potential Atlas. Department of Housing, Republic of South Africa. [accessed at www.dhs.gov.za]

12. GJMC (1999) Cities State of the Environment Project: Environmental Quality in Greater Johannesburg. Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Council. [accessed at www.environment.gov.za/enviro-info]

13. Hall, P. G. & Pfeiffer, U. (2000) Urban Future 21: A Global Agenda for the 21st Century. E & FN Spon, London.

http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/CS2007Basic/CS2007Basic.pdf.%5d

http://www.dhs.gov.za/

http://www.environment.gov.za/enviro-info


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

14. Hamdi, N; (1991) Housing Without Houses: Participation, Flexibility and Enablement. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

15. Huchzermeyer, M. (2009) The struggle for in situ upgrading of informal settlements: a reflection on cases in Gauteng, Development Southern Africa, Volume 26, Issue 1.

16. Huchzermeyer, M, & Karam, A. (2006) Informal Settlements: A Perpetual Challenge? UCT Press, South Africa.

17. JJGL (1996) Housing Strategies and the Urban Poor in South Africa: A Brief Critical Evaluation. Working Paper No. 80. Jacobus Johannes Gideon Lombard.

18. Kemeny, J. (1989) Community-based home and neighbourhood building: An interview with John Turner, Housing, Theory and Society. Volume 6, Issue 3.

19. Knight, R. (2001) Housing in South Africa. [accessed at www.richardknight.homestead]

20. Marais, L; Ntema, J & Venter, A. (2008) State Control in Self Help Housing: Evidence from South Africa. Centre for Development Support.

21. McDonald, D. (1998) Hear No Housing, See No Housing: Immigration and Homelessness in the New South Africa. Cities. Volume 15.

22. Mears, R. (1996) Improving Quality of life in Greater Soweto. Social Indicators Research. Volume 42, Issue3.

23. Morris, A; & Others. (1999) Change and Continuity: A Survey of Soweto in the 1990’s. Department of Sociology, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

24. Proceedings of the 8th Interschools Conference on Appropriate Technologies and Policies for Low income Settlements, Shelter, Settlements and the Poor (1991) Appropriate Policies and Technologies for Low income Settlements. Intermediate Technology Publications, London.

25. RSA (1985), Report of the Committee for Constitutional Affairs of the President's Council: An Urbanisation Strategy for the Republic of South Africa, Republic of South Africa, Cape Town, 1985.

26. RSA (1986), White Paper on Urbanisation, Republic of South Africa.

27. RSA (1994) White Paper: A New Housing Policy and Strategy for South Africa, Republic of South Africa, Department of Housing. December 1994

28. The Housing Accord (1994), Housing the Nation (booklet), Botshabelo Summit, 27 October 1994.

29. Turner, J. (1968) Housing Priorities, Settlement Patterns and Urban Development in Modernising Countries. Journal of the American Institute of Planners. Volume 34, Issue 6.


C A T R I O N A T A T A M [ 1 3 5 8 6 5 7 7 ]

30. UN-Habitat (2005) Slum challenge and shelter delivery: meeting the millennium development goals. Paper prepared by the UN-Habitat Regional Office for Africa and Arab States and presented at the Amchud Expert Group, Durban, 31 January-4 February.

31. Van der Merwe, M. & Van Vuuren, J. (1992) A holistic approach to design and construction of informal settlements in South Africa. Paper presented at the IAHS 20th World Congress: Housing, Housing Technology and Socioeconomic Change, Birmingham, September 1992.

32. Van Zyl, J. (1995) Need-based Development Strategy and the RDP: Some Broad Issues. Development paper 47, Development Bank of South Africa. Halfway House.

33. ALL PICTURES ARE SOURCED FROM FLICKR AND PHOTOSTOCK

34. MAPS SOURCED FROM GJMC (1999) Cities State of the Environment Project: Environmental Quality in Greater Johannesburg. Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Council. [accessed at www.environment.gov.za/enviro-info]

35. DIAGRAM SOURCED FROM DoH (2005) Housing Atlas 2005. National Housing Spatial Investment Potential Atlas. Department of Housing, Republic of South Africa. [accessed at www.dhs.gov.za]

http://www.environment.gov.za/enviro-info

http://www.dhs.gov.za/

assignment 1 [informal settlements in johannesburg

Documents