3.2.3 The State initiated SHH
The third form of SHH, called the «State initiated
self-help housing» or aided SHH, looks very different from the forms cited
above. In this form, the State takes responsibility and initiative to plan, to
organize and to finance, and requires the participation of beneficiaries,
especially in terms of labour. For Harris (1999), Aided SHH refers to the
situation where governments have developed programmes of assistance
specifically for owner-builders. In addition, this form of SHH refers to the
housing built with State assistance by families for their own use. This form of
SHH, sometimes called State SHH is practiced in Jamaica (Klak, 1997) and Cuba
(Mathey, 1992).
This kind of SHH was observed and developed where there was a
severe shortage of housing stock, especially in developed countries after the
World War II (see Schulist at al, 2002; Mathey, 1997; Wakeman, 1999; Dingle
1999; Parnell and Hart, 1999; and Harris 1999). In developing countries, this
form of SHH is adopted as policy for facing the rapid urbanization and
population growth that these countries face (Dwyer, 1975; United Nations Human
Settlement Programme 2003). As this form of SHH emanates from the government,
it may be observed that the successful State SHH demonstrates the situation
where the government takes its responsibility to supply housing for poor people
and also its ability to associate beneficiaries of housing projects to the
solutions related to their good. The main difference between this form of SHH
and the South African current Housing Policy is that the State involves the
beneficiaries at the phase of execution while the South African Housing policy
considers the beneficiaries as mere recipients. In comparison with the second
form of SHH presented above, in State initiated SHH the attempt at solving
housing need of low-income families comes from the government whereas in State
Supported SHH the State adds the low-income families' efforts to improve their
housing conditions. In this sense, State SHH indicates that the housing project
comes from the top or outside the community and the implementation is
negotiated between the designer or planners and beneficiaries.
This third form of SHH is challenged in the literature by
Burgess (1985 and 1992) who argues that SHH deepens social inequalities and
vulnerability of poor families. He also asserts that poor people for whom the
SHH project is initiated are not always the beneficiaries as they cannot afford
to pay fees related to land and construction materials. Amis (1995) points out
that this form of SHH overlooks the main causes of poverty. Kerr and Kwell
(2000) who analyze housing conditions in Botswana argue that SHH ignores the
main causes of poverty in capitalist societies; thus, it legitimizes
poverty.
These authors, especially Burgess, who criticize State SHH,
argue that it cannot adequately constitute a durable solution for low-income
households in developing countries. These critiques stand. However, these
authors fail to propose an efficient alternative and to recognize that this
policy is adapted to the deficient economy of developing countries. In fact, as
Henderson (1999) advocates, no country or development agency may adopt SHH for
facing the issue of severe housing shortage created by urban population growth.
These authors could not propose conventional housing policy as this type of
programme failed in many developing countries including South Africa to
decently house poor households. A just and fair critique regarding SHH should
recognize the complexity of the housing issue as it is correlated to other
issues. In that sense, housing solutions should include economic, political and
ideological aspects. This is to say that developing countries would not find a
durable housing solution, as long as political and economic instability exist:
This is what authors who criticize SHH fail to admit.
The fourth form of SHH looks very different from three forms
described above. In fact, it is the situation where the individual without
operating in illegality or informality solves his/her housing need alone (see
fig 2 in Appendix). This form of SHH is identified in the literature review, as
«the market Self-Help Housing». It is also
named «the market-driven»
| 
