Revisiting the Self-Help Housing debate: Perception of Self-Help Housing by the beneficiaries of South African low-cost housing

4.4.3.f The evidence of a weak community

Another aspect found in the interviews which does not allow the effective implementation of SHH or PHP in Tembisa is the inability to create an active or strong community^50(*). According to one of the councillors of Tembisa, PHP was implemented in Tembisa before but did not produce the results expected. Among the reasons, the councillor pointed out that participants in the project were spending their time fighting and arguing. This was also confirmed by some respondents especially to the question of: «how is your relationship with your neighbours?» According to some respondents, their relationships are bad and they cannot interact easily. Others recognized that they can sometimes meet for discussing community matters but it is not easy to find an agreement, especially when it relates to money issues. Some others again indicated that there is no `trust' between them. So, they cannot easily work together. Some poor households noted that they do not know other members of the community.

4.4.3.g Priority of needs

Alongside the reasons advanced for explaining the failure of PHP in Tembisa, there is the failure from implementers to recognize the existing diversity of cultures and background and the diversity of needs among the beneficiaries. This raises the question of whether housing constitutes the major priority in South Africa, more specifically in Tembisa. For the post-apartheid government, Housing seems to be very important^51(*). This appears in policy documents such as 1994 Housing WP, etc. In addition, as Sisulu (2005b), the current Minister of Housing affirms:

«Through a house the poor have an opportunity to propel themselves out of poverty. There is now a truism that if you feed a man or woman, you stay his or her hunger for the day, but if you educate him or her you create an ability to stay his or her hunger for life. I would like to add that if you help give him or her a fundamental asset like a house not only do you empower him or her but you give him or her the kind of dignity whose value is incalculable.  

The assumption raised in this research seems to answer negatively. In fact, this has appeared in the response provided to the question of: «what do you expect from the government?» All respondents answered that they urgently need a job. No respondent, however, mentioned housing as response. This response also appears from one of the residents of the informal settlement who works in a part time job with an average income of between R 1000 and R 2000. To the question of: «why do you stay in bad housing conditions while you can, with your income, rent a formal house where you can have basic services such as water, electricity, sanitation?» She answered that her job is temporary and she can be dismissed at any time. Therefore, she needs a regular job which may allow her to properly look after her children. This looks logical because with a job, a household may be able to solve their housing need alone and stop displaying a dependency attitude.

Policy-makers do not adequately address the real problem raised by society members. Taking housing as a central priority of all poor people seems to be a mistake and can, instead of solving housing need, create other issues. Huchzermeyer (2003a) shows that some beneficiaries of low-cost housing in Cape Town were obliged to sell their RDP houses to allow them to take care of their children who were suffering from Aids. This is to say that while some poor people urgently need a house, others need cash money or a job or something else. It should also be noticed that priority is dynamic and not static. This element appears in the responses provided by the beneficiaries of RDP houses who have complained about the size of the house and need to extend their houses. It can be argued that when they were in informal settlements, their priority was to obtain a RDP house and actually as they become a big family they also need a big house^52(*). This, properly speaking, manifests the problematic of need and desire discussed in chapter II of this research.

Finally, this case study which has focused on deep and open interviews made as significant assumptions that, on the one hand, the failure to implement SHH in some urban areas in South Africa, including Tembisa is not directly linked to weaknesses of SHH analyzed in the literature review. On the other hand, with the attitude of paternalism and dependency, it will be difficult and almost impossible to positively respond to the housing backlog observed in South Africa. Indeed, with paternalistic attitude, the main problem is that the government does not allocate enough funds to satisfy housing needs of all South African poor households. Furthermore, this attitude may, in the long run, endanger the decision to eradicate informal settlement by 2014 as the government does not have enough resources to supply adequate houses for all poor households whose income is less than R 3500 per month. Another aspect that complicates the housing delivery is the incapacity of local authorities in charge of housing to adequately use the money that has been allocated for low-income housing. As Charlton et al (2003: 87) put it, «The financial and maintenance burden on municipalities caused by the delivery of housing projects is of major concern. Capital expenditure on housing delivery to date has translated into severe operating expenses for both local authorities and end users.»

Referring to dependency attitude, there is a risk for poor households in South Africa to remain marginalized and excluded from society as a whole. Even if the government were to find vital resources to satisfy the housing need of all South African poor households, it is not certain that poor households can take advantage of government intervention related to them. This is to say that without participation and dialogue, no durable solution^53(*) can be expected from the housing sector where there is still much to do.

* ⁵⁰ I mean by active and strong community, a community that is able to define their main problems and to propose tentative solutions. This is to say, following Lankatilleke, that an active and a strong community have solutions to their problems in their hands. In turn, they need recognition, in term of finance, to solve their problems.

* ⁵¹ Although housing seems to be the major priority, budget speeches and Presidential «State of Nation» speeches give similar importance to health, education, employment, safety and security and economic growth. Actually, with the hosting of the 2010 Soccer World Cup, security issues will probably command great importance.

* ⁵² The dynamic of needs may also be explained by Maslow's «hierarchy of needs»

* ⁵³ Durable solution in South Africa related to housing issue is a solution which favours inclusion, avoids segregation of poor households and also seeks to empower poor households in considering them as actors of development and not as merely recipients of development projects.