5.0 Chapter V: Conclusion and
recommendations
5.1 General considerations
The debate concerning SHH has shown that this practice,
although old in application, saw its revival as policy in developed countries
after the first and the Second World War. It was adopted as policy to
compensate the economy of scarcity and also to tackle the severe housing
shortage. SHH has allowed many households to be housed while the conventional
housing policy failed to solve the housing need of poor people. Cuban
experience of SHH in a developing country and Canadian experience in a
developed country have provided great examples of the way to respond to severe
housing shortage. It appears that SHH is an alternative to conventional housing
policy and a policy of crisis. In developing countries, through the World Bank,
SHH was adopted as housing policy to face the issue of housing crisis generated
by urban and population growth.
Despite the main advantages of SHH such as to house a
significant number of poor households and to consolidate networks among
participants of SHH projects, this practice, especially the State initiated SHH
(named in this research as the third form of SHH) was severely challenged by
some academics of whom Burgess is the main proponent. Mathey who is one of the
advocates of SHH points out that SHH is an effective policy and may produce
great results. For him, criticisim addressed against SHH is relevant only in
capitalist countries. In analyzing SHH in Cuba, Mathey has shown that critiques
related to SHH should not be generalized. His counter arguments stand if severe
housing conditions were isolated from other issues. However, as it was argued,
severe housing shortage which stimulates SHH is also linked with inequality,
poverty and unemployment. Therefore, a housing solution should be integrated,
and include other policies.
In South Africa, the policy adopted by the Housing Department
as PHP received great audience from authorities; and policy documents give
favourable space to this practice. However, in practice, PHP in some areas has
failed to house a significant number of households, as happened in other
countries, or has not been implemented given the difficult access to land. The
assumption of this research was not to argue that SHH is an ideal housing
solution. This may constitute a topic for appropriate future research. Instead,
it sought to enumerate the main reasons which hamper the widespread use of SHH.
Through open and deep interviews with residents from informal settlements, RDP
houses and an official, this research has shown that in South Africa, the
failure to implement widespread use of SHH does not result from the weaknesses
of SHH. The findings of this research show that the difficult access to land,
the ignorance from households of their right of having access to adequate
shelter, the attitude of dependency evident in households, the paternalistic
attitude from the government, the failure to constitute an active community and
the failure to establish real priorities of poor people are the main causes of
limited use of SHH in South Africa.
Therefore, the main question that has constituted this
research has been answered. This research also set out to discover whether SHH
or PHP is possible and desirable in South African context. To the first
question, this research responds positively. Indeed, the implementation of SHH
is possible in South Africa insofar as the criteria defined in the framework
for successful implementation of SHH are respected. In South Africa, the main
difficulty for the authorities to properly execute SHH is to supply land for
housing. To the question related to the desirability of SHH, the finding of
this research has shown that there are two categories of poor households.
According to the first category of poor households, SHH is not desirable
because it requires hard work and to spend more time, while they do not work
and would like to spend their time in making their livelihood. It is this
category of poor household who witness dependency attitude towards the housing
issue. For the second category of poor households, SHH is desirable to the
extent that it costs less than the amount required for RDP houses and they
would be given an opportunity to learn how to build a house. Finally, SHH
cannot be imposed as solution to severe housing shortage on every poor
household. They have to decide themselves the mode of housing delivery that
best suits them
| 
