Marais, J. G. L.Ntema, Lejone John2015-09-282015-09-282018http://hdl.handle.net/11660/1290Thesis (Ph.D.(Development Studies))--University of the Free State, 2018𝑬𝒏𝒈𝒍𝒊𝒔𝒉 This thesis entitled Self-help housing in South Africa: paradigms, policy and practice was conducted as the first thorough evaluation of self-help housing policy in South Africa. Selfhelp housing policy and practice in both South Africa and globally are evaluated by means of Turner’s concept of dweller control. The thesis starts off by analysing the origin and development of low-income housing policies in developing countries, with specific reference to self-help housing policy. It is pointed out that the discussion on the influence of Turner’s theory and the role of the World Bank are central to the analysis of the origin and development of self-help housing policy in developing countries. Turner’s theory played a crucial role in the acceptance of self-help housing as an alternative housing-delivery mechanism in the 1960s, while the World Bank provided the necessary funding for its implementation through site-and-services schemes by governments in developing countries in the early 1970s. Despite self-help housing commonly being associated with neo-liberal policy trends, the thesis shows that self-help is practised in both capitalist and socialist countries. The international theoretical background on self-help housing is followed by an assessment of the development and application of various low-income housing policies in post-apartheid South Africa, with specific reference to self-help housing. South African policy on self-help is officially called the People’s Housing Process (PHP) and is implemented through self-help groups called housing support centres. It has been found that though Turner’s ideas and principles on self-help housing are entrenched in PHP policy, in practice this policy, to a large extent, neither conforms to Turner’s ideas particularly those on dweller control nor to certain principles stipulated in the policy. Thus, a technocratic rather than a people-centred approach (envisaged in policy documents) dominates the PHP programmes in South Africa. The levels of the influence exerted by local people in project design, project implementation and housing design remain low, and the housing outcomes do not differ much from the conventional project subsidy approach. This leads the author to conclude that self-help housing in South Africa is, in effect, dominated by the state. However, despite state control of the housing process, both the available South African literature on self-help housing and the empirical findings seem to be in agreement that the houses in PHP projects are generally much bigger than those provided by means of the conventional contractor-driven mechanism. The comparison between the laissez-faire self-help project and the aided self-help project using a contractor-driven approach confirms that better housing outcomes have resulted from the laissez-faire self-help example (larger houses, more extension activity). Against this background, the thesis proposes that government officials should become facilitators rather than dominant role players in the application of self-help housing, programmes on consumer education should be emphasised and used as means to enhance community participation and empowerment, the emphasis on sweat equity in the self-help mechanism should be reconsidered, the self-help mechanism inherently needs to accept a certain degree of informality, government should ensure accountability and oversight without necessarily controlling state-funded self-help housing projects, and, the emphasis in self-help should be on embracing housing as a process rather than as a one-off activity.𝑨𝒇𝒓𝒊𝒌𝒂𝒂𝒏𝒔 Hierdie proefskrif getiteld Self-help housing in South Africa: paradigms, policy and practice (Selfhelpbehuising in Suid-Afrika: paradigmas, beleid en praktyk) is onderneem as die eerste diepgaande evaluering van selfhelpbehuisingsbeleid in Suid-Afrika. Selfhelpbehuisingsbeleid en –praktyk in sowel Suid-Afrika as wêreldwyd word geëvalueer aan die hand van Turner se konsep inwonerbeheer. Ter aanvang word die oorsprong en ontwikkeling van laeinkomstebehuisingsbeleide in ontwikkelende lande ontleed, met spesifieke verwysing na selfhelpbehuisingsbeleid. Daar word aangetoon dat die bespreking van die invloed van Turner se teorie en die rol van die Wêreldbank sentraal staan in die ontleding van die oorsprong en ontwikkeling van selfhelpbehuisingsbeleid in ontwikkelende lande. Turner se teorie het ’n deurslaggewende rol gespeel in die aanvaarding van selfhelpbehuising as ’n alternatiewe wyse van behuisingsvoorsiening in die 1960’s, terwyl die Wêreldbank vroeg in die 1970’s die vereiste befondsing vir die implementering daarvan deur middel van erf-endiensskemas deur die regerings van ontwikkelende lande voorsien het. Ongeag die feit dat selfhelp behuising gewoonlik met neo-liberale politieke tendense vereenselwig word, dui die proefskrif aan dat selfhelp in sowel kapitalistiese as sosialistiese lande beoefen word. Teen die agtergrond van die internasionale teorie oor selfhelpbehuising, volg ’n evaluering van die ontwikkeling en toepassing van verskillende lae-inkomste behuisingsbeleide in die postapartheidera in Suid-Afrika, met spesifieke verwysing na selfhelpbehuising. Die SuidAfrikaanse selfhelpbeleid staan amptelik as die People’s Housing Process (PHP) bekend en word geïmplementeer by wyse van selfhelpgroepe genaamd behuisingondersteuningsentra. Daar is bevind dat alhoewel Turner se idees en beginsels van selfhelpbehuising in PHP-beleid veranker is, voldoen hierdie beleid in die praktyk grotendeels nóg aan Turner se idees veral dié ten opsigte van bewonerbeheer nóg aan sekere beginsels soos in die beleid gestipuleer. Aldus domineer ’n tegnokratiese eerder as ’n mens-gesentreerde benadering (soos in 241 beleidsdokumente beoog) die PHP-programme in Suid-Afrika. Die invloedspeil wat die plaaslike bevolking ten opsigte van projekontwerp, projekimplementering en behuisingsontwerp uitoefen, bly laag, terwyl die behuisingsresultate nie veel verskil van die konvensionele projeksubsidiebenadering nie. Die outeur kom dus tot die slotsom dat selfhelpbehuising in Suid-Afrika in werklikheid deur die staat gedomineer word. Ondanks staatsbeheer van die behuisingsproses is sowel die beskikbare Suid-Afrikaanse literatuur oor selfhelpbehuising en die empiriese bevindinge dit eens dat die huise in die PHP-projekte in die algemeen baie groter is as dié wat deur middel van die konvensionele kontrakteurgedrewe meganisme voorsien word. Die vergelyking van die laissezfaire selfhelpprojek en die ondersteunde selfhelpprojek wat ’n kontrakteurgedrewe benadering gebruik, bevestig dat beter behuisingsresultate verkry is in die geval van die laissezfaire selfhelp voorbeeld (groter huise, meer aanbou-aktiwiteite). Teen hierdie agtergrond doen die proefskrif aan die hand dat regeringsamptenare fasiliteerders eerder as dominante rolspelers moet word in die toepassing van selfhelpbehuising, verbruikersopvoedingsprogramme moet beklemtoon en aangewend word as ’n middel om gemeenskapsdeelname en –bemagtiging te verhoog, die klem op die persoonlike arbeidsinset (sweat equity) in die selfhelpmeganisme moet heroorweeg word die selfhelpmeganisme moet inherent ’n sekere mate van informaliteit aanvaar, die regering moet verantwoordbaarheid en toesig verseker sonder om staatsgefinansierde selfhelpbehuisingsprojekte noodwendig te beheer, en die klem ten opsigte van selfhelp moet geplaas word op die aanvaarding van behuising as ’n proses eerder as ’n eenmalige aktiwiteit.enHousing support centresPeople's housing processSelf-helping housing -- Developing countriesSelf-helping housing -- South AfricaHousing policy -- South AfricaLow-income housing -- South AfricaThesis (Ph.D. (Centre for Development Support))--University of the Free State, 2011ThesisUniversity of the Free State