Integrated Urban Development Framework: COGTA deputy minister briefing to Social Services cluster

Meeting report

The National Assembly House Chairperson for Committees, Mr Cedric Frolick, welcomed Mr Andries Nel, Deputy Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Mr Madala Masuka, Deputy Minister of Economic Development, and Ms Sindisiwe Chikunga, Deputy Minister of Transport.
 
Integrated Urban Development Framework: briefing by COGTA Deputy Minister
Mr Andries Nel, COGTA Deputy Minister, spoke on the following aspects: urbanisation and immigration in South Africa; legacy of apartheid spatial planning; link between urbanisation and infrastructure; policy framework; integrated planning, spatial alignment and collaboration; IUDF implementation; and the request that Portfolio Committees use the IUDF for interrogating the urban impact of the programmes and budgets of their reporting departments and entities.

The Deputy Minister noted that the world is urbanising rapidly and urban agglomerations are classified as megacities (which had a population of 10 million or more); large cities (which had five to 10 million); medium cities (one to five million); and cities (500 000 to one million). The 21st century was an urban century as for the first time, more than half the people on earth lived in urban areas. Today, 1.5 million people were added to the global urban population every week as the world continued to urbanise very rapidly, especially in Africa and Asia. By 2050, two-thirds of the world’s population would live in urban areas. According to the United Nations, Africa was expected to be the fastest urbanising region between 2010 and 2050. In 1950, only three in ten people lived in urban areas.

Looking at China, it Urbanisation Plan (2014-2020) was framed on the notion that domestic demand was the fundamental impetus for China’s development and the greatest potential for expanding domestic demand lay in urbanisation. Over the past 30 years, with the rapid development of industrialisation, China’s urbanisation rate rose from 17.92% in 1978 to 54.77% in 2014. However, there are still many problems in China’s urbanisation. The solution was to take the way of people-oriented new-style urbanisation, building more inclusive and harmonious cities. China needed to resolve its “three 100-million-people tasks”.

The Deputy Minister noted the challenges of urbanisation: environment consequences (direct impact on nature conversation and natural habitats); unemployment; urban poverty (poor living conditions); criminality; loss of original fabric of society due to change in living conditions; negative impact on heritage and culture; urban congestion; increase in cost of living (utilities and basic services).

South Africa had 95 urban municipalities; 16 intermediate urban towns, 45 intermediate urban villages, 49 intermediate mixed areas and 8 rural municipalities. However, many areas considered rural had very urban characteristics and people were living in high density urban areas throughout the country.

South Africa was urbanising rapidly: 63% of South Africans were already living in urban areas and the statistics would rise to 71% by 2030. By 2050, eight in 10 people would be living in urban areas and this would increase demand on basic infrastructure requirements. Gauteng had the highest influx of migrants and 29.30% of migrants were from outside South Africa. Steve Tshwete Local Municipality was ranked first according to percentage growth from 2001 – 2011, followed by Emalahleni Local Municipality, then Rustenburg Local Municipality. Municipalities had very different capacities to deal with urbanisation.

The legacy of apartheid spatial planning including Bantustans and forced removals, led to spatial challenges. These included spatial injustice, spatial unsustainability, lack of spatial quality, spatial inefficiencies, lack of spatial resilience and the need to increase state’s capabilities. Four primary factors perpetuated apartheid spatial patterns: continued segregated urban settlements; unequal income levels and access to services; unsustainable infrastructure networks and consumption patterns; and existing markets and land use.

The Deputy Minister explained the link between urbanisation and infrastructure. The rate of urbanisation or movement of people into cities led to a growth of new households by 3.7% on average annually over the past six years or put differently more than 375 000 new households were added to cities each year. In rural areas, the challenge was backlog whereas in urban areas the challenges were backlog in addition to massive increase in population. Infrastructure planning and delivery ought to take into account the impact of urbanisation in addressing backlogs in housing, schools, hospitals, clinics, students accommodation, access to reliable water supply and electricity.

Goal 11 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals was to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. The goal was reinforced by objectives of the UN New Urban Agenda (Habitat III, 2016) and 2013 African Union Agenda 2063. At national level, the 2011 National Development Plan (Vision 2030) devoted a chapter to transforming human settlements and national space economy. In particular, the National Spatial Development Framework needed to translate the principles of spatial justice, spatial sustainability, spatial quality and spatial efficiency into strategies and action plans.

Against this background, the Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) was drafted. It was adopted by Cabinet in April 2016. It sets out principles, policies and programmes to achieve the NDP: Vision 2030 goals. Spatial alignment was critical as a planning priority to target government’s investment, initiatives and projects, to address priority issues within specific areas. Bringing about the desired spatial and development outcomes required strategic selection, prioritisation and coordination of interventions. Different role players and institutions were needed, including the private sector and civil society. Given the South African planning system, constitutional and multi-sphere context, this kind of outcome oriented spatial alignment of government would require (i) integration between different functional sectors or line departments within specific localities, (ii) strategic alignment across different spatial scales and (iii) active guidance for spatial alignment and outcomes of different role players within specific places.

The Deputy Minister concluded by noting progress in implementing the IUDF:
• The IUDF Political Committee and Technical Steering Committee had been established and met regularly to guide programme implementation;
• The City Support Programme had already implemented core elements of IUDF;
• An Intermediate Cities Support Programme was being implemented with a Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs grant managed by the World Bank;
• A Small Towns Regeneration Programme had been championed by SALGA.

He asked that the Portfolio Committees to use the IUDF as a framework for interrogating the urban impact of the programmes and budgets of their reporting departments and entities.
 
Discussion
Mr M Filtane (UDM) said the briefing as enlightening and welcomed engagement with the departments at this level. He remarked that usually engagement with the department was so confrontational. He had a belief that South Africa if it were to begin to think out of box, it could start developing counter strategies to counter urbanisation. Urbanisation had to be considered seriously given that 30% were people migrating to Gauteng. If the country would go with the flow, it was headed for trouble because the land was not stretching there is not enough land in urban areas. There were standards applied in urban areas which were different to those in rural areas. Urban standards are costly and the departments might not have the budget to be able to do so. How could urbanisation be slowed down in South Africa? Economic factors contributed to urbanisation; it was not social factors pushing people to migrate to urban areas. Both economic and psychological reasons were push factors.

He was happy that the Department of Transport was part of the initiative. He asked why the transport systems were structured in a manner that taxis and buses transported people to towns in the morning and out of towns in the evening. Why were no activities created in the rural areas? All these could be responded to if there was coordinated and integrated planning.

Another problem that needed to be given adequate consideration was the undermining of traditional leaders in rural and urban planning. Traditional leaders were no longer part of the decision making structures. It was for example councillors who decided on how land is used in municipal planning. Who was really responsible for land planning? Not far from President Mandela’s home, they were planning for a SASOL garage – it was difficult to acquire the land as a clinic, which had not been used for 15 years, was on that land and the land was claimed to be privately owned. It could not be released for the Sasol garage. The Sasol garage was established after a few meetings in which he participated. What is the relationship – the Deputy Minister might not be comfortable to answer – with the Ingonyama Trust Board? When they learned that there was 2.9 million hectares allocated to KZN cities under Ingonyama Trust Board, they inquired about this allocation and the Trust said that it had no relationship with local government. Could the Deputy Minister explain if there was a relationship with the Trust and the kind of relationship?

Ms S Shope-Sithole (ANC) welcomed the informative input which was an eye opener. She asked whether the SABC could broadcast a discussion on this for South Africans so they could have an understanding of what is going on. She wanted South Africans to change their mind as she did. She heard the department saying that it had a project with the World Bank through the Swiss and asked how much SA owed them. She asked why BRICS was not mentioned as well as the role of BRICS Bank. Actually, BRICS had resources that could be used to promote urbanisation and development.

Ms M Dunjwa (ANC) welcomed the enlightening and empowering briefing. Was the reference to “Nyandeli” in the presentation referring to Nyandeni in the Eastern Cape? She asked why the COGTA had made the presentation and why the initiative was not driven by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) and what could be its role. What had DRDLR managed to do for rural development? DRDLR was established to ensure development in rural areas. What were the challenges of DRDLR in bringing about economic development in the rural areas? Failure to develop the rural areas contributed to migration in the cities.

Mr Z Mandela (ANC) appreciated the presentation. Referring to slide 23, he noted that, by 2050, eight in 10 South Africans would be living in urban areas and asked if rural areas such as Mvezo or Mbashe villages would be turned into cities. Since 1994, how many rural areas have been developed through urbanisation planning? How many cities have been developed in consultation with traditional leaders? If one looked at the world map, one could not see Mapungubwe (Zimbabwe) as one of cities and no one could see Bulawayo on the map, a city that had been there at the time of King Shaka. So how would development of rural areas if the old African cities were not being recognised? He asked why the World Bank was involved in urbanisation, rather than BRICS Bank.

Dr P Maesela (ANC) remarked that all aspects of urban planning needed resources. Without resources, there was no need to talk about this. Urbanisation was very important because very soon South Africa would have megacities and, for this to occur, South Africa would need money and land. Whilst the Department was thinking about housing the increasing population, it should also think about feeding them. He did not hear in the presentation about opening a school of agriculture that would teach young children about farming with a view to feeding the increasing population. How would the future generation survive if South Africa’s natural resources, in particular, minerals, were being taken? These natural resources were decreasing while the population was increasing. Such imbalances meant that there would be no future for children. He gave an example that DRC was dealing with China when it came to negotiating minerals and urged that South Africa should follow suit. He reiterated that people would need land to farm in order to survive and thus asked the meaning of the concept of development? Was the concept meant to build houses or to develop infrastructure? Or did the concept mean the creation of developers? He remarked that education was key to development; however, education has been seen as a favour to the rich and the poor were not able to access it. Agricultural sciences for the poor had been neglected. On top of this, there was no technology that was established to purify ocean water for agricultural use. In his view, the UIDF was illogical and irrational. The programme would backfire because it was funded by the IMF and World Bank, which had never developed any country in the world.

Mr N Gcwabaza (ANC) said that he struggling to understand the implications of urban migration for agriculture as nothing had been said about that. The people who moved to the cities were young people. Young people had no passion for agricultural activities and, as a result, it was only old people who were engaging in agricultural activities. This was problematic. He said that industrialisation was not affecting the population at the same level. Few people were interested in agriculture as a means of economic development. This brought into question the role of the DRDLR. He felt that the Committee should place emphasis on agriculture. In this regard, there was very slow development in rural areas. Slowness in developing reliable water supply and slowness in developing transport systems would compel people to leave the rural areas. The rural areas should be developed in terms of economic activities as this would slow down the migration to cities.

An ANC Member said that her concerns had been spoken to. There were suburbs in the cities that were degraded which people would not like to set their eyes on. For instance, when a person drives to the airport from the CBD, one sees the degrading view of Langa which was in-between an industrialised area and semi-industrialised area. What would the Department’s plan be to develop these disastrous and shameful areas? She noted that a choice would be made about which areas would be developed; however, there were areas that were not looking good and which were part and parcel of the so called developed cities.

Deputy Minister Nel welcomed the questions and said that they do underscore the point that urbanisation and dealing with the legacy of apartheid spatial planning were matters of serious concern to the Department. The inputs ranged from land to transport and from minerals to beneficiation. They were concerned with the interface between rural development and urban development and interface between councillors and traditional leaders. All these issues were departmental and societal. He noted the Deputy Ministers present would assist him to clarify certain matters.

Deputy Minister Nel said that rural development and urban development were crucial to the UIDF because they talked to the question of urban versus rural which was the point of departure. They were deep-seated processes driven by the development of the world. From 1700 onwards, when the Europe was going through the industrial revolution there was a particular type of urbanisation. Europe had the approach of closing the commons. People were driven out of the land to go to the cities and work. The rise of industrialisation in Europe was linked to the expansion of colonialism in other parts of the world. That colonialism – in South Africa – took another particular form. Colonialism was made to feed industrialisation with raw materials. South Africa was able to feed European industrialisation through the mining sector and migration system that led to forced removals and influx control. Whenever urbanisation was raised, the issue of forced removals should be discussed. It was historical. History could not be denied because it provided the context of urbanisation in South Africa. When you dealt with urbanisation, you dealt with migration. Migration was secular. Migrants were people who would be working in a certain areas whilst they had families in other regions or countries. In this context, the migration interlinked the rural and urban areas. The context adopted by the UIDF was not how people could be kept or how the urbanisation could slow down, but how the city could come to peasants and not peasants to go to the city. All these areas mentioned by Mr Mandela would be dealt with n terms of the UIDF. There was a need for strong rural areas and for successful urban areas. If you look at the agricultural value chain, that value chain would pass through urban areas. If there no viable agricultural activities and other economic activities, the urban areas would not be sustained. The agricultural tools and machinery were needed to make rural areas strong. Urban and rural areas should be developed in tandem.

On the question of BRICS, Deputy Minister Nel noted that they did it deliberately in the presentation. The presentation referred to China which was a fellow country in BRICS. The Department had a strong link with the BRICS and South Africa would, in 2018, host the BRICS Summit, which would include academics and researchers. He had recently met with China’s Minister of Human Settlements. They had looked at how they could strike a partnership in the BRICS context. All BRICS countries were advanced in urbanisation. The partnerships were very useful. South Africa was committed to BRICS.

Transport Deputy Minister Chikunga noted that the current transportation system was based on the transportation of people to the city from where they stayed. In terms of the UIDF, the system was expected to change as the rural areas would be developed. The UIDF was a good imitative that was preparing the Department of Transport not to be taken by surprise by urbanisation. Urbanisation was already happening. She agreed that the government was not doing enough in training people, but it was the desire of her Department to brief the Committee on what it was doing. There were people who were trained and being trained in transportation. She believed the effects would be observed. At the North West University, there was a faculty which the Department was funding. Land, air and sea transportation could not be transformed without training people. The important issue was integrated planning. For example, the Department of Human Settlements had a role to play. It had to build residential houses, clinics, hospitals and schools.

Economic Development Deputy Minister Masuka said that no loan had been taken from either the IMF or World Bank. He noted that to address urbanisation problems that were caused by the legacy of apartheid could be addressed by involving all role players, including traditional leaders. The role of the private sector was also critical especially in acting as partners. Planning was key and coherent implementation was essential.

The Chairperson thanked all Deputy Ministers and the Directors General as well as supporting staff for their presence and time.

The meeting was adjourned.