Reshaping Cities:
What can be done?
Professor Ivan Turok
Human Sciences Research Council
Outline

The national context

Diverse local contexts

Patterns and trends

Explanations

Policies
Renewed interest in spatial matters



Our people still have to daily confront the impact of
urban segregation. Many still live in areas once
designated for black people away from economic
opportunities and civic services (President Zuma, 2010)
Spatial challenges continue to marginalize the poor …
the situation has probably been aggravated since 1994,
with many more people now living in poorly located
settlements … The capacity of municipalities to plan
effectively is a significant challenge that needs to be
addressed, supported by the efforts of national and
provincial government” (NPC, 2011)
The cost of living is an important contributor to wage
levels. Diffuse settlement patterns and weak public
transport systems undermine job search and the ‘cost of
working’ (NPC, 2011)
Spatial dislocation between
jobs and population
is the key issue
The ‘spiky’ spatial economy - normal
Big cities have seen the biggest increase in the
employment rate, despite in-migration
% employed among 15-64 year olds
60%
56%
55%
53%
52%
50%
47%
47%
46%
43%
43%
43%
43%
43%
41%
39%
40%
29% 29%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Gauteng metros
Cape Town
eThekwini
N Mandela
2002
Secondary cities
2009
Commercial fmg
Ex-Bantustans
Total SA
Household income: major transfers to ex-Bantustans
100%
13%
12%
11%
11%
11%
90%
Other/unspecified
80%
11%
15%
21%
4%
26%
35%
4%
70%
Pensions/grants
8%
60%
7%
50%
15%
Remittances
40%
72%
68%
60%
30%
Salaries/wages
56%
20%
39%
10%
0%
Gauteng metros
Coastal metros
Secondary cities
Commercial farming
Ex-Bantustans
Population change – pressure on cities
40
35
30
Millions
25
Metros
20
Secondary Cities
15
10
Commercial farming areas
5
Mostly former Bantustan
0
1995
Africans
2010
1995
Other (white,
coloured, Asian)
2010
Regional inequalities translate into
urban inequalities
1. ‘Regional’ = former Bantustans versus
metropolitan areas
2. ‘Urban’ = townships versus suburbs
‘Adjustment’ via migration and commuting is
very normal but complicated in SA
As a result, spatial frictions
compound poverty and inequality
1. Distance from jobs – ‘spatial mismatch’

Exclusion from well-located land

RDP housing policy

Transport subsidies to workers
2. ‘Area effects’ of concentrated poverty

Inferior basic services

Other facilities under extreme pressure

Vulnerability to fire, crime, disease

Social networks & access to information

Peer effects & socialisation
Impedes upward mobility – inter-generational
Size of economic node (Source: Sinclair-Smith & Turok)
Location of growth (2001-05)(Source: Sinclair-Smith & Turok)
Where workers live
Location is highly contested – Mitchells Plain
Location
of
population
Location
of jobs
Source: Gerbrand
Mans, CSIR
Transport, storage and communication
Manufacturing
Finance, insurance, real estate
Wholesale, retail, motor repair, hotels,
restaurants
Community, social, government personal services
Spatial dislocation matters for the
economy and environment too

Imbalance creates excess travel & congestion

Cost of transport subsidies

Dispersed bulk infrastructure

Overheated property markets

Adverse environmental impacts

Cost of regular township disasters

Weaker place attachment, asset investment
Explanations

Housing

Employment

Transport subsidies
Reasons for poorly located housing

Low household incomes relative to cost of land

Existing property owners fear of shacks

Constitutional property rights

Passive public sector land owners

Better availability of greenfield sites

Lower cost of developing greenfield sites

Lack of creativity in house-building industry &
among planners & regulators(?)
Reasons for remote employment locations

Inertia in established employment centres

Central locations to maximise labour pool via
public transport

Shared services and infrastructure

Maintaining property values

Concerns about safety and security

Proximity to home of business owners

Sheer prejudice and herd instinct!
Policy responses
1.





People closer to the jobs
Subsidised well-located land & housing
Acceptance, gradual upgrading & expansion
of well-located informal settlements
Support services to enable labour market
and progression – info, advice, skills, childcare
Mixed-use development & cross-subsidies
Wider spectrum - housing ladder
Policy responses
2.






Jobs closer to the people
Township economic development with
priority area status in and around
Land, infrastructure, premises
Small business advice & financial support
Public procurement & supply chain devt.
Public Works & Community Works Prog.
Need + potential
Policy responses
3.



Improved public transport systems
Efficient, low cost commuting
Densification of transport corridors to knit
together the built environment
Active zoning, incentives, guidance
Big opportunity with
devolution of housing
and transport powers to
the metros (& SPLUMB?)
Can you rise to the
challenge?
3 forms of spatial planning
 ‘Spatially-blind’ - neutral
 Not explicit, reactive to market & events
 Reproduces dislocations and inequalities
 ‘Spatial targeting’ – concerted government action
 Coordinated infrastructure, regulation, incentives …
 Parachuting in, big projects, not embedded/sustainable

‘Integrated place-based’ - horizontal & vertical alignment
 Driven by local needs and potential, local energy and initiative
 Building indigenous capabilities, developing linkages, partnership,
negotiating transitions to green and inclusive economy
More research

Changing employment locations (by sector etc)

Shifting population (by skill, age, gender etc)

Changing land-use patterns

Underlying drivers

Creative use of planning & infrastructure
policies