Averting a downward spiral: building resilience in informal urban settlements through adaptive governance

Abstract

The growth of informal settlements can intensify the risks of social and ecological harm to their communities and to the wider urban area. The unplanned and poorly serviced character of these settlements raises the probability of disasters occurring. The public sector can increase these risks through indifference and poorly conceived actions or it can help to build resilience through a more constructive and integrated approach. This case study from Stellenbosch in South Africa illustrates how a resilience perspective can highlight the systemic challenges surrounding the growth and management of informal settlements. It emphasizes the interactions between such places and their urban context, and recognizes the negative feedback loops that can exacerbate poverty and vulnerability. It proposes adaptive governance as a framework for building resilience through strengthening local capabilities. This flexible and engaged approach goes beyond “just managing” informal settlements to integrating them in a more positive way into the wider city or town.

I. Introduction

There is considerable ambivalence, if not hostility, on the part of governments in many low- and middle-income countries towards the growth of informal settlements. Many decision makers harbour anxieties that implementing policies to accommodate shack dwellers may accelerate migration from rural areas. Another concern is that tolerating shack areas inevitably means urban squalor, social unrest and illegality because these are difficult places to upgrade and manage. However, the first reservation neglects the fact that expanding informal settlements reflect natural population growth at least as much as rural–urban migration;⁽¹⁾ and the second reservation is defeatist in ruling out the possibilities of progressively improving such places. Policies to resist informal areas should not stem from the administrative shortcomings of urban municipalities. There is too much at stake for that.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how a resilience perspective can help to understand the challenges facing informal urban settlements and point to a better way forward. Resilience is a useful concept for at least three reasons. First, it stresses the importance of seeing human settlements and the risks to which they are exposed in a holistic manner, i.e. that their economic, social and environmental problems are connected. Second, it emphasizes the need to understand shack settlement dynamics in the context of the wider urban area and in the longer timeframe of the urban transition. Informal areas are nested within, and shaped by, larger and more complex systems. Third, it recognizes the existence of feedback effects, or vicious cycles, that can disrupt and destabilize the development trajectories of such systems, potentially generating crises. Informal settlements need to be upgraded and transformed over time into more secure and prosperous communities, without destroying their fragile social fabric.

This paper argues that adaptive governance may be a useful framework for building resilience in informal settlements. Adaptive governance is an approach to system management that combines the insights of experimental learning in complex systems with organizational theory. Policy actions are deliberately open to change in the light of their impact on the ground and are flexible in response to shifting circumstances. They are bold where fundamental change is required and incremental where sensitive reforms and continuity are necessary. The approach is broad-based and extends beyond municipal service delivery to favour inclusive decision-making that incorporates the local community and other stakeholders as active partners in settlement upgrading, not just passive beneficiaries. Other spheres of government and the private sector also have important roles to play in building rounded and resourceful communities.

These arguments are elaborated and illustrated with reference to a case study of the Enkanini informal settlement in the large town of Stellenbosch in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. The town was selected because of its relative affluence and greater potential to absorb population growth in decent conditions than many other towns and cities in the country. Like most parts of the province, the rate of population growth is higher than the national average, but it is by no means exceptional. Stellenbosch has the potential to be a pathfinder of progressive urban planning and management, given sufficient political will and leadership capabilities. This would require a positive vision of inclusive urban development, rather than “just managing” informal settlement growth in a reactive and almost reluctant manner.

II. Methods and Data Sources

The paper draws on close participant observation by the authors, one of whom volunteered full-time for an NGO in the informal settlement for two years and who continues to be involved in the area. The insights from this practical experience were consolidated and enriched by reading and reflecting on two bodies of prior research: academic literature on resilience and related concepts; and previous studies of informal settlements in South Africa. Additional evidence to substantiate the argument was obtained from a community-led enumeration study and from nine interviews with key stakeholders in government, the private sector and civil society undertaken shortly before the paper was written.

III. Conceptual Framework

There are four organizing concepts in the paper: risk, vulnerability, resilience and adaptive governance. Since there is some overlap between these terms, clarity of definition is important in order to avoid confusion. Although there are differences in emphasis and common practice, the concepts of risk, vulnerability and resilience can all relate to people and social systems as well as to physical assets and natural systems.

Risk is a broad concept with many different meanings, but is essentially concerned with the likelihood or threat of damage, injury or loss caused by negative circumstances. It is particularly important in the field of disaster management, where it is defined as a combination of the probability of a hazard occurring and the seriousness of its consequences.⁽²⁾ Taking a simple example, unauthorized settlements face a high risk of being inundated if they occupy river floodplains and low-lying land in coastal areas. The risks of severe damage are generally greater than in many rural or formal urban areas because shack areas are typically located on marginal, leftover land and lack proper drainage systems.

Vulnerability is usually discussed in relation to particular sections of the population. It is typically understood to include groups of people who are especially sensitive to a hazard when exposed, together with their limited capacity to cope and adapt.⁽³⁾ It can also include the degree of exposure of a social group or system to a potential danger. For example, poor communities are particularly vulnerable to serious losses and dislocation caused by flooding, fire damage or other hazards because of their insubstantial dwellings and lack of savings or other forms of insurance to fall back on.

The concept of resilience emerged from the work of Holling,⁽⁴⁾ and describes the ability of an ecological system to bounce back or recover from a hazard. The resilience concept has since been broadened to include the capacity of different kinds of social and economic systems to recover, and their capacity to adapt and transform as a result of ongoing stresses and shocks. Thus, the resilience of an informal settlement increases and the risk of disruption decreases if it has benefited from investment in robust infrastructure that is adapted to local conditions and built to anticipate future threats.

According to resilience thinking, when systems are forced beyond their normal boundaries either through a sudden shock, for example an environmental disaster, or a gradual process, such as population expansion, new challenges and possibilities emerge.⁽⁵⁾ This process of development or decay is understood as the adaptive cycle. It is complex because there are many such cycles interacting with each other over different spatial scales and time horizons. There are feedback loops at work, the effects of which are often unpredictable, so progress is rarely linear. Ripple effects through the system can accelerate the process of change, especially when thresholds are reached.⁽⁶⁾

Resilience should not be confused with the notion of persistence, which excludes the ability to adjust to altered circumstances and bounce forward after shocks. An example of persistence, as distinct from resilience, might be where local communities or cities are exposed to risks of long-term stagnation and obsolescence because they are enmeshed in rigid social conventions or institutional practices, for instance the practice in some communities of preventing women from participating in the labour market, which restricts household incomes and the available labour supply. The ability of urban systems to adapt and transform over time is important for their survival and success in a dynamic environment where conditions never stand still.

Adaptive governance focuses on equipping stakeholders with the skills and capabilities to deal effectively with unexpected changes and risks inherent in complex systems.⁽⁷⁾ A simple example might involve raising community awareness of how to avoid everyday hazards and prepare for more serious setbacks. Another might involve strengthening community structures so that members can engage with government decision makers and play an active part in organizing settlement upgrading processes themselves. These kinds of changes could help to make neighbourhoods more resilient and robust in the face of constant threats and an unpredictable political environment.

Adaptive governance emerged from two fields of study – conservation science and organizational theory. The former developed an approach known as adaptive management that sought to include ecosystem dynamics into management structures.⁽⁸⁾ It achieved this by focusing on the impacts of multi-scalar socio-ecological processes on localities and adopting a learning process within management structures to allow for continual adjustment and organic development.⁽⁹⁾ Organizational theory extends these insights by focusing on the need to share power and responsibility across different communities of interest, government agencies and other bodies. The term “governance” reflects the importance of collaborative arrangements that extend beyond government, such as partnerships. It differs from traditional public administration and prescriptive planning by focusing on managing change and risk in a more open and responsive manner.⁽¹⁰⁾ According to Folke et al.:

“Adaptive governance focuses on experimentation and learning, and it brings together research on institutions and organizations for collaboration, collective action and conflict resolution in relation to natural resource and ecosystem management.”⁽¹¹⁾

IV. Resilience and Adaptive Governance in Informal Settlements

The broad socio-ecological scope of resilience makes it an important concept for cities because of their exceptional concentrations of population and economic activity, which exposes them to larger and more diverse risks with potentially devastating consequences. Cities also shoulder disproportionate responsibility for carbon emissions and excessive consumption of natural resources.⁽¹²⁾ Global sustainability depends on cities adjusting their wasteful systems of production and consumption and adapting their infrastructure networks and institutions to handle shifting circumstances and unanticipated events. Building resilience is particularly relevant to communities living in informal urban settlements because of their sensitivity to changing conditions and their limited coping capacity and assets offering protection against serious losses. They often occupy unsuitable land and have the least resources to adapt or escape from hazardous incidents.⁽¹³⁾

Formal urban areas are not immune from socio-ecological change either. When tipping points are reached in informal settlements, the consequences for human health and well-being can easily extend to the wider district. Indeed, the presence of large informal settlements can increase the pressure on citywide systems and push infrastructure networks to the limit unless decisions are taken to invest in larger and more versatile systems. The discharge of untreated effluent into natural watercourses and drainage systems as a result of overloaded treatment works is a good example. This reinforces the point about pursuing an integrated approach to strengthen the resilience of the wider district and avert costly losses through short-sighted and self-interested actions.

Integrated and inclusive urban development is difficult, of course, particularly in highly unequal cities and societies. Private land ownership constrains municipal abilities to install essential services, and social divisions can inhibit cross-subsidization and redistribution through the tax system. Informal settlers may feel entitled to services as voters and citizens and resort to illegal connections to adjacent electricity networks and water pipes. This can overload fragile systems and cause them to fail, creating blackouts and frustration for ratepayers and businesses. This can create feelings of antagonism towards shack dwellers and reinforce negative perceptions of these communities, thereby undermining any sense of shared responsibility and common purpose. An adaptive governance approach may be better at addressing these kinds of vicious cycles than conventional forms of public administration.

Adaptive governance recognizes that the complexity of informal urban settlements requires collaborative management and practical involvement through flexibility and negotiation, rather than the application of standard rules and procedures. This means a tractable and variable approach that can accommodate informal and interim solutions within more formal structures and systems. It needs experimentation, testing and reassessment to match the needs of the particular local situation with the shifting contextual conditions. It also requires multi-level systems that share power and responsibility between government, local communities and other stakeholders.⁽¹⁴⁾

V. A Resilience Assessment of Enkanini

In this section, we identify the social and ecological vulnerabilities of the Enkanini community, before linking these to broader risks facing the natural and social systems of Stellenbosch.

a. A young and insecure community

The informal settlement of Enkanini originally emerged in 2005 as the result of an invasion of municipal land zoned for agriculture next to Kayamandi township.⁽¹⁵⁾ The shacks lie between the township and the nature reserve of Papegaaiberg, and the settlement also borders a wine farm and the industrial area of Plankenbrug. The municipality, under the control of the Democratic Alliance (DA) political party, applied for a court order to remove the initial intrusion of approximately 100 shacks. Approval was granted but the court order was not carried out promptly. There was a change in political control of the municipality shortly afterwards in favour of the African National Congress (ANC), after which the number of squatters increased rapidly.⁽¹⁶⁾ About eight years on, Enkanini now has almost 2,500 shacks and a population of 4,200.⁽¹⁷⁾ (This rather low ratio of residents to shacks reflects the large number of young adults in the settlement.)

Shack dwellers are vulnerable to removal because they have no legal rights to the land they occupy. Many of them are young and single. One-third are aged between 25 and 34 according to a recent enumeration study.⁽¹⁸⁾ Contrary to popular perceptions that most are migrants from the Eastern Cape, in fact the majority previously lived in the local township of Kayamandi (61 per cent). Fewer than one in five (18 per cent) came from elsewhere in the Western Cape and a similar proportion from beyond there. Many of them moved to Enkanini because of a shortage of space in their family homes or because of a lack of income to pay rent.⁽¹⁹⁾ In other words, the settlement’s expansion reflects natural population growth more than in-migration, and resisting its expansion will only add to the pressures of overcrowding elsewhere.

b. Income poverty and under-employment

Low income is another source of vulnerability for the community, reflecting low levels of formal education and marketable skills among residents. The average household income is about R1,300 (US$ 140) a month⁽²⁰⁾ and most adults do not have secure full-time work. The enumeration study found that 45 per cent of household heads had full-time jobs, 23 per cent worked part-time and 30 per cent were unemployed. People commonly work as security guards, waiters, domestic workers, seasonal fruit pickers and casual construction workers. Until the nearby landfill site closed, some residents were garbage pickers who scraped a living from sorting waste. Households with dependents receive social grants from the state, namely child support grants, disability grants and old age pensions.⁽²¹⁾ It is estimated that about 500 adults get basic grants worth R260 (about US$ 25) per month to support their children.⁽²²⁾

Many residents live a precarious existence, exposed to frequent shocks and stresses arising from hunger, ill-health, outbreaks of fire, incidents of crime and other consequences of poverty and social marginalization. Poor communication, misunderstanding and instability within the community undermine the possibilities of collective organization and the social glue that stems from mutual trust and support.

c. Inadequate services threaten people’s health

Another source of environmental and social vulnerability is the inadequate public services in the area. The 4,200 shack dwellers share 32 communal taps and 80 waterborne toilets in combined water and sanitation blocks that are distributed unevenly across the informal settlement.⁽²³⁾ On average, there are about 130 residents for every tap and more than 50 per toilet. Poor access to sanitation means that many residents use the surrounding bush to relieve themselves, and the inadequate facilities make the community vulnerable to outbreaks of communicable diseases. It also means that raw sewage flows into the stormwater system and contaminates the Plankenbrug River that runs below Enkanini. As a result, the river has very high counts of E.coli (up to 13 million per 100 millilitres).⁽²⁴⁾

Enkanini has not been electrified because of its informal status. Residents have no legal access to electricity although many have tapped illegally into the electricity boxes of businesses in the industrial area and homes in the adjacent township. The precarious overhead or underground cable installations, with exposed wiring between shacks, make young children particularly vulnerable to electric shocks.

d. Vulnerability to natural and man-made disasters

Members of the community are vulnerable to floods, fires and violent crime.⁽²⁵⁾ The terrain is steep in places with the settlement etched into hills and valleys. As of 2012, at least 350 shacks were located in flood-prone areas that compromise household safety. Fires are also endemic and 111 have been reported since the settlement was established. Many households rely for lighting on paraffin and candles, which are common sources of accidental outbreaks of fire.

The dense settlement pattern and lack of space between the shacks increase the chances of a fire spreading. The paucity of internal roads and their poor condition also complicate access for emergency vehicles and waste collection trucks, especially in winter when the steep unsurfaced roads are wet. In March 2013, three people died when a fire raged through an adjoining area, destroying more than 1,300 shacks and leaving more than 4,500 people homeless and without their possessions.⁽²⁶⁾ High levels of violent crime make people fearful of accessing communal water and sanitation facilities at night.⁽²⁷⁾ The area has a reputation as a hiding place for criminals and the police tend to blame the congested shacks for their inability to get around easily and track down criminals.⁽²⁸⁾

e. Local heritage vulnerable to desecration

The squatters have encroached on a nature reserve that has cultural and ecological heritage value. The hilltop of Papegaaiberg is home to a critically endangered plant species known as Renosterveld.⁽²⁹⁾ The area also has historical value in that the founder of the town, Simon van der Stel, used it for shooting practice. Prehistoric stone implements have been found on the western slope, giving the area some archaeological significance too.⁽³⁰⁾ In the following section, we discuss how the various sources of vulnerability in the settlement are compounded by interactions with the surrounds of Stellenbosch, thereby increasing all kinds of other risks.

VI. Increasing Social, Ecological and Economic Risks in Stellenbosch

a. Increasing social instability

Stellenbosch remains a divided town where, two decades after the end of apartheid, people live in neighbourhoods that are still largely defined on the basis of race. The lack of contact between racial groups is reinforced by separate schools, workplaces and recreational amenities. Inferior schools and a highly segmented labour market restrict upward mobility for people of colour. Poor public facilities in and around Enkanini mean that the prospects for social advancement and integration are slim without bolder efforts to transform conditions. Some churches have congregations in different neighbourhoods and make an effort to encourage social mixing.⁽³¹⁾ Overall, however, there is little exposure to the social lives of different racial groups and few opportunities to build mutual understanding and trust.

Social tensions are reflected in Stellenbosch’s volatile political situation, characterized by six regime changes in the municipality in the last 16 years, involving repeated switches between the Democratic Alliance and ANC parties.⁽³²⁾ This political upheaval has filtered through to senior levels of the administration, leading to frequent turnover of senior managers. This instability has undermined policy continuity and institutional memory and incapacitated new officials thrown in at the deep end.⁽³³⁾

The growth of Enkanini has inflamed tensions between various territorial interests and stakeholders. While many Kayamandi residents don’t object to people living in the shack settlement nearby because they are former tenants, friends and relatives,⁽³⁴⁾ they also regard Enkanini as an area of high crime and social instability because of the lack of reliable community structures with which to engage in joint problem-solving. For example, the Kayamandi Development Forum has found it difficult to assist with community development activities in the settlement.⁽³⁵⁾

Enkanini residents, in turn, feel like outsiders in Stellenbosch. While their presence is more or less tolerated, they believe their needs receive scant attention.⁽³⁶⁾ The municipality’s emergency services do not meet even their most basic requirements. Municipal initiatives offering solar panels as a substitute for mains electricity have been dismissed as a token gesture and unacceptable without proper electrification. People do not understand why they cannot get the services available elsewhere in Stellenbosch,⁽³⁷⁾ and such frustrations prompt them to engage in occasional protest actions that damage the properties of third parties.⁽³⁸⁾

The Stellenbosch Ratepayer’s Association represents the interests of middle- and upper-income homeowners. Many of these ratepayers are also dissatisfied with municipal services and are suspicious of political leaders − their rates are rising without commensurate improvements in public services. They regard Enkanini as an illegal land invasion.⁽³⁹⁾ Homeless people need somewhere to live, but unauthorized development is considered unacceptable and a risk to surrounding property values. They also resent the threat to the Papegaaiberg nature reserve, given its heritage value. The visual impact of dense shacks creeping up Papegaaiberg is disconcerting and fuels a growing sense of malaise and decay in the town. Ratepayers fear that providing free services to poor communities will only swell the influx and have negative consequences.

b. Growing environmental risks

Stellenbosch’s municipal water and sanitation infrastructure has reached full capacity. The sewage treatment works overflows regularly, pumping raw effluent into surrounding farms and exposing the agricultural produce to the risk of exclusion from European markets.⁽⁴⁰⁾ Although no formal study has been completed on the Eerste River, it is reported to contain damaging levels of effluent because of the lack of treatment.⁽⁴¹⁾ Water pipes in established neighbourhoods are also ageing and the municipality is constantly having to repair leaks.⁽⁴²⁾ Budgets for infrastructure maintenance, upgrading and renewal are thinly stretched.

Inadequate sanitation in Enkanini contributes to the wider environmental problems. Untreated effluent from the community poses a serious health risk and threatens downstream activities that are dependent on clean rivers and drainage networks. The Stellenbosch sewer system is already overloaded because upmarket housing developments have exceeded the capacity of the treatment works. Stellenbosch’s Integrated Development Plan acknowledges that poorly designed property schemes threaten biodiversity, clean water and soil erosion.⁽⁴³⁾ The municipality has plans to spend R180 million (US$ 20 million) over the next three years to upgrade the wastewater works, but this is unlikely to address the long-term capacity problem.⁽⁴⁴⁾

The provision of solid waste services is another challenge, partly because 89 per cent of total waste in Stellenbosch goes to landfill and only 11 per cent is recycled. The local landfill site reached capacity early in 2012, with a new cell added as an interim arrangement. The whole emphasis is on waste removal and disposal, reflecting a “throw and forget” attitude among ratepayers, who demand a least-cost approach with little regard for the environmental cost.⁽⁴⁵⁾ Enkanini generates far less waste than the suburbs, but inadequate collection services within the area mean the waste is more of an eyesore and health hazard than elsewhere.

The municipality also has difficulties providing everyone with electricity. It would like to support the national drive to reduce the consumption of coal-fired power but distributing and selling electricity from the national grid provides a vital source of revenue used to cross-subsidize other services. Extending electricity to Enkanini is complicated by the need to rearrange the layout of shacks.⁽⁴⁶⁾ Moving people to make way for electricity poles and cables is contentious because of people’s distrust of the municipality and will require extensive negotiation. Community protests in 2012 over the lack of electricity resulted in vandalism against the Kayamandi Tourism Corridor and several businesses being set alight.⁽⁴⁷⁾

Stellenbosch’s natural habitats are an important part of its attraction as a tourist destination, but they are becoming more fragmented because of extensive agricultural production, house-building and shack encroachment.⁽⁴⁸⁾ The precious Renosterveld vegetation has been severely affected by human activity because it needs fertile soil on which to grow; originally, there was plenty of this in Stellenbosch but it has since been used to cultivate vineyards. Enkanini is situated next to a patch of remaining Renosterveld.⁽⁴⁹⁾

c. The prospects of economic stagnation

Stellenbosch’s population increased by almost one-third (32 per cent) between 2001 and 2011 (from 117,705 to 155,733) according to the census.⁽⁵⁰⁾ Much of this growth has been in shack areas such as Enkanini, and the population living in informal settlements in Stellenbosch is estimated to be 27,000.⁽⁵¹⁾ The labour market has been unable to absorb the expanding workforce because of the lack of economic dynamism and poor skills, resulting in high unemployment and economic inactivity. The unemployment rate in Stellenbosch Municipality is seven per cent, whereas it is 15 per cent in Kayamandi.⁽⁵²⁾Agriculture is the traditional local employer of low-skilled labour but jobs have been shrinking because of mechanization and labour unrest. Furthermore, climate change and water scarcity threaten the long-term viability of agriculture in the region.⁽⁵³⁾

The local economy has been one of the poorest performing among the 30 largest cities and towns in South Africa since the mid-1990s, limiting the opportunities available to new labour market entrants.⁽⁵⁴⁾ Output increased by only 26 per cent between 1996 and 2012, which placed Stellenbosch in twenty-eighth position; employment increased by 24 per cent, which put it in twentieth position; and finally, Stellenbosch was one of very few cities and towns among the 30 where average incomes barely increased at all over this period.

Stellenbosch’s income distribution is more polarized than that in South Africa as a whole, with a larger share of the population at both ends of the spectrum. One in five local households (21 per cent) has no annual income, compared to 15 per cent in the country as a whole. Able-bodied, working-age adults are not entitled to social grants from the state, so they have to rely on relatives or friends if they don’t have a job. Meanwhile, 20 per cent of Stellenbosch households have an income above R153,800 (about US$ 17,000), compared to only 15 per cent in South Africa as a whole.⁽⁵⁵⁾ Stellenbosch also appears to be slightly more unequal than the rest of the Western Cape, with a Gini co-efficient of 0.61 compared to 0.59 for the province.⁽⁵⁶⁾

Besides the threat to agricultural production, there are several other risks bound up with the town’s current economic trajectory and income distribution. Tourism is an important source of employment in this picturesque region but could be jeopardized by rising unemployment and disaffection, making the area more prone to social disorder and crime. Political instability and ongoing pressure to boost public spending at a faster rate than revenue growth also threaten the municipality’s financial standing. Municipal priorities revolve around household services rather than economic growth and job creation, and internal tensions and crisis responses tend to divert effort and resources away from more fundamental development efforts.

VII. Developing an Adaptive Governance Approach

Building resilience in informal settlements is not straightforward because of the multiple challenges faced both within the locality and in the wider functional area. Resilience depends on harnessing the potentially positive external connections and transforming the processes that cause human vulnerability. The focus of adaptive governance on collaboration among stakeholders, practical problem-solving and sharing responsibility for collective risks of socio-ecological damage may help to achieve this.

An adaptive governance approach is likely to require the current municipal stance towards Enkanini to shift from “just managing” the situation in a reactive and almost reluctant fashion, to one that builds local capabilities, invests in robust local systems and treats the area as an integral part of the town of Stellenbosch. In the following section, we examine what this might entail.

a. An holistic approach

The socio-ecological systems of urban areas are subject to many complex factors and forces that influence their development. Building resilience requires active cooperation across different departments and spheres of government and with other stakeholders. Improving public services in Enkanini will require a more proactive and responsive approach from the engineering, housing, planning, community protection and economic development departments of the municipality. Since they operate according to norms, standards and funding arrangements that are often set by provincial and national government, close engagement with these spheres will also be necessary to achieve the required flexibility.

For example, waste management is an overlapping responsibility of national, provincial and local government according to the Constitution. An adaptive governance approach to this issue in Enkanini requires close engagement through a dedicated forum involving key stakeholders and community-based organizations to address the failures of waste disposal, recycling and collection services. There are bound to be opportunities for local job creation and income generation if solutions to the waste problem are carefully conceived. There are several foundations to build upon. For example, several recycling companies operate next to Enkanini in the Plankenbrug industrial area;⁽⁵⁷⁾ the national waste management strategy⁽⁵⁸⁾ supports a collaborative approach to waste management; and the local landfill site already has a monitoring committee with community involvement.⁽⁵⁹⁾

b. Security and social cohesion

A pre-condition for tangible progress and investment in the area is to formalize and legitimize Enkanini as a residential zone. Residents need to be conferred with some basic rights in order to remain. Greater security will encourage people to take a longer-term view of the settlement as a place to live and invest in upgrading their shelters over time. International studies of informal settlements support the need for formal recognition and tenure security. To avoid the unaffordable costs often associated with full ownership of well-located land, such as taxation and service charges, an incremental approach to securing land tenure may be desirable, allowing land rights to be increased over time in line with rising incomes.⁽⁶⁰⁾

A more cohesive community also requires improved internal and external communication to build mutual understanding and trust. Some municipal officials acknowledge that public participation efforts in the past have amounted to one-way information rather than consultation, and promises have been made that have not been kept.⁽⁶¹⁾ Several municipal departments are now trying to rectify this. The enumeration study recently undertaken by the Informal Settlements Department and its partner Community Organizations Resources Centre (CORC) exemplifies a different approach. The municipality worked with local residents to collect reliable data about the area, which was gathered by trained community members. The ethos behind this approach is that shack dwellers are the best collectors of accurate data on themselves.⁽⁶²⁾

This kind of joint work or “co-production” on practical problem-solving is increasingly being used by grassroots organizations to obtain better living conditions.⁽⁶³⁾ Co-production challenges established approaches to service provision. It is not a linear process of following the rules and procedures prescribed from above, but rather one of social construction and negotiation between stakeholders. It also goes beyond addressing material needs by empowering shack dwellers with practical capabilities and a sense of self-worth, which recognizes their vital contribution to improving their circumstances.

c. Integrating communities and changing spatial patterns

The installation of improved services and the general upgrading of Enkanini will require some households to be relocated, in order to reduce the shack densities and reconfigure their layout. This “reblocking” approach is being pursued by the city of Cape Town to allow space for essential infrastructure and service delivery vehicles.⁽⁶⁴⁾ International experience suggests that as long as the community is closely involved, it is possible for more substantial physical restructuring to take place through the consolidation of land parcels, the readjustment of land uses and the creation of new street layouts.⁽⁶⁵⁾ This can release value from the land and allow multi-storey buildings, which raise residential densities while giving households more living space and reducing the health and social problems linked with overcrowding.

Population growth in and around Enkanini makes it important to identify additional land for affordable housing, ideally in areas that can help knit together the fragmented physical and social fabric of Stellenbosch. All South African cities contain under-utilized buffer zones and gap sites suitable for infill development. One approach might be to target people with reasonably stable incomes for multi-storey rental housing – security guards, tradesmen, retail assistants and domestic workers. Provided these projects are well designed and formulated in partnership with private developers and adjacent communities, they could also attract middle-income residents, foster social diversity and enable some cross-subsidization to improve viability. Relocating some people from informal areas could also free up space for improved housing and economic opportunities for the remaining residents who might not be employed, thereby improving the value of their assets. Mixed-income developments are being pursued in some of the country’s larger cities, partly in response to government encouragement for private house-building schemes to include a share of affordable housing.

d. Boosting jobs and livelihoods

It is vital that employment becomes a stronger feature of renewal activities in the area. More jobs would help to reduce vulnerability, poverty, alienation, crime and other anti-social activities. Raising income levels would also assist in upgrading the settlement, since households could then afford to pay something for service charges and to maintain their homes over the longer term. Furthermore, a job creation programme where the beneficiaries actively contribute to the local economy and society would be more likely to mobilize the tangible support of other communities in Stellenbosch than welfare measures for recipients perceived to be passive beneficiaries.

Strengthening and diversifying the local economy and boosting labour-absorbing sectors is a long-term agenda dependent on cooperation with the private sector and drawing upon the support of national and provincial authorities to attract investment and encourage business expansion. A great deal could be done in the short term to create temporary jobs through public works programmes that transfer skills and experience to community members. An immediate priority should be to make full use of government funding for such programmes, whose take-up by many municipalities has been disappointing. Stellenbosch announced its intention to do this in 2011⁽⁶⁶⁾ by encouraging key departments to create more opportunities in the provision of infrastructure, environmental services and social support. Definite targets could be set to instil greater vigour and a sense of urgency into employing local people to upgrade Enkanini’s amenities.

A second task is to build a local infrastructure of active labour market services to connect people with the world of work beyond Enkanini. This requires more systematic information about relevant vacancies in the wider labour market, small grants to cover the costs of transport and job search, and access to training courses to equip people with improved skills and increase employability in a dynamic labour market. A third task is to build economic capacity by improving the quantity and quality of support for local enterprises, both formal and informal. Relevant advice and training could help to enhance their products and services, improve their marketing methods and upgrade their owners’ financial literacy and bookkeeping. Stronger business planning and management is required to help firms grow and adapt to changing markets.

e. Fostering innovation and learning

The demands on public resources from poor communities will continue for the foreseeable future. Creativity and innovation are important to accommodate rising expectations and new risks to the environment, economy and public health. With improved communication and trust in public authorities, alternative, lower-cost technologies might be accepted by people as interim solutions. This would be preferable to them going without facilities for years because of financial and technical obstacles to the installation of conventional infrastructure in informal areas.

There is a precedent for this in Enkanini. Stellenbosch University built an “I-shack” there, which has a solar panel and battery to provide lighting and to charge cell phones.⁽⁶⁷⁾ The I-shack has now entered a second phase, with the developers of the concept also offering solar-powered TVs.⁽⁶⁸⁾ If solar power interventions were applied more widely, levels of take-up in the informal settlement might improve because the perception of them being second best would diminish. There is little doubt that more could be done to support green technology initiatives and innovation of this kind through collaboration between partners at the university, the municipality and the broader community. Improvements in infrastructure design to improve resource efficiency need to be extended throughout the town, perhaps using the lever of municipal procurement powers.

VIII. Conclusions

Neglecting informal settlements increases the risks of harm to their residents and renders the wider community more vulnerable to social and ecological disasters. The resilience analysis of Enkanini highlights the poverty and insecurity of shack dwellers, their high levels of unemployment and exposure to environmental hazards, and the risks to their health and well-being from inadequate public services. The interactions and interdependence between these issues need to be understood when analyzing the situation and in devising policy responses that equip poor communities with the capacity to cope and adapt. This applies both to personal and household attributes and to the physical attributes of the place itself. Addressing one feature at a time through ad hoc initiatives is unlikely to eradicate an increasingly difficult situation.

The expansion of Enkanini also has wider spillover effects for the town of Stellenbosch. The settlement is a source of social tension, degrades the natural environment and potentially threatens the town’s prospects for attracting investment. There are justified concerns about looming environmental problems, economic stagnation and a growing malaise in the town that could have highly undesirable consequences, setting in train a downward spiral. A resilience perspective draws attention to the cumulative, self-reinforcing effects of different problems, instabilities and risks to Stellenbosch as an interconnected system.

This paper illustrates how an adaptive governance approach might help to shift the negative trajectory of the town by adopting a more positive stance towards the informal settlement. The municipality and other parts of government need to accept that the settlement is here to stay and needs to be included in the long-term planning and management of Stellenbosch. Upgrading the area requires an integrated approach rather than piecemeal, half-hearted measures. This means working hand-in-hand with the community to understand their needs better and to co-produce solutions. This will help to build capabilities and create a more resourceful community. The municipality will also need to create an enabling environment for shared action and responsibility among its various departments, along with stakeholders in the business sector, NGOs and other parts of government. An outward-looking approach is required, as well as a strong focus on the internal challenges and dynamics of the settlement itself. Flexibility, creativity and innovation are essential, given the general lack of experience of dealing constructively with informality.